Home  ›  News  ›

AT&T Wireless Launches 3G

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 24 replies

Waste of 10 Mhz

viper

Jul 20, 2004, 11:21 AM
I assume they are using one chanel up and one down for a total of 10 Mhz plus guard bands.

That is a lot of spectrum to use for pretty minimal benefits. Good things its only in four cities.
...
muchdrama

Jul 20, 2004, 12:03 PM
viper said:
I assume they are using one chanel up and one down for a total of 10 Mhz plus guard bands.

That is a lot of spectrum to use for pretty minimal benefits. Good things its only in four cities.
Soon to be at a location near you, nationwide.
...
Rich Brome

Jul 20, 2004, 12:09 PM
muchdrama said:
Soon to be at a location near you, nationwide.


Yes, but not until after the merger, when they'll have much more spectrum to work with.
...
viper

Jul 20, 2004, 1:27 PM
I didn't want to sound too overly down on this. I do think its pretty cool that the carriers are deploying more capable gear.

Its just that you could do so much more with 10 MHz of spectrum than this. I'd like to see someone spend billions on something that represents a significant step forward instead of billions on these slow and expensive evolutionary changes.

i await until a day when the carriers deploy a real mobile data technology like 802.20 or whatever else is around at the time. then i'll get excited

then again, AT&T saved billions in payment to docomo by doing this so i can't say i blame them.
...
Rich Brome

Jul 20, 2004, 1:57 PM
viper said:
... then again, AT&T saved billions in payment to docomo by doing this so i can't say i blame them.


Plus, Cingular wouldn't have wanted to inherit that kind of liability, so I imagine it would have been a deal-breaker for the merger if they hadn't done it.

But also, this is a solid foundation for HSDPA, which increases capacity and boosts data rates to 14.4 Mbps. 😳 HSDPA is a true "upgrade" for WCDMA, just like EDGE was for GSM/GPRS. So from that point of view - WCDMA as a stepping stone to HSDPA - I think it's a wise investment even without the DoCoMo deal.
...
cellboy

Jul 20, 2004, 2:33 PM
I would have to second the waste thought. i mean come on you launch a ground breaking service half A$$ and we are supposed to get excited? Its always the same with ATTWS the service and no handsets or the handsets and no service. And in this case its a little of both. But like i said a week ago and like ive seen said here its a great test pad for cingular and it doesnt cost them anymore in fee's to docomo. since ATTWS fullfilled the agreement.
...
muchdrama

Jul 20, 2004, 3:49 PM
cellboy said:
I would have to second the waste thought. i mean come on you launch a ground breaking service half A$$ and we are supposed to get excited? Its always the same with ATTWS the service and no handsets or the handsets and no service.
Where do you come up with this stuff? Why is this a waste? This is an honest stepping stone to competing with EV DO and Verizon/Sprint. Data speeds will be blazing at first (not at the advertised 220-320 kbps...expect inital speeds somewhere in the 144-200 mbps area), and handset selection will be sparse. Just like any other introduction of new tech. Do you honestly think that EV DO will run at 2.4 mbps right after national roll out? How can you call something half asse...
(continues)
...
rice-a-rolla

Jul 20, 2004, 6:35 PM
YEAAAAAAAAAAH SAN FRACISCO!!!

Waiting for the v710 and sticking w/ Verizon is getting further out of the picture for me. Verizon's customer service is horrible and their phone service will be mediocre to Cingular/ATT pretty soon.
...
cellboy

Jul 21, 2004, 9:01 AM
Really you must work for ATTWS the way you dog me for dogin them...lol.

I think its a waste mostly because they released a service with no real handsets to take advantage of it. you yourself pointed to the nokia that is not all that great, and the a845 is not even out yet. That is also why i say half assed. Whats the point in releasing a service you cant fully use? ohh man 2.4 mb woo hoo.. but can i use it now..NO. maybe Rich had a good point is saying thats why they are getting bought out. 😈 And your right i havent used it yet and probably wont till the company i work for rolls it out next year, but i can assure you that we will have the handsets and services to make it worth trying then... and thanks for the reply "pal"!!
...
muchdrama

Jul 21, 2004, 3:26 PM

Really you must work for ATTWS the way you dog me for dogin them...lol.


I'm an STS manager for a major electronics retailer...got it? Good.

I think its a waste mostly because they released a service with no real handsets to take advantage of it.


That's happened with quite a few mobile tech startups. Get used to it. We're talking billions of dollars invested, here.

you yourself pointed to the nokia that is not all that great, and the a845 is not even out yet.


Like I said (and you keep ignoring...you're pretty good at that, aren't you?), it's a startup. You gotta give 'em time.

maybe Rich had a good point is saying thats why they ar
...
(continues)
...
cellboy

Jul 23, 2004, 9:34 AM
im not ignoring the facts im giving my opinion on them, and it happens to be different than yous. of course i guess thats what you call a "reciprocal" relation ship isnt it?...lmao

I work for a company that is migrating to GSM this september and we not only are going to release the "new" technology but we are going to have the services and handests to support it, and we are also spending billions of dollars doing it. so for you to say that they are doing it this way because its a launch is crazy. I worker for ATTWS when they launched GSM and they screwed it up. When Cingular launched GSM it was seamless, While my company is doing it it seems to be going fine, so im just saying ATTWS has issues launching new services and technology's for w...
(continues)
...
scbysnx

