Seriously though, isn't anyone else concerned with what's happening to mobile data?
Sure. It's completely meaningless, though, because there's nothing we can do about it.
Eventually we'll have LTE-A connections at 600Mbps, usable only on our smartphones, no tethering to computers, and a 5GB per month cap for $70 a month on top of our telephony.
Correction: Cingular came from a merger between Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems and Bell South Mobile (Not sure if that was the actual Bell South name).
Southwestern Bell then bought Bell South and shortly thereafter AT&T.
SouthWestern Bell then dropped the SW Bell name in favor of ATT (which no longer stands for American Telephone & Telegraph, but funny how they use both ATT and AT&T today)
Now we are back to AT&T Wireless.
There could be another correction to this coming because although I worked for SW Bell when all of this happened, I've slept since then.
Sure. It's completely meaningless, though, because there's nothing we can do about it.
Eventually we'll have LTE-A connections at 600Mbps, usable only on our smartphones, no tethering to computers, and a 5GB per month cap for $70 a month on top of our telephony.
And there's nothing. we. can. do. about. it.
And what historical precedent do you sight to back that prediction up? Data has become exponentially less expensive as time goes on. I get 3-4Mbps down, and 1-2Mbps up, and am allowed 4 gigs a month, including tethering, for $45 a month on top of the cost of minutes on my iPhone. That's insane. It was only a few years ago that I remember signing up for the first broadband service available in my neighborhood, and it was a 1Mbps down, 256Kbps up, cable connection for $90 a month. Back then phones were just beginning to regularly come with "mobile internet" capability, and they charged (a LOT) per Kb. If you could somehow figure out how to actually use 1 gig in a month it would cost you hundreds and hundreds of $$$, if not thousands.
It's basically all but guaranteed that we'll be paying less, if not significantly less, for data as time goes on.
The only thing T-Mobile has posted about the iPhone since the announcement:
I gather that a course in basic English is in order, especially in 'verb tensing'.
Not understanding the difference in simple and and future tenses would start. Makes one wonder how many dumber-than-doorknobbers are out there. Certainly a lot of them are here.
As for the 'conspiracy theory'; hopefully the doorknob is only one one sided of the door. IMO.
Haha am I missing something? I linked directly to that statement in my post... I know that's exactly what they said because that's exactly what I was referring to the whole time. To be honest I'm not even sure what "side" you're on, whether or not you're saying the iPhone is coming or not. As far as I'm concerned now, it's not even a question anymore. Of course their previous customers will be able to buy one, they'll be a part of AT&T. Period. T-Mobile only said they weren't getting it because they wanted to make it clear that it wouldn't happen in the next 12 months while T-Mobile still technically exists. Why would Apple make a deal with a company that won't exist this time next year? Then again, for all I know you think the same thing.
Just a reminder folks: One of the conditions that AT&T had to abide to in order to obtain a 5-year exclusivity for the iPhone was Jobs demand that they lower (significantly) the price they charged for data.
Um, no.
I had a Cingular phone before SBC bought ATT, renamed itself, and bought Bellsouth and Cingular.
Unlimited data was $20/month then. When I got an iPhone 3g, that increased to $30/month. Now it's unavailable at any price.
By becoming a fairly large shareholder in AT&T with the few tens of billion in new AT&T stocks that will be part of the transaction.
Tens of billions of shares?
There are only 5.9 billion shares outstanding.
The shares (not mentioned in the original article) will be $14 billion at the price within 30 days of the transaction, in addition to the $25 billion cash. Currently, ATT is ~$28.26 so at this price it would be 495 million shares, not tens of billions.
It's basically all but guaranteed that we'll be paying less, if not significantly less, for data as time goes on.
I guess what the guy you quoted (and many others) are referring to is that the TMO deal lowers competition, effectively creating a duopoly. This usually never ends up in lower prices for the consumer.
The prices you yourself quoted are double what I pay and are for 1/5 my speed. And you think they'll come down after competition is reduced even further?
Don't expect this deal to go through to fast. DOJ, FCC are all going to look this over carefully. I believe a senator already called for a review of this merger which translates into more time spent on this. This could take a year just to complete.
And what historical precedent do you sight to back that prediction up? Data has become exponentially less expensive as time goes on. I get 3-4Mbps down, and 1-2Mbps up, and am allowed 4 gigs a month, including tethering, for $45 a month on top of the cost of minutes on my iPhone. That's insane. It was only a few years ago that I remember signing up for the first broadband service available in my neighborhood, and it was a 1Mbps down, 256Kbps up, cable connection for $90 a month. Back then phones were just beginning to regularly come with "mobile internet" capability, and they charged (a LOT) per Kb. If you could somehow figure out how to actually use 1 gig in a month it would cost you hundreds and hundreds of $$$, if not thousands.
