how-to block ads
|
|
view: topics flat text |
|
Comments on news posted 2010-06-18 17:45:15: Yesterday we noted how AT&T's Microcell femtocell service was already a dubious value proposition given the device, intended to improve in-home cell coverage by routing voice and data calls over broadband, involves users paying AT&T to help ease cong.. ..
|
 NJ_Ray
join:2005-02-11
Dunellen, NJ | tired of same old story Just getting tired of them, charging more for the same or less services. No value added for the customer. This and the "Lower rates" for data on 3g. How much can they try and milk the same darned network, that you already pay for? | |
| | | what home ISP user aggreement banning commercial services? Hmm, so AT&T making money off some other ISP for home service. Usually, this in violation of the user's usage agreement with the ISP, isn't it? | |
| | | What AT&T is doing with the femtocell runs counter to ... their efforts to make content providers pay for its customers accessing the third-party sites. AT&T doesn't want net neutrality. The marketing-speak is that smartphones users, especially those people who own iPhones, are making the network more congested. AT&T wants you to buy their smartphones and the associated data plans, but they want you to only use a small part. The company oversells bandwidth, because they have to hit sales numbers to please their shareholders. They will continue to tell you that smartphones are the best thing since sliced bread, but they don't want to invest in 3G network infrastructure because it not a revenue generator, per se. The bean counters don't look at things like economists do (opportunity costs, etc.)... all they care about are debits and credits... what is revenue and what is an expense...
AT&T needs to come up with revamped plans for femtocells that actually provide customers value. They are NOT being good corporate citizens... their main focus will always be to enhance shareholder value... | |
| | | AT&T Double Dipping? Microcell should be free or at most a small monthly rental fee for the hardware, maybe $0.99. After all, all Microcell does is get you a service that you are already paying for.
Microcell keeps customers that otherwise may move to other carriers that provide better signal (coverage) in that particular area.
Heck... AT&T should pay Microcell users a fee for using their broadban service. | |
| Reviews:
 ·Comcast
 ·T-Mobile US
| Just a way for ATT to say...GOTCHA!!! I can see this one happening real soon.. and the complaints form non tech savy users rolling in, example...
CUSTOMER...Hey ATT I signed up for your Mcell and I have an Iphone when Im downtown ( any major city) using the Iphone connecting to a tower I get a 3G connection and speeds average of 3.5 mbps per second. At home I have ATT DSL I paid the extra $20 for unlimited data over the Mcell and I connect to the Mcell fine but I Only get 575kbps, WHAT GIVES ITS IT BROKEN ?
ATT REP..... OH I see the problem here, you have ATT DSL basic for $19.95 and the highest speed is 756 Kbps so if you want the 3G experience at home over the Mcell we require you to sign up with us for our DSL Elite for $45.00 per mth ( estimated cost if your off contract) and then your guaranteed to get your 3G speeds at home.
SO Moral of the story is they raped you.., Once, Twice, Three times before you even knew what was going on!
PS: god forbid your on a basic ISP service with Comcast, centurylink, etc.. for $19.95 with the 1mbps package. Complain to ATT the same way, the only thing you will hear it the ATT rep laughing and snickering while saying... "Thats not our problem your 3G Mcell speeds are slow everything if fine on our end would you like to purchase a new phone at full price, if not take up your issues with your ISP.
JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS LOOKED AT THAT SCENARIO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.
The 3G speed does not mean a thing if your home internet connection is starting off is below the bar. Unless your making a cell phone call ( Id just use Mjack at this point) The Mcell is almost pointless from that perspective.
BUDDAH | |
| | | All of them do it This is amazing, first I pay for AT&T to expand the network and then pay to use it. Maybe there will be a new monthly surcharge for 'Network CapEx'
However, this pales compared to T-Mobile UMA (Unified mobile access) pricing.
UMA allows you to use certain T-Mobile phones via WiFi. It is better than regular VoIP because it uses your number, cel-wifi handoff, etc.
BUT! When surfing the web or making phone calls via this sytem you get CHARGED unless you have paid an extra monthly fee.
If you paid this fee you still get charged while roaming! So, I am using my T-Mobile phone, over WiFi to surf the web, same as on my iPhone but get hit with MASSIVE roaming charges on T-Mobile.
When making the WiFi phone call (My WiFi at my apartment in Moscow, I am paying for the signal's transport to the USA, GSM radio turned off) I get charged $4.99 a minute roaming charge!!!
All of these operators are soon going to find out that alternatives exist. | |
|  dddane
join:2002-01-10
Chicago, IL | not that it matters a ton, but... "that’s why all of our smartphones include Wi-Fi radios"
that's a flat out, easy to refute lie. you can still buy a Blackberry 8310 through AT&T, for example. smart phone, no wifi. i'm sure there are others
also if they're so pro-wifi, why do they not allow wifi users to alleviate network congestion by placing calls over their own wifi... you know, like t-mobile does using the same equipment? (my guess is they don't want to lose out on the potential international roaming revenue that wifi users can avoid paying...) | |
|
| |
|
