 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / ATT Wireless / May 2008iPhones now get free AT&T WiFi
AT&T is now offering free Wi-Fi access to iPhone users. After joining the hotspot, iPhone users have encountered a specially formatted iPhone page requiring their mobile number to verify a valid AT&T account. Once authenticated, users can then access the Wi-Fi freely at any number of AT&T hotspots, including those at Starbucks and Barnes and Noble. > AT&T is now offering free Wi-Fi access to iPhone users. After joining > the hotspot, iPhone users have encountered a specially formatted iPhone > page requiring their mobile number to verify a valid AT&T account. > > Once authenticated, users can then access the Wi-Fi freely at any number > of AT&T hotspots, including those at Starbucks and Barnes and Noble. Do iPhone owners get to use the hotspot service ontheir laptops as well, or only on their iPhones? T-Mobile offers a similar service to their customers- any T-Mobile customer who subscribes to the $20/month "Total Internet" package gets free access at any T-Mobile hotspot for any of their WiFi-enabled devices; phones, laptops, etc. Through a contractual obligation with AT&T that covers the next few years, this also includes the Starbucks Hotspots which recently transisitioned from T-Mobile to AT&T. It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to "apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) >> AT&T is now offering free Wi-Fi access to iPhone users. After joining >> the hotspot, iPhone users have encountered a specially formatted iPhone [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to > "apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) It's only for the iPhone. But if your a DSL user from AT&T you get free WiFi from AT&T with your laptop. Starbucks has only changed a few of there Hotspots over to AT&T. They expect all there stores that offer WiFi to be switched over by the end of the year. Here in town they have a UPS Store that already has AT&T WiFi and it's next door to a Starbucks. Edge in my town sucks bad. 60-80K speed. > It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to > "apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) And the apology is accepted ;-) And it is not just a rumor, I just checked it out at a local AT&T hotspot and it is indeed true. >> It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to >> "apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) > > And the apology is accepted ;-) And it is not just a rumor, I just > checked it out at a local AT&T hotspot and it is indeed true. Last week took the family into NYC to see a broadway show, while in Times Sqaure I walked into the Starbucks to get a cup of coffee, my iPhone switched to wifi and it worked. For whatever reason, its fine by me. > It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to > "apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) I was surprised to see that my AT&T DSL comes with free AT&T WiFi access. I haven't tried it, and I don't go to Starbucks at all in my area, and only occasionally while traveling. In this case it's not related to 3G, in fact it may hinder sales of 3G. [alt.cellular.cingular removed, Cingular no longer exists] >> It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to >> "apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > only occasionally while traveling. In this case it's not related to 3G, in > fact it may hinder sales of 3G. I don't see how. You really can't have it both ways- on the one hand, you blast everyone except Verizon for not covering every rural nook and cranny and National or State Park in the wilderness, then on the other, you suggest that the WiFi which is largely only available primarily downtown/urban/shopping areas somehow could hurt sales of 3G. In your mind, are the majority of cellular users all struggling to get a signal in Yosemite, or are they all clustered around the coffee shop counter checking email? They can't be in both places at once! ;-) > [alt.cellular.cingular removed, Cingular no longer exists] [alt.cellular.cingular re-added, it still has a significant amount of traffic, and this thread is already posted there...] > I don't see how. You really can't have it both ways- on the one hand, > you blast everyone except Verizon for not covering every rural nook and > cranny and National or State Park in the wilderness, then on the other, > you suggest that the WiFi which is largely only available primarily > downtown/urban/shopping areas somehow could hurt sales of 3G. I never said that WiFi was only available in downtown/urban/shopping areas. In fact, it's widely available outside these areas. You're making up a story that's not true and then accusing me of trying to have it both ways, when in fact I never signed on to the story you made up in the first place. In fact WiFi is widely available outside these areas. Most inns, even those in out of the way places, are now offering WiFi, sometime with the router connected via satellite. Many National Parks offer Wi-Fi. It's often not free, but there is no 3G available in these places anyway, so even a 3G user wanting internet access would have to pay for it. > In your > mind, are the majority of cellular users all struggling to get a signal > in Yosemite, or are they all clustered around the coffee shop counter > checking email? They can't be in both places at once! ;-) Yosemite has excellent wireless coverage via Golden State Cellular, as long as you have a tri-mode CDMA/AMPS phone. They also have Wi-Fi in the valley, see "http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/internet.htm". But back to AT&T free wireless for DSL customers, and how it impacts 3G. The areas of the