Sorry to dash your WiMax dreams, Larry...

The Bob <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

>> Alltel has never slowed me down that I can see. Of course, Friday,
>> Alltel will be history, making this point moot.
>
> Alltel is not a broadband provider.
>
>

In the context of a sellphone, define "broadband".

---

› See More: Sorry to dash your WiMax dreams, Larry...

Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote in news:csg9l.161$Nq.152
@newsfe25.iad:

> hey, Nokia: how about one with a built-in
> cellular phone, or would that be too much to ask of a CELLPHONE
> manufacturer!

Nokia has plenty of them. Sellphone companies keep hobbling them up like
iPhone and Storm into uselessness. The N8xx won't be a sellphone.

At 08 Jan 2009 14:53:17 +0000 Larry wrote:

> >> Alltel has never slowed me down that I can see. Of course, Friday,
> >> Alltel will be history, making this point moot.
> >
> > Alltel is not a broadband provider.
> >
> >
>
> In the context of a sellphone, define "broadband".

He's not talking about cellular-he's arguing that the Clear WiMax TOS is
similar to cable/DSL broadband TOS, to refute my claim that WiMaxis just
another cellular-type offering. (And, frankly, upon reflection, he's
winning that argument!) ;-)

At 08 Jan 2009 14:55:58 +0000 Larry wrote:

> > hey, Nokia: how about one with a built-in
> > cellular phone, or would that be too much to ask of a CELLPHONE
> > manufacturer!
>
> Nokia has plenty of them. Sellphone companies keep hobbling them up
> like iPhone and Storm into uselessness. The N8xx won't be a sellphone.

If they sell it unlocked/unsubsidized/"unhobbled," cellcos won't be able
to do anything about it...

A 3G-equipped N8xx should cost much more to manufacture than a WiMax model,
and would have a far broader potential customer base.

Larry <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
news:[email protected]:

> The Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>>> Alltel has never slowed me down that I can see. Of course, Friday,
>>> Alltel will be history, making this point moot.
>>
>> Alltel is not a broadband provider.
>>
>>
>
> In the context of a sellphone, define "broadband".

In the context of Wimax, define "sellphone." My understanding is that US
WiMax, as represented by Clearwire, is a data network, not a communications
network. So, when talking about it as a data network, it is an automatic
given that 3g cellular network technology is not accepted anywhere as
"broadband" by definition.

You need to stop thinking with that old mentality.

At 08 Jan 2009 09:21:15 -0700 Todd Allcock wrote:

> A 3G-equipped N8xx should cost much more to manufacture than a WiMax
model,
> and would have a far broader potential customer base.

Oops- that should've been "SHOULDN'T cost much more..."

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

> At 08 Jan 2009 14:55:58 +0000 Larry wrote:
>
>> > hey, Nokia: how about one with a built-in
>> > cellular phone, or would that be too much to ask of a CELLPHONE
>> > manufacturer!
>>
>> Nokia has plenty of them. Sellphone companies keep hobbling them up
>> like iPhone and Storm into uselessness. The N8xx won't be a
>> sellphone.
>
> If they sell it unlocked/unsubsidized/"unhobbled," cellcos won't be
> able to do anything about it...
>
> A 3G-equipped N8xx should cost much more to manufacture than a WiMax
> model, and would have a far broader potential customer base.
>
>
>
>

You underestimate the world market for the internet tablets. When the
Maemo hackers held a conference to discuss its open source software in
Berlin, over 200 programmers from all over the world showed up, an amazing
support for the open source Linux community.

None of that would be possible if the SELLphone company bureaucrats had
anything to do with the tablet, just like iPhone. We'd be jailbreaking
internet tablets to wrestle control back away from the telecom corporation
elephants....just like iPhone.

As soon as SELLphone carriers had anything to do with them, the open source
community making them great would simply move on to another device NOT
under the control of some corporate bureaucrat. Your concept of what the
tablets represent, as a laboratory experiment of Nokia Labs in Finland is
simply wrong.

At 09 Jan 2009 02:15:46 +0000 Larry wrote:

> >> > hey, Nokia: how about one with a built-in
> >> > cellular phone, or would that be too much to ask of a CELLPHONE
> >> > manufacturer!
> >>
> >> Nokia has plenty of them. Sellphone companies keep hobbling them up
> >> like iPhone and Storm into uselessness. The N8xx won't be a
> >> sellphone.
> >
> > If they sell it unlocked/unsubsidized/"unhobbled," cellcos won't be
> > able to do anything about it...
> >
> > A 3G-equipped N8xx should cost much more to manufacture than a WiMax
> > model, and would have a far broader potential customer base.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> You underestimate the world market for the internet tablets. When the
> Maemo hackers held a conference to discuss its open source software in
> Berlin, over 200 programmers from all over the world showed up, an
amazing
> support for the open source Linux community.

