Anyone have any ideas how this might affect those like me who use unlocked iPhones on T-Mobile and occasionally use Edge for internet? Will my Edge connection still work?
Anyone have any ideas how this might affect those like me who use unlocked iPhones on T-Mobile and occasionally use Edge for internet? Will my Edge connection still work?
Sure. You'll be forced to pay for an AT&T iPhone data plan, but otherwise it will still work.
I think this pretty much clinches that nobody will be able to buy an iPhone on a T-Mobile contract before this acquisition is complete. Apple almost certainly won't build a separate GSM iPhone just for T-Mobile's 3G network that is just going to be acquired by AT&T in a few months anyway. Once the acquisition is complete, customers will be paying AT&T's rates, not T-Mobile's. You can pretty much bet that these customers that are "grandfathered" on T-Mobile plans will probably have to give them up and sign a contract for a new plan the next time they buy a phone.
Given the growth in wireless broadband data, maybe AT&T plans something more radical than merely using the AWS to provide the same services as on its existing network ...
The AWS band allocations [from 1710 to 1755 MHz, and 2110 to 2155 MHz] are only used in the US and Canada ... and given the global approach of migrating the 1800 MHz band [1710-1785 MHz and 1805-1880 MHz) to LTE (eg here in Australia with Telstra), it maybe possible over the longer term .... that AT&T is going to 'split' for want of a better word ... and use the 1700 MHz spectrum to provide TD-LTE and the 2100 Mhz spectrum to provide UMTS/WCDMA - TDD ...
Both allocations are within global standards and are consistent with the bursting requirement which AT&T flagged when then bought the Qualcom MediFLO spectrum at 700 MHz .... then AT&T indicated that it intends to deploy this spectrum as supplemental downlink, using carrier aggregation technology. If you are not familar with this see http://lteworld.org/blog/carrier-agg...n-lte-advanced ... Such technology with be used in LTE-Advanced a true 4G technology ...
Obviously this means that existing customers with AWS only handsets (and I am not sure there are many especially in the days of quad and penta band phones... and the move to smatphones) will be required to get new handsets....
So all up AT&T is being real smart, in my book, and securing spectrum for its wireless broadband future....
Given the growth in wireless broadband data, maybe AT&T plans something more radical than merely using the AWS to provide the same services as on its existing network ...
The AWS band allocations [from 1710 to 1755 MHz, and 2110 to 2155 MHz] are only used in the US and Canada ... and given the global approach of migrating the 1800 MHz band [1710-1785 MHz and 1805-1880 MHz) to LTE (eg here in Australia with Telstra), it maybe possible over the longer term .... that AT&T is going to 'split' for want of a better word ... and use the 1700 MHz spectrum to provide TD-LTE and the 2100 Mhz spectrum to provide UMTS/WCDMA - TDD ...
That would give us a lot more international uniformity, too. In the US you have the PCS and AWS bands in use (UMTS bands II and IV) and in Europe and much of the rest of the world you have the DCS ("1800MHz", UMTS band III) and IMT-2000 ("2100MHz", UMTS band I) in use. Between them, these bands use more or less the same frequencies, but they are paired differently and use different choices for uplink and downlink. Going to TDD and eliminating the idea of using different bands for uplink and downlink means that US and international allocations become the same. And this takes into account that data services are asymmetric anyway, so it is win-win. I think it is going to take a while to get there from where we are now though. Although the fact that the 1800MHz band does not seem to be being used for 3G/W-CDMA anywhere does provide an opportunity.
I am just writing as I am thinking here. Yes, basically, I agree. That's a good point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecomsroadwarrier
Obviously this means that existing customers with AWS only handsets (and I am not sure there are many especially in the days of quad and penta band phones... and the move to smatphones) will be required to get new handsets....
So all up AT&T is being real smart, in my book, and securing spectrum for its wireless broadband future....
I don't think there are many AWS only handsets. Most that I have seen are dual band and support both AWS and IMT-2000 (UMTS band I).
I think AT&T are being smart and securing spectrum however it is going to be used. They merge with T-Mobile, and initially have W-CDMA at 850MHz, 1900MHz and AWS. At some point they refarm at least one of these bands, depending on what technologies are dominant.
