  swintec Premium join:2003-12-19 Alfred, ME | Sprint beat you to it!
Sprints had this since summer and it is great! Went from very little signal in my home to full bars. -- Block Accounts | UseNet Now | |
|
 |   TamaraB Question The Current Paradigm Premium join:2000-11-08 Brooklyn NYC | Re: Sprint beat you to it! More bars for your neighbors too? | |
|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |   rcdailey Dragoonfly Premium join:2005-03-29 Rialto, CA
| Re: Sprint beat you to it! That business about the system being open to other users by default probably means that unless you restrict it to your cell phone only, then the traffic from other users would be attributed to your account and, if there is a cap, would count against that, too. Smart users ought to restrict the devices to their cell phones just on general principle. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |   nixen Rockin' the Boxen Premium join:2002-10-04 Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: Sprint beat you to it! said by swintec :By traffic you mean bandwidth from your ISP correct and not minute wise? From what I understand, even if you have restrictions set up, 911 calls will still be allowed regardless of who is trying. One could always build a Faraday cage inside their house... -- The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  wildcat man
join:2007-11-03 Kansas City, MO
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| you can get unlimited access to any Sprint Femtocell deployed for $10/ mo for an individual, $20/ family. This does not apply to any Sprint cap (this does not travel over the Mobile Broadband card), but will take up some bandwidth for the High Speed Internet provider. more details on the Sprint website www.sprint.com/airave.
I also have an Airave and RR Turbo. It works fine but the first version had some issues. I have about 1 dropped call per month and do a lot of mobile calls out of my home.
The 911 issue would only occur if the caller was in a nearby home. Still, unless the caller cannot talk, the physical address should be validated and this is more precise than some/ most of the triangulation techniques today.
Best kept secret at Sprint. Wish they marketed it as the "best d--- in home network. Period." | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |
  fireflier Coffee. . .Need Coffee Premium join:2001-05-25 Limbo
·Skype
| Yup. "Hopefully the calls being routed over AT&T customers' broadband connections don't count toward the caps and overage fees AT&T is testing in two markets"
That was my first thought too. . .
Then again, from AT&T's perspective it would be great because they could bill you for using your phone, using your internet connection, and then bill you when you go over on your minutes on the phone and bill you when you go over your data allocation caused either by internet use or the phone. Wow, great idea.
And hey, if that works they can also charge you for IPTV related overages too. Think of all the extra income!  -- Tradition: Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid. --despair.com | |
|
 |  beaups
join:2003-08-11 Hilliard, OH | Re: Yup. Caps? come on. Cell calls are what 64kbps?? That is 29MB per hour. So you'd have to talk for 35 hours to use 1GB. At that point you'll have more to worry about with overage fees on the cell bill than your broadband connection. | |
|
 |  |   fireflier Coffee. . .Need Coffee Premium join:2001-05-25 Limbo 1 edit | Re: Yup. Your reasoning assumes voice calls are the only thing going on. The reality is (while not a high probability) that voice calls could contribute to putting one over caps.
Your point is well taken however. | |
|
 |  |  |   nixen Rockin' the Boxen Premium join:2002-10-04 Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: Yup. said by fireflier :Your reasoning assumes voice calls are the only thing going on. The reality is (while not a high probability) that voice calls could contribute to putting one over caps. Your point is well taken however. It also assume that your cell is the only one in your house and that it's possible to secure the access point against usage by neighbors. -- The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell | |
|
 |  |   bobjohnson Premium join:2007-02-03 Titusville, FL | So far every company that has made these mainstream has unlimited calling on the femtocell. | |
|
 |  |  |
 |   nixen Rockin' the Boxen Premium join:2002-10-04 Alexandria, VA | Bonus: you're paying them $100 for the privilege of providing them the additional revenue streams! | |
|
 bnceo
join:2007-10-11 West Orange, NJ
| Where's Verizon? I'm pondering a move to Verizon (mostly because everyone in my family and girlfriend's family has it). I would love Femtocells on Verizon. But as of now, I got Sprint (which I love and would love to try their Airave). So yeah, Verizon, come out with this please. Thanks | |
|
 |  flashcore
join:2007-01-23 Lutherville Timonium, MD | Re: Where's Verizon? There was talk over the summer of Verizon testing femtocells with a release sometime in 2009. | |
|
 |  |
 |  |  bnceo
join:2007-10-11 West Orange, NJ
| Re: Where's Verizon? At this point, I love Sprint and all the features it has. Love the phones too. And I will probably love this Airave. But the only reason I would change is because everyone I know has Verizon and thus makes it easier to downgrade my plan. If Verizon came out with femtocells, I would be more enticed to get it. Where my gf lives is very crappy signal all around. | |
|
 rbrugman
join:2002-09-22 Marquette, MI
| My logic... I don't quite understand how the customer will actually benefit from this service, other than with slightly better coverage in their home/office:
Customer pays $100 for the device Customer pays additional fees to use the device Customer pays for the internet connection that it is routed over Customer pays for cell service that already includes access to cell towers
AT&T sits there and collects all of this money and then passes the network load off to ISPs.
