I find the new AT&T/SBC rather rude, obnoxious, and downright ugly, but other than that, they're wonderful.
Randall Stephenson, the CEO of the new AT&T/SBC, seems unhappy to have customers, especially those with smart phones. Speaking at a conference, he told the audience how the carriers could no longer afford to give large subsidies.
I fully expect that the company would hold onto Early Termination Fees, which the carriers have been using as a hedge against someone not finishing their contract. Of course, if you get a US$599.99 phone at US$199.99 and your ETF is only $350, they might be losing something, depending on when you would cancel your contract. It's more likely that they're gaining money because people will be happy with their phone for several months to a year, and as new models are released, they want to switch to the new one.
Randall Stephenson has a habit of attacking the company's smart phone users. First with an attack on iPhone users after the company got an exclusive, and they were in no shape to provide 3G data services because their network was far behind the times and didn't even provide decent 2G data services. Those users who paid $599 for the original iPhone (later refunded part of it when Apple announced a price drop, and people complained loudly), were dragging down the company's profit by requiring an upgrade to their network.
When Android users stepped on board, Mr. Stephenson once again complained about the expenditures.
Surely, if the company doesn't want to be in business, they should stop. If the stress of his US$22 million per year, or whatever it is currently, is too much for his delicate sensibilities, he should take up basket weaving.
When AT&T Wireless was still in business, they seemed to be on the up-and-up, but SBC/Cingular/The New AT&T seems to deceive wherever possible and doesn't like their customers.
They make fun of their customers in the advertising and complain about them quite often. They boast network statistics that aren't always accurate or precise. "More Bars in More Places" comes to mind, or the bit about the most 4G coverage, when they had increased the speed of their 3G services and had no LTE.
I've witnessed their "More Bars in More Places" when I lived in the Orlando, Florida area. My first phone call was dropped 6 times in 10 minutes with 3 towers visible from my house. In June of 2012, I went to the trouble of trying a 4G mobile hotspot from AT&T first. I bought a refurbished model from their web site, and the three days it was in shipment, they charged me for data usage and typical expenses.
When I activated the mobile hotspot, it required an update, which was not free to be downloaded. How it left the warehouse or refurbishment without the update, I have no idea. Customer service was pleasant enough about the situation and had some difficulty removing the charges, but they fixed things for me. Nowhere in my area did they have LTE nor did they have their enhanced HSPA+ and their almost unused 3G data service was about the same speed as my current Sprint service was, even though it was loaded with 3G customers and AT&T wasn't.
I ended up cancelling, returning and running away as quickly as possible. They continued to charge me various fees after the fact, and I called repeatedly to remind them that I no longer had the device.
So, if the customers are too much for the company to bear, should they charge the customers more--more for their phone (initially), more for their service, more for their ETF?
I suspect T-Mobile (in metropolitan areas) will have more business than they can handle, but they're willing. Verizon will pick up customers who don't mind the inconvenience of switching between voice and data for the time being. Sprint might even get some customers looking for unlimited data and a superior LTE experience, once Spark (tri-band LTE) is fully functional.
I must congratulate AT&T on being able to keep customers, while disliking them and abusing them.
At to that, this article on AT&T eliminating a technology, and trying to push up prices to any wholesale customer looking for the internet backend (backhaul) to support their retail internet data services.
It's funny to me that BellSouth (before SBC/the New AT&T absorbed them) was charging me a "recovery" fee for universal access--sharing their lines--when they resisted any sharing of their lines.
I'm thinking that the only thing that BellSouth ever did for me, before they were absorbed by SBC, was to offer me faster DSL service for the same price. They were charging $37.95 per month for 1.5 Mbps, which was an unlikely speed. Some time one year later, someone called to get me to buy a higher speed, and during the discussion, they told me that they could lower the price by $5.00, to the new price (which should have occurred automatically, don't you think?) or to double the speed to 3.0 Mbps down. Of course, I went for the 3.0 Mbps. Funny though, that in November 2006, I started to tether my Sprint phone and found that tethering was faster than BellSouth's 3.0 Mbps DSL.
I guess the new AT&T is just having a tough time, and they're trying to pass it on to everyone else.
Here's something else: They've been selling phone records to the CIA.
Showing posts with label HSPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HSPA. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Monday, November 12, 2012
Give me the real 4G!
It seems that people are so starved for data (or merely terribly impatient) that 4G mobile data can't come soon enough.