No, I don't think I'munderestimating anything. The tablet division of
Nokia is comparable to the ketchup producing divison of McDonald's Corp.

> None of that would be possible if the SELLphone company bureaucrats had
> anything to do with the tablet, just like iPhone.

Agin, you don't understand the GSM world. In addition to carrier-branded
models, phone manufacturers build "generic" unlocked handsets. Take
Nokia's own N-series phones, like the N95. Streaming players, built-in
Skype, etc. Features that would give some operators fits.

> We'd be jailbreaking
> internet tablets to wrestle control back away from the telecom
corporation
> elephants....just like iPhone.


Look at HP's current line of Windows Mobile phones. They're not sold by
any carrier, are completely unlocked, and some include an integrated VoIP
app that runs off the regular phone dialer.

> As soon as SELLphone carriers had anything to do with them, the open
source
> community making them great would simply move on to another device NOT
> under the control of some corporate bureaucrat.


Again, cellular companies have no say in the manufacture of unlocked, non-
carrier-branded handsets.


> Your concept of what the
> tablets represent, as a laboratory experiment of Nokia Labs in Finland
is
> simply wrong.


Really? Then why, in your next post, do you mention an upcoming model
with "cellular data connectivity"?

Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote in news:kpE9l.20$qi.10
@newsfe09.iad:

>
> Really? Then why, in your next post, do you mention an upcoming model
> with "cellular data connectivity"?
>
>
>

Because I hadn't read it, yet?

Don't know what that means, and neither does anyone I've talked to, so far.
Nokia isn't saying as I don't think they know, either.

So, you're saying the carriers of GSM that plug the programming card into
your phone have no control over what the phone does? That sounds awfully
stupid on their part. The whole idea of going to digital phones was
carrier control of everything they couldn't control under AMPS, like
roaming. If the SIM doesn't do any control over your foreign phone,
someone screwed up at the programmer level.

I suppose what you say is true. You certainly defend them like someone who
works for them.

"Larry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Really? Then why, in your next post, do you mention an upcoming model
>> with "cellular data connectivity"?
>>
>
> Because I hadn't read it, yet?
>
> Don't know what that means, and neither does anyone I've talked to, so
> far.
> Nokia isn't saying as I don't think they know, either.

I'm pretty sure Nokia knows exactly what that means! ;-)

Whether they'll bother wiring voice to the mic and speaker, or just use
cellular for direct data capability might be in question, (IIRC, the
WinMo-based HTC Advantage tablet/laptop only supports GSM calls via
bluetooth headset- the cellular radio is primarily for data connectivity)
but either way. it's also a phone!


> So, you're saying the carriers of GSM that plug the programming card into
> your phone have no control over what the phone does?

A SIM is not really a "programming card" as much as a removable NAM.

> That sounds awfully
> stupid on their part. The whole idea of going to digital phones was
> carrier control of everything they couldn't control under AMPS, like
> roaming.

No, the whole idea of digital phones was originally for increasing network
capacity in metro areas with fewer towers.

> If the SIM doesn't do any control over your foreign phone,
> someone screwed up at the programmer level.

A SIM card is simply a memory card with very small (by today's standards!)
storage space. It contains essentially the same infomation that the NAM in
an analog cellphone has- your "ESN", your phone number, and a few network
settings. It also has a small user-writable storage space to hold SMS
messages and your phonebook (the idea in the olden days was that you could
move the SIM from phone to phone and move the phone book with it. SIM
phonebooks only hold name and one phone number per contact, so these days
that feature is used less since most phones store multiple numbers,
addresses, etc.)

Carrier-branded phones are programmed to respond to certain
network-insterted data bits in the SIM and react accordingly. For example,
I have an AT&T-branded unlocked Nokia dumbphone that "hides" certain menus
(like manual network selection) if I put an AT&T SIM in it, but the menus
come back if I stick a T-Mobile SIM- the AT&T SIM obviously contains a "hide
certain menus" value that certain AT&T-branded phones observe, but non-AT&T
phones ignore (i.e. if I put that same AT&T SIM in a T-Mobile-branded Nokia,
the network selection menus DON'T hide themselves- they lack the AT&T
programming to observe whatever "hide" bit is set in an AT&T SIM.)