This looks a really good deal for AT&T however I look at it.
Or Apple could include the AWS band in a future iPhone. Why is this option being completely ignored without an explanation as to why it?s not possible?
Because T-Mobile is the only company that uses it? It isn't worth it to add that to the radios for just a tiny customer base. If this deal goes through, they will leave that frequency and move to the ones everyone else is using. The only reason they use it is because they couldn't get the bandwidth in the other frequencies.
Why? What's the point? They're one company in the end. Whether the iPhone supports 1700MHz is irrelevant, as all towers would be changed to do all the same frequencies, anyway.
There is the little problem of the people using phones from T-Mobile that only use 1700 MHz. When the switch comes, they will be cut off unless their phones also work on the other frequencies.
There is the little problem of the people using phones from T-Mobile that only use 1700 MHz. When the switch comes, they will be cut off unless their phones also work on the other frequencies.
Wha... there are phones that only use 1700?
Okay, then doesn't that make the decision for them? AT&T will have to add 1700 to their towers and the rest of the frequencies to T-Mobile's towers. That'd be pentaband coverage across both networks, then, right?
Everyone except T-Mobile customers who hate AT&T and Verizon and enjoyed T-Mobiles competitive prices.
Most consumers are sheep, so I am sure they will be thrilled with the continue increasing prices and fewer choices.
The government is a joke though and they aren't concerned with anti-competition, so the deal will go through.
The only reason why both Sprint and T-Mobile have low prices and extra features is because they are both failing carriers. Both companies have been losing customers, and money. Companies that have that problem often use lower pricing as a way of trying to keep customers, and of getting new ones.
But it's not working. Sprint had a better quarter, last, but overall, both companies are doing poorly. Even lower pricing and enticing plans aren't preventing customers from leaving.
So what would happen if AT&T didn't buy T-Mobile? Well, after a couple of years, it might go bankrupt. I can't really say how long it would take, but it's not well. At some point DT, the owner, would have to dump it.
What people aren't understanding about this is these low prices are just artificial contrivances made up in a desperate attempt to save the business. As it hasn't been working, it couldn't last.
If AT&T didn't buy this now, as a whole company, they would be buying bits and pieces in a few years anyway.
The only way Sprint and T-Mobile would be able to stay independent is for the government here to do what the governments in the EU do, that is, give billions away to companies to keep them solvent, and to not do so as a loan, but as a gift. Some of the EU's biggest companies are here today just because of that.
So if those on T-Mobile who are so mad about this want the US to give them billions every few years, well, ok. But then, there will be other companies from other industries who will come knock g on that door as well, with just as good a reason for a bailout. So we can give it to all of them, and pay the higher taxes that come with it.
Really, we're between a rock and a hard place. Tell DT they can't sell the company, and tell others they can't buy it, and see it go down. Or have the Gov. pay for it. Otherwise, we can just let AT&T buy it, even though we're not happy about that either.
And again remember, those low prices aren't being given because they're nice, it's because they're desperate for the business, and it isn't working.
This is terrible reporting! T-Mobile getting an iPhone has NOTHING to do with AT&T's acquisition. If anything, T-Mobile users will become AT&T users, and then they will be transitioned into a company that offers the iPhone. But T-Mobile as a company is not getting an iPhone for being bought by AT&T. T-Mobile will get the iPhone IF and WHEN Apple supports the 1700 MHz spectrum. But if this deal goes through, T-Mobile might not be a carrier anymore by the time that happens. Sure, AT&T will use 1700 MHz, and Apple might support it, but it will still be with AT&T's lousy data caps and high prices.
What you're saying isn't completely true. T-Mobile and DT have been saying that their poor performance is due to not having the iPhone. We can't comment on that, because only they know.
As for 1700, it's assumed that it will disappear after the networks are merged. AT&T commented on this.
Of course it will be approved. AT&T owns enough Congressmen and leaders of regulatory agencies to get it through easily.
That's just a ridiculous statement. There are philosophical reasons why Republicans and Democrats have differing opinions on this. Democrats, during the Clinton years imposed a 30% max in each market, which the Bush administration eliminated. It's not a matter of owning anyone. It's a matter of politics overall. Conservatives will approve of this deal, while liberals will oppose it.
