Got what he said, sure, just wanted to make sure there was no confusion. On many cellphone forums, there is a mistaken belief that "LTE is advanced GSM" or "4G GSM". And even on AI, there was this comment in this thread:
But it's not really GSM, as you yourself seem to agree. So you're upset at me... why, again?
I never said it was. I did say that the terms UMTS and WCDMA are used interchangeably, and so they are, though certainly somewhat inaccurately. Still, we are splitting hairs a bit... the air interface to UMTS is certainly a form of code division multiple access (CDMA), not time division multiple access (what GSM uses).
.
We are on the same page.. and it wasn't a nap, it was lunch
I'm not suggesting that they would offer two different data packages for the iPhone, but that they would do a market bump of the HDPA iPhone data plan cost for all new contracts (which would conveniently happen to include the new iPhone).
We know the iPhone uses a lot of data because of its browser. We can assume that HSDPA will make this even more popular to use and that 3rd-party apps utilizing the internet functions could weight in heavily too.
We also know that the unlimited/unlimited data packages for their other phones is quite a bit more expensive than the iPhone's data plan. I believe that AT&T's unlimited/unlimited data plans are $35/month. It seems that all the US carriers have retooled their data plans and one way AT&T might compensate is simple to make the iPhone's data plan the same as their other smartphones, after all they know the 3G feature can only be used on AT&T's network in the States so they kinda have the customer by the balls for and extra $15/month.
Well, you are correct in that the exact configured base iPhone plan is $75 for any other smartphone versus 59.95 for the iPhone. However, I'm sure this is an Apple thing, and if you think about it, it makes sense. For other smartphones, data is not required to sign-up, so most people are used to spending $35-50 for a cellphone plan instead of the $60-100 that the iPhone requires. Yes, people SHOULD realize they are getting a great deal since unlimited data is included, but most people are stupid and will just bitch about the monthly price being "so much higher" than a regular phone, smartphone or not.
I'm sure Apple/AT&T will continue this discount plan pricing. Remember, AT&T and most other carriers hardly see any data usage from current phones.. It's most likely worth it to them to discount it a bit for iPhone customers in order to drum up sales. AT&T said that the average iPhone monthly contract brings in roughly twice as much ($100) versus the average cell phone plan.
Also, you have to remember again that people are stupid. Whether the new iPhone is 3G or not doesn't matter to most people. What will matter is If they see a higher monthly price than the older iPhone customers are paying. That would not go over to well, ESPECIALLY for the people who do not have 3G coverage in their area. I just can't see AT&T/Apple thinking that is a good idea.
i've found when i talk to cellphone users it's the text messaging that ends up expensive, most don't use the internet much so they don't see the "value". i am opposite i rarely use text, but use internet (even on my v551--stop laughing) for movie times , news, weather etc. as people start considering smartphones internet has to be on their minds, perhaps they see this as now two costs a text plan AND data plan. even with BB's the primary data (they don't see it as such) is email from the office. those that have BB;s when i talk to them they don't "text" like a teenager, they email, the company picks that up as a corp discount. as smartphones increase data use will also, but they will do now more of both texting and internet. isn't some country carrier offering a $7 dollar plan?
the other issue is using your smartphone as modem....NOW THAT IS EXPENSIVE for att. unlimited data at $20 doesn't include use as a modem for your laptop. THAT'S EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA.
so at least for att, they have tied data services to get the most out of a customer
text, data, phone as modem, email support
with the iphone it gives me about 95% of using my laptop at 20$ so using it as a modem and the higher cost not as required.
With the iPhone it is NOT OFFERED NOT OFFERED NOT OFFERED.
I wish it was, I'd pay a premium for the days I'd use it as my backup internet link for my computers when my primary service goes down.
I should have been more specific.....for my v551 and other non iphones this is true. my phone can connect and can be used as a modem, (we tried it at the att store) but when the rep said it was extra cost in addition to my $20 plani told him NO!!!! it was a ripoff. my company had a modem card for a laptop, cost $80 a month, that was 4 years ago, we dropped it when wifi became more available. so i would have had to pay $20 AND $80/ month for the modem capable usage.