country covered by 3G will almost always have a Starbucks around. For someone that just needs casual access while away from home, and isn't depending on ubiquitous access, having AT&T Wireless service included at no extra cost as part of their DSL service may in fact cause them to decide to not bother with getting 3G service at $60/month. In fact, I was considering signing up for Sprint 3G service on a SERO plan, but now I won't bother. I didn't even know about the included AT&T WiFi when I signed up for AT&T DSL. They just recently extended this down to all but the lowest tier of service. [alt.cellular.cingular re-removed, Cingular no longer exists, also AT&T DSL doesn't allow posting to both groups at the same time! Apparently they are on different servers] >> I don't see how. You really can't have it both ways- on the one hand, >> you blast everyone except Verizon for not covering every rural nook and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I never said that WiFi was only available in downtown/urban/shopping > areas. In fact, it's widely available outside these areas. Widely available? > You're making up a story that's not true and then accusing me of trying to > have it both ways, when in fact I never signed on to the story you made up > in the first place. Perhaps, but now you're offering a different "both ways" scenario below.... > But back to AT&T free wireless for DSL customers, and how it impacts 3G. > > The areas of the country covered by 3G will almost always have a Starbucks > around. People don't buy "3G," per se, they buy cellular data. Sure, 3G has a smaller footprint than voice, but cellular data customers can fallback on slower speeds outside 3G areas, so, while often slower, cellular data is virtually available anywhere. Someone reliant on say, Exchange, or Blackberry BES, isn't going to stop at the odd hotspot a dozen times a day to check his e-mail- he expects it to be available wherever he or she is. > For someone that just needs casual access while away from home, and isn't > depending on ubiquitous access, having AT&T Wireless service included at > no extra cost as part of their DSL service may in fact cause them to > decide to not bother with getting 3G service at $60/month. But you're comparing apples and oranges- the guy willing to spring for a $60/month broadband air card is NOT the guy who needs "casual access." A $60/month customer wants ubiquitous access- not access wherever fine lattes and books are sold. Besides, in this Blackberry/iPhone/Smartphone world we live in, it's not "$60/month" data the majority of customers are buying- it's $20-30 data add-on plans to their business voice service, which will not be impacted by AT&T's generous "free access" offer. > In fact, I was considering signing up for Sprint 3G service on a SERO > plan, but now I won't bother. I didn't even know about the included AT&T > WiFi when I signed up for AT&T DSL. They just recently extended this down > to all but the lowest tier of service. If you're willing to put up with spotty WiFi coverage, you don't need ubiquitous service either. I hardly believe access to 10,000 AT&T hotspots nationwide tipped the scales away from a $50 SERO data plan. You've gone this long with cellular data, so I suspect you find the current hit or miss hodgepodge of WiFi access acceptable, which is fine. But claiming access to AT&T's Hotspot network will cannibalize wireless broadband card sales is like Hyundai claiming every Sonata sold is one less Lexus on the streets. These are products with different markets. The cellular broadband customer already has the same access to free WiFi as everyone else (save for, perhaps, the AT&T Hotspots,) yet has already made the decision that here-and-there access isn't good enough. A few thousand more heres and theres across the country isn't going to change that. > [alt.cellular.cingular re-removed, Cingular no longer exists, also AT&T > DSL doesn't allow posting to both groups at the same time! Apparently > they are on different servers] So it's not really a political statement as much as a technological limitation of your service... >>> I don't see how. You really can't have it both ways- on the one hand, >>> you blast everyone except Verizon for not covering every rural nook and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Widely available? Absolutely, unless you're using 5 year old information. Those of us that travel and try to use WiFi are really impressed that WiFi is MORE than widely available. McDonalds, Burger King, all manner of restaurants have free and open WiFi, many Coffee shops. Hotels that may not have open WiFi, do have open WiFi in their Lobby/restaurants downstairs. Librarys, Hospitals, Govt Buildings, Universities, Shopping Malls. You literally are never more than a few blocks away from WiFi anywhere in any top 50 Metroplitan area, not just "downtown". Just pull into the parking lot of a McDonalds, and you're good to go. Even in airports, just sit down outside the Continental Air Lounge for free open WiFi. And its so widely available now that even if you thought it wasn't available, go search for SSIDs and Bingo, you may find it is from some establishment, business or residence a block away. Not sure its legal, but go park in a suburb, and use the SSID "DLink" or "Linksys", and there's often someone that set up their WiFi with defaults, and no password. Last year while in South Beach, FL the pay WiFi in my hotel was down while they were changing providers, but I had no trouble getting to the internet in my hotel room via the Free, Open WiFi of a hotel 1 block away! There are locations where the WiFi is not open, and there if you have ATT dsl or an iPhone, you also have access to log into ATT wifi. At a Holiday Inn, just go to the front desk, and say "my spouse lost the WiFi password", and they'll hand you a sheet with instructions. > Not sure its legal, but go park in a suburb, and use the SSID "DLink" > or "Linksys", and there's often someone that set up their WiFi with > defaults, and no password. Y'all can use ours in my neighborhood. My SSID is W4CSC and has been open for years. The boys in the enlisted barracks at the air force base have Pringle's Can beams pointed towards my extended range node 50' up the oak tree in the yard in an inverted bucket to keep it out of the rain. It uses power-over-Ethernet and runs 200mw across the spectrum..... ....I'm showing 6 hooked to it, at the moment, from "somewhere 'round heah"...