SPCS announces EV-DO release

"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 22:58:29 GMT, Paul Miner <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 02:56:51 GMT, "[email protected]"
> >><[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>Surely you understand that Sprint has T1 lines to their cellsites.
> >>If 2 million subscribers suddenly started subscribing to EV-DO and
> >>watching video constantly would there be enough capacity on the
> >>cellsite for the voice calls, of would it all grind to a halt? The
> >>latter, obviously.
> >
> >As someone else already pointed out, there is no cell site serving 2
> >million customers anywhere in Sprint's network or anyone else's
> >network, for that matter. Long before it gets to that point,
> >additional sites would be added. Bottom line, your "grind to a halt"
> >observation also looks to be made up. :-)
>
> One cellsite? Who said one cellsite? Not me. That's ridiculous.
>
> If they had 2 million subscribers among their entire population of
> customers distributed over all their cellsites who suddenly upped
> their usage of bandwidth by 100x we would ALL notice it. Sheesh.
>
> They would need to limit subscribers until they were sure they could
> carry the load. So prices are high until then.
>
> Heck, if they made broadband cellular phone data service cost $3 a
> month we would likely ALL subscribe, they could never expand enough to
> provide that much service.

You make it sound like every customer is going to go down to the SPCS store,
or one of their approved outlets, and snap up all the EV-DO cards, and EV-DO
capable phones overnight and modify their plans to bring on capacity
problems with all of the towers.

That's not going to happen. By the time that SPCS has phased out all the
current line of phones & PCMCIA cards and replaced them with EV-DO capable
devices, it's going to be 8-12 months, and not everyone is going to be doing
EV-DO transmissions. Not everyone who has replaced a phone in the past year
or the new customers who have signed up in the past six months, will be
updating to a new capable EV-DO device.

Bob ::Noticing that this argument has now swung from cost to bandwidth::

---

› See More: SPCS announces EV-DO release

Paul Miner wrote:

>>Surely you understand that Sprint has T1 lines to their cellsites.
>>If 2 million subscribers suddenly started subscribing to EV-DO and
>>watching video constantly would there be enough capacity on the
>>cellsite for the voice calls, of would it all grind to a halt? The
>>latter, obviously.
>
>
> As someone else already pointed out, there is no cell site serving 2
> million customers anywhere in Sprint's network or anyone else's
> network, for that matter. Long before it gets to that point,
> additional sites would be added. Bottom line, your "grind to a halt"
> observation also looks to be made up. :-)

Just for sake of clarification, are we talking about bandwidth between the
cell sites and Sprint or between Sprint and the rest of the Internet?

(sounds like the former, but I just want to make sure)

--
JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / [email protected] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)

"Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"

I just checked the sbc web site. The $24.99 price is introductory
price and requires a 1 yr. agreement. The lowest month-to-month price
is $49.95.


Joseph Huber wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 02:07:41 GMT, Jerome Zelinske
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> I don't know the local cost of roadrunner, but my dsl is around $50, so
>>how is evdo 3 times the cost? Besides that it is apples to oranges.
>>dsl does not get me data on my phone.
>
>
> DSL (unlimited 1.5 Mbps down / 384 kbps up) is being offered for
> $25/month by SBC and $30/month by Waymark in this market (before
> taxes). 80/30 = 2.67 ~= 3. These are the long-term prices, not the
> introductory short-term prices. Comcast is offering cable Internet
> for $42/month to cable customers.
>
> I'm not talking about getting data on my phone, I'm talking about
> getting data on my laptop. DSL, or cable, or whatever it is, gets me
> high speed Internet on my laptop when I'm in my hotel room while
> traveling, and that is where I'd be using EV-DO most
> frequently...seems like apples-to-apples to me.
>
> Joe Huber
> [email protected]

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 23:59:17 GMT, Jerome Zelinske
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I just checked the sbc web site. The $24.99 price is introductory
>price and requires a 1 yr. agreement. The lowest month-to-month price
>is $49.95.

