Cody B. (
codeman38) wrote in
accessibility_fail2009-11-06 10:48 am
Can you hear me now? No...
(cross-posted to
gimp_vent)
Is it just me, or do phone companies make it as hard as possible to get a smartphone on a data-only plan-- at least now that the Sidekick, what I'm using currently on a grandfathered plan, seems to be dead and gone?
Seriously. The whole reason I want a data-centric phone to begin with? Because I can't hear well on the phone. In any given month, I usually don't use more than 100 minutes of talk time because phone calls are so stressful; in most months, I don't even use 60.
Let's look at the options:
So, in other words: If you want a data-centric plan, better prepare to have a credit check and be billed on a postpaid basis, possibly with a 2-year contract required. And you may have to go see a doctor in the process to become eligible. If you want an off-contract option, don't expect to have a nice data-centric phone or a reasonably priced data plan.
Seriously, why aren't there more options for this? There are tons of options for voice plans, but very few choices for people who can't use voice services for whatever reason (or who use them so little as to not even hit 100 minutes in a month).
EDITED TO ADD: OK, I found out what Verizon requires on another page of their site, and it's just as I feared:
So they *have* gone and done the same thing as AT&T. Grr. And I have to wonder whether they would consider my auditory processing disorder eligible or not. Not that it's not already a hassle to try to catch a bus to the necessary doctor's office to get the thing signed off on anyway-- though I suppose they might accept a letter from my GP. I also have to wonder how it'd apply to some of my autistic friends who are speech-impaired but not hearing-impaired...
Which, of course, just makes the subject line of this post just that much more appropriate...
Is it just me, or do phone companies make it as hard as possible to get a smartphone on a data-only plan-- at least now that the Sidekick, what I'm using currently on a grandfathered plan, seems to be dead and gone?
Seriously. The whole reason I want a data-centric phone to begin with? Because I can't hear well on the phone. In any given month, I usually don't use more than 100 minutes of talk time because phone calls are so stressful; in most months, I don't even use 60.
Let's look at the options:
- AT&T: Not so bad when it comes to Windows Mobile phones and Blackberries, which actually surprises me quite a bit (though most of the options do seem to be postpaid and contract-based). But the iPhone, perhaps AT&T's most popular smartphone, actually requires filling out a form with documentation of disability. I do have a diagnosed auditory processing disorder, but it's quite a hassle for me to get to a counselor or medical professional who'd be able to actually sign off on the form. (Not to mention that this whole thing with requiring medical documentation cheeses me off as a fan of the social model of disability.)
- T-Mobile: Sidekick prepaid was wonderful... while it was still being sold. And again, Blackberry and WinMo aren't so bad-- if you're willing to go with a postpaid plan. There are flexpay (i.e., prepaid) plans available for WM/BB, but only if you're willing to add 500 voice minutes to the package. And as for any phones running the Android OS (G1, MyTouch, Cliq), there is literally no data-only option, despite several deaf people having complained.
- Sprint: Although there's nothing on their main site about this, they do have a backchannel data-only offering, and the price is quite good. Doesn't require documentation of disability, either; it's all on the honor system, which is also nice. However, it requires signing a 2-year contract; I'd prefer 1-year, even though that means the phone will be more expensive.
- Verizon: Oh, this one gets really weird. As of yesterday, it was possible to get a smartphone on a $55 data/text plan. But now that they've introduced two new Android phones, this has changed. Apparently now, this has to be activated in store, and "appropriate documentation may be required" (I hope this doesn't mean having to track down diagnosis docs like with AT&T!).
So, in other words: If you want a data-centric plan, better prepare to have a credit check and be billed on a postpaid basis, possibly with a 2-year contract required. And you may have to go see a doctor in the process to become eligible. If you want an off-contract option, don't expect to have a nice data-centric phone or a reasonably priced data plan.
Seriously, why aren't there more options for this? There are tons of options for voice plans, but very few choices for people who can't use voice services for whatever reason (or who use them so little as to not even hit 100 minutes in a month).
EDITED TO ADD: OK, I found out what Verizon requires on another page of their site, and it's just as I feared:
In order to establish your eligibility for the Blackberry or PDA Smartphone plan, please bring either (i) a letter indicating that you are hearing impaired on appropriate letter head from your audiologist, hearing health professional, speech or language therapist/specialist, physician, surgeon, vocational rehabilitation agency counselor, teacher or credentialed therapist; or (ii) your membership card for the National Association of the Deaf, Hearing Loss of America, AG Bell, Association of Late Deafened Adults, Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc or other similar group.
So they *have* gone and done the same thing as AT&T. Grr. And I have to wonder whether they would consider my auditory processing disorder eligible or not. Not that it's not already a hassle to try to catch a bus to the necessary doctor's office to get the thing signed off on anyway-- though I suppose they might accept a letter from my GP. I also have to wonder how it'd apply to some of my autistic friends who are speech-impaired but not hearing-impaired...