(c; Help yourselves. What I always find hilarious is someone with a 20mw Linksys pouring over which security lock is best when his little rubber duck antenna can't make it to the other end of the house. Noone can use it unless they're standing in the flower bed right outside the computer shack window. Too funny. In all the years I've been running an open hotspot with nearly a mile of range, I've had one "abuser" hell bent on trying to destroy it. I mentioned it to some of my other "users" and a group of them knocked on his door to politely ask him to cease and desist. I never even locked out his MAC. I didn't have to....(c; Terabytes of bandwidth go unused every microsecond. Bandwidth is a terrible thing to waste....(c; (A green tree frog has just stuck himself to the side of my WinXP box and is making a curious croaking noise that sounds like a caster wheel that needs some WD-40. I think he's looking for lunch....or his mate.) >Y'all can use ours in my neighborhood. My SSID is W4CSC and has been >open for years. The boys in the enlisted barracks at the air force base >have Pringle's Can beams pointed towards my extended range node 50' up >the oak tree in the yard in an inverted bucket to keep it out of the >rain. It uses power-over-Ethernet and runs 200mw across the >spectrum..... While that's very generous of you to provide this service for free to the public, how would you feel if someone used your Internet connection to, say, send a threatening email to the President? > While that's very generous of you to provide this service for free to > the public, how would you feel if someone used your Internet > connection to, say, send a threatening email to the President? How is it different than if that same clown did it at McDonald's or Starbucks? The Men in Black show up, Larry shows them the open setup, explains the part about serving the troops at the AFB, and they'll be on their way... >> While that's very generous of you to provide this service for free to >> the public, how would you feel if someone used your Internet >> connection to, say, send a threatening email to the President? > >How is it different than if that same clown did it at McDonald's or >Starbucks? The main difference is that the Good Samaritan providing the free Internet access is going to become the prime suspect, and will waste time and resources trying to prove his innocence. Most people would want to avoid that potential hassle, however remote the possibility might be. > While that's very generous of you to provide this service for free to > the public, how would you feel if someone used your Internet > connection to, say, send a threatening email to the President? Every time I mention this on Usenet, I get this same exact response. However, there IS case law that I'm sorry I don't have under my thumb a perfect reference for you of, that having an OPEN, UNMONITORED node is, in fact, a GREAT defence in front of the jurors. NOONE, not even the Illuminati's judge, can hold you accountable for the actions of someone who "used your system without your express permission".....any more than they can hold Comcast responsible for his same actions on his Comcast internet modem. If you let Y use your wifi, you are in EXACTLY the same position as Comcast in your scenario. I suppose it could get very expensive trying to defend yourself, but it won't work as there are many who have gone before....way back in the BBS days, even. "They" know it won't work, having had their faces rubbed in the dirt in court before.... > Every time I mention this on Usenet, I get this same exact response. > However, there IS case law that I'm sorry I don't have under my thumb a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > internet modem. If you let Y use your wifi, you are in EXACTLY the same > position as Comcast in your scenario. No, you're not. Not at all. When you're a comcast customer, you have an explicit agreement with Comcast. But when you have an open, unmonitored wireless connection, you have no specific agreement with anyone who may stumble upon it. It's just like your leaving a gun in the open, such that it's easily taken by anyone. You are liable for leaving the gun in the open. If someone takes your gun that you simply left hanging on a hook on your front porch, and then uses that to kill the president, guess what? You're liable. You knew someone could take that gun, you knew it was advertised for anyone to see and take, and you didn't take proper care to eliminate just anyone from taking and using that gun. So try that, Lar. Hang a loaded pistol on your front porch for all to see, make sure your SSN is on it for identification, then wait for the results. > It's just like your leaving a gun in the open, such that it's easily > taken by anyone. You are liable for leaving the gun in the open. If > someone takes your gun that you simply left hanging on a hook on your > front porch, and then uses that to kill the president, guess what? > You're liable. I've