 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | For most, not worth it. To make this useful they have to:
1. Make ALL calls over microcell 'free', assuming you have a standard post-paid plan
2. Make the devices very cheap (~$50 or less)
3. Free with broadband + cell plan on boradband service.
4. Unlimited data while on microcell.
UMA is a more practical approach if all cellphones came with WiFi.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
| I would go even further than that.
Since *MY* broadband connection is now alleviating strain on *THEIR* cell tower network, the device should be free and I should receive a credit on my monthly cell phone bill.
Why should I pay anything to fix a problem with their cell coverage? |
|
 CoronaIt's cool, I'm takin it backPremium
join:2000-03-14
Dallas, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to en102
said by en102:To make this useful they have to: 1. Make ALL calls over microcell 'free', assuming you have a standard post-paid plan 2. Make the devices very cheap (~$50 or less) 3. Free with broadband + cell plan on boradband service. 4. Unlimited data while on microcell. UMA is a more practical approach if all cellphones came with WiFi. I completely understand your point of view. However...
you do realize that a carrier's radio network is only half of the network used to complete calls. Femto's only replicate that localized radio network portion.
The calls still go back to the wireless carrier's switching network and are completed on their facilities.
The same goes for the data as well. The data sessions go back to the carrier's switching network and are completed like a regular session on their cellular network.
--
"To be sincere, you don't have to know anything, you just say whatever makes you feel good and spin and smug circles in your tiny fucked up little head, happy as long as you're true to yourself. In other words, Sincerity is bullshit!" -Penn Jillette |
|
|
|
| reply to jmt380
Yeah...its their problem!!! Why should I have to pay..this sucks...I expect to have 4 bars everywhere I go.
Sure, lets put cell towers everywhere. Do you have space in your backyard for one? Do you want it there? Do your neighbors want it there? Lets put them on every street corner (oh wait, there were payphones there at onetime and now they are gone).
Get a satellite phone…oh wait, its cloud outside I can’t use it. I have tree in the line of sight. There is a building in the way. And yes, I have one and we have those problems
Its not perfect. |
|
 fcislerPremium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY | Yes - I do want them to put a cell tower in my backyard. You do know they pay something ridiculous like 85% of your property taxes - at a minimum - and will usually give you some other financial incentive ($$) and I personally know someone who has Spring unlimited service - for life.
They can put as many towers in my backyard as they like!!! |
|
CoronaIt's cool, I'm takin it backPremium
join:2000-03-14
Dallas, TX | Do you have an HOA? |
|
fcislerPremium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY | Absolutely not! Would have NEVER bought the house had I!
I know they'd never be interested in a cell tower in my yard, though. My friend a short distance away has a farm and they put one there. |
|
| reply to fcisler
I know someone who has a US Cellular site on their property and gets $1000 a month to rent it to them! |
|
en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to Corona
Yes - I am aware.
However, think of it this way...
VoIP calls are typically dirt cheap. Since I'm providing the most expensive part of the infrastructure (last mile), AND I have a monthly cell bill anyways (for those times that I'm using the radio network), I don't see the issue.
Skype to landline = $36/year. Why should microcell to landline be much more ?
Microcells aren't popular because they're essentially double dipping where coverage is not good, or doesn't exist (due to cost, location or otherwise).
People don't 'need' them, and as they're cost prohibitive, I would switch carriers rather than use one.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
| reply to en102
Agreed. Good comments. It really helps the wireless carrier the most. It keeps a customer for them and it takes strain of of their network. Why would they try and charge the customer for that? I can see, perhaps, charging the customer for the cost of the device. Otherwise, EVERYTHING a business does DOES NOT need to be a profit center. If they want to justify the "costs" they can look at it as helping out in other areas of their business where they are lacking such as coverage. |
|
| reply to jmt380
Bingo! |
|
1 edit | reply to Corona
and your point is?
No offense, but I want to understand what you're getting at before I make a complete comment. |
|
CoronaIt's cool, I'm takin it backPremium
join:2000-03-14
Dallas, TX Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by jjeffeory:and your point is? No offense, but I want to understand what you're getting at before I make a complete comment. My point is that 95% of the people out there complaining about a very small portion of the entire call string is also using their high speed bandwidth.
--
"To be sincere, you don't have to know anything, you just say whatever makes you feel good and spin and smug circles in your tiny fucked up little head, happy as long as you're true to yourself. In other words, Sincerity is bullshit!" -Penn Jillette |
|