Jul 21, 2004, 7:29 PM
muchdrama said:
cellboy said:
expect inital speeds somewhere in the 144-200 mbps area


this was a typo right? I really hope you don't think thats true.. its not possible nowhere does the gsm association even claim this is possible
...
muchdrama

Jul 22, 2004, 12:32 PM
this was a typo right? I really hope you don't think thats true.. its not possible nowhere does the gsm association even claim this is possible
First of all, we're talking about WCDMA. Secondly, this "GSM Association" you speak of is not going to give you realtime speed estimates.
...
scbysnx

Jul 22, 2004, 12:49 PM
umm.. .. wcdma is the version of cdma that the gsm association developed.. do you honestly have any idea what you're talking about? please do everyone a favor and stop talking now
...
BrandonP63

Jul 22, 2004, 5:01 PM
So wait. Are you guys saying that 144-220Kbps or whatever is too slow or too fast?
...
muchdrama

Jul 22, 2004, 7:39 PM
BrandonP63 said:
So wait. Are you guys saying that 144-220Kbps or whatever is too slow or too fast?
I'm saying ATTWS's quotes of 220-320kbps initially is a tad presumptuous. I'd expect speeds slightly slower than that. But only slightly.
...
muchdrama

Jul 22, 2004, 7:45 PM
scbysnx said:
umm.. .. wcdma is the version of cdma that the gsm association developed.. do you honestly have any idea what you're talking about? please do everyone a favor and stop talking now
Aw, sweetheart. Mom forgot to rub your tooshie this morning? Fine, fine...you must have seen the obvious "mbps" typo. Sorry to spoil your day...say hi to mom for me.
...
scbysnx

Jul 22, 2004, 8:33 PM
all you had to say from the beginning was "it was a typo" as I asked.. in that case I agree I don't think it will be as fast as they say. However you need to learn a little bit more about what you're talking about as apposed to referring to the gsm association in quotes.
...
viper

Jul 20, 2004, 3:54 PM
yes i agree hsdpa is not too bad but....

That 10 mpbs (14 mbps is the theoretical max) goes down plenty quickly in the face of interference, distance and otherwise negative chanel conditions.

i agree its nice improvement but WCDMA in general strikes me as an unnecessary and costly step. Just go to ofdm and save some cash.
...
Rich Brome

Jul 20, 2004, 4:22 PM
WCDMA and WCDMA+HSDPA are complete, standardized voice, data, and multimedia solutions, with hardware available from all major vendors.

OFDM is a data-only technology being promoted mostly just by one company (Flarion). It's not a complete solution and it's not an accepted standard. It's not lined up to be any kind of successor to WCDMA. The fact that some people call it "4G" is misleading. (Which is why I try not call it that.)
...
muchdrama

Jul 20, 2004, 4:54 PM
Rich Brome said:
WCDMA and WCDMA+HSDPA are complete, standardized voice, data, and multimedia solutions, with hardware available from all major vendors.

OFDM is a data-only technology being promoted mostly just by one company (Flarion). It's not a complete solution and it's not an accepted standard. It's not lined up to be any kind of successor to WCDMA. The fact that some people call it "4G" is misleading. (Which is why I try not call it that.)
And who's going to make handsets for OFDM? Wouldn't that get Nextel into trouble again (fixing themselves into a spot where only one vendor (or none) would manufacture handsets for them)?
...
viper

Jul 20, 2004, 7:27 PM
Richard,


I was actually talking about the IEEE's 802.20 which is not done yet but will almost certainly be OFDM and is also a standard. That specification should be done by year end 2005 and most carriers could easily wait for it.

flarion is another more immediate option which by the way is not data only. They introduced voice support at CTIA this year. 802.16e is a third option and the one that i think has the furthest to go. The spin masters are working overtime on that latter one. i wouldn't expect product for that one anytime before 2008 but a lot of carriers can wait that long.
...
Rich Brome

Jul 20, 2004, 7:49 PM
I thought 802.20 wasn't expected to reach the market until a couple years after 802.16e... 😕 I admit I don't know much about 802.20 - what companies are working on it?
...
viper

Jul 21, 2004, 7:43 AM
the battle between 802.20 and 802.16e is really quite interesting.

No where in 802.16's initial scope did it talk about becomming a mobile platform which is why 802.20 was able to form (that and some pushing).the idea of including full mobility wihtin 802.16 really fools no one in its intent and there is quite a battle raging to stop it.

Most of those IEEE standards take 24-36 months to complete. 802.20 was started in late 2002 which puts completion at around late 2005. implementation, testing, etc could take time but you could also have people like flarion coming out with a pre certified systems with upgrade paths to full standard compliance.

802.16e is now making a lot of noise but i would not expect that spec to be done for ano...
(continues)
...
viper

Jul 21, 2004, 9:57 AM
just a little correction here. I went to the 802.20 website on which they posted their schedule. It was just approved about a week ago. They seem to have nov 2006 as the official standard is done time for 802.20 which is a bit longer than usual.

i encourage all of you to keep cable labs in mind as well. The IEEE had a standard for cable modems. The cable operators decided they didn't like it and came up with their own standard and organization called cablelabs.

Nothing is stopping mobile carriers from doing the same. And mobile carriers are a tad bit pissed at the vendor community so you never know, though i would not count on it.
...

This forum is closed.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

This forum is closed.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Threads Follow @phonescoop on Mastodon Phone Scoop on Facebook Follow on Instagram

 

Playwire

All content Copyright 2001-2024 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.