I consider how few companies had a 3G presence in the U.S.A. in late 2006 when I got my first 3G data-capable phone and things seem much less advanced for 4G than faux G today.
Given that AT&T and T-Mobile hammer home this message that they have 4G everywhere, and that even LTE itself is not truly considered a 4G technology by ITU, the U.S.A. has very little coverage that's not close to old technologies. HSPA+ can deliver great speeds but supposedly it's inefficient or they wouldn't be trying to replace it.
I remember looking back to the iPhone launch in 2007 and AT&T had little in the way of 3G coverage. Verizon's more recent advertising ridiculed AT&T's 3G coverage. When AT&T realized that it looked ridiculous, they stopped naming places where they had 3G and started telling everyone that they were covered for data access.
I used WiMAX the other day, and if you don't know, WiMAX was the initial 3.5G data technology that was used by Sprint/Clear/ClearWire in the U.S.A. and had thriving networks in several other countries before LTE was available. WiMAX in the U.S.A. was hampered by some really terrible frequency that allowed it to reach a good distance outdoors but not work much indoors at all, unable to penetrate walls with any consistency.
In my experience, I haven't seen much difference between the speed of WiMAX and LTE in this area. Both hovered around 5 Mbps download speed for me, on Sprint and Verizon, respectively. Once Verizon completes their rollout of LTE, that will likely change, as they'll have a similar number of towers, plus a faster technology. Of course, Sprint isn't sitting still and with the boost of Softbank, maybe they'll have some decent LTE coverage by the end of 2013. Maybe, we'll all have some decent LTE coverage by then.
My mobile hotspot supports WiMAX and LTE, plus 3G, so I'm mostly prepared except that Sprint will add a lower frequency once they decommission the last of Nextel's iDEN network, which operates at 800 MHz. Unfortunately, the mobile hotspot doesn't cover Sprint's lower 3G frequency either, so when things get rough, the tough have to pack it up and forget the internet. (I was wondering why my phone had better connections than my dedicated, data-only device. Now, I know.)
I wonder how 4G coverage will change 2G coverage. There are still places where I see no 3G coverage but I understand that AT&T are re-purposing their 2G towers for 4G spectrum in metropolitan areas.
This weekend, I'll likely be on the move and I should pass through Atlanta (stuck on I-75 isn't much of a place to test), where Sprint already has LTE active in some state of service. Whether I'll actually find coverage or not will be interesting. I'm likely to find WiMAX coverage in the Orlando area (10-13Mbps on I-drive!). WiMAX was a mixed bag in southeastern Pennsylvania, Delaware, and southern New Jersey. At my motel in Wilmington/Newark/Christiana Delaware, WiMAX was the only reliable technology. Voice calls were absolutely horrible but I was getting 4+ Mbps from WiMAX in the same location.
If I look back to my entry into 3G data in the second half of 2006 to now, it took probably 4 years for 3G to be strong enough to be considered everywhere. Can we wait until 2015 or 2016?
Update 2013.10.26: It's nearly a year later and AT&T is claiming to have the fastest and most reliable LTE network. Verizon seems to have the most coverage, although putting LTE on 1 tower is not really coverage, is it? Sprint has started their LTE network and they've changed greatly by being 70 some percent owned by Softbank telecommunications of Japan, and Sprint bought Clearwire, of which they were already a majority shareholder and customer. T-Mobile has accelerated their network buildout by buying MetroPCS and their LTE network. Still, it's mostly Verizon and AT&T at this point.
I consider how few companies had a 3G presence in the U.S.A. in late 2006 when I got my first 3G data-capable phone and things seem much less advanced for 4G than faux G today.
Given that AT&T and T-Mobile hammer home this message that they have 4G everywhere, and that even LTE itself is not truly considered a 4G technology by ITU, the U.S.A. has very little coverage that's not close to old technologies. HSPA+ can deliver great speeds but supposedly it's inefficient or they wouldn't be trying to replace it.
I remember looking back to the iPhone launch in 2007 and AT&T had little in the way of 3G coverage. Verizon's more recent advertising ridiculed AT&T's 3G coverage. When AT&T realized that it looked ridiculous, they stopped naming places where they had 3G and started telling everyone that they were covered for data access.
I used WiMAX the other day, and if you don't know, WiMAX was the initial 3.5G data technology that was used by Sprint/Clear/ClearWire in the U.S.A. and had thriving networks in several other countries before LTE was available. WiMAX in the U.S.A. was hampered by some really terrible frequency that allowed it to reach a good distance outdoors but not work much indoors at all, unable to penetrate walls with any consistency.