Unlocked, unbranded devices would simple ignore those bits, since they
wouldn't mean anything to the generic software of an unbranded phone/device.

I'm certainly not saying GSM providers don't control access to their
networks whatsoever, they just block access at the network level- any
carrier can set up their network to block access any way they choose- cap
data access, block ports, restrict access to certain device models, types or
IMEI serial number (the phone's serial number- not the SIM's.) European
carriers, for example, use a stolen phone "blacklist" database that cuts off
any phone reported stolen, regardless of what SIM is inserted (but I'm told
American GSM carriers don't bother using it- since I don't own any stolen
phones AFAIK, I can't verify personally.)

You like to pretend your tablet is free to enjoy unbridled usage because
it's not a cellphone, but you're still subject to the whims to whatever
carrier you tether it to. It's why you're so concerned with Verizon's
takeover of Alltel- you need to play by Verizon's rules even with your
non-cellular tablet if you tether it to a phone operating on Verizon. If
the tablet could magically bypass network restrictions willy-nilly just
because it's not "controlled by sellular carriers" you'd have nothing to
fear from Verizon.

Similarly, I have to play by T-Mo's network restrictions (closed ports,
bandwidth caps, speed throttling) even though my phone is unlocked and
uncrippled, just like you and your tablet. However, I'll take a lot of
restriction crap from T-Mobile in return for an unlimted $6/month data plan.
;-)


> I suppose what you say is true. You certainly defend them like someone
> who
> works for them.

Who am I defending? GSM carriers? Nokia? I'm simply pointing out the
reality of life on the "other side of the fence," and correcting your
assumptions that all carriers follow the draconian level of hardware control
that Verizon uses.

I'm under no delusion that GSM carriers can't excersize even more control if
they wish- T-Mo and AT&T could simply block all unbranded devices by IMEI to
ensure you use their crippled devices. The point is that they don't, at
least currently. And the GSM market is such that the "bring your own
device" model is responsible for a small but significant enough amount of
business that it's unlikely that will change anytime soon.

Just as you've seen the differences between Alltel and Verizon versions of
the same phone, the differences between, say, a direct-from-Nokia unbranded
phone and a carrier-branded one can be staggering. There's absolutely no
reason Nokia couldn't make exactly the same N8xx tablet with the same
open-source software with or without a cellular radio module if they chose
to. I'll agree that it's extremely unlikely that AT&T or T-Mobile would
then place an order for 10,000 of them to sell subsidized, but that has
never stopped Nokia before!

In reality, the best possible scenario would be a carrier-branded N8xx
cellular tablet- that way you take advantage of the subsidy, then go
download and install whatever uncrippled version of the software the hackers
have whipped up and get the best of both worlds- an uncrippled device at a
crippled price! It's what the WinMo power-users do. Buy, say, an AT&T Tilt
(the $200 AT&T subsidized version of the $700 HTC TyTn II) and flash the
unbranded HTC TyTn II firmware on it. The Maemo guys would be doing the
same thing. I suspect if AT&T or T-Mo started selling a crippled Nokia
cellular tablet today, you've have an uncrippled software version available
tomorrow afternoon!

"Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in news:2IM9l.760$zJ2.141
@newsfe23.iad:

> In reality, the best possible scenario would be a carrier-branded N8xx
> cellular tablet- that way you take advantage of the subsidy,

But, with that subsidy comes control. I disagree, wholeheartedly. I don't
want some sellphone bureaucrats designing in ANYTHING into my tablets.
That can only lead to iphoneitis....another damned pocket box office always
trying to SELL you something to increase the profits. That's nonsense.
I'll pay for the unencumbered computer with noone telling me what I want
and what I can have, thank you. I don't need the Nanny Corporation acting
as bureaucrat babysitter.

At 09 Jan 2009 20:00:02 +0000 Larry wrote:
> "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AnoOspam
> > In reality, the best possible scenario would be a carrier-branded
N8xx
> > cellular tablet- that way you take advantage of the subsidy,
>
> But, with that subsidy comes control. I disagree, wholeheartedly. I
don't
> want some sellphone bureaucrats designing in ANYTHING into my tablets.

Why would you care, if you could remove it 10 minutes after opening the
box?


> That can only lead to iphoneitis....another damned pocket box office
always
> trying to SELL you something to increase the profits. That's nonsense.

> I'll pay for the unencumbered computer with noone telling me what I
want
> and what I can have, thank you. I don't need the Nanny Corporation
acting
> as bureaucrat babysitter.


Nor do I, but I don't mind gaming the system. I only buy uncrippled
phones, or crippled phones that are easy to uncripple. This lets me take
advantage of the subsidy, and still have a useable device.

Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote in news:APQ9l.11210$%
[email protected]:

> Nor do I, but I don't mind gaming the system. I only buy uncrippled
> phones, or crippled phones that are easy to uncripple. This lets me
take
> advantage of the subsidy, and still have a useable device.
>
>

But the carriers' influences cripple the phones by default. No
manufacturer is going to work his ass off developing some concept or
feature in a sellphone he thinks the carriers are just going to disable
as soon as they get their grubby little beancounter mitts around it.
That's stupid! The carriers STIFLE development by being the CUSTOMERS
of the phones. YOU are not the customer for the latest phone....Verizon
is. What Verizon wants, is what manufacturers deliver.

Case in point:

http://maemo.org/news/announcements/first_maemo_5
_sdk_release_targeting_platform_developers/

http://maemo.org/news/announcements/maemo_diablo_4-1
_reference_manual_released/

Here are the very first two casualties to any carrier influence of the
tablets I love. NO carrier is gonna let a bunch of "outsiders" have a
free hand at programming ANY phone on their system. Name one. It
doesn't exist. The carrier tells Nokia, or whoever, what it wants the
next gen phone to do....or it won't buy them to distribute! If the
carrier says NO, it means NO, no matter how much the end users want it!
There isn't gonna be any open source programming that some carrier's
bureaucrats are going to have to watch like hawks wondering out loud how
much anything the open source programmers dream up is gonna cost them in
lost revenue, excess bandwidth, sales of other phones, etc., etc., etc.!
They ride bird dog on every phone THEY BUY....which is every phone
BUILT!

To turn the tablet over to sellphone corporate bureaucrats and you'll
end up with another hobbled up PoS like iPhone, Storm, (just list them
all, it's all the same.)

If Nokia produced the N850 sellphone, it would be just another piece of
carrier-controlled crap you can't really do anything with that plays
"Run Bunny Run" and has 27 flashlites.

Larry wrote:
> To turn the tablet over to sellphone corporate bureaucrats and you'll
> end up with another hobbled up PoS like iPhone, Storm, (just list them
> all, it's all the same.)
>
> If Nokia produced the N850 sellphone, it would be just another piece
> of carrier-controlled crap you can't really do anything with that
> plays "Run Bunny Run" and has 27 flashlites.

Just out of curiosity, everything usb has usb wimax dongles and usb phone
dongles and blutooth dongles, know if anyone ever tried em with a tablet?

from way back in 2006
http://www.everythingusb.com/airspan...ile_wimax.html
(they must have newer stuff by now)

"Peter Pan" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Larry wrote:
>> To turn the tablet over to sellphone corporate bureaucrats and you'll
>> end up with another hobbled up PoS like iPhone, Storm, (just list
>> them all, it's all the same.)
>>
>> If Nokia produced the N850 sellphone, it would be just another piece
>> of carrier-controlled crap you can't really do anything with that
>> plays "Run Bunny Run" and has 27 flashlites.
>
> Just out of curiosity, everything usb has usb wimax dongles and usb
> phone dongles and blutooth dongles, know if anyone ever tried em with
> a tablet?
>
> from way back in 2006
> http://www.everythingusb.com/airspan...ile_wimax.html
> (they must have newer stuff by now)
>
>
>

I use a Linksys USB100M Ethernet dongle on an Electronics Product Online
USB OTG/Host plug to the N800 under OS2008 Diablo to connect directly to
my LAN, here.

http://www.electronicproductonline.c...o.php?cPath=35
_67&products_id=2043&osCsid=dc333c10cac0f9255f2d73b44aee5f2e

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833124146

It works very well, except for the idiotically fragile Ethernet jack
caused by consumer demand for "tiny". The USB200M will not work as
there is no "driver" in its Linux to support it. I'd think that would
be the only issue to using the dongles you refer to. I'm amazed at the
number of gadgets that it supports, considering its USB port was never
intended to be in Host mode by Nokia. The plug switches the port in
hardware, somehow, eliminating the need for a software solution to
switch it that's available on maemo.org's download.

The Bluetooth dongle is unnecessary because of the extensive
multitasking Bluetooth multiconnecting support built into the tablets.
The only BT that's missing, curiously, is A2DP stereo for my Motorola S9
headphones. There's a software solution, but it takes more of the
limited resources of the little 400Mhz processor so I use a Sony BT
transmitter that simply plugs into the headphone jack, which works much
better and reduces load on the CPU so it can concentrate on rendering
the high speed DivX movie it's playing....(c;]