Unless it's free, no Femtocell for me! | |
|
 |  flashcore
join:2007-01-23 Lutherville Timonium, MD
| Re: My logic... I'm with you there. The fees are stupid especially when you have to buy the device as well pay for each phone to access it.
There are devices out there now that cost ~ 200-300 that do basically the same thing only they do not require an internet connection, any of the fees and they work with multiple providers. All they just boost the signal from an antenna you place in your attic or on your roof to a box that looks similar to a wireless access point that is inside of your house. They work quite well if you can get a decent signal outside your house like me but can not get reception inside. | |
|
 |  |  DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX
·Comcast Workplace
·Comcast
| Re: My logic... If they're going to nickel and dime us then whats the point but if they did it this way
pay $100 and you own the device and can have it work for any carrier you want
and no fee just to use it
so it would be a one time cost then it would be ok | |
|
 |   NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Yeah, it is even more funny because ATT to is offloading the expense of running their network onto another company. Ironically, this is the same company that complained that Google and others were using ATT's pipes for nothing. Now ATT is guilty of the same thing. -- There is no such thing as too much vacation, but I would wager that there is such a thing as too little. | |
|
 |  |   nixen Rockin' the Boxen Premium join:2002-10-04 Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: My logic... said by NetAdmin :Yeah, it is even more funny because ATT to is offloading the expense of running their network onto another company. Ironically, this is the same company that complained that Google and others were using ATT's pipes for nothing. Now ATT is guilty of the same thing. Caught that bit of irony, eh? *AND* you're paying for the privilege to help them offload that stuff from their network. Sheer freaking genius on AT&T's part. -- The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell | |
|
 |  blips
join:2001-04-17 Addison, IL
| said by rbrugman :I don't quite understand how the customer will actually benefit from this service, other than with slightly better coverage in their home/office: Customer pays $100 for the device Customer pays additional fees to use the device Customer pays for the internet connection that it is routed over Customer pays for cell service that already includes access to cell towers AT&T sits there and collects all of this money and then passes the network load off to ISPs. Unless it's free, no Femtocell for me! AND if ATT is your DSL provider you will soon pay them for going over your cap. That is a win,win,win,win,win for ATT and you just keep paying. | |
|
 |  |   KAD Imaging Just Shoot It Premium join:2002-09-21 Hialeah, FL
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: My logic... said by blips :AND if ATT is your DSL provider you will soon pay them for going over your cap. That is a win,win,win,win,win for ATT and you just keep paying grabbing yer ankles. There. Fixed it for ya.  | |
|
 |  payurbills
join:2002-01-18 Springfield, VA | I agree.. | |
|
 |   Mountain Jake
| I don't quite understand how the customer will actually benefit from this service, other than with slightly better coverage in their home/office:
Some unlucky people have either really bad service or no service at all where they live. That's very true for a lot of the fringe areas of Colorado, just outside the city or in the foothills. I live in the foothills and have no cell service at all, but I do have high speed Internet. I'm paying for additional phone lines, because my wife works from home and uses our primary line 8 hours a day for work.
Our Qwest phone service is horrible as well. They won't upgrade the CO, so we can't get voicemail or any of the modern services that most people enjoy. A FEMTOCELL would allow me to drop my second phone line and actually be able to get calls from friends, rather than miss them all they time and have to find out 12 to 24 hours later that I got invited to dinner, etc. To me it's a really big deal that will save me about $100 a month and also allow me to finally communicate effectively.  | |
|
 datwell1
join:2002-01-08 Falls Church, VA | AT&T Shareholders Yes! Billed extra for each and every little thing!
Nickel & Dime you to death!
AT&T shareholders will be SO pleased!!
Thank goodness I have Verizon!
--Doug | |
|
 Skippy25
join:2000-09-13 Hazelwood, MO
| So they are......
going to charge us to get a device that benefits them by
A.) Providing better coverage B.) Off loads traffic on their towers C.) Saves them money on improvements by using B to accomplish A
That just doesnt seem to make much sense to me. And I think the second poster has it right..... they will use this to charge us for minutes (whether included in package or overage) and then charge us for bandwidth (whether included in package or overage).