In my experience, I haven't seen much difference between the speed of WiMAX and LTE in this area. Both hovered around 5 Mbps download speed for me, on Sprint and Verizon, respectively. Once Verizon completes their rollout of LTE, that will likely change, as they'll have a similar number of towers, plus a faster technology. Of course, Sprint isn't sitting still and with the boost of Softbank, maybe they'll have some decent LTE coverage by the end of 2013. Maybe, we'll all have some decent LTE coverage by then.
My mobile hotspot supports WiMAX and LTE, plus 3G, so I'm mostly prepared except that Sprint will add a lower frequency once they decommission the last of Nextel's iDEN network, which operates at 800 MHz. Unfortunately, the mobile hotspot doesn't cover Sprint's lower 3G frequency either, so when things get rough, the tough have to pack it up and forget the internet. (I was wondering why my phone had better connections than my dedicated, data-only device. Now, I know.)
I wonder how 4G coverage will change 2G coverage. There are still places where I see no 3G coverage but I understand that AT&T are re-purposing their 2G towers for 4G spectrum in metropolitan areas.
This weekend, I'll likely be on the move and I should pass through Atlanta (stuck on I-75 isn't much of a place to test), where Sprint already has LTE active in some state of service. Whether I'll actually find coverage or not will be interesting. I'm likely to find WiMAX coverage in the Orlando area (10-13Mbps on I-drive!). WiMAX was a mixed bag in southeastern Pennsylvania, Delaware, and southern New Jersey. At my motel in Wilmington/Newark/Christiana Delaware, WiMAX was the only reliable technology. Voice calls were absolutely horrible but I was getting 4+ Mbps from WiMAX in the same location.
If I look back to my entry into 3G data in the second half of 2006 to now, it took probably 4 years for 3G to be strong enough to be considered everywhere. Can we wait until 2015 or 2016?
Update 2013.10.26: It's nearly a year later and AT&T is claiming to have the fastest and most reliable LTE network. Verizon seems to have the most coverage, although putting LTE on 1 tower is not really coverage, is it? Sprint has started their LTE network and they've changed greatly by being 70 some percent owned by Softbank telecommunications of Japan, and Sprint bought Clearwire, of which they were already a majority shareholder and customer. T-Mobile has accelerated their network buildout by buying MetroPCS and their LTE network. Still, it's mostly Verizon and AT&T at this point.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Mobile Hotspots and Me
I've been using a mobile internet connection since late 2006. I got a new mobile phone, the Samsung SPH-A900 or Blade. (This was later Lex Luthor's phone on Smallville. I felt so evil.) The one feature that intrigued me was the "phone as modem" capability. I did some checking and got it to work using Sprint's 3G EVDO technology. It was faster than the 3 Mbps DSL line from BellSouth that I'd been using, except in PING response speed.
Once I had things set, I discontinued my DSL service and never looked back. Then, I moved again to a rural community (to help with my parents) where Sprint had no 3G service. Often, their 1.5G speed was worse than dial up. They were slated for 3G service the month before I arrived, but something wasn't working and the technicians didn't understand what was happening. In the middle of a freezing, snowy January they figured it out. I would go from 2 Mbps to dial up speeds about once every 6 weeks, call customer service who told me that there was nothing wrong, but they would send me PRL updates, etc. and the phone would work better for 6 weeks. There was "nothing wrong with their network" over an LG Musiq, LG Lotus, LG Optimus S, and finally the iPhone 4S. I didn't draw the same conclusion about their network.
In these last 3 years, it's become slightly more stable, and with an iPhone having EVDO Revision A technology, I'd seen downlink speeds of 3 - 4 Mbps fairly regularly and I'd once or twice seen downloads through Firefox exceed 500 KB/sec. Someone in the neighbourhood apparently got connected to Sprint recently and my numbers dwindled to unusable--shutting off the phone unusable. Besides that, Apple's iOS 5.x mobile hotspot is unstable.
Back on June 6th, I decided to do something about the situation. I ordered a Sierra Wireless Elevate from AT&T. I'm not very trusting of the company since they were Southwestern Bell + PacBell + AmeriTech + BellSouth and who knows what other baby Bells. I went against my feelings.
