In article <[email protected]>, The Bob
<[email protected]> wrote:

> >>> * WiMAX is 3G, not 4G
> >>
> >>Not according to the trades, or the players involved, e.g.:
> >><http://www2.nortel.com/go/solution_c...atId=0&parId=0
> >>&prod _id=61702>
> >
> > The players involved are of course not a good source of accurate
> > information, and the trades aren't much better -- see
> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4g>
>
> Who would call one source unreliable and then point to a wiki as being
> better?

hilarious.

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

> I find it ironic that for years you've been *****ing about the lousy
> range of handheld cellphones vs. old bagphones, and suddenly you're
> willing to ditch cellular for either metro-only Cricket service or the
> promise of metro-only WiMax.
>
>

Times change. I'm retired, now, and not a slave to the phone any more for
my living. Hey! Wednesday is another PAYDAY!....Thank you for your
contribution....(c;

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

> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 03:31:44 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>>>> * I was referring to Wi-Fi versus WiMAX, not cellular
>>>
>>>
>>> My mistake, sorry. In that case the answer is clear- a spotty (if
>>> you'll pardon the pun) hotspot network, even with 80,000 locations
>>> can't compete with a more ubiquitous technology like WiMax should
>>> eventually be. I suspect, like with T-Mo, AT&T Hotspots will
>>> primarily be used by those who get it for "free" (bundled with a
>>> different AT&T service, like broadband DSL or wireless.)
>>
>>That thinking, wifi VS Wimax is all wrong. Look at the videos:
>>
>>http://www.youtube.com/results?
>>search_query=wifi+wimax+handoff&search_type=&aq=f
>>
>>They're going to seamlessly hand of from your wifi, or hotspot TO the
>>Wimax system as you leave the house....use Wimax while you're on the go
>>and NOT near a wifi hotspot....then, hand off from Wimax to the hotspot
>>or home as soon as you arrive, unloading you and your VoIP calls onto
>>the wifi hotspots where you don't have to pay for mobile Wimax or use up
>>its resources.
>
> Only in their dreams. LOL! There's a huge gap between that laboratory
> curiosity and ubiquitous real world deployment.


Yo, Novice- real world deployment with paying customers has been going on
for months. You truly are clueless.


Those "seamless"
> handoffs can also occur with Wi-Fi, but in the real world they don't --
> too many deployment issues.


There's a huge gap between that laboratory curiosity and ubiquitous real
world deployment.

Notice how your own words are far more accurate when applied to your
statement.

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

> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:08:17 -0700, Todd Allcock
> <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>At 13 Dec 2008 15:10:36 -0800 John Navas wrote:
>
>>> * WiMAX is 3G, not 4G
>>
>>Not according to the trades, or the players involved, e.g.:
>><http://www2.nortel.com/go/solution_c...atId=0&parId=0
>>&prod _id=61702>
>
> The players involved are of course not a good source of accurate
> information, and the trades aren't much better -- see
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4g>
>

Who would call one source unreliable and then point to a wiki as being
better?


>>> * I was referring to Wi-Fi versus WiMAX, not cellular
>>
>>My mistake, sorry. In that case the answer is clear- a spotty (if
>>you'll pardon the pun) hotspot network, even with 80,000 locations
>>can't compete with a more ubiquitous technology like WiMax should
>>eventually be.
>
> Maybe, but that depends on how well WiMAX proves to work in practice.


It's working like a charm. If you didn't have your head firmly planted up
your ass you would know that- it has been the subject of numerous articles
in the last three months.

At 14 Dec 2008 08:08:47 -0800 John Navas wrote:

> >IMO, what'll really make WiMax viable short-term is Sprint's upcoming
> >EVDO/WiMax combo service that falls back to Sprint's EVDO network when
> >WiMax isn't available.
>
> But only in a single carrier sense, not seamless roaming across
> carriers.


Sprint < > Clear should be ubiquitous enough for a large percentage of the
population, I'd think...

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 03:20:06 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 01:02:06 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
>> <[email protected]>:
>>
>>>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> Good for AT&T, because Wi-Fi is free and available, unlike cellular
>>>> spectrum, a win-win. But will it be competitive with WiMAX over the
>>>> long term? Only time will tell.
>>
>>>John, have you seen the youtube videos of them handing to/from between
>>>wifi and Wimax? Very cool....(c;]
>>
>> No -- got a link? Thanks.
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYtGG2bTEpg
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8gNGCGI-EI
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh0awIw7PNY
>
>http://www.youtube.com/results?
>search_query=wifi+wimax+handoff&search_type=&aq=f
>
>It's going to be a great ride off this sellphone merry-go-round.

