Using your laptop on the Sprint PCS Network

Two Double Standards-
1. Using cell phone as modem
2. Using PC Card to get to Internet on SprintPCS network.


We know about the wink-wink-nudge-nudge use of a cell phone as a modem
that Sprint allows for casual usage with a Vision plan, @ $15/month, by
attaching a phone to a laptop and dialing #7777

Anytime SprintPCS was serious about not allowing it, #7777 would stop
working. But apparently you have to use gigabytes of data per month for
SprintPCS to complain.


ON April 20, 2004 o/siris posted:

"So far, the only customers I've seen enforced under this policy have
been obvious examples. One of them over 10GB in a month."

======

Your laptop is supposed to use a PC Card, according to the TOS, for
which unlimited data use is $80/month if you are on a "Business" plan.

http://www.sprint.com/pcsbusiness/pr...ited_data.html

If you are not business, the pricing is rather much higher for
"consumer" accounts:

http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/se.../DataPlans.jsp

"The SprintPCS website says:

Cost Per
Month PCS VisionSM
$40 20MB
$60 40MB
$80 70MB
$100 300MB

A one-year PCS Advantage Agreement is required.
Additional kilobytes $0.002.
Additional $0.20/minute charge for calls made on PCSConnection Cards
with voice capability."


==================
Since one hour of browsing might typically use 10 Megs of data, that
means for $100/month you might only be allow 1 hour a day of useage
before you'd go over. OUCH !

=================

---

› See More: Using your laptop on the Sprint PCS Network

In article <[email protected]>,
Røbert M <[email protected]> wrote:
>Two Double Standards-
>1. Using cell phone as modem
>2. Using PC Card to get to Internet on SprintPCS network.
>
>
>We know about the wink-wink-nudge-nudge use of a cell phone as a modem
>that Sprint allows for casual usage with a Vision plan, @ $15/month, by
>attaching a phone to a laptop and dialing #7777
>
>Anytime SprintPCS was serious about not allowing it, #7777 would stop
>working. But apparently you have to use gigabytes of data per month for
>SprintPCS to complain.
>
>
>ON April 20, 2004 o/siris posted:
>
>"So far, the only customers I've seen enforced under this policy have
>been obvious examples. One of them over 10GB in a month."
>
>======
>
>Your laptop is supposed to use a PC Card, according to the TOS, for
>which unlimited data use is $80/month if you are on a "Business" plan.
>
>http://www.sprint.com/pcsbusiness/pr...ited_data.html
>
>If you are not business, the pricing is rather much higher for
>"consumer" accounts:
>
>http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/se.../DataPlans.jsp
>
>"The SprintPCS website says:
>
>Cost Per
>Month PCS VisionSM
> $40 20MB
> $60 40MB
> $80 70MB
> $100 300MB
>
>A one-year PCS Advantage Agreement is required.
>Additional kilobytes $0.002.
>Additional $0.20/minute charge for calls made on PCSConnection Cards
>with voice capability."
>
>
>==================
>Since one hour of browsing might typically use 10 Megs of data, that
>means for $100/month you might only be allow 1 hour a day of useage
>before you'd go over. OUCH !

As per my posts yesterday, something is cuckoo here.
Either there is some technical problem (which makes no sense
since people are able to use it) or it's a bad management decision
as in nobody knows how to deal with it.

I don't understand, because even if you use the handset
on the phone to surf, that's pulling bytes too, through
granted probably usually not as many as you'd normally be
pulling.

Anyway, they have to know that folks won't want to pay those
rates, and turning a blind eye to "non abusive" PC connections
which is arbitrary in some way, isn't helping them in the long run.
Especially since the 2G WW was $10/month, and then the 3G using
the above rates. Is there a network difference in some way
between how the 2G's would use data vs the 3G phones?

--
Greg Comeau / Comeau C++ 4.3.3, for C++03 core language support
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?

"Greg Comeau" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Anyway, they have to know that folks won't want to pay those
> rates, and turning a blind eye to "non abusive" PC connections
> which is arbitrary in some way, isn't helping them in the long run.
> Especially since the 2G WW was $10/month, and then the 3G using
> the above rates. Is there a network difference in some way
> between how the 2G's would use data vs the 3G phones?

Yes, WW & Vision are two different protocols ...