Okay, then doesn't that make the decision for them? AT&T will have to add 1700 to their towers and the rest of the frequencies to T-Mobile's towers. That'd be pentaband coverage across both networks, then, right?
Well, I don't know if there are phones that ONLY use 1700, but if there are, it would be a problem.
This stuff costs billions to do. It may not be worth it. If there are people with phones that only use 1700 for 3G, it would be cheaper to give them new phones.
That would be interesting. But what would happen to wi-max? Surely Verizon would have no interest in swallowing that pill. It's completely at odds with their LTE plans. Sprint's wi-max network likely isn't extensive enough to stand on it's own, but if it is perhaps it could be spun off as an independent data-only network. Then have the voice/3G Sprint customers merge with Verizon.
The ATT/Tmobile merger makes more sense because the networks are mostly compatible and ATT needed to shore up it's network. From the articles I've read, part of the problem ATT had was they didn't have access to the wireless bandwidth to expand. So instead they simply b
ought a company that owned part of the spectrum. If Verizon already has the spectrum they need to support their plans, that would be one less reason to consider buying Sprint.
I was joking
We have 4 to 8 major tele carriers BUILDING out MASSIVE 4g/7g systems that duplicate each others towers fiber optic line and the such .
Billions upon billions spent so hulu can download for 8 minutes and then fade away on me .
The Verizon iphone I just bought has dropped a few dozen calls already . Calls MY verizon crap 23 dollar cellphone never dropped .
If said merger is approved . Any one can then walk in any brand>newly named tmob/att store and buy a iphone.
The Pimple faced clerk justs signs the buyer up and thats that . No one asks about what system they want unless their from Canada. ATT is also buying T-Mobile'S customer BASE also . THEY MAY want to sell to those dudes to cover the 40 billion they just spent.
So for all you nay sayers one mo time .
You walk into a T-Mobile store and buy a iphone . You pay .You leave with AN iphone and the girl .
The fact that is may not run on aT-Mobile system is MOOT .
Comments
Anyone have any ideas how this might affect those like me who use unlocked iPhones on T-Mobile and occasionally use Edge for internet? Will my Edge connection still work?
Sure. You'll be forced to pay for an AT&T iPhone data plan, but otherwise it will still work.
I glad I stopped pulling my hair out and read this timely article.
I hope sprint joins verizon
9
yea i would love that, too. sprint is the worst phone company in the world.
The AWS band allocations [from 1710 to 1755 MHz, and 2110 to 2155 MHz] are only used in the US and Canada ... and given the global approach of migrating the 1800 MHz band [1710-1785 MHz and 1805-1880 MHz) to LTE (eg here in Australia with Telstra), it maybe possible over the longer term .... that AT&T is going to 'split' for want of a better word ... and use the 1700 MHz spectrum to provide TD-LTE and the 2100 Mhz spectrum to provide UMTS/WCDMA - TDD ...
Both allocations are within global standards and are consistent with the bursting requirement which AT&T flagged when then bought the Qualcom MediFLO spectrum at 700 MHz .... then AT&T indicated that it intends to deploy this spectrum as supplemental downlink, using carrier aggregation technology. If you are not familar with this see http://lteworld.org/blog/carrier-agg...n-lte-advanced ... Such technology with be used in LTE-Advanced a true 4G technology ...
Obviously this means that existing customers with AWS only handsets (and I am not sure there are many especially in the days of quad and penta band phones... and the move to smatphones) will be required to get new handsets....
So all up AT&T is being real smart, in my book, and securing spectrum for its wireless broadband future....
Given the growth in wireless broadband data, maybe AT&T plans something more radical than merely using the AWS to provide the same services as on its existing network ...
The AWS band allocations [from 1710 to 1755 MHz, and 2110 to 2155 MHz] are only used in the US and Canada ... and given the global approach of migrating the 1800 MHz band [1710-1785 MHz and 1805-1880 MHz) to LTE (eg here in Australia with Telstra), it maybe possible over the longer term .... that AT&T is going to 'split' for want of a better word ... and use the 1700 MHz spectrum to provide TD-LTE and the 2100 Mhz spectrum to provide UMTS/WCDMA - TDD ...