Which, of course, just makes the subject line of this post just that much more appropriate...

no subject
I don't get it. Deaf people have been around a hell of a lot longer than phones, why is it so confusing that people might not use voice calls much, for whatever reason?
no subject
no subject
I wonder what it would take for them to realise there is a demand for data-only?
no subject
I don't mind paying for it since we don't have any sort of home line, and he does actually use the phone sometimes, but I wish we could go lower than the lowest step of minutes they offer, especially now that they have unlimited cell to cell (on any provider, not just on sprint), which means most of my calls don't even hit minutes any more, since when I'm not calling my partner, I'm just trying to reach friends to coordinate plans by and large.
Also, the "having to have a diagnosis" is pretty crap, since I don't use voice phone much because I have anxiety issues that make it very difficult for me...which is a lot harder to convince a sales rep is a "legitimate" disability to let me off the hook for paying for minutes.
Ugh!
no subject
Me: I have a hearing impairment, please speak clearly.
Salesperson (SP): *continues mumbling*
Me: Sorry?
SP: *mumbles again*
Me: I'm looking for a phone that is compatible with my hearing aids, do you have live phones I can test?
SP: *looks at me like I'm a three-headed alien, and mumbles again*
Me: *puzzled, look at friend who is with me*
Friend: He said no, they don't have any activated phones, here's his card if you want to come back and buy a phone.
Me: *does not take card, and leaves store*
no subject
Gah, yes. I'd be interested in potentially sharing a family plan with my parents, but the options for shared plans are all ridiculously huge numbers of minutes that assume there will be multiple voice users.
Yes, exactly!
I'm not technically deaf, but I do have an auditory processing disorder that affects my comprehension of speech, particularly when certain frequencies are muffled as is the case on the phone. I have to wonder whether the phone companies would consider that to be on equal footing with an actual hearing impairment.
And then there are people who are just plain introverted and don't talk that much. They deserve access to data-only options as well, as far as I'm concerned!
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Yes!
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
The history of the telephone company's failure of deaf people is epic, and well told in A Phone of Our Own: The Deaf Rebellion Against Ma Bell
Don't know if the Cricket service is available where you are, but they do have $3/day PAYG data plans.
no subject
I don't see how they can make a requirement that you give them federal protected information without responding in kind in that regard.
Someone with a better understanding of HIPAA than I might be able to find a hole in my thinking, but to me it's a glaring problem.
no subject
Other parties that you authorize to be informed about your health are not bound by HIPAA, including your employer if they get health care information (for example to get medical leave or return to work after same).
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Also, from what I've read on HowardForums (a mobile phone forum site), Verizon doesn't support unlocked smartphones (Blackberry, Droid, Touch, etc.) on anything but their smartphone plans.
no subject
I'm offering specifics for Verizon, because I've got experience with them and their methods, but I expect that similar tactics would work on other carriers. (I also find that if I can't get through with one rep, I can call back and the second rep will probably work better.)
no subject
no subject
no subject
I can't speak to putting unlocked smartphones on US networks, but all the carriers that have SIM cards have networks that support unlocked 3G imports.
It is also possible to "run down" a contract that way. My contract ran out several years ago, and I'm still on the same plan, paying the same amount (not much), using my awesome phone for everything I want.
Added: I feel like I should mention that AT&T does not require a phone to be "locked" a second time. I just insert my SIM card and turn the phone on.
no subject
And, yeah, "bring your diagnosis so we'll consider it" is just... WTF?! Why should people be forced to prove their disability and, hell, why *shouldn't* abled people who just don't care for telephone conversations be able to get that kind of plan? Never to mention that not only are there non-deafness/HoH auditory disabilities that might mean someone doesn't like using the phone, there are actually non-auditory disabilities that can cause the same! I have a speech disorder that often winds up causing severe anxiety when it comes to phone conversations; I don't see why stutterers shouldn't be able to get this kind of plan.
I've recently got a pay-as-you-go iPhone. I don't know if they don't have that where you live (I'm in the UK) or whether it's just not an option for you, but I am finding it awesome. (Disclaimer: I've only had it a few days and am mainly using it for organisational things.)
no subject
If AT&T ever offers a prepaid iPhone option stateside, I'm so jumping on the bandwagon.
no subject
no subject
I hope this made sense, and that it might help someone. The phone's also available in blue, if that matters.
no subject
This seriously, seriously pisses me off. Because yeah, one shouldn't need to prove disability to just to get a phone. I'm able-bodied, and the reason I bought a Blackberry with a data-only plan is because I wanted to check the real-time bus schedules online, and maybe visit websites when I am bored. That's it. I don't need a voice plan because I don't talk on the phone. I can go months without calling anyone on my cell. If you deduct work-related calls (I work from home) from my landline, then you have maybe two calls to my mom each month.
I'm thinking this calls for a letter to Verizon--that's how mad I am. GRRRRRRRRRR.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject