iPhone to get in-home Booster from AT&T

"iPhone 3Gold" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4f981308-5b1e-4784-9da2-2e1e7045f229@m16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...

> Stankey said Dallas-based AT&T is looking at femtocells that provide
> full cellular broadband, or "3G" speeds.

Help me out with this one- you'll connect to AT&T's 3G network via a
femtocell connected to your faster home broadband, rather than just turning
on your phone's WiFi and use your broadband directly? Let me guess- the
femtocell also plugs into your RJ-11 jack so you can make cellular calls
through your landline? ;-)

---

› See More: iPhone to get in-home Booster from AT&T

"Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:vQH%[email protected]:

>
> "iPhone 3Gold" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4f981308-5b1e-4784-9da2-2e1e7045f229
@m16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com.
> ..
>
>> Stankey said Dallas-based AT&T is looking at femtocells that provide
>> full cellular broadband, or "3G" speeds.
>
> Help me out with this one- you'll connect to AT&T's 3G network via a
> femtocell connected to your faster home broadband, rather than just
> turning on your phone's WiFi and use your broadband directly? Let me
> guess- the femtocell also plugs into your RJ-11 jack so you can make
> cellular calls through your landline? ;-)
>
>
>
>

I've had this "feature" for years. We call it "Skype". Netgear and
Linksys make several "femtocells" for it. They look just like tiny
sellphones that make calls directly over my wifi to anyplace on the
planet REALLY CHEAP, not like sellphones. They can even call Skypers
free, something iPhone doesn't do well.

Todd Allcock wrote:
>
> "iPhone 3Gold" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4f981308-5b1e-4784-9da2-2e1e7045f229@m16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Stankey said Dallas-based AT&T is looking at femtocells that provide
>> full cellular broadband, or "3G" speeds.
>
> Help me out with this one- you'll connect to AT&T's 3G network via a
> femtocell connected to your faster home broadband, rather than just
> turning on your phone's WiFi and use your broadband directly? Let me
> guess- the femtocell also plugs into your RJ-11 jack so you can make
> cellular calls through your landline? ;-)
>


I presume they'll even charge for the privilege of using your own
broadband service that you've already paid for. And if you're in your
own home with landline service, why would you use a cellphone?

Is this femtocell thing specific to iPhone? I can't imagine why any
company would blow a foot off with that limitation.


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

I donb't need no boost to my cell service at home anymore.

I just use my magicJack with my dsl for all local and long distance
calls.

http://mgaicJack.com

On 2008-12-10, Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "iPhone 3Gold" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4f981308-5b1e-4784-9da2-2e1e7045f229@m16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Stankey said Dallas-based AT&T is looking at femtocells that provide
>> full cellular broadband, or "3G" speeds.
>
> Help me out with this one- you'll connect to AT&T's 3G network via a
> femtocell connected to your faster home broadband, rather than just turning
> on your phone's WiFi and use your broadband directly?

I'll guess that this is exactly what a lot of people do now,
except that without the femtocell they just use AT&T's 3G service.
3G speed isn't bad, the phones themselves aren't fast enough that
the difference between 3G and home broadband would generally matter
much and it doesn't cost anything extra to just leave the phone
using the 3G data service, so if you have 3G coverage at home why
would you even bother to go to the effort of figuring out how to
turn on and configure the WiFi?

The problem this causes for AT&T is that while AT&T doesn't make
money if you actually use a lot of 3G data, if 3G data is available
where you are there's no particular reason for you to want to help
AT&T out by using the alternatives you might have available.

Hence, while the femtocell solves no problems you might have,
it potentially solves a nasty problem for AT&T. Most people spend
a lot of time at home or at work, so if AT&T can get femtocells
into your home and workplace they'll be able to move a considerable
fraction of your load off of the wireless part of their network
without having to rely on you to do something to make that happen.
And if AT&T can shed enough load then they can put their data RPU in
their pocket instead of having to spend it building sufficient
facilities to support what they've sold.