It's basically all but guaranteed that we'll be paying less, if not significantly less, for data as time goes on.
How about the attack on net neutrality by the republican party? Wireless data wasn't subjected to the same rules as land lines, and something like Verizon's trotting is a direct result of this bs.
Haha am I missing something? I linked directly to that statement in my post... I know that's exactly what they said because that's exactly what I was referring to the whole time. To be honest I'm not even sure what "side" you're on, whether or not you're saying the iPhone is coming or not. As far as I'm concerned now, it's not even a question anymore. Of course their previous customers will be able to buy one, they'll be a part of AT&T. Period. T-Mobile only said they weren't getting it because they wanted to make it clear that it wouldn't happen in the next 12 months while T-Mobile still technically exists. Why would Apple make a deal with a company that won't exist this time next year? Then again, for all I know you think the same thing.
No offense, but you are still totally missing the boat (in my opinion). T-Mobile has not since the merger, nor prior to the merger ever said "we are not getting the iphone". Tmobile's statement simply said "We do not offer the iphone". Re-read that quote. It is written in the present tense, as in, we do not offer the iphone today. T-Mobile has said nothing about whether or not they will get the iphone, regarless of the AT&T deal. They did not say we will not get the iphone. HUGE difference. To me, when I read it, I assumed it meant they would be getting the iphone 5 the same time AT&T does. Would you prefer they say, "We are getting the iphone in June. Please stop buying phones from us"...not going to happen. They released a true statement, which will not slow phone sales until a huge IPhone announcement.
Also, very telling, check out the frequently asked quesytions page today. All refernecs to the iphone have been deleted. Not even the "we do not off the iphone".
And Apple would make a deal with T-mobile to sell the iphone in order to make money. Apple doesn't care whether they will officially be around in two years.
I recently got the "iPhone 4 - Factory Unlocked (apple store unlocked)", but unfortunately EDGE is still the only option on it for T-Mobile..
Is there an app or hack or a way to enable usage HSPA+ (T-Mobile Network) on “iPhone 4″. I read that the hardware on the “iPhone 4″ is capable of picking up HSPA+, but the software currently is not allowing it to. That would be an upgrade worth paying for… EDGE is to freaking slow.
No, the iPhone 4 does not have any hardware for HSPA+.
Nor does it have any hardware frequency support for T-Mobile's 3G.
I'm jus saying, I've seen plenty of forced software on hardware it doesn't belong too.
And frequencies??? The "iPhone 4" has the abilities to pick up other types of frequencies, examples radars, rc cars, cell phones towers... Why wouldn't it be capable of being able to utilize tmobiles network 3G/4G ... If older version iPhones basebands can be altered..
I'm jus saying, I've seen plenty of forced software on hardware it doesn't belong too.
How do you expect to write software to do something the hardware is physically incapable of doing?
Quote:
And frequencies??? The "iPhone 4" has the abilities to pick up other types of frequencies, examples radars, rc cars, cell phones towers...
No, it? doesn't.
Quote:
Why wouldn't it be capable of being able to utilize tmobiles network 3G/4G ?
Because it's physically impossible.
Quote:
If older version iPhones basebands can be altered..
Baseband is software? which can't do anything for hardware, like we've said.
Here, read this blurb.
Quote:
AT&T uses Band II (1900 MHz) or Band V (850 MHz), T-Mobile uses Band IV AWS (part lower part of 1700 MHz and lower part of 2100 MHz), it will never be compatible. The 2100 MHz band the iphone uses is Band I.
Cell receptions are achieved by calibrating the resonant crystal, which is done on hardware level, so software override is not possible
No, the iPhone 4 does not have any hardware for HSPA+.
Nor does it have any hardware frequency support for T-Mobile's 3G.
Yes, the iPhone 4 does have hardware for HSPA+. It's only in the Verizon iPhone 4, but it exists nonetheless. Click here to read an article detailing the specific chip.
Yes, the iPhone 4 does have hardware for HSPA+. It's only in the Verizon iPhone 4, but it exists nonetheless. Click here to read an article detailing the specific chip.
Comments
Seriously though, isn't anyone else concerned with what's happening to mobile data?
Sure. It's completely meaningless, though, because there's nothing we can do about it.
Eventually we'll have LTE-A connections at 600Mbps, usable only on our smartphones, no tethering to computers, and a 5GB per month cap for $70 a month on top of our telephony.
And there's nothing. we. can. do. about. it.
Correction: Cingular swallowed AT&T.
Correction: Cingular came from a merger between Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems and Bell South Mobile (Not sure if that was the actual Bell South name).
Southwestern Bell then bought Bell South and shortly thereafter AT&T.
SouthWestern Bell then dropped the SW Bell name in favor of ATT (which no longer stands for American Telephone & Telegraph, but funny how they use both ATT and AT&T today)
Now we are back to AT&T Wireless.