For other smartphones, data is not required to sign-up...
Excellent point, the required data plan could easily accommodate the difference in prices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I wish it was, I'd pay a premium for the days I'd use it as my backup internet link for my computers when my primary service goes down.
I pay AT&T an additional $60/month for a Seirra Wireless 3G USB card. I have seen 1.7Mb/s and say I get over 1Mb/s on average, but that essentially doubles my AT&T bill. While I have the convenience of the card while abroad, I use my iPhone so much more that my data on the phone far exceeds my data usage with the 3G card on my MacBook.
Nobody has since the WiMax spectrum was sold in 2004 (IIRC). We had two pilot schemes in ONE town but now it's available properly, it's 50 quid for 40GB when people are used to paying under a tenner for 'unlimited' 8mbps ADSL.
3 (the mobile network) is currently doing £5 a month tariffs inc a free HSDPA USB modem here - 2.8mbps / 1GB bandwidth. It works across the whole country, and all of Europe, not just Milton Keynes.
O2 - with the iPhone - do unlimited data. They charge non-iPhone users £6.38+VAT for the same plan. Interestingly they have a fair use policy of 200MB which they waved on the iPhone. It'll be interesting to see what they do with 3G but usually in the UK 3G data is no more expensive than non-3G.
But anyway, what is the point of having another wireless network that is only as fast as the existing 3G network? If they were getting 20mbps+ (faster than LLU networks) or something like that, then I'd perhaps see the point (and if I lived in Milton Keynes).
WiMAX is dead in the water here. It's just not wanted.
All of those you mentioned still cost more than the WiMAX plan, except ADSL which is not a wireless technology. The point of having WiMAX or any other wireless standard is because it gives you a choice. You don't even know what you might be missing out on if there's no choice and the monopoly (or equally oligopoly) gives you one product. Next you'll be telling me Windows is great and why would anyone bother with a Mac.
Well, again, LTE isn't really GSM. And some CDMA carriers will be supporting LTE too.
UMTS? Not really GSM either... it uses CDMA for its air interface. Hence its other name, WCDMA.
The GSM association can support whatever they like, but the 3G and 4G technologies they're supporting aren't really GSM (more like GSM-compatible) nor will it be only GSM carriers supporting said technologies.
Sorry to be particular.
.
You can be pedantic as you want, but its utterly meaningless, and you're wrong anyway, as other have pointed out. You say you're being particular, but not so particular that you can be shown to be inaccurate. Great.
Back to a useful discussion, I would say that Sprint or whoever it is that's using LTE will probably support 3G and possibly 2G as well. When they go shopping for LTE base stations they'll find that they will support 2G and 3G for free. There may be efficiency reasons for lopping of one or both, but the upside is the support of a greater range of phones. You could imagine initial LTE phones will be less that petite and hungry for power. The earlier phones will be slimmer with better battery life and for people who just want voice they may be a good choice. So it's like to happen.
Anyway, one thing is for certain, CDMA, UMB and other standards owned by Qualcomm are dead. Hurray for standards!
You can be pedantic as you want, but its utterly meaningless, and you're wrong anyway, as other have pointed out. You say you're being particular, but not so particular that you can be shown to be inaccurate. Great.
Actually, the person who expanded on what I said largely agreed with me. Seems like you're the second person in this thread who's needed a nap/lunch, but whatever.
Quote:
I would say that Sprint or whoever it is that's using LTE will probably support 3G and possibly 2G as well.
Sprint's been promoting WiMax for their 4G solution, not LTE. It's Verizon, Alltel, and ATT who've committed to LTE, in the US.
Oh I'm sorry... was the above too 'pedantic' for ya, or was it useful information?
Quote:
Anyway, one thing is for certain, CDMA, UMB and other standards owned by Qualcomm are dead. Hurray for standards!
Meh.... Qualcomm has patents and does chipsets on a wide variety of technologies, from CDMA to W-CDMA and UMTS. They also bought, Flarion, the company that created OFDM. Guess what uses OFDM? That's right, LTE. Though it's unclear how many Flarion patents will be needed to implement LTE's OFDM, I'd be surprised if Qualcomm was not able to wet it's beak there to at least some extent.