authored a bunch of stupid Usenet analogies in my life, sir, but I bow to the master! ;-) You're really equating an open internet access point to leaving a loaded gun in the open? Sure, you'd be liable for the gun, because a reasonable person could foresee the potential danger. What "danger" is the wireless AP owner supposed to foresee? My outdoor garden hose and spigot left out in the open is a greater potential threat to the public than a wireless AP- someone REALLY intent on it could probably manage to drown himself. What is Larry doing that thousands of independent coffee shops across the country aren't? (Like Larry, many of the smaller ones don't require logins or ToS acceptance pages to connect- they're simply "open.") > > It's just like your leaving a gun in the open, such that it's easily > > taken by anyone. You are liable for leaving the gun in the open. If [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > You're really equating an open internet access point to leaving a loaded gun > in the open? If it came down to someone making threats to the president, do you want to guess what would happen? > In article <fvja9v$93...@aioe.org>, > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > If it came down to someone making threats to the president, do you want > to guess what would happen? Which President. Obama or Hillary? In article <bf7799b2-0f14-45cb-8497-59940cf5e4a7@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, > > If it came down to someone making threats to the president, do you want > > to guess what would happen? > > Which President. Obama or Hillary? I said the president. It's a generic term, meaning whomever is in office at the time in question. Or are you too dense to understand the basic concept? I repeat: if my knowingly open wireless was involved in a situation where the president received a threat on his life, I would be in trouble. The Secret Service doesn't take these things casually. > If it came down to someone making threats to the president, do you want > to guess what would happen? Sure- the feds would investigate, see Larry was blameless, and go on their way... > > If it came down to someone making threats to the president, do you want > > to guess what would happen? > > Sure- the feds would investigate, see Larry was blameless, and go on their > way... Don't think so. >> If it came down to someone making threats to the president, do you want >> to guess what would happen? > >Sure- the feds would investigate, see Larry was blameless, and go on their >way... You mean like the Secret Service did to Steve Jackson Games? As I recall, the SS took a bunch of their computers, hard drives, business records, and the work-in-progress GURPS Cyberpunk game, causing a catastrophic disruption to the company's business. The SS took its own sweet time about giving the stuff back, too - it took months of effort and involved over $250,000 in legal fees, but the SS eventually did let SJG go on their merry way. So clearly Larry has nothing whatsoever to worry about. > >Sure- the feds would investigate, see Larry was blameless, and go on their > >way... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > months of effort and involved over $250,000 in legal fees, but the SS > eventually did let SJG go on their merry way. Didn't the EFF have to get involved? > So clearly Larry has nothing whatsoever to worry about. hehehehehehe Clearly. >> >Sure- the feds would investigate, see Larry was blameless, and go on >> >their [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Didn't the EFF have to get involved? IIRC, yes, they were created in part due to this debacle. >> So clearly Larry has nothing whatsoever to worry about. > > hehehehehehe Clearly. To be fair, that was fifteen years ago, when the Feds were still trying to figure out what "cybercrime" was all about, and were going after specific "cyberpunk" targets, regardless of whether or not they actually had broken any laws. I'll certainly agree that they make mistakes, and the SJG fiasco might well be the "Ruby Ridge" of cybercrime "investigations," but early blunders like that one are EXACTLY why Larry would really have nothing to worry about today. The Feds know how "all the internets" work these days, and would easily figure out that your hypothetical email threat didn't originate from Larry. Would they confiscate his equipment for awhile and inconvenience him? Probably, particularly if the "in person" Larry is as stubborn and irascible as his Usenet persona is, they might just do it to torque him off! Alternately, I suspect he could charm his way out of it with his patriotic side, and I suspect he would probably feel compelled to aid them in any way possible. Now, having said that, they might have a few questions about the 500 terabytes of downloaded Usenet movies and music Larry has purported to have "acquired"'over the last couple of years, but that's another matter... ;-) >The Feds know how "all the internets" work these days, >and would easily figure out that your hypothetical email threat didn't [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >terabytes of downloaded Usenet movies and music Larry has purported to have >"acquired"'over the last couple of years, but that's another matter... ;-) That's it in a nutshell. Even if you're completely innocent, you stil have to go through the hassle of having your home raided, your equipment confiscated, and your private files rifled. Plus whatever other incriminating "evidence" they might stumble across in the process. >> >Sure- the feds would investigate, see Larry was blameless, and go on their >> >way... [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Didn't the EFF have to get involved? The EFF was *created* because of this case. On 5/4/08 6:28 PM, in article o4hs14tb8qtgc4knvd84b01bqr8hlp0qdm@4ax.com, >>> If it came down to someone making threats to the president, do you want >>> to guess what would happen? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > So clearly Larry has nothing whatsoever to worry about. I get the impression from his posts that "Larry" is really Alfred E. Newman. >> While that's very generous of you to provide this service for free to >> the public, how would you feel if someone used your Internet >> connection to, say, send a threatening email to the President? > >Every time I mention this on Usenet, I get this same exact response. That shouldn't surprise you. Anyone who has been around long enough to remember things like Operation Sundevil would naturally be concerned. >However, there IS case law that I'm sorry I don't have under my thumb a >perfect reference for you of, that having an OPEN, UNMONITORED node is, >in fact, a GREAT defence in front of the jurors. NOONE, not even the >Illuminati's judge, can hold you accountable for the actions of someone >who "used your system without your express permission" In Message-ID: <Xns9A9385582973Anoonehomecom@208.49.80.253> you gave us all express permission to use your WiFi. What does that do to your alleged protection? >I suppose it could get very expensive trying to defend yourself, but it >won't work as there are many who have gone before....way back in the BBS >days, even. > >"They" know it won't work, having had their faces rubbed in the dirt in >court before.... I honestly hope that nobody ever tests your theory. You can be "right," and you can be "dead right." Just ask Steve Jackson. > (A green tree frog has just stuck himself to the side of my WinXP box and > is making a curious croaking noise that sounds like a caster wheel that > needs some WD-40. I think he's looking for lunch....or his mate.) Most likely he hears WinXP about to croak. >> (A green tree frog has just stuck himself to the side of my WinXP box >> and is making a curious croaking noise that sounds like a caster >> wheel that needs some WD-40. I think he's looking for lunch....or >> his mate.) > > Most likely he hears WinXP about to croak. Ha! That's it! He's taken up guarding my desk light, now that the sun's going down, hoping some bugs will be attracted. They wedge themselves up under my porch light, which runs continuously. Sometimes they get so fat eating the attracted bugs, they get stuck between the globe and the wall!...(c; > hoping some bugs will be attracted. Frog will be well satisfied. Windows is full of bugs. > There are locations where the WiFi is not open, and there if you > have ATT dsl or an iPhone, you also have access to log into ATT wifi. > At a Holiday Inn, just go to the front desk, and say "my spouse lost > the WiFi password", and they'll hand you a sheet with instructions. Our local mall was locked up tight with easily-broken WEP codes. I thought that was awful, having my own open hotspot for anyone to use. I approached a couple of stores whos SSIDs I could identify and talked to their managers, who were all convinced hackers were going to eliminate their company books if they let anyone use their internet bandwidth, which goes 99% totally wasted. I convinced 4 of them this was not the case who had small networks with simple routers hooked to cable modems....not company mainframes with restrictive firewalls to prevent browsing or downloading. You many now use all 4 systems by simply connecting to them. No bad vibes in months and months and I can sit with my little Linux tablet inside the food court (2 are on the food court), eat some lunch, and have lots more serious bandwidth than Alltel on my sellphone provides (EVDO). One of the stores took my suggestion and has a sign at the entrance offering FREE WIFI to attract geek customers. We would all be doing ourselves a big favor to BUY FROM THEM to help keep free wifi available to all. If you buy from any FREE WIFI labeled store or restaurant, be SURE to THANK the manager and make sure he knows you are buying BECAUSE OF his free wifi offering.....especially cafes and restaurants. > On Fri, 2 May 2008 16:19:37 -0600, "Todd Allcock" > >Widely available? > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > wasn't available, go search for SSIDs and Bingo, you may find it is > from some establishment, business or residence a block away. Sure, there are plenty of places I can GO to find free WiFi, but places I can GO doesn't necessarily equal places that I AM. Cellular data is ubiquitous , WiFi isn't. > Not sure its legal, but go park in a suburb, and use the SSID "DLink" > or "Linksys", and there's often someone that set up their WiFi with > defaults, and no password. Often,perhaps, but not always. > Last year while in South Beach, FL the pay WiFi in my hotel was down > while they were changing providers, but I had no trouble getting to > the internet in my hotel room via the Free, Open WiFi of a hotel 1 > block away! Lucky you. Alternatively, I've beeninhotels where the free WiFi only worked in certain parts of the suite, because my room was at the edge of the AP's range. > There are locations where the WiFi is not open, and there if you > have ATT dsl or an iPhone, you also have access to log into ATT wifi. If it's an AT&T Hotspot, yes- not if it's, say, Boingo. > At a Holiday Inn, just go to the front desk, and say "my spouse lost > the WiFi password", and they'll hand you a sheet with instructions. Very convenient... >> On Fri, 2 May 2008 16:19:37 -0600, "Todd Allcock" > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >Cellular data is ubiquitous , WiFi isn't. Thats what the maps and the marketers say, but dead zones exist, even in big cities (or maybe especially in big cities), and all too often 3G coverage is like Swiss cheese in some areas, so your 3G is working, and then it isn't. I took and dumped on eBay an 8525 Phone after 1 week as 3G WAS NOT UBIQUITOUS. >>>On Fri, 2 May 2008 16:19:37 -0600, "Todd Allcock" >> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > week as 3G > WAS NOT UBIQUITOUS. Which is more ubiquitous? Which facilitates mobile handoffs? Not Wifi. >>Cellular data is ubiquitous , WiFi isn't. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > week as 3G > WAS NOT UBIQUITOUS. Perhaps 3G wasn't, but CELLULAR DATA is. 3G falls back on EDGE/GPRS, so the "3G" customer still has a connection, albeit a slower one. What does WiFi fall back on? "Borrowing" a neighbor's or hotel's phone jack? (I realize the iPhone has EDGE to fall back on as well, IF you're buying a data plan. I'm really addressing the "WiFi is so readily available, I don't need a cellular data plan" mindset.) >>>Cellular data is ubiquitous , WiFi isn't. >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >data plan. I'm really addressing the "WiFi is so readily available, I don't >need a cellular data plan" mindset.) WiFi is usually free, and is widely available, as those of us who use it know. EDGE/GPRS is not free, and it remains to be seen what AT&T will charge for data plans for 3G iPhones, it typically charges $40/month for 3G Smart Phone data planes, and the Edge iPhone has already demonstrated the burden it puts on data infrastructure. You can't have it both ways. Bitch about iPhone having to use Edge, and then brag how Edge is UBIQUITUOUS. And even Edge, like other cellular services will have dead zones, or times and places where it wont work from over use. Try it 5 PM on a rainy night for instance. Or anyplace more than 1/2 mile from the nearest Cell tower. The "ubiquitous" cell service or data of 1900 MHz providers is even more less so, with myriad complaints about indoor penetration. > WiFi is usually free, and is widely available, as those of us who use > it know. Um, WiFi users are hardly a secret club. I, too, use WiFi, on my laptops, my WinMo phone, and various PDAs. If it was as ubiquitous as you seem to believe, I wouldn't need a data plan, but I do. Yes, WiFi is available in many places, but not enought to be relied upon for use on demand, unless I pre-select my itinerary to favor hotspots (i.e. Starbucks for coffee, followed by a trip to the library, then Panera Bread for lunch, etc.) As a T-Mo cusomer, I'm stuck with EDGE wireless data, just like an iPhone customer is, so I too will happily take advantage of WiFi when/where available. > EDGE/GPRS is not free, and it remains to be seen what AT&T will > charge for data plans for 3G iPhones, it typically charges $40/month > for 3G Smart Phone data planes, and the Edge iPhone has already > demonstrated the burden it puts on data infrastructure. Historically AT&T doesn't price plans based on speed. Data for PDAs and smartphones is what it is regardless of whether the phone is 2G or 3G. Whether that will hold true for the iPhone remains to be seen, But someone pointed out (Dennis Ferguson, IIRC) one advantage of 3G speed is it uses less "time" on the network for the same amount of data- i.e. assuming you follow the same usage pattern on 3G- unattended e-mail retrieval and the same web lookups (weather, movies, the news, Google Maps directions, etc.) you still transfer the same amount of data, but in a quarter of the time, leaving the network idle for more users. Other than infrastructure build- out costs, higher speed data is usually cheaper for the carrier- as the switch from 1G (which used a full voice channel during the connection whether data was being actively transferred or not!) to 2G (that sent data packets "around" voice calls during active transfers) demonstrated. (I always appreciated the irony that my 1G data on T-Mo was "free"- using my plan minutes, while they charged me monthly for the 2G data which saved them network usage! Obviously, though the same could said of texting, which consumes less sytem resources than a voice call, but is sold as a premium service.) > You can't have it both ways. Bitch about iPhone having to use Edge, > and then brag how Edge is UBIQUITUOUS. This is a long thread with twists and turns- I wasn't "bitching" about the iPhone using EDGE. I was (at first) suggesting that the free AT&T Wireless access for iPhones was a sort of "apology" for EDGE (perhaps "compensation" is a better word,) the same way T-Mo includes WiFi hotspot for their their EDGE customers, (since they're the only national carrier with NO 3G yet), and then the discussion morphed to whether AT&T DSL customers' free hotspot access would prevent AT&T wireless customers from buying wireless data. I don't believe hotspots are any substitute for cellular data, so I don't think AT&T's generous offer will impact their wireless data sales. WiFi is certainly a nice augmentation or cell data, but it's no replacement! > And even Edge, like > other cellular services will have dead zones, or times and places > where it wont work from over use. Try it 5 PM on a rainy night for > instance. Or anyplace more than 1/2 mile from the nearest Cell tower. > The "ubiquitous" cell service or data of 1900 MHz providers is even > more less so, with myriad complaints about indoor penetration. Perhaps, but what percentage of "downtime" in a typical day would you have with cellular data vs. WiFi? I'm a happy T-Mo EDGE user. My web and e- mail work fine on rainy days, in weak signal areas, etc. If I'm able to make a voice call, I'm able to use EDGE or GPRS. Perhaps T-Mo's typical demographic (low-end, teeny-bopping text generation) doesn't lend itself to data congestion or perhaps I've just been lucky... >> WiFi is usually free, and is widely available, as those of us who use >> it know. >available. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Historically AT&T doesn't price plans based on speed. Data for PDAs and >smartphones is what it is regardless of whether the phone is 2G or 3G. Don't know where you make that up from. 3G PDAs are required to get the $40 plan, EDGE ones not. >>Historically AT&T doesn't price plans based on speed. Data for PDAs and >>smartphones is what it is regardless of whether the phone is 2G or 3G. > > Don't know where you make that up from. Where I get all of my "made-up" AT&T info- from AT&T... > 3G PDAs are required to get the $40 plan, EDGE ones not. The list of "compatible phones" for the $30 PDA plan, (they dropped it to $30 from $40 a while ago, now...) directly from AT&T's website, is: "AT&T: Tilt Cingular: 8125 , 8525 HP:hw6515 Motorola: Moto Q Global Nokia: E62 Palm: Centro, Treo 650, Treo 680, Treo 750 Pantech: Duo Samsung: Blackjack, Blackjack II" Off the top of my head, I know the Cingular 8125, HP 6515, Treos 650 and 680, and Palm Centro are not 3G phones, although AFAIK, the Centro is the only currently-sold non-3G PDA- the others are long discontinued. The only "PDA" (AT&T's website definition, certainly not mine!) with a sub-$30 data plan is the iPhone, which has it's own "iPhone" data plan. All other PDAs, REGARDLESS OF DATA SPEED, are $30 for the data add-on, (or $60 if you want tethering included.) But please- don't take my word for it- go to the AT&T wireless website, stick a Centro in the shopping cart, go to "add services" and try to find us a cheaper "2G PDA data plan," ok? > The only "PDA" (AT&T's website definition, certainly not mine!) with a > sub-$30 data plan is the iPhone, which has it's own "iPhone" data plan. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > stick a Centro in the shopping cart, go to "add services" and try to > find us a cheaper "2G PDA data plan," ok? My hw6515 operates on a $19.99/month unlimited data plan. >> The only "PDA" (AT&T's website definition, certainly not mine!) with a >> sub-$30 data plan is the iPhone, which has it's own "iPhone" data plan. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > My hw6515 operates on a $19.99/month unlimited data plan. I assume you are using MEdia Net rather than a PDA plan, though, correct? That's a plan for "dumbphones" that isn't really hard to "trick" AT&T into letting you have. I do the same on T-Mobile, with a $5.99 "WAP" plan instead of their $20 PDA plan. Like AT&T, T-Mo seems ok with it as long as you don't call attention to yourself by using "too much" of your unlimited data. Arguably, you could use that same $20 plan on a brand-new 3G PDA as well, as long as you "stay under the radar." HowardForums are full of posters who've done just that. Usually it involves sticking your SIM in a non-PDA phone, and then signing up for the unlimited MEdia Net plan, then putting the SIM in your PDA and conveniently forgetting to tell AT&T you've changed phones. In your case, you'd probably get away with it even more easily since you already have the data plan, and could simply buy a 3G model and slip your SIM in. That's how I did it with T-Mo- I've had the same data plan add-on for four or five years over three or four phones. When I switched from my last "dumbphone" to my T-Mobile MDA, I simply moved the SIM to the MDA, and never changed plans. I was going to mention some of this in my reply to Ron, but I felt that "tricking" AT&T into lower priced plans was beyond the scope of the argument, because it isn't really 2G or 3G related- 3G PDA owners can play the same tricks as 2G PDA owners do into gaming the system, so, IMO, it's a moot point. >>> The only "PDA" (AT&T's website definition, certainly not mine!) with >>> a sub-$30 data plan is the iPhone, which has it's own "iPhone" data [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > play the same tricks as 2G PDA owners do into gaming the system, so, > IMO, it's a moot point. Absolutely no trickery or misrepresentation involved or required. The $19.99/month "Smart Phone Connect" is an AT&T retail offered PDA email/data/network access plan. >> I was going to mention some of this in my reply to Ron, but I felt that >> "tricking" AT&T into lower priced plans was beyond the scope of the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The $19.99/month "Smart Phone Connect" is an AT&T retail offered PDA > email/data/network access plan. Actually it was an AT&T retail offered SMARTPHONE email/data plan. Back in the day, Cingular made separate distinctions between "Smartphones" and "PDAs." (Strangely enough, having a QWERTY keyboard was Cingular's definition of a "PDA." A silly distinction, but that's what they used.) Frankly I'm surprised they let you get it on the 6915- when I asked two years ago if I could put an 8125 on Smartphone Connect and they told me I couldn't. The Cingular forums are full of threads pointing out the even Cingular didn't always get it right (Samsung Blackjack users in particular seemed to be offered Smartphone Connect and PDA Connect randomly.) I may be wrong, but I don't think they offer Smartphone connect any longer (I think it was pulled when the old $40 PDA Connect became "PDA Personal" for $30.) I believe the current data plan lineup is here: http://www.wireless.att.com/businesscenter/popup/dataconnect-comp-table.jsp So your Smartphone Connect plan is likely grandfathered, and would be something I'd think twice about before ever cancelling, since it's replacement seems to be $10/month more. >>> I was going to mention some of this in my reply to Ron, but I felt >>> that "tricking" AT&T into