Thanks -- that's what I thought. But only in their dreams. LOL!
There's a huge gap between that laboratory curiosity and ubiquitous real
world deployment. Those "seamless" handoffs can also occur with Wi-Fi,
but in the real world they don't -- too many deployment issues. WISPr?
What's that? WiMAX<>Wi-Fi will be even more problematic. What is going
to work is a single Wi-Fi network of 80,000 hotspots (if that's the
number).
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 03:31:44 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>>> * I was referring to Wi-Fi versus WiMAX, not cellular
>>
>>
>> My mistake, sorry. In that case the answer is clear- a spotty (if
>> you'll pardon the pun) hotspot network, even with 80,000 locations
>> can't compete with a more ubiquitous technology like WiMax should
>> eventually be. I suspect, like with T-Mo, AT&T Hotspots will
>> primarily be used by those who get it for "free" (bundled with a
>> different AT&T service, like broadband DSL or wireless.)
>
>That thinking, wifi VS Wimax is all wrong. Look at the videos:
>
>http://www.youtube.com/results?
>search_query=wifi+wimax+handoff&search_type=&aq=f
>
>They're going to seamlessly hand of from your wifi, or hotspot TO the
>Wimax system as you leave the house....use Wimax while you're on the go
>and NOT near a wifi hotspot....then, hand off from Wimax to the hotspot
>or home as soon as you arrive, unloading you and your VoIP calls onto
>the wifi hotspots where you don't have to pay for mobile Wimax or use up
>its resources.

Only in their dreams. LOL! There's a huge gap between that laboratory
curiosity and ubiquitous real world deployment. Those "seamless"
handoffs can also occur with Wi-Fi, but in the real world they don't --
too many deployment issues. WISPr? What's that? WiMAX<>Wi-Fi will be
even more problematic. What is going to work is a single Wi-Fi network
of 80,000 hotspots (if that's the number).
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:08:17 -0700, Todd Allcock
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>At 13 Dec 2008 15:10:36 -0800 John Navas wrote:

>> * WiMAX is 3G, not 4G
>
>Not according to the trades, or the players involved, e.g.:
><http://www2.nortel.com/go/solution_c...0&parId=0&prod
>_id=61702>

The players involved are of course not a good source of accurate
information, and the trades aren't much better -- see
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4g>

>> * I was referring to Wi-Fi versus WiMAX, not cellular
>
>My mistake, sorry. In that case the answer is clear- a spotty (if you'll
>pardon the pun) hotspot network, even with 80,000 locations can't compete
>with a more ubiquitous technology like WiMax should eventually be.

Maybe, but that depends on how well WiMAX proves to work in practice.

>I
>suspect, like with T-Mo, AT&T Hotspots will primarily be used by those who
>get it for "free" (bundled with a different AT&T service, like broadband
>DSL or wireless.)

Or Starbucks. Agreed.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

At 14 Dec 2008 03:31:44 +0000 Larry wrote:

> > My mistake, sorry. In that case the answer is clear- a spotty (if
> > you'll pardon the pun) hotspot network, even with 80,000 locations
> > can't compete with a more ubiquitous technology like WiMax should
> > eventually be. I suspect, like with T-Mo, AT&T Hotspots will
> > primarily be used by those who get it for "free" (bundled with a
> > different AT&T service, like broadband DSL or wireless.)
> >
>
> That thinking, wifi VS Wimax is all wrong.

I agree, the same way WiFi doesn't compete with cellular data. WiFi has
found it's niche for home, as well as public use in airports, coffee shops,
bbookstores, etc. I don't think "subscription" WiFi is a great business
idea, however, but AT&T can leverage it a a value-add to their other
internet businesses.

> Look at the videos:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/results?
> search_query=wifi+wimax+handoff&search_type=&aq=f
>
> They're going to seamlessly hand of from your wifi, or hotspot TO the
> Wimax system as you leave the house....use Wimax while you're on the go
> and NOT near a wifi hotspot....then, hand off from Wimax to the hotspot
> or home as soon as you arrive, unloading you and your VoIP calls onto
> the wifi hotspots where you don't have to pay for mobile Wimax or use up
> its resources.