The device arrived on the 8th and it arrived with the SIM card installed and I just needed to tailor it to my needs. Despite the slick marketing, it wasn't very fast using HSPA/HSPA+. Granted, it was much better than unusable but for all their hype, it was barely faster than Sprint at best and it rarely achieved the best time, despite a lack of users. Once they had as many users as Sprint, they'd be in trouble. Then, they gave me the first bill and I was a bit shocked that they charged me for data usage while it was being shipped to me. It wasn't that the money was so high, but that I was paying for time when I didn't have access to it. Several times, it wasn't connected for whatever reason and a power cycle (power off/power on) was necessary. This was a refurbished unit, so it should have been working much better. I returned the whole thing and cancelled the contract. I must pay for the usage but supposedly, I shouldn't have to pay for anything else--supposedly. The usage was rather high. In 10 days, I'd used slightly more than 2.5 GB--half my monthly allowance, and overages were $10 per 1 GB.
I went to a corporate Verizon store in the same town and bought a hotspot. This was made by ZTE. I was uncomfortable with all the complaints about the latest Novatel Wireless MiFi LTE device. Verizon has a 10 GB plan for $80, as well as the typical 5 GB plan for $50. This ZTE device (#890L) has been out about a month, so it might not be so foolproof, and I'm definitely a fool. By the way, all of these devices support LTE, where you can find it available. The ZTE device does not keep track of data used, so you're on your own to look for overages.
Unfortunately, I didn't take the computer with me, so I didn't get to experience LTE right away. However, I wouldn't be returning to a house with LTE available so, did it really matter? When I returned home, I set it to charge and connected and personalised it. It worked fine but Verizon's EVDO/3G service is slower than Sprint's and it's just as overloaded as Sprint's. Oops.
I had a download of over 800 MBs waiting that I wasn't going to ignore and since I was on the last day of the billing cycle (last day to start?), I tried downloading. It showed 2 hours, 15 hours, 3 hours, 1 day, and levelled off at 6 hours and change. Whoa! I went to another location closer to the main road and it was just as bad. (Since I wrote this in June, Verizon Wireless has implemented LTE service in town. I don't know if it's good or bad, but a friend has a Samsung Galaxy S III and it shows up as having LTE service available. I guess I should have been more patient.) I headed back toward the town where I bought the device, where LTE was active, and the download finished the final ~700 MB in 20 minutes. I tried speedtest.net just after that and it recorded something a bit over 5 Mbps--not blazing speed in my experience, though there was a peak of 25 Mbps for maybe half a second. That's not exactly what I'd expect from the nation's fastest 4G network but better than what I'd seen from their 3G network, of course.
One problem I've noticed with the ZTE 890L is that connected to EVDO/3G and using battery only, once disconnected it needs a power cycle to be usable again. It doesn't happen connected to a power outlet. Another odd thing I've noticed with the Verizon network in town is that they seem to be on EVDO Revision 0 instead of Revision A, even though they claimed years ago that their whole network was faster than Sprint's because they were on Revision A.
My exploration and experimentation is complete. Sprint had the best speed in town and perhaps after their capacity and data speed upgrades, they'll be faster than Verizon here. They'll probably be faster than AT&T, if AT&T actually get some customers and therefore, get the congestion.
I ended up returning the Verizon device about a week from when I bought it. I'm now using another Sierra Wireless device from Sprint with a huge (over double the size) 3700 mAh battery for long life (and long charging) that cost $99.99 after rebate. They call it "Tri-Fi", as it supports EVDO/3G, WiMAX, and LTE; the latter two being considered casually as 4G technologies. I like that it keep track of data during the session, as well as overall usage. I'll see how it works in a WiMAX environment since I'm planning a trip to Philadelphia.
Update 2014.03.02: This ended badly overall, and I've changed again.
Once I had things set, I discontinued my DSL service and never looked back. Then, I moved again to a rural community (to help with my parents) where Sprint had no 3G service. Often, their 1.5G speed was worse than dial up. They were slated for 3G service the month before I arrived, but something wasn't working and the technicians didn't understand what was happening. In the middle of a freezing, snowy January they figured it out. I would go from 2 Mbps to dial up speeds about once every 6 weeks, call customer service who told me that there was nothing wrong, but they would send me PRL updates, etc. and the phone would work better for 6 weeks. There was "nothing wrong with their network" over an LG Musiq, LG Lotus, LG Optimus S, and finally the iPhone 4S. I didn't draw the same conclusion about their network.