They're very, very good at that, which is part of why they're so universally despised in the wireless world.
Comments
My, my. Looks like someone needs a nap.
Got what he said, sure, just wanted to make sure there was no confusion. On many cellphone forums, there is a mistaken belief that "LTE is advanced GSM" or "4G GSM". And even on AI, there was this comment in this thread:
But it's not really GSM, as you yourself seem to agree. So you're upset at me... why, again?
I never said it was. I did say that the terms UMTS and WCDMA are used interchangeably, and so they are, though certainly somewhat inaccurately. Still, we are splitting hairs a bit... the air interface to UMTS is certainly a form of code division multiple access (CDMA), not time division multiple access (what GSM uses).
.
We are on the same page.. and it wasn't a nap, it was lunch
I'm not suggesting that they would offer two different data packages for the iPhone, but that they would do a market bump of the HDPA iPhone data plan cost for all new contracts (which would conveniently happen to include the new iPhone).
We know the iPhone uses a lot of data because of its browser. We can assume that HSDPA will make this even more popular to use and that 3rd-party apps utilizing the internet functions could weight in heavily too.
We also know that the unlimited/unlimited data packages for their other phones is quite a bit more expensive than the iPhone's data plan. I believe that AT&T's unlimited/unlimited data plans are $35/month. It seems that all the US carriers have retooled their data plans and one way AT&T might compensate is simple to make the iPhone's data plan the same as their other smartphones, after all they know the 3G feature can only be used on AT&T's network in the States so they kinda have the customer by the balls for and extra $15/month.
Well, you are correct in that the exact configured base iPhone plan is $75 for any other smartphone versus 59.95 for the iPhone. However, I'm sure this is an Apple thing, and if you think about it, it makes sense. For other smartphones, data is not required to sign-up, so most people are used to spending $35-50 for a cellphone plan instead of the $60-100 that the iPhone requires. Yes, people SHOULD realize they are getting a great deal since unlimited data is included, but most people are stupid and will just bitch about the monthly price being "so much higher" than a regular phone, smartphone or not.
I'm sure Apple/AT&T will continue this discount plan pricing. Remember, AT&T and most other carriers hardly see any data usage from current phones.. It's most likely worth it to them to discount it a bit for iPhone customers in order to drum up sales. AT&T said that the average iPhone monthly contract brings in roughly twice as much ($100) versus the average cell phone plan.
Also, you have to remember again that people are stupid. Whether the new iPhone is 3G or not doesn't matter to most people. What will matter is If they see a higher monthly price than the older iPhone customers are paying. That would not go over to well, ESPECIALLY for the people who do not have 3G coverage in their area. I just can't see AT&T/Apple thinking that is a good idea.
the other issue is using your smartphone as modem....NOW THAT IS EXPENSIVE for att. unlimited data at $20 doesn't include use as a modem for your laptop. THAT'S EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA.
so at least for att, they have tied data services to get the most out of a customer
text, data, phone as modem, email support
with the iphone it gives me about 95% of using my laptop at 20$ so using it as a modem and the higher cost not as required.
unlimited data at $20 doesn't include use as a modem for your laptop. THAT'S EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA.
With the iPhone it is NOT OFFERED NOT OFFERED NOT OFFERED.
I wish it was, I'd pay a premium for the days I'd use it as my backup internet link for my computers when my primary service goes down.
With the iPhone it is NOT OFFERED NOT OFFERED NOT OFFERED.
I wish it was, I'd pay a premium for the days I'd use it as my backup internet link for my computers when my primary service goes down.
I should have been more specific.....for my v551 and other non iphones this is true. my phone can connect and can be used as a modem, (we tried it at the att store) but when the rep said it was extra cost in addition to my $20 plani told him NO!!!! it was a ripoff. my company had a modem card for a laptop, cost $80 a month, that was 4 years ago, we dropped it when wifi became more available. so i would have had to pay $20 AND $80/ month for the modem capable usage.
they blister business users that need this.
For other smartphones, data is not required to sign-up...
Excellent point, the required data plan could easily accommodate the difference in prices.