Bob

<Two Double Standards-
1. Using cell phone as modem
2. Using PC Card to get to Internet on SprintPCS network.>

In my case Sprint has never enforced not using my phone as a modem. Your
"double standard" has been discussed hundreds of times. At one time Sprint
approved Vision for laptop use and sold the cable. Now they don't. It
stands to reason that Sprint does not want to lose customers who use their
phone as a modem to T-Mobile where you can actually get free internet access
but not https or nntp with your phone/laptop setup from what I have read.
It also stands to reason Sprint wants to provide a data service to compete
with AT&T . For example, my other provider Cincinnati Bell Wireless (AT&T)
charges $9.99/mo for 8 mb data! So, I for one, am not going to rock the
boat over Sprint's so-called double standard! This is a good thing not a
bad thing and I can see why they are not *****ing this out to the public.
DonnaB

In article <[email protected]>,
"Donna Becker" <[email protected]> wrote:

> <Two Double Standards-
> 1. Using cell phone as modem
> 2. Using PC Card to get to Internet on SprintPCS network.>
>
> In my case Sprint has never enforced not using my phone as a modem. Your
> "double standard" has been discussed hundreds of times. At one time Sprint
> approved Vision for laptop use and sold the cable. Now they don't. It
> stands to reason that Sprint does not want to lose customers who use their
> phone as a modem to T-Mobile where you can actually get free internet access
> but not https or nntp with your phone/laptop setup from what I have read.
> It also stands to reason Sprint wants to provide a data service to compete
> with AT&T . For example, my other provider Cincinnati Bell Wireless (AT&T)
> charges $9.99/mo for 8 mb data! So, I for one, am not going to rock the
> boat over Sprint's so-called double standard! This is a good thing not a
> bad thing and I can see why they are not *****ing this out to the public.

You give them too much credit, when more likely they have no way of
telling how your Vision is being used.

Greg Comeau wrote:

> As per my posts yesterday, something is cuckoo here.
> Either there is some technical problem (which makes no sense
> since people are able to use it) or it's a bad management decision
> as in nobody knows how to deal with it.
>
> I don't understand, because even if you use the handset
> on the phone to surf, that's pulling bytes too, through
> granted probably usually not as many as you'd normally be
> pulling.
>
> Anyway, they have to know that folks won't want to pay those
> rates, and turning a blind eye to "non abusive" PC connections
> which is arbitrary in some way, isn't helping them in the long run.
> Especially since the 2G WW was $10/month,

Umm I've been paying only $5.00 a month for WW

"Greg Comeau" wrote:
<<Especially since the 2G WW was $10/month, and then the 3G using the
above rates.>>

Wireless Web was $5/month, plus airtime.

Eric

In article <[email protected]>,
Bob Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Greg Comeau" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Anyway, they have to know that folks won't want to pay those
>> rates, and turning a blind eye to "non abusive" PC connections
>> which is arbitrary in some way, isn't helping them in the long run.
>> Especially since the 2G WW was $10/month, and then the 3G using
>> the above rates. Is there a network difference in some way
>> between how the 2G's would use data vs the 3G phones?
>
>Yes, WW & Vision are two different protocols ...

Why should Vision (in particular 3G phones as modems)
incur more on them than a 2G phone as a modem?
Just more people wanting to use it since it's faster?
--
Greg Comeau / Comeau C++ 4.3.3, for C++03 core language support
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?

In article <[email protected]>,
Røbert M <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> "Donna Becker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> <Two Double Standards-
>> 1. Using cell phone as modem
>> 2. Using PC Card to get to Internet on SprintPCS network.>
>>
>> In my case Sprint has never enforced not using my phone as a modem. Your
>> "double standard" has been discussed hundreds of times. At one time Sprint
>> approved Vision for laptop use and sold the cable. Now they don't. It
>> stands to reason that Sprint does not want to lose customers who use their
>> phone as a modem to T-Mobile where you can actually get free internet access
>> but not https or nntp with your phone/laptop setup from what I have read.
>> It also stands to reason Sprint wants to provide a data service to compete
>> with AT&T . For example, my other provider Cincinnati Bell Wireless (AT&T)
>> charges $9.99/mo for 8 mb data! So, I for one, am not going to rock the
>> boat over Sprint's so-called double standard! This is a good thing not a
>> bad thing and I can see why they are not *****ing this out to the public.
>
>You give them too much credit, when more likely they have no way of
>telling how your Vision is being used.

