AT&T, the nation’s only carrier of the Apple iPhone and iPad products, will be changing its data plan coverage to no longer offer unlimited data transfers.

Plans will now be sold with limited data and a premium price on higher data usage. The changes will not affect current customers in good standing with unlimited plans.

While the change could mean lower rates for those customers who mainly use their connected devices for email and simple Web browsing, it could also mean much higher fees for more data-intense users. Streaming videos, downloading content or heavy use of sites like Twitter and Facebook could end up costing those users more.

Nationally, networks are fighting to manage a data explosion as more and more of the Internet becomes available on smarter and smarter devices that access it. Other carriers may follow suit, with Verizon indicating it may instill similar plans on its network.

AT&T does plan to give users tools to track their data usage including real-time apps to watch their usage, text message alerts to warn of pending new charges if data usage keeps up, and so forth.

Some users are up in arms over the changes and industry analysts are interested in how customers will react to the new changes. There will undoubtedly be a backlash, especially from the heaviest users, but most think that the problems will smooth over time as users realize how much (or how little) data they were really using.

As Twitter focuses more on how to monetize the company, developers are beginning to feel as though they may get the cold shoulder.

Until recently, Twitter has been very free with its information that allows developers to build companies on applications that complement or make direct use of the company’s platform. More recently, however, it’s becoming evident that Twitter has ambitions to make some of the profits from those developers’ ideas its own.

Twitter recently acquired the company Atebits, which makes the popular iPhone and Mac application Tweetie, and it has been making inroads toward developing in-company applications that directly rival many companies whose offerings make use of the Twitter structure and data.

Another example of Twitter simply buying up the information is the search engine company, Summize, which Twitter acquired in 2008. What developers are worried about isn’t being bought out – it’s being circumnavigated entirely.

For example, one company, CoTweet, offers tools for businesses to manage their Twitter accounts. Twitter is in the process of developing its own in-house business system that directly competes with CoTweet.

And CoTweet is not alone in its fears that perhaps what came to them so freely might not stay that way for long.

People are coming to expect that no matter what they’re doing, there’s an application that can help them do it faster, better, and easier.

Real estate firms are answering the call with a series of applications that are designed to make looking at home in a certain area easier when potential buyers are on the go.

Though real estate agents say that the applications aren’t actually improving their bottom line, they are pacifying the buyers who have come to expect apps for everything. With global-positioning technology, buyers can see other houses in the area that they’re perusing without actually having to go across town to a house that doesn’t even fit their specifications. They’re also able to see other homes that a realtor might not show them.

Buyers can get details like the house’s location, a map, panoramic views, photo galleries, home values, and even the amount of crime in an area.

The apps may not be helping real estate agents sell more houses, but they are extremely popular. One of the biggest real-estate info sites, Zillow, says people are looking up two million homes a month on its free app, which has been downloaded nearly one million times already.

Mobile advertising is an as-yet-untested-fully venue, but many advertisers are thinking of it as the next wave in media opportunities to reach a younger, technology-savvy demographic.

Apple seems to think so too: It has just unveiled Apple iAds, their ad program for mobile phones.

There is a lot of speculation on whether the new iAds will use the information it currently possesses about its phone users to generate ads that appeal to them. Apple has invested a great deal into technology that custom fits new possibilities to previous purchases.

iTunes is one stellar example of this trend: Apple knows what any individual’s preferences are when it comes to genre of music and artists that user might like, and it pitches new bands and solo acts based on that knowledge. If Apple can get its ad network to hit the same note, it could potentially be serious competition for Google’s AdSense.

The other interesting notion is that Patently Apple has announced a patent that could force users to watch advertising by using their smartphone to interact with the ads. This interaction ensures that the user is watching the whole commercial – a problem for both online and mobile media right now, since many users simply ignore the ad until it’s over.

There are rumors that Apple is considering using techniques like these in exchange for heavily discounted rates on their technology, since they may be unpopular among users who paid well to use their iDevices.

Though iAds has been revealed, exactly how it will be executed has not. We’ll be interested to see how iAds wind up changing the way we use mobile phones – and advertising.

Look at any website devoted to helping families cut their budget, and you’re sure to hear about the amount of money you probably spend on your pricy non-fat no-foam lattes in a month.

What you’re not likely to hear is how much money the average family spends on entertainment every month – and it turns out that number may be significantly more.

New data shows that by adding together cable television, Internet, video games, cell phones and other sources of entertainment and communications, the average family may be spending as much on entertainment as it does on gasoline. That’s a shocking figure considering both the high price of gasoline and the purported low cost of entertainment.

One of the problems is that families don’t view their entertainment as a single bill. They’re more likely to see only the few dollars they spent this week on a few songs purchased on iTunes, the $30 game subscription, the $40 internet bill and so on. They don’t add them together into a single entertainment budget, which, on average, often surpasses $175 a month.

Ironically, many families believe they are saving money by investing in home entertainment rather than going out to see a movie at the theater. It may actually cost less to watch TV at home than go to the movies every night, but it doesn’t mean that the average family can afford the cost of “less” entertainment.