Since WiMax will likely be sold on an unlimited basis, (monthly or day pass)
to what advantage to the end-user is a handoff to his own network. I'd
personally be inclined to ditch my home service if I subscribed to WiMax-
only one bill and no "handoff" necessary.


> Check out the first few videos where the engineers making this happen
> sort of give you an idea how they're going to do it. You won't drop
> your call when you go into the house....you'll simply be handed off to
> your own router on your own broadband system while you're home. Imagine
> no more DEAD ZONES anywhere in your house....even if you're miles from
> the towers.


You can have that now with T-Mo's Hotspot@Home UMA service.

> When you drive up into the parking lot of your favorite wifi restaurant,
> your mobile device, phone, laptop, tablet, video player, etc., will
> watch the availability of the local wifi to provide a stable system, and
> after a few minutes of good signal/bandwidth, it will tell the Wimax who
> to hand the call off to and your device will simply be transferred to
> the Linkxyx in the hallway of the restaurant. As you leave, the signal
> becomes unstable, and the Wimax device will call the Wimax to complain
> and the Wimax will seamlessly reclaim the call so you don't drop as you
> go mobile, once again.
>
> If this works as they say it will....we're in for a helluva decade in
> mobile data service.....hopefully without the sellphone bull**** and
> footdragging trying to keep their soon-to-be-obsolete data voice network
> online. Wifi and Wimax were meant for each other....TCP/IP packet
> networks made for handling internet data, including VoIP.


I find it ironic that for years you've been *****ing about the lousy range
of handheld cellphones vs. old bagphones, and suddenly you're willing to
ditch cellular for either metro-only Cricket service or the promise of
metro-only WiMax.

IMO, what'll really make WiMax viable short-term is Sprint's upcoming
EVDO/WiMax combo service that falls back to Sprint's EVDO network when
WiMax isn't available.

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

> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 14:44:21 -0700, Todd Allcock
> <[email protected]> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>At 13 Dec 2008 08:13:10 -0800 John Navas wrote:
>>
>>> >AT&T continues to see a dramatic spike in Wi-Fi use. Combining both
>>> >AT&Tand Wayport customer use, Wi-Fi connections in November alone
>>> >surpassed2.5 million. AT&T drives Wi-Fi use by enabling free Wi-Fi
>>> >access to nearly15 million AT&T wired broadband customers, and
>>> >millions more wirelesscustomers, and is a leading provider of Wi-Fi
>>> >enabled mobile phones.
>>>
>>> Good for AT&T, because Wi-Fi is free and available, unlike cellular
>>> spectrum, a win-win. But will it be competitive with WiMAX over the
>>> long term? Only time will tell.
>>
>>Time may have already told: T-Mobile's combination of Wi-Fi hotspots and
>>EDGE service didn't allow them to sucessfully compete with 3G, so I doubt
>>3G+WiFi can stave off 4G for long, but might at least buy AT&T some time.
>
> * WiMAX is 3G, not 4G
> * HSPA is 3.5G, very fast
> * I was referring to Wi-Fi versus WiMAX, not cellular

Excuse me, Novice- WiMax is 4G. Speak only when you know something about
the subject at hand (IOW- we shouldn't hear from you again).

On 12/13/08 5:35 PMDec 13, "C. Sowash" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On 13-Dec-2008, Bob Haar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Is there an iPhone application that uses Location Services to locate and
>>> guide
>>> you to nearby AT&T Wi-Fi hotspots?
>>
>> The is an app called Easy Wi-Fi for AT&T in the iTunes store. One part of
>> its functionality is a hotpsot locator.
>
>
> As far as I can tell, that application just logs you into an AT&T hotspot. It
> doesn't locate them.

It does have a locate function, but you have to enter a location - address
or ZIP code, or navigate through a map of the U.S.

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

>> * I was referring to Wi-Fi versus WiMAX, not cellular
>
>
> My mistake, sorry. In that case the answer is clear- a spotty (if
> you'll pardon the pun) hotspot network, even with 80,000 locations
> can't compete with a more ubiquitous technology like WiMax should
> eventually be. I suspect, like with T-Mo, AT&T Hotspots will
> primarily be used by those who get it for "free" (bundled with a
> different AT&T service, like broadband DSL or wireless.)
>

That thinking, wifi VS Wimax is all wrong. Look at the videos:

http://www.youtube.com/results?
search_query=wifi+wimax+handoff&search_type=&aq=f

They're going to seamlessly hand of from your wifi, or hotspot TO the
Wimax system as you leave the house....use Wimax while you're on the go
and NOT near a wifi hotspot....then, hand off from Wimax to the hotspot
or home as soon as you arrive, unloading you and your VoIP calls onto
the wifi hotspots where you don't have to pay for mobile Wimax or use up
its resources.