Dennis Ferguson

Todd Allcock wrote:
>
> "iPhone 3Gold" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4f981308-5b1e-4784-9da2-2e1e7045f229@m16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Stankey said Dallas-based AT&T is looking at femtocells that provide
>> full cellular broadband, or "3G" speeds.
>
> Help me out with this one- you'll connect to AT&T's 3G network via a
> femtocell connected to your faster home broadband, rather than just
> turning on your phone's WiFi and use your broadband directly?

Too many iPhone users aren't bothering with WiFi, even when it's
available. If they have DSL, WiFi often isn't really much faster than
using 3G anyway.

Assuming that most iPhone users are using 3G almost exclusively (when
both WiFi and 3G are available), it makes sense for AT&T to try to move
them off the 3G network onto broadband, via femtocells. AT&T can promise
their users a faster connection, while moving traffic off the 3G network.

No doubt tethering to the iPhone is something AT&T greatly fears,
because of the bandwidth requirements, which is why they limit data on
tethered devices or with 3G cards/USB sticks.

3G capacity is an issue that all the 3G carriers are struggling with.
The 5GB caps are to prevent people from using a 3G to WiFi router and
dumping DSL or broadband.

In article <EYS%k.9187$x%[email protected]>, SMS
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Todd Allcock wrote:
> >
> > "iPhone 3Gold" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:4f981308-5b1e-4784-9da2-2e1e7045f229@m16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >> Stankey said Dallas-based AT&T is looking at femtocells that provide
> >> full cellular broadband, or "3G" speeds.
> >
> > Help me out with this one- you'll connect to AT&T's 3G network via a
> > femtocell connected to your faster home broadband, rather than just
> > turning on your phone's WiFi and use your broadband directly?
>
> Too many iPhone users aren't bothering with WiFi, even when it's
> available.

and you know this how?

> If they have DSL, WiFi often isn't really much faster than
> using 3G anyway.

nonsense.

> Assuming that most iPhone users are using 3G almost exclusively (when
> both WiFi and 3G are available),

a bad assumption.

> it makes sense for AT&T to try to move
> them off the 3G network onto broadband, via femtocells. AT&T can promise
> their users a faster connection, while moving traffic off the 3G network.

tmobile has been doing this for a while. it's an easy way to reduce
demands on the network.

> No doubt tethering to the iPhone is something AT&T greatly fears,
> because of the bandwidth requirements, which is why they limit data on
> tethered devices or with 3G cards/USB sticks.

except that att has stated they *will* be offering tethering on the
iphone.

In article
<4f981308-5b1e-4784-9da2-2e1e7045f229@m16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
iPhone 3Gold <[email protected]> wrote:

> Femtocells are small boxes that beam low-power wireless signals to
> cell phones and relay signals back to the carrier through the
> subscriber's high-speed Internet connection. In essence, they're
> miniature cellular towers for the home.

Great. So now all I need is a high-speed Internet connection.
Unfortunately, I'm an AT&T customer, and they aren't interested in
selling me DSL.

"Jer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>> Help me out with this one- you'll connect to AT&T's 3G network via a
>> femtocell connected to your faster home broadband, rather than just
>> turning on your phone's WiFi and use your broadband directly? Let me
>> guess- the femtocell also plugs into your RJ-11 jack so you can make
>> cellular calls through your landline? ;-)
>>
>
>
> I presume they'll even charge for the privilege of using your own
> broadband service that you've already paid for. And if you're in your own
> home with landline service, why would you use a cellphone?
>
> Is this femtocell thing specific to iPhone? I can't imagine why any
> company would blow a foot off with that limitation.

No, it'll work with any AT&T phone. I was just poking fun at Vic's
fanboy-insistance to post any AT&T related news as iPhone-specific news.

Continuing in that vein, I could say something like "the femtocells might be
of particular interest to iPhone owners, however, since many might have weak
cell service deep in their parents' basements where they live..."

"nospam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:101220080954272059%[email protected]...

>> Too many iPhone users aren't bothering with WiFi, even when it's
>> available.
>
> and you know this how?

Well, if they're anything like my wife, they may have turned off WiFi to
increase battery life, and to avoid the continual bombardment of messages
telling them WiFi is available everytime the phone sees a new hotspot.