Sprint also requires a 1-yr agreement for their data plans. SBC still
gives you 12 months of DSL for $24.99/mo. SBC isn't the only game in
town. If you are worried that SBC won't offer you a competitive rate
after the 1-yr agreement is up, choose a different DSL provider.
Waymark (www.waymark.net) is offering DSL at similar speeds in this
market for the slightly higher price of $29.95/mo. They also require
a 1-yr agreement. I received the following from their sales staff
regarding what happens after the 1-yr agreement is up:

"It will stay at the same rate. If we are able to offer a lower rate
on the service, you can sign up for another year and we will lower the
rate again. Otherwise, you can stay on a monthly basis and keep the
same rate."

I'll be happy to forward you this email if you like, because this
information is not posted on Waymark's web site.

So, what was the point of your post? To show that DSL is really much
more expensive than I claimed it was? Well, in this markey anyway, it
really isn't...

Joe Huber
[email protected]

I do live in sbc territory. They are not my dsl provider. If another
dsl provider's permanent rate was significantly lower, I might switch.
By significantly lower, I mean it would have to be low enough that it
plus earthlink's "Bring Your Own Access" fee would be lower than what I
am paying now. Well if it is not on their web site, then I will pass on
the waymark "smoke". I think that a provider of any service should list
exactly what the expected price will be after any introductory offer
concludes. They are the first dsl provider I know of that does not give
new customers a free terminal adapter. That is two strikes against
doing business with them.


Joseph Huber wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 23:59:17 GMT, Jerome Zelinske
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> I just checked the sbc web site. The $24.99 price is introductory
>>price and requires a 1 yr. agreement. The lowest month-to-month price
>>is $49.95.
>
>
> Sprint also requires a 1-yr agreement for their data plans. SBC still
> gives you 12 months of DSL for $24.99/mo. SBC isn't the only game in
> town. If you are worried that SBC won't offer you a competitive rate
> after the 1-yr agreement is up, choose a different DSL provider.
> Waymark (www.waymark.net) is offering DSL at similar speeds in this
> market for the slightly higher price of $29.95/mo. They also require
> a 1-yr agreement. I received the following from their sales staff
> regarding what happens after the 1-yr agreement is up:
>
> "It will stay at the same rate. If we are able to offer a lower rate
> on the service, you can sign up for another year and we will lower the
> rate again. Otherwise, you can stay on a monthly basis and keep the
> same rate."
>
> I'll be happy to forward you this email if you like, because this
> information is not posted on Waymark's web site.
>
> So, what was the point of your post? To show that DSL is really much
> more expensive than I claimed it was? Well, in this markey anyway, it
> really isn't...
>
> Joe Huber
> [email protected]

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 01:54:05 GMT, Jerome Zelinske
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I do live in sbc territory. They are not my dsl provider. If another
>dsl provider's permanent rate was significantly lower, I might switch.
>By significantly lower, I mean it would have to be low enough that it
>plus earthlink's "Bring Your Own Access" fee would be lower than what I
>am paying now. Well if it is not on their web site, then I will pass on
>the waymark "smoke".

Do you have any evidence or experience suggesting that Waymark would
not keep the promise made in the email they sent me? Or are you just
berating them for no good reason? You could always ask Waymark to
"put it in writing". Of course, I did that with Sprint, and it meant
nothing, but I would guess that most companies would honor a written
agreement. I have a cheap dial-up account with Waymark that I keep
for emergencies and traveling. They have not broken any promises to
me so far. I don't use them for DSL, as I have cable Internet.

> They are the first dsl provider I know of that does not give
>new customers a free terminal adapter.

Maybe that's how Waymark is able to offer the same or lower monthly
rate after the 1-yr agreement expires. Perhaps the cost of your
"free" terminal adapter is rolled into you montly rate???

Joe Huber
[email protected]

Jerome Zelinske wrote:
> I just checked the sbc web site. The $24.99 price is introductory
> price and requires a 1 yr. agreement. The lowest month-to-month price
> is $49.95.


Fact is that SBC allows you to renew at the end of the contract year
for the then current promo price, IF YOU ASK.
I don't know what state you live in, but if I go here:
http://www02.sbc.com/DSL_new/content_new/1,,18,00.html
and input California, the prices are $14.95 for 1.5Mbps
and $24.99 for 3.0Mbps, with a one year contract.

--
John Richards