ATT MicroCell

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

>
> The whole point of the Microcell is that the use of it, once properly set
> up, is transparent to the user- it's just another cell site you don't have
> to think about, like all of the other cell sites your phone uses.

That's my impression as to how my Verizon femtocell works.

[That is, when my cellphone -- or anyone else's Verizon cellphone -- is
located inside my house, so that the femtocell is the strongest nearby
"tower", the femtocell senses that that cellphone is there, within
connection range of the femtocell "tower;" and tells Verizon (over the
Internet) that that cellphone is currently electronically linked to, or
available through, that tower. Verizon then remembers that, and if a
call for that cellphone -- mine or someone elses -- comes in to the
Verizon system from anywhere else, the Verizon system sends it on to my
femtocell tower, and rings the appropriate cellphone cellphone. Right?]

But if this is true, what purpose does "registration" serve? My
impression is that it only gives the registered phones some priority, in
situations where a _bunch_ of Verizon cellphones may all be in close
physical range of and electronic contact with the femtocell "tower"...??

---

› See More: ATT MicroCell

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Edward A. Falk) wrote:

> My understanding is that because of AT&T's poor coverage in some areas,
> they make the MicroCell available to improve your personal coverage
> inside the immediate area of the device. The device attaches to the
> broadband you already have.
>
> In other words, they're giving you the privilege of paying them money so
> you can expand *their* inadequate infrastructure for them, using network
> bandwidth you're also paying for.

This is the interpretation I've seen taken by a lot of people -- I don't
buy it.

My house is in a very dead spot for cell signals -- and this happens
because I have a lot of surrounding dense trees and shrubs all around my
house, which I'm able to enjoy and which give me privacy, and a lot of
berm-provided noise shielding from a nearby noisy freeway.

I don't think Verizon (or AT&T) should be required by a divine mandate
to put up an expensive extra tower just to serve me, and I'm happy to
pay the modest price for the femtocell, with no additional cost at all
(at least for the Verizon case)

In article
<[email protected]>, AES
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I don't think Verizon (or AT&T) should be required by a divine mandate
> to put up an expensive extra tower just to serve me, and I'm happy to
> pay the modest price for the femtocell, with no additional cost at all
> (at least for the Verizon case)

it's a *lot* less expensive to give you a femtocell instead of putting
up an expensive tower.

and why lock it down like they do by registering handsets? why not make
it strong enough to help out the neighbors too.

it's a money grab.

In article <[email protected]>, John Higdon <[email protected]> wrote:

>And my further understanding is that ANYONE within range of the
>microcell can use it as well.

No, it's only available to numbers that you, as owner of
the Microcell, authorize.

>So...not only do you pay to improve AT&T's
>miserable coverage for YOU (by paying them and also providing the
>bandwidth), but for anyone else who happens by.

Yeah, kind of. But let's face it, if you're an AT&T subscriber
you pay a share of the cost of their infrastructure anyway.
With a Microcell, you pay a small premium, and you get a say
in exactly how that additional infrastructure is deployed.

It's not exactly the greatest thing since sliced bread. But
it works for me because:

1. I am an AT&T subscriber that is generally reasonably happy
with their service. The coverage is mainly decent, the rates
are competitive, and I like the rollover minutes.

2. There's a specific problem with reception at my home location.
Verizon and Sprint are just as bad. T-Mobile is okay but
their coverage elsewhere is not as good and they don't offer
rollover minutes.

3. For the first time in 5 years I have decent cell coverage
at home for a one-time cost of $150. That's not great but
it does represent an improvement for me.

For anyone that isn't basically in the same situation the
Microcell is completely irrelevant, in my view.

Of course, I still think AT&T, and the cellular industry as
a whole, pretty much suck. We have no disagreement there.

--
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". |
| [email protected] Gary Player. |
| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On 5/25/2010 11:43 AM, Malcolm Hoar wrote:
> In short, if you are generally okay with AT&T's cellular
> service but have a major reception problem at your home
> location, the Microcell is well worth considering.



Other than getting better coverage at the location of the microcell, is
there any other advantage to getting one of these devices, maybe
something like "3G calls that are routed over the internet and then to
the microcell don't use my minutes, or are billed at a lower rate"

"Malcolm Hoar" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, John Higdon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>And my further understanding is that ANYONE within range of the
>>microcell can use it as well.
>
> No, it's only available to numbers that you, as owner of
> the Microcell, authorize.

That could be a nuisance if you have frequent visitors who also use AT&T wireless service.

