[ale] Metropcs 4G LTE vs AT&T DSL (ot)

Sun Feb 5 23:23:03 EST 2012

+1

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Feb 5, 2012 1:20 PM, "Greg Clifton" <gccfof5 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > Granted, we may well not live in the best of all possible worlds.
> Verizon, where I had been "since the silicon cooled off" or for at least 10
> years lost my 5 member family plan (at about $160/mo) over their "no smart
> phone without an additional $15 or $30/mo data plan" policy. So long as
> alternative [non-contract] carriers provide "good enough" coverage I have
> no intention of going back.
> >
> > I think that there are legitimate reasons for the carriers to offload to
> WiFi. Who among us doesn't have WiFi at home and at the office? How many of
> us have had reception issues at home or at the office or both? Obviously
> the carriers can't provide 100% 5 bar coverage of all terrain and inside
> buildings. In the case of TMobile, the ability to offload to WiFi provides
> a much better coverage footprint. This should allow for a more satisfactory
> customer experience without going to the expense of provisioning enough
> cell towers to "fill in the gaps" in their coverage. Also, from home or the
> office it allows you to use your cell phone, with all your contacts
> readily accessible, without eating up your minutes if you do have a metered
> plan. For that reason I think it is a win-win. As to your comment about
> "stealing" service from others, that is a related but separate issue. As I
> understand it, you do have to join your phone to whatever WiFi network(s)
> you wish to use, so it gets down to a matter of conscience as to whether
> you "steal" or not, like the question of whether you pay for shareware or
> not. Also, if you were in an area with poor coverage and had pay per
> minute/hour WiFi available would it be worth it to be able to use your
> phone? For some people, yes, some no, but at least it gives you the option
> to use the phone rather than no option to do so. This frees me up from
> being locked into an exorbitant Verizon contract, which undeniably provides
> the best coverage nationwide. Wouldn't most of us agree that More Choices =
> More Better!?
> >
> > It also must be said that the carriers are pushing the TV services. Most
> of them offer some sort of streaming video (for an additional fee, of
> course); Cricket even has a plan with unlimited music downloads included in
> the monthly charge ($55/mo BTW). There must be an element of classical
> supply and demand, but my take is that some customers want it and the
> carriers want to provide it because it boosts their profits. Just
> speculating here, but as virtualization has boosted server utilization from
> something like 18% up to more like maybe ~80% all this video traffic
> probably pushes the wireless network utilization up to more like maybe 50%?
> Obviously the carriers would love for everybody to pay for gobs of
> bandwidth that they never use, but the next best situation for them would
> be for gobs of people to use SOME of the available bandwidth, for which
> they can be charged extra $, so that they are getting "optimal" utilization
> of their network capacity for some value of optimal.
> >
> > <snip> "I amusing my phone for almost all personal email" just curious
> here, but how do you amuse your phone? ;-)
> >
> By leving out rndom lettes :-) drives the spll chekr nuts!
>
> > On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> good bunch of info.
> >>
> >> My take is all the carriers want you to _buy_ their service but not
> _use_ their service. On one hande they will happily sell a phone with
> required big data plan fee and then turn around a whine about how much
> bandwidth their customers are using and then come up with ways to cut down
> on the access.
> >>
> >> From a technology standpoint, people want more and more data all the
> time. From a social standpoint, most of this data is little more than "TV"
> (and this group has had several discussions of the quality of that :-).
> >>
> >> I bought into Verizon with my droid (first gen). That little phone is
> still running on the original battery. They keep trying to get me to
> upgrade. A rep I spoke with swore that as long as I keep my service with
> them, my unlimited data will remain "unlimited". My wife also has a plan
> from the same time frame. My Verizon bill (4 phone, 2 data plans, large
> text message package on one) is truly a horror!
> >>
> >> I really am unimpressed with moving the data flow off the carrier and
> onto local wireless. It seems to be a crutch/workaround for carriers not
> investing enough to provide the services they offer. They are, in effect,
> stealing carrier service from other people and as many area wi-fi hotspots
> re moving towards a pay-as-you-go structure, the end result is just to
> screw the customer a bit more as they have to pick the added cost of access
> at a coffee shop even though they pay for access from their phone provider.
> >>
> >> I amusing my phone for almost all personal email now as the only laptop
> I use is work provided. I put NOTHING personal on that unless I have to use
> a larger screen to see something. (BTW: the Lenovo ThinkPad W520 is
> __AWESOME___!!!).
> >>
> >> I keep wondering how much longer we can continue to push for larger
> bandwidth data uses before we hit some physical limit on multiplexing
> carrier signals. Maybe if the cell tower range were smaller and there were
> many more of them. I'm thinking street lights as cell points with
> power-line data feeds as multiplex sources for the common carrier crap like
> cell-phone TV. You can just pick up a feed and do some local caching for
> small time shifting.
> >>
> >> Hmm. That would make for a fun, tech/sci-fi horror story: The day the