>> If they have DSL, WiFi often isn't really much faster than
>> using 3G anyway.
>
> nonsense.

Not necessarily. Obviously a faster WiFi connection will be noticible when
downloading large apps from the app store, but using Safari, for example,
the phone's major bottleneck will be it's page rendering speed, rather than
the difference between 3G and a fast WiFi connection.


>> Assuming that most iPhone users are using 3G almost exclusively (when
>> both WiFi and 3G are available),
>
> a bad assumption.

Again, it depends on the user. Even stuck on EDGE, I rarely turn WiFi on
unless I'm planning on an extended web session. It's easier not to slog my
way through a few menus to turn on WiFi and wait for it to regognize my home
network and connect just to pull up my browser home page to see the weather,
or lookup a phone number.

>> it makes sense for AT&T to try to move
>> them off the 3G network onto broadband, via femtocells. AT&T can promise
>> their users a faster connection, while moving traffic off the 3G network.
>
> tmobile has been doing this for a while. it's an easy way to reduce
> demands on the network.

While that's a side benefit, the primary objective of T-Mobile's
Hotspot@Home service is to compensate for lousy signal penetration in homes.
I suspect AT&T's impetus is probably the same.


>> No doubt tethering to the iPhone is something AT&T greatly fears,
>> because of the bandwidth requirements, which is why they limit data on
>> tethered devices or with 3G cards/USB sticks.
>
> except that att has stated they *will* be offering tethering on the
> iphone.

What's taking so long, other than AT&T trying to figure out how much extra
to charge for that service, and how to insure they'll be able to recognize a
tethered connection vs. on-phone data use, so iPhone owners can't "backdoor"
their way into getting free tethering?

(One of my newsservers is eating my posts, so I apologize if this shows up
twice...)

"nospam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:101220080954272059%[email protected]...

>> Too many iPhone users aren't bothering with WiFi, even when it's
>> available.
>
> and you know this how?

Well, if they're anything like my wife, they may have turned off WiFi to
increase battery life, and to avoid the continual bombardment of messages
telling them WiFi is available everytime the phone sees a new hotspot.

>> If they have DSL, WiFi often isn't really much faster than
>> using 3G anyway.
>
> nonsense.

Not necessarily. Obviously a faster WiFi connection will be noticible when
downloading large apps from the app store, but using Safari, for example,
the phone's major bottleneck will be it's page rendering speed, rather than
the difference between 3G and a fast WiFi connection.


>> Assuming that most iPhone users are using 3G almost exclusively (when
>> both WiFi and 3G are available),
>
> a bad assumption.

Again, it depends on the user. Even stuck on EDGE, I rarely turn WiFi on
unless I'm planning on an extended web session. It's easier not to slog my
way through a few menus to turn on WiFi and wait for it to regognize my home
network and connect just to pull up my browser home page to see the weather,
or lookup a phone number.

>> it makes sense for AT&T to try to move
>> them off the 3G network onto broadband, via femtocells. AT&T can promise
>> their users a faster connection, while moving traffic off the 3G network.
>
> tmobile has been doing this for a while. it's an easy way to reduce
> demands on the network.

While that's a side benefit, the primary objective of T-Mobile's
Hotspot@Home service is to compensate for lousy signal penetration in homes.
I suspect AT&T's impetus is probably the same.


>> No doubt tethering to the iPhone is something AT&T greatly fears,
>> because of the bandwidth requirements, which is why they limit data on
>> tethered devices or with 3G cards/USB sticks.
>
> except that att has stated they *will* be offering tethering on the
> iphone.

What's taking so long, other than AT&T trying to figure out how much extra
to charge for that service, and how to insure they'll be able to recognize a
tethered connection vs. on-phone data use, so iPhone owners can't "backdoor"
their way into getting free tethering?

(One of my newsservers is eating my outgoing posts, so I apologize if this
shows up twice...)