In these last 3 years, it's become slightly more stable, and with an iPhone having EVDO Revision A technology, I'd seen downlink speeds of 3 - 4 Mbps fairly regularly and I'd once or twice seen downloads through Firefox exceed 500 KB/sec. Someone in the neighbourhood apparently got connected to Sprint recently and my numbers dwindled to unusable--shutting off the phone unusable. Besides that, Apple's iOS 5.x mobile hotspot is unstable.
Back on June 6th, I decided to do something about the situation. I ordered a Sierra Wireless Elevate from AT&T. I'm not very trusting of the company since they were Southwestern Bell + PacBell + AmeriTech + BellSouth and who knows what other baby Bells. I went against my feelings.
The device arrived on the 8th and it arrived with the SIM card installed and I just needed to tailor it to my needs. Despite the slick marketing, it wasn't very fast using HSPA/HSPA+. Granted, it was much better than unusable but for all their hype, it was barely faster than Sprint at best and it rarely achieved the best time, despite a lack of users. Once they had as many users as Sprint, they'd be in trouble. Then, they gave me the first bill and I was a bit shocked that they charged me for data usage while it was being shipped to me. It wasn't that the money was so high, but that I was paying for time when I didn't have access to it. Several times, it wasn't connected for whatever reason and a power cycle (power off/power on) was necessary. This was a refurbished unit, so it should have been working much better. I returned the whole thing and cancelled the contract. I must pay for the usage but supposedly, I shouldn't have to pay for anything else--supposedly. The usage was rather high. In 10 days, I'd used slightly more than 2.5 GB--half my monthly allowance, and overages were $10 per 1 GB.
I went to a corporate Verizon store in the same town and bought a hotspot. This was made by ZTE. I was uncomfortable with all the complaints about the latest Novatel Wireless MiFi LTE device. Verizon has a 10 GB plan for $80, as well as the typical 5 GB plan for $50. This ZTE device (#890L) has been out about a month, so it might not be so foolproof, and I'm definitely a fool. By the way, all of these devices support LTE, where you can find it available. The ZTE device does not keep track of data used, so you're on your own to look for overages.
Unfortunately, I didn't take the computer with me, so I didn't get to experience LTE right away. However, I wouldn't be returning to a house with LTE available so, did it really matter? When I returned home, I set it to charge and connected and personalised it. It worked fine but Verizon's EVDO/3G service is slower than Sprint's and it's just as overloaded as Sprint's. Oops.
I had a download of over 800 MBs waiting that I wasn't going to ignore and since I was on the last day of the billing cycle (last day to start?), I tried downloading. It showed 2 hours, 15 hours, 3 hours, 1 day, and levelled off at 6 hours and change. Whoa! I went to another location closer to the main road and it was just as bad. (Since I wrote this in June, Verizon Wireless has implemented LTE service in town. I don't know if it's good or bad, but a friend has a Samsung Galaxy S III and it shows up as having LTE service available. I guess I should have been more patient.) I headed back toward the town where I bought the device, where LTE was active, and the download finished the final ~700 MB in 20 minutes. I tried speedtest.net just after that and it recorded something a bit over 5 Mbps--not blazing speed in my experience, though there was a peak of 25 Mbps for maybe half a second. That's not exactly what I'd expect from the nation's fastest 4G network but better than what I'd seen from their 3G network, of course.
One problem I've noticed with the ZTE 890L is that connected to EVDO/3G and using battery only, once disconnected it needs a power cycle to be usable again. It doesn't happen connected to a power outlet. Another odd thing I've noticed with the Verizon network in town is that they seem to be on EVDO Revision 0 instead of Revision A, even though they claimed years ago that their whole network was faster than Sprint's because they were on Revision A.
My exploration and experimentation is complete. Sprint had the best speed in town and perhaps after their capacity and data speed upgrades, they'll be faster than Verizon here. They'll probably be faster than AT&T, if AT&T actually get some customers and therefore, get the congestion.
I ended up returning the Verizon device about a week from when I bought it. I'm now using another Sierra Wireless device from Sprint with a huge (over double the size) 3700 mAh battery for long life (and long charging) that cost $99.99 after rebate. They call it "Tri-Fi", as it supports EVDO/3G, WiMAX, and LTE; the latter two being considered casually as 4G technologies. I like that it keep track of data during the session, as well as overall usage. I'll see how it works in a WiMAX environment since I'm planning a trip to Philadelphia.
Update 2014.03.02: This ended badly overall, and I've changed again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)