Seriously. Take a step back and realize just how screwed up this is and yet we are allowing them to abuse our blind ignorance like this. | |
|
 beaups
join:2003-08-11 Hilliard, OH | Fuss What's all the fuss about? IF you don't like it, don't buy it. They are not forcing anyone to buy one, no? | |
|
 |  jznomoney
join:2002-08-21 Moscow, PA | Re: Fuss does this support 3g? | |
|
  TamaraB Question The Current Paradigm Premium join:2000-11-08 Brooklyn NYC
·Verizon Online DSL
| What for this? Not knowing anything about this, why would I want to pay AT&T $100 so I can route my iPhone calls over my VZ DSL connection?
If it's to alleviate tower congestion, shouldn't they pay me? Or at least give me the hardware for free? Perhaps I'll grok this after coffee.
Sounds dumb on first waking Off to coffee-time.
Bob -- Motor Vessel - Tamara B. 43' Long-Range Trawler Cape Elizebeth ME. See her Here. | |
|
 |  |
 |  |   nixen Rockin' the Boxen Premium join:2002-10-04 Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: What for this? said by OSUGoose :More than likely it would be somesort of unlimited/free calls while ur calling through it. This is aimed at rual areas more, for the customers they have that get signal outdoors, but as soon as u walk away from the road or go inside, it drops. These people are paying an extra price for being out in the country, from having to buy satellite internet, or only getting basic dsl, and alot of times no cable tv, so they have to get dish or direct. Ah... So the reasoning is, "if you want to be able to use the service you're paying for, you need to pay us extra". This sounds more in line with the Telcos' double-billing dreams for Google (et. al.). -- The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell | |
|
 |   Rob23
@windstream.net
| If you have a cellphone and internet connection,Just look at this as a new landline service from at&t for unlimited calling from your home for 15 dollars a month. Good-bye pots & cable voip. At&t and vz can pick the call at the 1st hop for QOS. This is a GOOD thing. | |
|
 |  FightingBlue
join:2006-04-08 Warsaw, NY | The point is:
1. Unlimited free calling, all the time.
2. Perfect signal.
3. Never any dropped calls or network congestion.
4. Perfect 3G speeds. | |
|
 weaver0
join:2004-05-05 Macungie, PA | Handoffs? for the sprint users of femtocells:
Do they handoff to the cell network okay? | |
|
 |  |
 pbxtx
join:2006-05-24 Plano, TX
| Femtomania As one in the industry and asked to weigh in on this in the past, I'd like to bring a bit of perspective.
For example, if I have a mobile or two and favor WiFi, the extra (device) cost of 1-2 mobiles that do VoWiFi/UMA is certainly less than a femtocell, and one gets the benefit of using the device anywhere there is wifi access. An excellent example of this is T-Mobile USA's HotSpot@home service, and there are others that are independent of the mobile operator, such as Fring on the iphone, or numerous other examples on high end RIM, Nokia, and other handsets that use SIP clients on the phone. Note TMO hotspot@home is really no different than a femtocell, it has somewhat lower lock in (due to no incremental investment in a custom AP), but things like Fring don't support the model of lock-in.
Operators in the US subsidize handsets and will certainly subsidize femtocells, and they will have to recover their substantial femtocell hardware and licensing costs through monthly fees, contracts, and other innovative ways of separating you from your $.
If I have more handsets, such as a family plan and more than 2 mobiles, a femtocell might make sense, if my only objective is coverage in my home. The wifi capability and of course necessary licensing of technology aren't free.
A lot of this issue has to do with cellular operator religion, walled gardens, lock in, and so on. Femtocells lock one into the operator infrastructure, wifi does not, and as such a lot of the traditional US operators will favor femtos over wifi.
The fundamental *user* challenge is a need for good home coverage and/or reasonable cost. A dirty not so secret secret in 3 and 4g is that the in-building coverage is worse at higher frequencies, and that one is going to have to get broadband backhaul to all those cell towers ... folks are going to have to pepper a tower every 1-2 miles or less.
Another observation has to do with network neutrality. The wireless divisions of these companies are going to have to argue for net neutrality on terrestrial connections, otherwise what happens when you deploy a VZ femtocell and the customer has AT&T uverse? The wireline sides of these companies of course are going to argue differently, and argue for something other than network netrality for their own or their partner's packets (welcome to the world of differentiated service and pay for QoS). As we all know, operators treat packets equally, but some packets are more equal than others (to paraphrase Orwell in Animal Farm).
What is optimal for me is wifi support on the handset, but I also won't rule out that femtos might be a good and smart choice for others.
I agree with the posts so far folks... wake up, recognize that a femto locks you in, limits your choice, ... but if it makes sense for you, then I'm not one to object in the end of what may be a rational decision for you. Just be aware of the choice and to ask to be paid if you let other mobiles use your femto.
