John Keels
@appstate.edu
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Old vs New small print
Unlike the WIRED internet providers who do not generally have valid excuses for not having enough bandwidth I can see where the wireless providers have to watch bandwidth more carefully. EVDO/HSDPA etc are much more bandwidth limited in the sense that they cannot support massive bandwidth for 100's of users at a time. Also, especially in rural areas that have these services it is not unheard of for a tower to be connected through one or TWO T1's which really doesn't provide massive bandwidth for users. I suppose that in cities the tower backhaul is more likely fiber or OC3, ATM, etc that has more bandwidth. Even then the limitations of wireless mean that they cannot always provide endless bandwidth to users.
For wired services I'd argue that its a bunch of B&*&S&*& when comcast and others argue that they don't have enough bandwidth for everyone though. AT&T, Charter, TW, etc same thing. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by John Keels :
Unlike the WIRED internet providers who do not generally have valid excuses for not having enough bandwidth I can see where the wireless providers have to watch bandwidth more carefully. EVDO/HSDPA etc are much more bandwidth limited in the sense that they cannot support massive bandwidth for 100's of users at a time. Also, especially in rural areas that have these services it is not unheard of for a tower to be connected through one or TWO T1's which really doesn't provide massive bandwidth for users. I suppose that in cities the tower backhaul is more likely fiber or OC3, ATM, etc that has more bandwidth. Even then the limitations of wireless mean that they cannot always provide endless bandwidth to users.
For wired services I'd argue that its a bunch of B&*&S&*& when comcast and others argue that they don't have enough bandwidth for everyone though. AT&T, Charter, TW, etc same thing.
1 GB is still a joke. So is the 5 GB cap everyone has especially for $60 a month. Not to mention $256 per GB overage Verizon charges. |
|
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
 ·T-Mobile US
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by BF69  :said by John Keels :
Unlike the WIRED internet providers who do not generally have valid excuses for not having enough bandwidth I can see where the wireless providers have to watch bandwidth more carefully. EVDO/HSDPA etc are much more bandwidth limited in the sense that they cannot support massive bandwidth for 100's of users at a time. Also, especially in rural areas that have these services it is not unheard of for a tower to be connected through one or TWO T1's which really doesn't provide massive bandwidth for users. I suppose that in cities the tower backhaul is more likely fiber or OC3, ATM, etc that has more bandwidth. Even then the limitations of wireless mean that they cannot always provide endless bandwidth to users.
For wired services I'd argue that its a bunch of B&*&S&*& when comcast and others argue that they don't have enough bandwidth for everyone though. AT&T, Charter, TW, etc same thing.
1 GB is still a joke. So is the 5 GB cap everyone has especially for $60 a month. Not to mention $256 per GB overage Verizon charges. I agree with you both. While wireless providers have a far better argument for bandwidth management techniques, 5GB or less is atrocious. I'm glad to see T-Mobile is responsive to the market - unlike VZW, ATT, and Sprint...
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
schja01
I need to get a life.
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-27
Morton Grove, IL
clubs: 
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Midwest
| said by tiger72 :I agree with you both. While wireless providers have a far better argument for bandwidth management techniques, 5GB or less is atrocious. I'm glad to see T-Mobile is responsive to the market - unlike VZW, ATT, and Sprint... Actaually Sprint doesn't cap it's 3G Phones. Only Data Cards and the optional "Phone as a Modem" Plan. My $15/mo Data Plan shows "Unlimited". |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by schja01 :said by tiger72 :I agree with you both. While wireless providers have a far better argument for bandwidth management techniques, 5GB or less is atrocious. I'm glad to see T-Mobile is responsive to the market - unlike VZW, ATT, and Sprint... Actaually Sprint doesn't cap it's 3G Phones. Only Data Cards and the optional "Phone as a Modem" Plan. My $15/mo Data Plan shows "Unlimited". That's actually useless. The only reason people like my friend that lives a few miles out of town would want to use a mobile company for interent is to use it on a computer. In which case there is a cap. One isn't likely to go over 5 GB surfing the web on a cell phone anyways. |
|
schja01
I need to get a life.
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-27
Morton Grove, IL
clubs:
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
| said by BF69 :said by schja01 :said by tiger72 :I agree with you both. While wireless providers have a far better argument for bandwidth management techniques, 5GB or less is atrocious. I'm glad to see T-Mobile is responsive to the market - unlike VZW, ATT, and Sprint... Actaually Sprint doesn't cap it's 3G Phones. Only Data Cards and the optional "Phone as a Modem" Plan. My $15/mo Data Plan shows "Unlimited". That's actually useless. The only reason people like my friend that lives a few miles out of town would want to use a mobile company for interent is to use it on a computer. In which case there is a cap. One isn't likely to go over 5 GB surfing the web on a cell phone anyways. But since this discussion pertains to the Android phone and not a computer you are mixing apples and oranges. Other carriers limit Data on 3G phones but not Sprint which was the point of my original reply. |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :1 GB is still a joke. So is the 5 GB cap everyone has especially for $60 a month. Not to mention $256 per GB overage Verizon charges. While 1GB is a low number to start at, T-Mobile has it right in this case.
