Search:  

 
theme to black backgroundlet page decide theme
HomeFind ServiceReviewsISP NewsFAQsForumsToolsDatabaseAbout 
 
   News
newer
story category New U-Verse Box May Include Femtocell
Insiders claim it's in the works at AT&T
(old news - 04:03PM Wednesday Feb 04 2009)
tags: business · wireless · hardware · alternatives · AT&T U-Verse
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. Femtocells allow users to make wireless phone calls over their broadband connection, and are popular with carriers because they let them ease strain on local towers. Early details of AT&T's first femtocell, the "3G Microcell," emerged last week after AT&T prematurely unveiled a website highlighting the device. AT&T's first femtocell offering should drop sometime during the first half of this year, and will extend both 3G and wireless range -- while offering users unlimited calling for an additional monthly fee.

Related:
  1. AT&T Dead Quiet After PR Hell Week
  2. FCC To Investigate Exclusive Handset Deals
  3. Motorola Androids To Hit T-Mobile, Verizon
  4. Femtocells Slow To Catch On
  5. Analyst: Apple Will Stick With AT&T Exclusivity
  6. Rumor: Apple Tablet Will Support HSDPA
  7. MetroPCS: LTE In Late 2010
  8. AT&T To Launch Femtocells Next Week
Forums » New U-Verse Box May Include Femtocell
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

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
permalink · 2009-02-04 16:18:50 · Print · Reply to this
Pair Gain

join:2002-12-23
Washington

Re: This may actually make Uverse a deal for me

»www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4···id=26509
permalink · 2009-02-04 16:35:27 · Reply to this

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: This may actually make Uverse a deal for me

I wonder what the hold up has been ?
Uverse was available here since April/May 2007.
--
Canada = Hollywood North
permalink · 2009-02-04 16:53:00 · Reply to this

djrobx

join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA		 It's about f***ing time!
permalink · 2009-02-04 22:07:19 · Reply to this

en102
Canadian, eh?

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

Re: This may actually make Uverse a deal for me

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
permalink · 2009-02-05 00:56:15 · Print · Reply to this

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!
permalink · 2009-02-04 16:27:20 · Reply to this
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Not A Bad Idea

never. you pay ATT to use the service via a monthly fee.
permalink · 2009-02-05 09:28:51 · Reply to this

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

Re: Not A Bad Idea

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!
permalink · 2009-02-05 09:43:07 · Print · Reply to this
SpookyET

join:2001-04-30
Lawrenceville, GA

T-Mobile

Will this work with T-Mobile?

/sarcasm
permalink · 2009-02-04 17:01:21 · Reply to this

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...
permalink · 2009-02-04 17:18:10 · Reply to this
Vtr_Racing

join:2006-09-04
Pflugerville, TX

Watching

Will be keeping any eye on this. Sounds cool to me.
permalink · 2009-02-04 17:55:04 · Reply to this

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.
permalink · 2009-02-04 18:31:52 · Reply to this

wear a horse

@swbell.net

Re: bull

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....
permalink · 2009-02-04 19:18:24 · Reply to this

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
permalink · 2009-02-04 20:37:20 · Reply to this

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: why not UMA?

More revenue possibilities and control.
Personally... I'd prefer UMA.
--
Canada = Hollywood North
permalink · 2009-02-04 21:16:56 · Reply to this
wierdo

join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
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.
permalink · 2009-02-05 14:33:55 · Print · Reply to this
hwobu

join:2009-02-08
Arlington, VA

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).
permalink · 2009-02-08 22:37:04 · Reply to this
wierdo

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

Re: why not UMA?

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.
permalink · 2009-02-08 23:50:34 · Print · Reply to this
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.
permalink · 2009-02-05 19:16:15 · Reply to this
Forums » New U-Verse Box May Include Femtocell

Sunday, 08-Nov 12:39:02 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.