"Jer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>> Help me out with this one- you'll connect to AT&T's 3G network via a
>> femtocell connected to your faster home broadband, rather than just
>> turning on your phone's WiFi and use your broadband directly? Let me
>> guess- the femtocell also plugs into your RJ-11 jack so you can make
>> cellular calls through your landline? ;-)
>>
>
>
> I presume they'll even charge for the privilege of using your own
> broadband service that you've already paid for. And if you're in your own
> home with landline service, why would you use a cellphone?
>
> Is this femtocell thing specific to iPhone? I can't imagine why any
> company would blow a foot off with that limitation.

No, it'll work with any AT&T phone. I was just poking fun at Vic's
fanboy-insistance to post any AT&T related news as iPhone-specific news.

Continuing in that vein, I could say something like "the femtocells might be
of particular interest to iPhone owners, however, since many might have weak
cell service deep in their parents' basements where they live..."

In article <j5X%[email protected]>, Todd Allcock
<[email protected]> wrote:

> >> Too many iPhone users aren't bothering with WiFi, even when it's
> >> available.
> >
> > and you know this how?
>
> Well, if they're anything like my wife, they may have turned off WiFi to
> increase battery life, and to avoid the continual bombardment of messages
> telling them WiFi is available everytime the phone sees a new hotspot.

there's a toggle to disable those annoying messages while leaving wifi
on, and i would think that disabling 3g (or at least not using it for
data) would save more battery than disabling wifi.

in any event, sms has no evidence about what most iphone users do.

> >> If they have DSL, WiFi often isn't really much faster than
> >> using 3G anyway.
> >
> > nonsense.
>
> Not necessarily. Obviously a faster WiFi connection will be noticible when
> downloading large apps from the app store, but using Safari, for example,
> the phone's major bottleneck will be it's page rendering speed, rather than
> the difference between 3G and a fast WiFi connection.

for safari, that might be true, but there are numerous other apps that
access data over the air.

> >> Assuming that most iPhone users are using 3G almost exclusively (when
> >> both WiFi and 3G are available),
> >
> > a bad assumption.
>
> Again, it depends on the user. Even stuck on EDGE, I rarely turn WiFi on
> unless I'm planning on an extended web session. It's easier not to slog my
> way through a few menus to turn on WiFi and wait for it to regognize my home
> network and connect just to pull up my browser home page to see the weather,
> or lookup a phone number.

the iphone remembers networks it previously joined. it should
automatically join a network again if it picks up the signal, without
any additional action from the user. just turn on the phone and wait a
second or two and it's associated with the wifi network.

> >> it makes sense for AT&T to try to move
> >> them off the 3G network onto broadband, via femtocells. AT&T can promise
> >> their users a faster connection, while moving traffic off the 3G network.
> >
> > tmobile has been doing this for a while. it's an easy way to reduce
> > demands on the network.
>
> While that's a side benefit, the primary objective of T-Mobile's
> Hotspot@Home service is to compensate for lousy signal penetration in homes.
> I suspect AT&T's impetus is probably the same.

they want to reduce the load on their network. it's a lot cheaper to
give someone a cheap box to connect to their phone line than it is to
build more towers along with the necessary approval (which in some
places is next to impossible).

> >> No doubt tethering to the iPhone is something AT&T greatly fears,
> >> because of the bandwidth requirements, which is why they limit data on
> >> tethered devices or with 3G cards/USB sticks.
> >
> > except that att has stated they *will* be offering tethering on the
> > iphone.
>
> What's taking so long, other than AT&T trying to figure out how much extra
> to charge for that service, and how to insure they'll be able to recognize a
> tethered connection vs. on-phone data use, so iPhone owners can't "backdoor"
> their way into getting free tethering?

i have no idea what's taking so long. at&t isn't exactly fast at
anything.

how many times did they announce free wifi to their subscribers and
then un-announce it the next day? finally, after several months, they
are actually offering it.

Todd Allcock wrote:

> Well, if they're anything like my wife, they may have turned off WiFi to
> increase battery life, and to avoid the continual bombardment of messages
> telling them WiFi is available everytime the phone sees a new hotspot.

Yes, it gets really annoying to be constantly reminded that a WiFi
network is available, when you really don't care. Also the WiFi sucks
more power for no good reason if 3G is available.