Seems weird to approve it, and then not do so.
Something must be going on, perhaps in some long term plan.
--
Greg Comeau / Comeau C++ 4.3.3, for C++03 core language support
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Anyway, they have to know that folks won't want to pay those
> rates, and turning a blind eye to "non abusive" PC connections
> which is arbitrary in some way, isn't helping them in the long run.
> Especially since the 2G WW was $10/month, and then the 3G using
> the above rates. Is there a network difference in some way
> between how the 2G's would use data vs the 3G phones?
>=20

Greg, every policy carries some level of selectivity. Some point=20
beyond which diminishing returns yields an actual loss.

Phillie has been told, repeatedly, there is no "wink wink" to this. =20
Only reports that certain people have been enforced *so far*. Just=20
as with the selectivity police exercise when enforcing, for example,=20
speed limits.

Priorities have been established. I hope they re-examine the policy=20
once the current priority works, because I think we should have=20
*some* allowance for tethered data usage via the phones. But=20
prioritizing hardly equates to "wink wink, nudge nudge." That is=20
only Phillie's fabrication of it.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>=20
> Why should Vision (in particular 3G phones as modems)
> incur more on them than a 2G phone as a modem?
> Just more people wanting to use it since it's faster?
>=20

Basically, yeah. The older technology, branded "Wireless Web", is=20
circuit-switched data. Meaning it is, for all intents and purposes,=20
an actual call, very much like a voice call.

Vision is a newer technology, packet-switched data. In short, it=20
doesn't utilize a dedicated connection like a circuit-switched call=20
does.

Now, I don't have sufficient training in either the theory or the=20
underlying math to get into the real nitty-gritty. What I *do* have=20
is a kind of "big picture" view of it. Basically, it requires more=20
of a back end support structure. It requires a higher technology to=20
enable it.

It isn't the towers that are stressed, it's the actual data systems=20
themselves.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <rmarkoff-233288.10423318052004
@news06.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
>=20
> You give them too much credit, when more likely they have no way of=20
> telling how your Vision is being used.
>=20
>=20

That kind of deliberate lying is at the heart of why you've been=20
labeled a troll, Phill. You've been told, repeatedly, that we *can*=20
and we *do* track it. Call in as a Vision user, and you can find out=20
how many KB you've used.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

I intend to very occasionally use my VM4500 for laptop linkage to the Net,
and I have ordered a USB cable. In the meatime, I have tried dialing "#777"
on my phone. However, I get a recording saying that "the code entered is
not valid", or words to that effect. Anyone else getting the same message?

Bill

"Bill T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:YHDqc.50718$b%[email protected]...
> I intend to very occasionally use my VM4500 for laptop linkage to the Net,
> and I have ordered a USB cable. In the meatime, I have tried dialing
"#777"
> on my phone. However, I get a recording saying that "the code entered is
> not valid", or words to that effect. Anyone else getting the same
message?
>
> Bill

You don't physically dial that number to connect with Vision while tethered
to your laptop. Your DUN does. Once you get the cable, the steps to set it
up are -

1) Find and download the phone drivers for your particular model.
2) Connect the USB cable to your phone and then to the USB port. Your
computer will recognize new hardware. When it asks for the drivers, browse
to where you downloaded the phone drivers.
3) Set up a new DUN, putting #777 in the phone number field, and leave your
username and password fields empty.

After that, you should be good to go.

Bob

"Greg Comeau" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Bob Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> >"Greg Comeau" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> Anyway, they have to know that folks won't want to pay those
> >> rates, and turning a blind eye to "non abusive" PC connections
> >> which is arbitrary in some way, isn't helping them in the long run.
> >> Especially since the 2G WW was $10/month, and then the 3G using
> >> the above rates. Is there a network difference in some way
> >> between how the 2G's would use data vs the 3G phones?
> >
> >Yes, WW & Vision are two different protocols ...
>
> Why should Vision (in particular 3G phones as modems)
> incur more on them than a 2G phone as a modem?
> Just more people wanting to use it since it's faster?

Yes, it's much faster, and it doesn't use minutes off your plan.

Bob