The problem tho I do see tho is that operators are not pursuing WiFi seriously on the handsets nor is there any interest in the US to make the handset or femtocell open. If one said I could pick from handsets equally and services equally, that would be the case, but it is not. If 3G had been ready, does anyone really think AT&T would have included WiFi on the iphone? And what about all those novel applications that use wifi on the iphone, e.g., Remote which uses the wifi link in your home to message an apple TV (yes I have one of these too). Or would you have to subscribe to a monthly "remote" fee to use the remote application on the femto, and would it be nearly as good, etc. | |
|
 |  decifal
join:2007-03-10 Bon Aqua, TN
| Re: Femtomania This kills me.. First they are placing monthly limits on dsl, now they wish to offload their towers and use up your allocated bandwidth just to keep their upkeep lower and claim they are helping the customer out by allowing them to use this device to increase their signal? What in the hell man..
If they stopped with the caps they are toying with, this wouldn't be such an issue, but my god.. The timing is just too convenient.. That and competition from other services such as blockbuster netflix, and many others.. I call ATT's practice unfair.. I mean how can you compete if the medium your business is controlled by providers that are getting into the same business their selfs and wish for you to leave? It all starts with outside network caps...
And yes, it would take several hours of talking to burn up the limits.. But considering there are "OTHER" things you will be doing with your broadband connection, you'd like to know when its all said and done, you could still freaking check your e-mail at the end of the day without being billed for overusage fees that shouldn't exist to begin with... | |
|
 |  DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX | The iPhone is made by apple not At&t (sure they have a deal) but the iPhone was allways going to have wifi and the remote app wouldn't work through the cell net anyway | |
|
  DEE
@ti.com | More than just the initial cost Also, expect a monthly fee($10-15) to use it on top of the $100 initial cost. | |
|
  odreian615
join:2006-01-18 Chicago, IL | Can ATT Femtocells work with T-mobile and viseversa | |
|
 |  FightingBlue
join:2006-04-08 Warsaw, NY | Re: Can ATT Femtocells work with T-mobile No, they can't. | |
|
  woody7 Premium join:2000-10-13 Torrance, CA | AT&T Femtocells I have a question.Say if you have cable as your broadband connection, and Att as your cell, and you use this product, what does the cable company get out of this or am I missing something? -- BlooMe | |
|
 |  See 6 replies to this post |
|
 ace41690
join:2003-01-24 Northfield, CT | Sprints got it already I got my airave from sprint 100% free, so i think its a good idea  | |
|
  burgerwars
join:2004-09-11 Northridge, CA
·voip.ms
·RoadRunner Cable
| AT&T Femtocells - I hope it's soon. I'm an AT&T Wireless customer mainly because I prefer the flexibility of being able to swap my SIM in and out of any other AT&T (or unlocked GSM phone) as I please, and be up and running. That along with the ability to use any quad band GSM phone overseas, and not be tied to a limited selection of Verizon or Sprint phones that may do the same.
Cellphone reception in my house sucks. This includes T-Mobile. I would be willing to pay $100 for a femtocell if it would solve that issue. Being able to use any other GSM phone that I could put my AT&T SIM in to use a femtocell, would also have an advantage to me rather than being limited to cellphones that can do WiFi.
Just my two cents worth. | |
|
 flyingjoey
join:2005-11-07 Jersey City, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Explain this to me like you'd explain it to your 5 year old So lets see... if I understand correctly... I'd have to pay ATT $100 bucks, so that I can help AT&T compensate for their $h1ty coverage, while using my OWN internet connection and me paying for electricity.
Better yet... this is helping all ATT customers, not just me, in other words, I have a mini antenna in my house for the benefit of ATT.
I think there IS something wrong with this picture.
Now, if ATT came to me and said, we have crappy service in your area, we'll give you $10 bucks a month for you to install this in your house, then I'd consider something like that... otherwise ARE THESE MOBILE CARRIERS OUT OF THEIR FREAKEN MIND! | |
|
 |   skids Dave Roe Premium join:2001-07-16 Newburgh, NY
| Re: Explain this to me like you'd explain it to your 5 year old They might be out of their mind but if you had zero bars in the house and your phone is now a paper weight it is a solution.
I got the Sprint Air Rave back a month ago. Yeah I give them 14.99 a month but in the first month I racked up about 1000 minutes that do not count against my plan.
Now the other 4 phones on the plan don't have to worry about blowing out the plan. Not that my father or mother in law use thier phones that much.
Our copper wire is down to a basic charge and when the power goes out I still have a phone - it's a princess BTW in the closet waiting to be plugged in.
Now I have 5 bars, can get calls and it makes a difference. Not every one lives in an area where the signal is great.
You do what you do to make do. -- Finally got broadband.... RoadRunner is ok but considering I used Direcway for 4 plus years anything would be better......  | |
|
 |
 |
|
 |