There could be another correction to this coming because although I worked for SW Bell when all of this happened, I've slept since then.
The McRib doesn't come with a rider defining what constitutes a McRib (What DOES constitute a McRib, anyway?), but I see your point.
Well, if that's the case, I don't have any compelling reason to stay with AT&T. Good to know. Thanks.
The same thing that constitutes a Big Mac, McNuggets, the fries, shakes, and everything else they sell...
McSTUFF!!!
Just inject it into the appropriate mold, add color, and viola.
Sure. It's completely meaningless, though, because there's nothing we can do about it.
Eventually we'll have LTE-A connections at 600Mbps, usable only on our smartphones, no tethering to computers, and a 5GB per month cap for $70 a month on top of our telephony.
And there's nothing. we. can. do. about. it.
And what historical precedent do you sight to back that prediction up? Data has become exponentially less expensive as time goes on. I get 3-4Mbps down, and 1-2Mbps up, and am allowed 4 gigs a month, including tethering, for $45 a month on top of the cost of minutes on my iPhone. That's insane. It was only a few years ago that I remember signing up for the first broadband service available in my neighborhood, and it was a 1Mbps down, 256Kbps up, cable connection for $90 a month. Back then phones were just beginning to regularly come with "mobile internet" capability, and they charged (a LOT) per Kb. If you could somehow figure out how to actually use 1 gig in a month it would cost you hundreds and hundreds of $$$, if not thousands.
It's basically all but guaranteed that we'll be paying less, if not significantly less, for data as time goes on.
The only thing T-Mobile has posted about the iPhone since the announcement:
I gather that a course in basic English is in order, especially in 'verb tensing'.
Not understanding the difference in simple and and future tenses would start. Makes one wonder how many dumber-than-doorknobbers are out there. Certainly a lot of them are here.
As for the 'conspiracy theory'; hopefully the doorknob is only one one sided of the door. IMO.
Haha am I missing something? I linked directly to that statement in my post... I know that's exactly what they said because that's exactly what I was referring to the whole time. To be honest I'm not even sure what "side" you're on, whether or not you're saying the iPhone is coming or not. As far as I'm concerned now, it's not even a question anymore. Of course their previous customers will be able to buy one, they'll be a part of AT&T. Period. T-Mobile only said they weren't getting it because they wanted to make it clear that it wouldn't happen in the next 12 months while T-Mobile still technically exists. Why would Apple make a deal with a company that won't exist this time next year? Then again, for all I know you think the same thing.
And what historical precedent do you sight to back that prediction up?
Texting was once 5 cents. Now it's 20. It costs the carrier $0.00.
Data has become exponentially less expensive as time goes on.
Faster data means more money.
It's basically all but guaranteed that we'll be paying less, if not significantly less, for data as time goes on.
Keep living in that world. Dreams were fun when we were young.
Just a reminder folks: One of the conditions that AT&T had to abide to in order to obtain a 5-year exclusivity for the iPhone was Jobs demand that they lower (significantly) the price they charged for data.
Um, no.
I had a Cingular phone before SBC bought ATT, renamed itself, and bought Bellsouth and Cingular.
Unlimited data was $20/month then. When I got an iPhone 3g, that increased to $30/month. Now it's unavailable at any price.
This is better how?
By becoming a fairly large shareholder in AT&T with the few tens of billion in new AT&T stocks that will be part of the transaction.
Tens of billions of shares?
There are only 5.9 billion shares outstanding.
The shares (not mentioned in the original article) will be $14 billion at the price within 30 days of the transaction, in addition to the $25 billion cash. Currently, ATT is ~$28.26 so at this price it would be 495 million shares, not tens of billions.
It's basically all but guaranteed that we'll be paying less, if not significantly less, for data as time goes on.
I guess what the guy you quoted (and many others) are referring to is that the TMO deal lowers competition, effectively creating a duopoly. This usually never ends up in lower prices for the consumer.
The prices you yourself quoted are double what I pay and are for 1/5 my speed. And you think they'll come down after competition is reduced even further?
Regs, Jarkko
And what historical precedent do you sight to back that prediction up? Data has become exponentially less expensive as time goes on. I get 3-4Mbps down, and 1-2Mbps up, and am allowed 4 gigs a month, including tethering, for $45 a month on top of the cost of minutes on my iPhone. That's insane. It was only a few years ago that I remember signing up for the first broadband service available in my neighborhood, and it was a 1Mbps down, 256Kbps up, cable connection for $90 a month. Back then phones were just beginning to regularly come with "mobile internet" capability, and they charged (a LOT) per Kb. If you could somehow figure out how to actually use 1 gig in a month it would cost you hundreds and hundreds of $$$, if not thousands.