When it comes to revolutionizing how modern-day customers do their banking, USAA is head and shoulders above the pack. This is hardly surprising, as many of its customers are currently deployed on military duty in Afghanistan and Iraq, making innovations in mobile banking one of the most valuable services USAA can provide.

Currently, one of their most impressive offerings includes the ability to deposit a check by merely taking a photo of the front and back and sending it to their bank, who then verifies the transaction. The next step, however, is person-to-person mobile payments that would allow mobile users to send money to other mobile users, make purchases and pay their bills, all from their phone. Think of it like a credit card in your cell phone, or a mobile PayPal.

Nokia is already two steps ahead of USAA in this regard. Nokia Money is set to roll out this 2010, and similar to PayPal, it would charge a percentage or a flat fee for each transaction made on a mobile device. This precedent indicates there may be a new revenue stream available to banks who want to invest in mobile technology. The fees for each transaction are generally small, but they add up significantly. Furthermore, many people who do not have bank accounts do have cell phones, allowing banks to tap into a market they may not have previously considered.

Phone-to-phone mobile banking may be the most popular in the developing world, where cashless payments have previous been an issue. M-Pesa in Kenya has already shown the movement has legs, and person-to-person mobile payments are popular throughout Africa and South Asia. For European and North American markets, person-to-person likely won’t supplant mobile banking, but it could be invaluable to third-world and developing nations who don’t have banking systems that support their economic status.

Retailers including 7-Eleven, Blockbuster, Whole Foods Market, Restoration Hardware, and any number of other equally varied retailers were all banking on the Beatles last year.

The industry recently released – and saw excellent sales from – The Beatles: Rock Band, a video game that allows players to drum, play guitar, and sing along to the classic hits of the Fab Four.

The Beatles are hardly a thing of the past, with many in the younger generation still posting them on their Facebook pages among their favorite artists, right next to more recent inundations to the pop hall of fame like the Jonas Brothers and Miley Cyrus.

Retailers hoping to generate interest in the new video game are relying heavily on interactive devices in their stores and contests that appeal to younger people. 7-Eleven hosted a contest around their Slurpees and Big Gulps, while Best Buy put out setups in over 800 stores and giving away Beatles memorabilia and prizes like trips to London.

Though the majority of sales were expected to go to older players, retailers are pretty certain that those who lived through the glory days of the Brit invasion won’t need much persuasion to relive their favorite memories of Yesterday.

The new Rock Band is bound to see a lot of popularity, especially as the Beatles have notoriously kept their music from becoming available in single-song format on media channels like iTunes.

Airlines have been trying to figure out new ways to increase their bottom line for some years now, which has added to the decline in customer satisfaction.

Customers are unhappy about having to pay for amenities they once took for granted: in-flight meals, free checked baggage, and even the standard complimentary drink is no longer complimentary on many airlines.

Airlines are finding it’s no different for the addition of Wi-Fi. Wi-Fi has been in tests for many airlines, including AirTran Airways, Virgin, Delta, American, and Southwest. The service has seen a lot of usage every time it’s offered, but that usage drops off sharply when customers find they have to pay for the service.

Most airlines are using Gogo from Aircell LLC, which uses a hotspot on the plane to connect to Aircell towers on the ground, to avoid interfering with normal cellular towers and aircraft navigation. Row 44 Inc. recently received approval for a satellite-based service that Southwest will be using to equip all of its planes with Wi-Fi, a service that so far they intend to offer for free.

Aircell has a price control in place, which allows users to buy the service through Aircell and gives the airline a portion of the profits. The service costs $12.95 for flights longer than three hours, $4.95 for flights shorter than an hour and a half, and $9.95 for the in-between flights – a price that many users are finding far too steep.

For others, particularly business travelers, the chance to keep up with their work while in the air is worth almost any price. If it’s going to be profitable, airlines are going to have to find a price point that works for everyone.

It was only a matter of time before we were able to see full-length live TV shows on our hand-held devices.

After all, they could do everything else: play music, download games and applications, keep track of our calendar events and answer our calls. They could also play brief snippets of TV shows or commercials. How long did anyone really think it would take before full-length video arrived?

It’s here. The new smart phones, including the iPhone, Palm Inc.’s Pre and Nokia Corp.’s N-series, have larger screens that make video-watching a more enjoyable experience. In an ironic twist they’re now about as large as the miniscule screens enjoyed by Americans in the first days of television.

We’ve come full circle, but we’re much more mobile.

Consumers can also download their own TV shows, DVR recordings, and other media to their phones using a variety of services provided by companies including Sling Media, CBS, and Nero Inc. It’s even possible to watch live TV in some instances.

The new technology hasn’t boosted the number of mobile users or even video viewers. The numbers from when phone video was only a brief snippet to the present moment, when it can be a full-length episode of Project Runway, haven’t moved substantially.

The ability to watch TV on a smart phone isn’t necessarily enough of a draw to convince an old-time cell user to switch to a smart phone, with higher costs. However, the evidence suggests that longer-form television is worth watching on phones – which means there’s another place for networks to make up their lost ad revenue.