That would give us a lot more international uniformity, too. In the US you have the PCS and AWS bands in use (UMTS bands II and IV) and in Europe and much of the rest of the world you have the DCS ("1800MHz", UMTS band III) and IMT-2000 ("2100MHz", UMTS band I) in use. Between them, these bands use more or less the same frequencies, but they are paired differently and use different choices for uplink and downlink. Going to TDD and eliminating the idea of using different bands for uplink and downlink means that US and international allocations become the same. And this takes into account that data services are asymmetric anyway, so it is win-win. I think it is going to take a while to get there from where we are now though. Although the fact that the 1800MHz band does not seem to be being used for 3G/W-CDMA anywhere does provide an opportunity.
I am just writing as I am thinking here. Yes, basically, I agree. That's a good point.
Obviously this means that existing customers with AWS only handsets (and I am not sure there are many especially in the days of quad and penta band phones... and the move to smatphones) will be required to get new handsets....
So all up AT&T is being real smart, in my book, and securing spectrum for its wireless broadband future....
I don't think there are many AWS only handsets. Most that I have seen are dual band and support both AWS and IMT-2000 (UMTS band I).
I think AT&T are being smart and securing spectrum however it is going to be used. They merge with T-Mobile, and initially have W-CDMA at 850MHz, 1900MHz and AWS. At some point they refarm at least one of these bands, depending on what technologies are dominant.
This looks a really good deal for AT&T however I look at it.
Or Apple could include the AWS band in a future iPhone. Why is this option being completely ignored without an explanation as to why it?s not possible?
Because T-Mobile is the only company that uses it? It isn't worth it to add that to the radios for just a tiny customer base. If this deal goes through, they will leave that frequency and move to the ones everyone else is using. The only reason they use it is because they couldn't get the bandwidth in the other frequencies.
*blink*
Why? What's the point? They're one company in the end. Whether the iPhone supports 1700MHz is irrelevant, as all towers would be changed to do all the same frequencies, anyway.
There is the little problem of the people using phones from T-Mobile that only use 1700 MHz. When the switch comes, they will be cut off unless their phones also work on the other frequencies.
There is the little problem of the people using phones from T-Mobile that only use 1700 MHz. When the switch comes, they will be cut off unless their phones also work on the other frequencies.
Wha... there are phones that only use 1700?
Okay, then doesn't that make the decision for them? AT&T will have to add 1700 to their towers and the rest of the frequencies to T-Mobile's towers. That'd be pentaband coverage across both networks, then, right?
Everyone except T-Mobile customers who hate AT&T and Verizon and enjoyed T-Mobiles competitive prices.
Most consumers are sheep, so I am sure they will be thrilled with the continue increasing prices and fewer choices.
The government is a joke though and they aren't concerned with anti-competition, so the deal will go through.
The only reason why both Sprint and T-Mobile have low prices and extra features is because they are both failing carriers. Both companies have been losing customers, and money. Companies that have that problem often use lower pricing as a way of trying to keep customers, and of getting new ones.
But it's not working. Sprint had a better quarter, last, but overall, both companies are doing poorly. Even lower pricing and enticing plans aren't preventing customers from leaving.
So what would happen if AT&T didn't buy T-Mobile? Well, after a couple of years, it might go bankrupt. I can't really say how long it would take, but it's not well. At some point DT, the owner, would have to dump it.
What people aren't understanding about this is these low prices are just artificial contrivances made up in a desperate attempt to save the business. As it hasn't been working, it couldn't last.
If AT&T didn't buy this now, as a whole company, they would be buying bits and pieces in a few years anyway.
The only way Sprint and T-Mobile would be able to stay independent is for the government here to do what the governments in the EU do, that is, give billions away to companies to keep them solvent, and to not do so as a loan, but as a gift. Some of the EU's biggest companies are here today just because of that.
So if those on T-Mobile who are so mad about this want the US to give them billions every few years, well, ok. But then, there will be other companies from other industries who will come knock g on that door as well, with just as good a reason for a bailout. So we can give it to all of them, and pay the higher taxes that come with it.
Really, we're between a rock and a hard place. Tell DT they can't sell the company, and tell others they can't buy it, and see it go down. Or have the Gov. pay for it. Otherwise, we can just let AT&T buy it, even though we're not happy about that either.