> bandwidth died.
> >>
> >> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Greg Clifton <gccfof5 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Jesse,
> >>>
> >>> I just spent the better part of a day researching various prepaid
> phone services, not with an eye towards tethering, but what I learned may
> still be helpful in your decision.
> >>>
> >>> First, not all LTE is created equal, and Verizon's version is faster
> than Metro's, they run at different frequencies and are NOT compatible as
> the CDMA technology is. Be sure and check the coverage map for the area(s)
> you will be using the phone and don't plan to use it while traveling (by
> car/bus/train) except in a few large metropolitan centers (they have
> zoomable maps of all the cities where they offer LTE on their web site).
> Also note that Metro has no EVDO (3G) service, so if you don't have
> functional LTE service, you'll be running at 1X data rate on the Metro
> network. Roaming with Metro depends on Verizon (or perhaps Sprint) service
> and if you are out of a home area for 3 months (even less if you are using
> data heavily) Metro will "pull the plug," killing not only your phone but
> also your phone number. In other words, if you are roaming and costing them
> $ they cut you off forever. The technician at the company owned store on
> Steve Reynolds Blvd told me this just a couple of weeks ago. So you loose
> your phone # through Metro (not sure if you could get it back on a
> different carrier, didn't have the presence of mind to ask) and they
> essentially brick your phone. Since Verizon and Metro operate their LTE
> networks at different frequencies (I haven't looked at AT&T) the phones
> can't be taken to a different carrier. This question came up because I have
> a daughter at GCSU in Milledgeville which is in the "Extended Home
> Coverage" area and I was looking into getting the $5 off for each line on a
> "family plan." When the tech told me that, it pretty well put the stake
> through the heart of that idea.
> >>>
> >>> Second, if you do much multimedia streaming you would have to go with
> their $60/month plan and you can get DSL for less than that.
> >>>
> >>> Third, I think all the mobile carriers that offer "unlimited" web will
> be going to a throttled service sooner or later.TMobile was the first
> carrier to reduce your speed until the next month once you hit their data
> limit, IIRC. I am currently on the Virgin Mobile $25/month plan (300minutes
> + unlimited everything else) and I received both an email and a snail mail
> notification recently that they are going to a throttled unlimited service
> effective next month.
> >>>
> >>> Fourth, I assume you intend to use the phone as a phone when not in
> tethered mode and are going without a land line. An alternative, but at the
> cost of another plan, that might server you well if you do travel to any
> large extent, you might consider one of the data only services. If you are
> a Kroger shopper, you may have noticed their iWireless offerings (which is
> Sprint service). My wife is on an iWireless LG Optimus S phone and gets 20
> minutes added to her bucket for each $100 I spend at Kroger on top of the
> minutes we pay for monthly, and the minutes roll over (which is rare for a
> prepaid plan). Sprint is known to have a very good data network that covers
> most of the USA (esp. along the interstates) and you can get the data only
> service through iWireless for ~$40/mo IIRC. This would be EVDO data, so not
> as fast as LTE, but WAY faster than 1X and you would have coverage in most
> population centers as well as between, assuming you were travelling via
> Interstate Hwy.
> >>>
> >>> Fifth, another thing that carriers are doing is offloading to WIFI
> when you have WIFI available. I know that TMobile is doing this and I saw a
> Clark Howard clip saying that Metro is doing it too, but I haven't found
> any mention of it on their website. There is also Rebublic Wireless which
> is in Beta right now, but is developing a business model of providing
> "unlimited" service for $19/month. The phone is set to prefer WIFI over the
> wireless network (Sprint) so that you are using WIFI most of the time ["or
> else"]. As WIFI hot spots become more ubiquitous I think this sort of
> business model will become common at least for voice traffic, but maybe
> also for data traffic.
> >>>
> >>> HTH,
> >>> GC
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:57 AM, jesse james <yoshi_mush_room at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Does anyone know if one of the MetroPCS 4G LTE phones could be
> replacement for basic dsl. I was thinking of getting rid of my dsl and
> getting a Samsung Indulge($200) and just tethering my laptop to it.
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Ale mailing list
> >>>> Ale at ale.org
> >>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >>>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> >>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Ale mailing list
> >>> Ale at ale.org
> >>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> >>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> --
> >> James P. Kinney III
> >>
> >> As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to
> consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they
> please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome.
> >> - 2011 Noam Chomsky
> >>
> >> http://heretothereideas.blogspot.com/
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ale mailing list
> >> Ale at ale.org
> >> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> >> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ale mailing list
> > Ale at ale.org
> > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20120205/470d8c83/attachment-0001.html 