It's basically all but guaranteed that we'll be paying less, if not significantly less, for data as time goes on.
How about the attack on net neutrality by the republican party? Wireless data wasn't subjected to the same rules as land lines, and something like Verizon's trotting is a direct result of this bs.
Haha am I missing something? I linked directly to that statement in my post... I know that's exactly what they said because that's exactly what I was referring to the whole time. To be honest I'm not even sure what "side" you're on, whether or not you're saying the iPhone is coming or not. As far as I'm concerned now, it's not even a question anymore. Of course their previous customers will be able to buy one, they'll be a part of AT&T. Period. T-Mobile only said they weren't getting it because they wanted to make it clear that it wouldn't happen in the next 12 months while T-Mobile still technically exists. Why would Apple make a deal with a company that won't exist this time next year? Then again, for all I know you think the same thing.
No offense, but you are still totally missing the boat (in my opinion). T-Mobile has not since the merger, nor prior to the merger ever said "we are not getting the iphone". Tmobile's statement simply said "We do not offer the iphone". Re-read that quote. It is written in the present tense, as in, we do not offer the iphone today. T-Mobile has said nothing about whether or not they will get the iphone, regarless of the AT&T deal. They did not say we will not get the iphone. HUGE difference. To me, when I read it, I assumed it meant they would be getting the iphone 5 the same time AT&T does. Would you prefer they say, "We are getting the iphone in June. Please stop buying phones from us"...not going to happen. They released a true statement, which will not slow phone sales until a huge IPhone announcement.
Also, very telling, check out the frequently asked quesytions page today. All refernecs to the iphone have been deleted. Not even the "we do not off the iphone".
And Apple would make a deal with T-mobile to sell the iphone in order to make money. Apple doesn't care whether they will officially be around in two years.
Is there an app or hack or a way to enable usage HSPA+ (T-Mobile Network) on “iPhone 4″. I read that the hardware on the “iPhone 4″ is capable of picking up HSPA+, but the software currently is not allowing it to. That would be an upgrade worth paying for… EDGE is to freaking slow.
“iPhone 4″ Specs
UMTS/HSDPA/HSUPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz) GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800,
1900 MHz) T-Mobile runs on UMTS1700 for their 3G network
T-Mobile Connectivity:
4G HSPA+ (14.4 Mbps download, 5.76 Mbps upload)
3G Bands 1700/2100/AWS, UMTS = Yes
I recently got the "iPhone 4", but unfortunately EDGE is still the only option on it..
Uh, YEAH.
Is there an app or hack or a way to enable usage HSPA+ (T-Mobile Network) on “iPhone 4″.
It's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE. Why did you buy it?
And "iPhone 4"? What, are you not sure you bought a real one?
I read that the hardware on the ?iPhone 4″ is capable of picking up HSPA+
No, the iPhone 4 does not have any hardware for HSPA+.
Nor does it have any hardware frequency support for T-Mobile's 3G.
No, the iPhone 4 does not have any hardware for HSPA+.
Nor does it have any hardware frequency support for T-Mobile's 3G.
I'm jus saying, I've seen plenty of forced software on hardware it doesn't belong too.
And frequencies??? The "iPhone 4" has the abilities to pick up other types of frequencies, examples radars, rc cars, cell phones towers... Why wouldn't it be capable of being able to utilize tmobiles network 3G/4G ... If older version iPhones basebands can be altered..
Just a thought...
I'm jus saying, I've seen plenty of forced software on hardware it doesn't belong too.
How do you expect to write software to do something the hardware is physically incapable of doing?
And frequencies??? The "iPhone 4" has the abilities to pick up other types of frequencies, examples radars, rc cars, cell phones towers...
No, it? doesn't.
Why wouldn't it be capable of being able to utilize tmobiles network 3G/4G ?
Because it's physically impossible.
If older version iPhones basebands can be altered..
Baseband is software? which can't do anything for hardware, like we've said.
Here, read this blurb.
AT&T uses Band II (1900 MHz) or Band V (850 MHz), T-Mobile uses Band IV AWS (part lower part of 1700 MHz and lower part of 2100 MHz), it will never be compatible. The 2100 MHz band the iphone uses is Band I.
Cell receptions are achieved by calibrating the resonant crystal, which is done on hardware level, so software override is not possible
No, the iPhone 4 does not have any hardware for HSPA+.
Nor does it have any hardware frequency support for T-Mobile's 3G.
Yes, the iPhone 4 does have hardware for HSPA+. It's only in the Verizon iPhone 4, but it exists nonetheless. Click here to read an article detailing the specific chip.
Yes, the iPhone 4 does have hardware for HSPA+. It's only in the Verizon iPhone 4, but it exists nonetheless. Click here to read an article detailing the specific chip.
Fat lot of good that does T-Mobile users.