And again remember, those low prices aren't being given because they're nice, it's because they're desperate for the business, and it isn't working.
This is terrible reporting! T-Mobile getting an iPhone has NOTHING to do with AT&T's acquisition. If anything, T-Mobile users will become AT&T users, and then they will be transitioned into a company that offers the iPhone. But T-Mobile as a company is not getting an iPhone for being bought by AT&T. T-Mobile will get the iPhone IF and WHEN Apple supports the 1700 MHz spectrum. But if this deal goes through, T-Mobile might not be a carrier anymore by the time that happens. Sure, AT&T will use 1700 MHz, and Apple might support it, but it will still be with AT&T's lousy data caps and high prices.
What you're saying isn't completely true. T-Mobile and DT have been saying that their poor performance is due to not having the iPhone. We can't comment on that, because only they know.
As for 1700, it's assumed that it will disappear after the networks are merged. AT&T commented on this.
Of course it will be approved. AT&T owns enough Congressmen and leaders of regulatory agencies to get it through easily.
That's just a ridiculous statement. There are philosophical reasons why Republicans and Democrats have differing opinions on this. Democrats, during the Clinton years imposed a 30% max in each market, which the Bush administration eliminated. It's not a matter of owning anyone. It's a matter of politics overall. Conservatives will approve of this deal, while liberals will oppose it.
Wha... there are phones that only use 1700?
Okay, then doesn't that make the decision for them? AT&T will have to add 1700 to their towers and the rest of the frequencies to T-Mobile's towers. That'd be pentaband coverage across both networks, then, right?
Well, I don't know if there are phones that ONLY use 1700, but if there are, it would be a problem.
This stuff costs billions to do. It may not be worth it. If there are people with phones that only use 1700 for 3G, it would be cheaper to give them new phones.
Yes, so we the consumers have less choices and we get screwed more. That sounds great.
apple is doomed
9
,,,
That would be interesting. But what would happen to wi-max? Surely Verizon would have no interest in swallowing that pill. It's completely at odds with their LTE plans. Sprint's wi-max network likely isn't extensive enough to stand on it's own, but if it is perhaps it could be spun off as an independent data-only network. Then have the voice/3G Sprint customers merge with Verizon.
The ATT/Tmobile merger makes more sense because the networks are mostly compatible and ATT needed to shore up it's network. From the articles I've read, part of the problem ATT had was they didn't have access to the wireless bandwidth to expand. So instead they simply b
ought a company that owned part of the spectrum. If Verizon already has the spectrum they need to support their plans, that would be one less reason to consider buying Sprint.
I was joking
We have 4 to 8 major tele carriers BUILDING out MASSIVE 4g/7g systems that duplicate each others towers fiber optic line and the such .
Billions upon billions spent so hulu can download for 8 minutes and then fade away on me .
The Verizon iphone I just bought has dropped a few dozen calls already . Calls MY verizon crap 23 dollar cellphone never dropped .
the joke is on us
9
We have 4 to 8 major tele carriers BUILDING out MASSIVE 4g/7g systems that duplicate each others towers fiber optic line and the such.
You mean we have two telecoms who meet in a room and collude over pricing and features for customer plans.
Billions upon billions spent so hulu can download for 8 minutes and then fade away on me .
You mean tens of thousands spent so that we can have 4GB bandwidth caps to render streaming video pointless in the first place, right?
You mean we have two telecoms who meet in a room and collude over pricing and features for customer plans.
You mean tens of thousands spent so that we can have 4GB bandwidth caps to render streaming video pointless in the first place, right?
No, neither of those statements you've made are right. Bruce was right this time.
THIS ARTICLE misses the real point ,
If said merger is approved . Any one can then walk in any brand>newly named tmob/att store and buy a iphone.
The Pimple faced clerk justs signs the buyer up and thats that . No one asks about what system they want unless their from Canada. ATT is also buying T-Mobile'S customer BASE also . THEY MAY want to sell to those dudes to cover the 40 billion they just spent.
So for all you nay sayers one mo time .
You walk into a T-Mobile store and buy a iphone . You pay .You leave with AN iphone and the girl .
The fact that is may not run on aT-Mobile system is MOOT .
9