Check out the first few videos where the engineers making this happen
sort of give you an idea how they're going to do it. You won't drop
your call when you go into the house....you'll simply be handed off to
your own router on your own broadband system while you're home. Imagine
no more DEAD ZONES anywhere in your house....even if you're miles from
the towers.

When you drive up into the parking lot of your favorite wifi restaurant,
your mobile device, phone, laptop, tablet, video player, etc., will
watch the availability of the local wifi to provide a stable system, and
after a few minutes of good signal/bandwidth, it will tell the Wimax who
to hand the call off to and your device will simply be transferred to
the Linkxyx in the hallway of the restaurant. As you leave, the signal
becomes unstable, and the Wimax device will call the Wimax to complain
and the Wimax will seamlessly reclaim the call so you don't drop as you
go mobile, once again.

If this works as they say it will....we're in for a helluva decade in
mobile data service.....hopefully without the sellphone bull**** and
footdragging trying to keep their soon-to-be-obsolete data voice network
online. Wifi and Wimax were meant for each other....TCP/IP packet
networks made for handling internet data, including VoIP.

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 01:02:06 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> Good for AT&T, because Wi-Fi is free and available, unlike cellular
>>> spectrum, a win-win. But will it be competitive with WiMAX over the
>>> long term? Only time will tell.
>
>>John, have you seen the youtube videos of them handing to/from between
>>wifi and Wimax? Very cool....(c;]
>
> No -- got a link? Thanks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYtGG2bTEpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8gNGCGI-EI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh0awIw7PNY

http://www.youtube.com/results?
search_query=wifi+wimax+handoff&search_type=&aq=f

It's going to be a great ride off this sellphone merry-go-round.

At 13 Dec 2008 15:10:36 -0800 John Navas wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 14:44:21 -0700, Todd Allcock
> <[email protected]> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
> >At 13 Dec 2008 08:13:10 -0800 John Navas wrote:
> >
> >> >AT&T continues to see a dramatic spike in Wi-Fi use. Combining both
> >> >AT&Tand Wayport customer use, Wi-Fi connections in November alone
> >> >surpassed2.5 million. AT&T drives Wi-Fi use by enabling free Wi-Fi
> >> >access to nearly15 million AT&T wired broadband customers, and
> >> >millions more wirelesscustomers, and is a leading provider of Wi-Fi
> >> >enabled mobile phones.
> >>
> >> Good for AT&T, because Wi-Fi is free and available, unlike cellular
> >> spectrum, a win-win. But will it be competitive with WiMAX over the
> >> long term? Only time will tell.
> >
> >Time may have already told: T-Mobile's combination of Wi-Fi hotspots and
> >EDGE service didn't allow them to sucessfully compete with 3G, so I doubt
> >3G+WiFi can stave off 4G for long, but might at least buy AT&T some time.
>
> * WiMAX is 3G, not 4G

Not according to the trades, or the players involved, e.g.:
<http://www2.nortel.com/go/solution_c...0&parId=0&prod
_id=61702>

> * HSPA is 3.5G, very fast

Yes, it is, and should be an effective competitor to both WiMax and LTE.


> * I was referring to Wi-Fi versus WiMAX, not cellular


My mistake, sorry. In that case the answer is clear- a spotty (if you'll
pardon the pun) hotspot network, even with 80,000 locations can't compete
with a more ubiquitous technology like WiMax should eventually be. I
suspect, like with T-Mo, AT&T Hotspots will primarily be used by those who
get it for "free" (bundled with a different AT&T service, like broadband
DSL or wireless.)

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 01:02:06 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> Good for AT&T, because Wi-Fi is free and available, unlike cellular
>> spectrum, a win-win. But will it be competitive with WiMAX over the
>> long term? Only time will tell.

>John, have you seen the youtube videos of them handing to/from between wifi
>and Wimax? Very cool....(c;]

No -- got a link? Thanks.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>