I wish it was, I'd pay a premium for the days I'd use it as my backup internet link for my computers when my primary service goes down.
I pay AT&T an additional $60/month for a Seirra Wireless 3G USB card. I have seen 1.7Mb/s and say I get over 1Mb/s on average, but that essentially doubles my AT&T bill. While I have the convenience of the card while abroad, I use my iPhone so much more that my data on the phone far exceeds my data usage with the 3G card on my MacBook.
Nobody has since the WiMax spectrum was sold in 2004 (IIRC). We had two pilot schemes in ONE town but now it's available properly, it's 50 quid for 40GB when people are used to paying under a tenner for 'unlimited' 8mbps ADSL.
3 (the mobile network) is currently doing £5 a month tariffs inc a free HSDPA USB modem here - 2.8mbps / 1GB bandwidth. It works across the whole country, and all of Europe, not just Milton Keynes.
O2 - with the iPhone - do unlimited data. They charge non-iPhone users £6.38+VAT for the same plan. Interestingly they have a fair use policy of 200MB which they waved on the iPhone. It'll be interesting to see what they do with 3G but usually in the UK 3G data is no more expensive than non-3G.
But anyway, what is the point of having another wireless network that is only as fast as the existing 3G network? If they were getting 20mbps+ (faster than LLU networks) or something like that, then I'd perhaps see the point (and if I lived in Milton Keynes).
Back in 2006, The Reg had this to say...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07...wimax-outlook/
WiMAX is dead in the water here. It's just not wanted.
All of those you mentioned still cost more than the WiMAX plan, except ADSL which is not a wireless technology. The point of having WiMAX or any other wireless standard is because it gives you a choice. You don't even know what you might be missing out on if there's no choice and the monopoly (or equally oligopoly) gives you one product. Next you'll be telling me Windows is great and why would anyone bother with a Mac.
Well, again, LTE isn't really GSM. And some CDMA carriers will be supporting LTE too.
UMTS? Not really GSM either... it uses CDMA for its air interface. Hence its other name, WCDMA.
The GSM association can support whatever they like, but the 3G and 4G technologies they're supporting aren't really GSM (more like GSM-compatible) nor will it be only GSM carriers supporting said technologies.
Sorry to be particular.
.
You can be pedantic as you want, but its utterly meaningless, and you're wrong anyway, as other have pointed out. You say you're being particular, but not so particular that you can be shown to be inaccurate. Great.
Back to a useful discussion, I would say that Sprint or whoever it is that's using LTE will probably support 3G and possibly 2G as well. When they go shopping for LTE base stations they'll find that they will support 2G and 3G for free. There may be efficiency reasons for lopping of one or both, but the upside is the support of a greater range of phones. You could imagine initial LTE phones will be less that petite and hungry for power. The earlier phones will be slimmer with better battery life and for people who just want voice they may be a good choice. So it's like to happen.
Anyway, one thing is for certain, CDMA, UMB and other standards owned by Qualcomm are dead. Hurray for standards!
You can be pedantic as you want, but its utterly meaningless, and you're wrong anyway, as other have pointed out. You say you're being particular, but not so particular that you can be shown to be inaccurate. Great.
Actually, the person who expanded on what I said largely agreed with me. Seems like you're the second person in this thread who's needed a nap/lunch, but whatever.
I would say that Sprint or whoever it is that's using LTE will probably support 3G and possibly 2G as well.
Sprint's been promoting WiMax for their 4G solution, not LTE. It's Verizon, Alltel, and ATT who've committed to LTE, in the US.
Oh I'm sorry... was the above too 'pedantic' for ya, or was it useful information?
Anyway, one thing is for certain, CDMA, UMB and other standards owned by Qualcomm are dead. Hurray for standards!
Meh.... Qualcomm has patents and does chipsets on a wide variety of technologies, from CDMA to W-CDMA and UMTS. They also bought, Flarion, the company that created OFDM. Guess what uses OFDM? That's right, LTE. Though it's unclear how many Flarion patents will be needed to implement LTE's OFDM, I'd be surprised if Qualcomm was not able to wet it's beak there to at least some extent.
They're very, very good at that, which is part of why they're so universally despised in the wireless world.
.