lower priced plans was beyond the scope of [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > something I'd think twice about before ever cancelling, since it's > replacement seems to be $10/month more. I'm not complaining.... ;-) >> So your Smartphone Connect plan is likely grandfathered, and would be >> something I'd think twice about before ever cancelling, since it's >> replacement seems to be $10/month more. > > I'm not complaining.... ;-) Nor would I! ;-) Just something to keep in mind should you ever decide to upgrade phones (although the 6915 is such a great phone, I can't really think of a good reason you'd need to upgrade unless you were wanting 3G for the sake of 3G... I wanted one back in the day for the internal GPS, but couldn't get past the square screen- too many old PPC programs expected a 240x320 display and the bottom 1/3 of the screen (often the part with the "ok," "cancel," and other controls!) would be inaccessible. Obviously it's less of a problem today, given that HP and Palm's WM Treos have used the 240x240 for awhile now, but I still prefer the rectangle!) >>>Historically AT&T doesn't price plans based on speed. Data for PDAs and >>>smartphones is what it is regardless of whether the phone is 2G or 3G. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >> 3G PDAs are required to get the $40 plan, EDGE ones not. I was wrong, the data plan is $45 for a Blackberry > I was wrong, the data plan is $45 for a Blackberry Kinda sorta. $45 includes "corporate email" (Blackberry Enterprise Server,) which business users would obviously have. "Personal" users who just want their POP/IMAP email can opt for "Blackberry Personal" which is $30, same as other PDA phones. AT&T seems to have tried to greatly simplify their data plans- Today, essentially, there are two tiers of unlimited "on-phone" data price points- $30 for Smartphones/PDAs, and $20 for feature/multimedia phones (including the iPhone.) It'll be interesting to see how they position the 3G iPhone- keep iPhone data plans consistent (i.e. $20/month) or redefine the 3G iPhone as a "PDA" and charge $30. A two-tiered iPhone data pricing approach could certainly help clear inventory of older EDGE iPhones without drastic price cuts- 2G iPhones could be sold until stock is depleted alongside 3G models using the $10/cheaper data rate as an advantage ("you'll save $240 over the two year contract!"), particularly for users who intend to primarily use WiFi for data, and only need the cellular data for email, casual browsing, and Visual Voicemail. > Those of us that travel and try to use WiFi are really impressed that > WiFi is MORE than widely available. McDonalds, Burger King, all manner > of restaurants have free and open WiFi, many Coffee shops. Hotels > that may not have open WiFi, do have open WiFi in their > Lobby/restaurants downstairs. Librarys, Hospitals, Govt Buildings, > Universities, Shopping Malls. I've found another great WiFi location that is often overlooked.....Churches! > I've found another great WiFi location that is often > overlooked.....Churches! I guess draft 802.11god has finally been ratified. DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:NW6Tj.2028$3O7.163 @newssvr19.news.prodigy.net: >> I've found another great WiFi location that is often >> overlooked.....Churches! > > I guess draft 802.11god has finally been ratified. http://www.god.org/ DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:NW6Tj.2028$3O7.163 @newssvr19.news.prodigy.net: >> I've found another great WiFi location that is often >> overlooked.....Churches! > > I guess draft 802.11god has finally been ratified. Of course, the money grubber Evangelicals have: http://www.god.com/ being a business and all.....(c; "Matt K." <mattie@nospam.net> wrote in news:mattie-82392F.19172503052008 @news.giganews.com: >> Those of us that travel and try to use WiFi are really impressed that >> WiFi is MORE than widely available. McDonalds, Burger King, all manner [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I've found another great WiFi location that is often > overlooked.....Churches! I fix church organs for a living and have since 1985. Churches are pretty paranoid about wifi security around here. My Linux tablet is loaded with passwords to get on them. I only know of a couple that are open due mostly to ignorance. Great if you can get it. Most of them have professionally-installed servers to aid in the money collections. SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:TgISj.12885$GE1.6099 @nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com: >> It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to >> "apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > [alt.cellular.cingular removed, Cingular no longer exists] They gonna have ta 'pologize fo mo dan dat with the NEW 3G iPhoney cummin' out at $199, putting the BIG shaft to all the $500 2G customers..... Free Wifi isn't gonna make it up to 'em! > It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to > "apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) Let them "apologize" as much as they want. :-) Good for me.  SignatureTo reply by email, remove the word "space" >>It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to >>"apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) > > Let them "apologize" as much as they want. :-) Good for me. You are sure they aren't apologizing for the iPhone? >>>It seems both "free WiFi" plans have the same underlying purpose- to >>>"apologize" for lack of 3g! ;-) >> >> Let them "apologize" as much as they want. :-) Good for me. > > You are sure they aren't apologizing for the iPhone? Low Blow! LOW BLOW!......hee hee....(c; |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.