Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » New U-Verse Box May Include Femtocell
Search Topic:
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

Comments on news posted 2009-02-04 16:03:23: An AT&T employee dishes to Gizmodo that the telco is working on a new U-Verse set top box that will include a femtocell. ..

AuthorAll Replies


en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME

This may actually make Uverse a deal for me

Since AT&T has been too lazy to deploy Uverse VoIP in Los Angeles, and attempting to milk POTS (filled with FEES/UNFEES and TAXES!), I had been hoping that Uverse could bundle with femtocell service.

This would make my POTS or standard VoIP obsolete for me.

Current:
$90 (+10 in fees/taxes) for TWC all the best:
TV/Phone/Internet
$60 (after taxes) for 2 Wireless AT&T lines (550 + rollover, no data)

Future?
Uverse Bundle (femtocell, TV, Internet) ($100?)
$60 (after taxes) for 2 Wireless AT&T lines (550 + rollover, no data)

Benefit ? I would have 2 unlimited lines at home vs. 1
Data on the phone should be included off the femtocell... I would expect AT&T to force a data plan though.
--
Canada = Hollywood North


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
Not A Bad Idea

Provided there is a service credit for allowing AT&T to use your residence as a small cell tower of course.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!

Pair Gain

join:2002-12-23
Washington
reply to en102
Re: This may actually make Uverse a deal for me

»www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4···id=26509


en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
I wonder what the hold up has been ?
Uverse was available here since April/May 2007.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

SpookyET

join:2001-04-30
Lawrenceville, GA
T-Mobile

Will this work with T-Mobile?

/sarcasm


baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
·Comcast
·magicjack.com
·Verizon Wireless B..

Very Significant

This article wont have a ton of comments about it, since its not about Broadband Caps or Network Neutrality...But this article, to me, is very important. Its the first step of a streamlined video/internet/wireless, which, we all know eventually will be just one entity...

Vtr_Racing

join:2006-09-04
Pflugerville, TX
Watching

Will be keeping any eye on this. Sounds cool to me.


StarFish267

join:2005-11-25
Fort Worth, TX
bull

Union won't let it work, prem tech's already doing 1,000% more than getting paid for.


wear a horse

@swbell.net

said by StarFish267 See Profile :

Union won't let it work, prem tech's already doing 1,000% more than getting paid for.
don't worry, the union will be getting paid even less when they are out on strike....


otty

join:2008-10-24
Toronto, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·VBUZZER
·voip.ms
·Vonage
·3 Web

why not UMA?

Why not just introduce UMA service like Tmobile and Rogers in Canada?

No need for expensive femtocell equipment and none of the problems with opening up your broadband connection to the public.
--
Sasktel HighSpeed Extreme , Vista, AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-60 Dual-Core @ 2.0GHz; 2GB RAM


en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
More revenue possibilities and control.
Personally... I'd prefer UMA.
--
Canada = Hollywood North


djrobx

join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
reply to Pair Gain
Re: This may actually make Uverse a deal for me

It's about f***ing time!


en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME

Yup.. pricing is still a bit on the high side... but inline with the 'standard' TWC rates for all the best


I currently have TWC 'All the best' package for $89/month (10/1, VoIP unlimited, Digital TV + broadcast on 2 other sets).

--
Canada = Hollywood North

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to pnh102
Re: Not A Bad Idea

never. you pay ATT to use the service via a monthly fee.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

never. you pay ATT to use the service via a monthly fee.
Lucky for me, AT&T has great coverage where I live and use my phones the most. If they didn't, and they were not willing to pay me for letting them use my home as a small cell tower, then I would have to switch to a carrier that either would do this, or has actually put up towers and provides me with the coverage that I need.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!

wierdo

join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP

reply to otty
Re: why not UMA?

said by otty See Profile :

Why not just introduce UMA service like Tmobile and Rogers in Canada?

No need for expensive femtocell equipment and none of the problems with opening up your broadband connection to the public.
Because UMA requires a phone with WiFi. Any UMTS phone can make use of the femtocell. (and it uses less juice than WiFi)
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.

Rekrul

join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

How does this affect their coming usage caps?

And will this phone traffic be exempt from AT&T's new usage caps (which they will eventually impose nation-wide)? If not, they can take their femtocells and shove them. There's no way in hell I'd ever waste some of my monthly usage cap on providing cell phone bandwidth.

hwobu

join:2009-02-08
Arlington, VA

reply to wierdo
Re: why not UMA?

Because UMA requires a phone with WiFi. Any UMTS phone can make use of the femtocell.



I'd say that this is the point, since it is WiFi it can be locked down to only be accessible to those you want to permit, as opposed to the UMTS femtocell approach which will allow every one in range to use the connection, including when these other user(s) use the femtocell's full capacity (meaning there's no capacity left for the person paying the bill).

wierdo

join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP

said by hwobu See Profile :

I'd say that this is the point, since it is WiFi it can be locked down to only be accessible to those you want to permit, as opposed to the UMTS femtocell approach which will allow every one in range to use the connection, including when these other user(s) use the femtocell's full capacity (meaning there's no capacity left for the person paying the bill).
Except that it's completely possible to allow only certain mobiles use of the femtocell, presuming at&t desires that it work that way.

They could even force a handover of other users from the femtocell to a macrocell if the femtocell was at capacity and the owner attempted to make a call.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.
Forums » New U-Verse Box May Include Femtocell


Wednesday, 09-Dec 23:00:18 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole
page compression OFF