--
John Richards

On 5/25/2010 9:28 PM, Anthony Guzzi wrote:
> On 5/25/2010 11:43 AM, Malcolm Hoar wrote:
>> In short, if you are generally okay with AT&T's cellular
>> service but have a major reception problem at your home
>> location, the Microcell is well worth considering.
>
>
>
> Other than getting better coverage at the location of the microcell, is
> there any other advantage to getting one of these devices, maybe
> something like "3G calls that are routed over the internet and then to
> the microcell don't use my minutes, or are billed at a lower rate"

It depends on what you want and the provider (Verizon, AT&T, etc). One
option may be unlimited minutes via the microcell for a monthly fee and
another option is no monthly fee and you use your minutes.

In article <[email protected]>,
Anthony Guzzi <[email protected]> wrote:

> Other than getting better coverage at the location of the microcell, is
> there any other advantage to getting one of these devices, maybe
> something like "3G calls that are routed over the internet and then to
> the microcell don't use my minutes, or are billed at a lower rate"

Internet calls don't use minutes regardless.

--
John Higdon
+1 408 ANdrews 6-4400
AT&T-Free At Last

On Tue, 25 May 2010 22:35:00 -0700, John Higdon <[email protected]> wrote
in <[email protected]>:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> Anthony Guzzi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Other than getting better coverage at the location of the microcell, is
>> there any other advantage to getting one of these devices, maybe
>> something like "3G calls that are routed over the internet and then to
>> the microcell don't use my minutes, or are billed at a lower rate"
>
>Internet calls don't use minutes regardless.

Not in the case of AT&T Wireless.
--
Best regards,
John

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

On Tue, 25 May 2010 21:55:54 -0700, "John Richards"
<[email protected]> wrote in <[email protected]>:

>"Malcolm Hoar" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>, John Higdon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>And my further understanding is that ANYONE within range of the
>>>microcell can use it as well.
>>
>> No, it's only available to numbers that you, as owner of
>> the Microcell, authorize.
>
>That could be a nuisance if you have frequent visitors who also use AT&T wireless service.

They are always free to use public towers or your landline.
--
Best regards,
John

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

In article <[email protected]>, John Navas
<[email protected]> wrote:

> >>>And my further understanding is that ANYONE within range of the
> >>>microcell can use it as well.
> >>
> >> No, it's only available to numbers that you, as owner of
> >> the Microcell, authorize.
> >
> >That could be a nuisance if you have frequent visitors who also use AT&T
> >wireless service.
>
> They are always free to use public towers or your landline.

not always an option if there's no cellular coverage (the reason why
someone would have a microcell) and/or if the call would incur charges
on the land line.

In article <[email protected]>,
Elmo P. Shagnasty <[email protected]> wrote:

> AT&T charges you for the device, which then gives you the privilege of
> hooking it to the broadband you pay for AND THEN paying AT&T for the
> minutes you use through that device.

amazing isn't it? you forgot reduce the load on the rest of the network.

it's one of the best money making schemes they've come up with.

In article <[email protected]>, Anthony Guzzi <[email protected]> wrote:

>Other than getting better coverage at the location of the microcell, is
>there any other advantage to getting one of these devices, maybe
>something like "3G calls that are routed over the internet and then to
>the microcell don't use my minutes, or are billed at a lower rate"

Calls routed through the Microcell are billed just like any
other normal call. A normally "free" call (nights and weekends,
calls to other AT&T cell phones etc) will also be free if
made via the Microcell.

However, you can subscribe to a $20/month plan that gives you
unlimited calling through the Microcell.

--
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". |
| [email protected] Gary Player. |
| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 25 May 2010 21:55:54 -0700, "John Richards"
> <[email protected]> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>"Malcolm Hoar" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>> In article <[email protected]>, John Higdon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>And my further understanding is that ANYONE within range of the
>>>>microcell can use it as well.
>>>
>>> No, it's only available to numbers that you, as owner of
>>> the Microcell, authorize.
>>
>>That could be a nuisance if you have frequent visitors who also use AT&T wireless service.
>
> They are always free to use public towers or your landline.

Not very helpful. Presumably there are no usable public towers in that location
or else there would be no need for a MicroCell.
Many folks no longer have a landline.

--
John Richards

In article <[email protected]>, "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>And my further understanding is that ANYONE within range of the=20
>>>microcell can use it as well.=20
>>=20
>> No, it's only available to numbers that you, as owner of
>> the Microcell, authorize.
>
>That could be a nuisance if you have frequent visitors who also use AT&T =
>wireless service.

Well, it doesn't make things any worse!

And if you have a few frequent/regular visitors, you can
authorize those numbers. It's pretty easy to update the
list of up to 10 numbers authorized to use your Microcell.

--
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". |
| [email protected] Gary Player. |
| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~