The other carriers just charge you exorbitant overage fees. T-Mobile seems to want to throttle your speed. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.  |
|
uroberto
join:2001-05-01
Piscataway, NJ | Verizon wireless has overage fees. at&t and Sprint don't. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to John Keels
It seems most of the towers I connect to are backhauled by a T1 or two. Only in big cities do towers have fiber running to them (probably a 10 or 20 Mbps link at the moment). However, so far the T-Mobile network seems to be holding up in the few places they're deploying it (presumably where they can get fiber to the tower for relatively cheap). As such, a 1GB on mobile internet usage isn't good. 3GB, okay, but not 1GB. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | reply to BF69
So basically cell phone companies don't want to get into the fixed residential broadband market. Lame, yse. Uncalled-for, no. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by iansltx :So basically cell phone companies don't want to get into the fixed residential broadband market. Yes give on on 20 million potential customers. I'd fire the CEO that has that kind of thinking. |
|
Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| reply to iansltx
My experience is that cell providers are clinging to the dinosaur known as TDM and seem reluctant to jump into backhaul solutions that are robust and don't cost a ridiculous amount of money. For what they spend (waste) on DS1's, they could get a 5x5 or sometimes a 10x10 Mbps ether circuit. For what they waste on DS3's, they're in the neighborhood of 100x100 Mbps ether. Obviously this scenario is more likely to take place in urban areas, but why not use P2P microwave for backhaul in the sticks?
I just don't understand why they don't packetize EVERYTHING at the tower and bring it back to concentrators / hubs via ether which then hand off to the PSTN over their precious DS3's.
It makes me cringe every time I see an order for a DS1 to a cell tower at work (pretty much a weekly thing).
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-768 in your basement... |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | reply to BF69
Not when it's more profitable to have them on landline, and don't forget that half the major wireless companies are also telephone companies, and Sprint is now dependent on cable companies to fund Clearwire. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by EPS :Not when it's more profitable to have them on landline, and don't forget that half the major wireless companies are also telephone companies, and Sprint is now dependent on cable companies to fund Clearwire. Well let's see at&t is the phone company here. So who would Verizon offering wireless internet at reasonable rates and higher caps and lower overage fees be cannibalizing thier business? It seems it would be ADDING to it since Verizon doesn't have a landline footprint anywhere near here. |
|
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
·T-Mobile US
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by BF69 :said by EPS :Not when it's more profitable to have them on landline, and don't forget that half the major wireless companies are also telephone companies, and Sprint is now dependent on cable companies to fund Clearwire. Well let's see at&t is the phone company here. So who would Verizon offering wireless internet at reasonable rates and higher caps and lower overage fees be cannibalizing thier business? It seems it would be ADDING to it since Verizon doesn't have a landline footprint anywhere near here. maybe not near you, but Verizon has a massive landline footprint - second only to ATT... They're not going to have varying packages for various regions. They're a national carrier so they have national rate plans. And since they don't want to undercut themselves in the regions they serve, they're offering the same thing everywhere.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| reply to Done_Posting
Uh, how exactly do you plan to get this Ethernet to the cell site, if not over telco fiber, DS3, or DS1? I know around here the telco's 'metro ethernet' product (and the cable company, too, for that matter) is transported over SONET with media converters at each end, just like anything else.
It is cheaper to get a GigE transport than it would be for OC-48 for whatever reason, but that doesn't apply when you get below that level of bandwidth.
T1s are down to $150 to $200 a month with no mileage within the wire center, though. That's a lot better than the thousand bucks plus mileage they were charging 10 years ago.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word. |
|
Done_Posting
Shoot to kill
Premium
join:2003-08-22
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| I never said anything about not using telco fiber. What I said was that I can't believe that in this day & age, copper TDM is still so prevalent. My suggestion for its replacement is a combination of GPON / EPON, CWDM / DWDM, SONET, and microwave where optical isn't cost effective.
The point I'm trying to make with my rant is that regardless of the physical medium cellular voice and data traffic takes to get from point A to point B, I'd really like to see everything get packetized at the cell site and routed through mostly IP-based networks (heck, why not just use SIP trunking?).
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-768 in your basement... |
|
iLive4Apple
Hybrid power
Premium
join:2006-07-13
Helena, AL
·Verizon BroadbandA..
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southeast
·ViaTalk
| reply to John Keels
said by John Keels :
Unlike the WIRED internet providers who do not generally have valid excuses for not having enough bandwidth I can see where the wireless providers have to watch bandwidth more carefully. EVDO/HSDPA etc are much more bandwidth limited in the sense that they cannot support massive bandwidth for 100's of users at a time. Also, especially in rural areas that have these services it is not unheard of for a tower to be connected through one or TWO T1's which really doesn't provide massive bandwidth for users. I suppose that in cities the tower backhaul is more likely fiber or OC3, ATM, etc that has more bandwidth. Even then the limitations of wireless mean that they cannot always provide endless bandwidth to users.
For wired services I'd argue that its a bunch of B&*&S&*& when comcast and others argue that they don't have enough bandwidth for everyone though. AT&T, Charter, TW, etc same thing.
Have you ever seen T-Mobile in a rural area? |
|