> Not necessarily. Obviously a faster WiFi connection will be noticible when
> downloading large apps from the app store, but using Safari, for example,
> the phone's major bottleneck will be it's page rendering speed, rather than
> the difference between 3G and a fast WiFi connection.

It's not just that, it's that many DSL subscribers opted for the
el-cheapo DSL. AT&T is offering $10/month DSL in my area to new
subscribers, but it's comparable in speed to AT&T 3G, maybe a bit slower.

> Again, it depends on the user. Even stuck on EDGE, I rarely turn WiFi on
> unless I'm planning on an extended web session. It's easier not to slog my
> way through a few menus to turn on WiFi and wait for it to regognize my
> home
> network and connect just to pull up my browser home page to see the
> weather,
> or lookup a phone number.

Yes, that's the issue. Most users can't be bothered to turn on WiFi for
a marginal, if any, increase in speed, unless there is no 3G (or even
EDGE) available, which is really only the case in rural areas these days.

> While that's a side benefit, the primary objective of T-Mobile's
> Hotspot@Home service is to compensate for lousy signal penetration in
> homes.

LOL, I know how that goes.

> I suspect AT&T's impetus is probably the same.

AT&T doesn't have nearly the problems that T-Mobile has in that regard.

> What's taking so long, other than AT&T trying to figure out how much extra
> to charge for that service, and how to insure they'll be able to
> recognize a
> tethered connection vs. on-phone data use, so iPhone owners can't
> "backdoor"
> their way into getting free tethering?

Tethering is very dicey. They have the potential to piss off a lot of
customers that really don't understand about the monthly limits that
will apply for tethering but not for direct use.

In article <hZY%[email protected]>, SMS
<[email protected]> wrote:

> > Well, if they're anything like my wife, they may have turned off WiFi to
> > increase battery life, and to avoid the continual bombardment of messages
> > telling them WiFi is available everytime the phone sees a new hotspot.
>
> Yes, it gets really annoying to be constantly reminded that a WiFi
> network is available, when you really don't care.

that's why there's a toggle.

> Also the WiFi sucks
> more power for no good reason if 3G is available.

what tests have you done?

> > Not necessarily. Obviously a faster WiFi connection will be noticible when
> > downloading large apps from the app store, but using Safari, for example,
> > the phone's major bottleneck will be it's page rendering speed, rather than
> > the difference between 3G and a fast WiFi connection.
>
> It's not just that, it's that many DSL subscribers opted for the
> el-cheapo DSL. AT&T is offering $10/month DSL in my area to new
> subscribers, but it's comparable in speed to AT&T 3G, maybe a bit slower.

so someone who gets the cheapest dsl possible then runs out and buys an
iphone? hardly likely.

3g may be faster than the rock bottom dsl but it's slower than what
most people have, particularly cable and fios users.

> > Again, it depends on the user. Even stuck on EDGE, I rarely turn WiFi on
> > unless I'm planning on an extended web session. It's easier not to slog my
> > way through a few menus to turn on WiFi and wait for it to regognize my
> > home
> > network and connect just to pull up my browser home page to see the
> > weather,
> > or lookup a phone number.
>
> Yes, that's the issue. Most users can't be bothered to turn on WiFi for
> a marginal, if any, increase in speed, unless there is no 3G (or even
> EDGE) available, which is really only the case in rural areas these days.

there's nothing to turn on. it connects automatically. also, at&t's
3g network is not very widely deployed, with a lot of holes even in
major cities.

> > While that's a side benefit, the primary objective of T-Mobile's
> > Hotspot@Home service is to compensate for lousy signal penetration in
> > homes.
>
> LOL, I know how that goes.

right, just like you know about everything else.

> > What's taking so long, other than AT&T trying to figure out how much extra
> > to charge for that service, and how to insure they'll be able to
> > recognize a
> > tethered connection vs. on-phone data use, so iPhone owners can't
> > "backdoor"
> > their way into getting free tethering?
>
> Tethering is very dicey. They have the potential to piss off a lot of
> customers that really don't understand about the monthly limits that
> will apply for tethering but not for direct use.

or they pick a limit that is high enough that it only affects the true
bandwidth hogs.