Slashdot Mirror
Comparing Wireless Internet Services
Carl Oppedahl writes "AT&T has released its new "Edge" wireless Internet access service, claiming it is twice as fast (100-130K) as Sprint's "PCS Vision" wireless service (50-70K). I have written up a few comments on my experiences with the services. What data rates are others getting with Edge? I rarely get the advertised faster speeds."
Ok... I put the AOL CD in my computer but they didn't include a wireless wire. How do I connect to teh intarweb?
Trolling is a art,
What I'd like is a reasonably fast wireless service that is good enough to let VPN work over it. My boss has had a terrible time getting that working on his Sprint PCS connection.
I almost feel bad when he calls from Hawaii and he can't get access to our database from the beach chair.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
Just to clarify things, those speeds should be in Kilobits per second, not Kilobytes.
"K" refers to kilobits, not kilobytes. Speed measured in optimal circumstances, not all users may achieve similar results. Figures may include sum of up/download speeds. Weather may impact throughput. Excess ozone or solar flare activity may impact throughput. Figures are provided for information purposes only and do not constitite a contractual obligation or guarantee of any kind. User equipment may impact network throughput. Compatible with all compatible equipment, non-compatible equipment may cause performance degredation. Not for use outdoors. Not for use by minors. Not end-user serviceable: any attempt to reverse-engineer software or hardware internals is contrary to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DCMA) of 1999, sections 2b and 3a. May cause fatal electrocution. Not for indoor use. May not be exported to the following countries: Afghanistan through Zimbabwe. Not for use in Canada.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
My love affair with Vision ended about two weeks into the service. It's never been fast, its never worked reliably, and most important, I've never found it particularly useful.
Like a lot of products I have an early-adoptor's love affair with, it solves a problem I don't have. About the most useful thing I ever did with it was write a wap frontend for the nessus batch commandline so I could really impress the ladies. Turns out most ladies don't even know what nessus is. In a college town, I tell you!
For those of you that read Gartner, you'll note where Sprint falls on the fabled magic quadrent. Its a special quadrent reserved for those who had a great idea and then blew it. Can you guess which?
trustedworlds.net - gaming, security, and the gunk that lives in between
Is this surprising? Have you EVER gotten the advertised specs from your high tech products? Have you ever gotten 56K from a 56K modem? Have you ever gotten 2Mbps from a DSL provider? Have you ever gotten 17" viewable from your 17" monitor? Have you ever gotten 20GB from your 20GB hard drive?
The advertised specs are almost always inflated and unattainable. But, the sad thing is that consumers continue to allow the vendors to get away with it.
I'm paying $8/mo for 1MB of GMRS data transfer. That's barely a few web pages these days. Each extra KILOBYTE is something like EIGHT cents.
Frankly, GMRS is plenty fast enough for me; it's just way, way, WAY too expensive. It's stupid, because the data rates pale in comparison to a voice call, and they're come+go...you'd think much cheaper for them to handle.
Of course, this is all because AT&T and every other provider seems obsessed with cameraphones. I don't know a single person in my office who has a cameraphone, nor a single person that wants one. They're useless toys, but because the wireless companies are fixated on 'em, and they're giving 'em away, they've jacked up the costs on data transfer to the point that anyone trying to actually use the phone for real work can't afford it unless they're a billionaire.
When I talk with friends, they don't say "oh, i want a phone with a camera!" They say things like: a)better reception b)fits in pocket(the camera phones are pretty damn big) c)easy to hold+use d)good battery life(and a battery that will NOT be gone within a year), and so on. Bluetooth is getting up there among my coworkers. Anyone at the phone companies listening?
Please help metamoderate.
I pay an extra $10 for unlimited data services through my cell phone on Sprint. It's called "Vision" and it has been around for several years. The data minutes don't count against your regular cell minutes.
Overall, it works really well. It's not as slick as the PCMCIA card Sprint offers, but it works just as well, uses the exact same network & speeds, and even turns heads when they seem me surfing my laptop over my cell phone.
Wireless data rates are not unlike modem data rates, in that you're fairly unlikely to get the maximum speed unless conditions are optimal. In the case of a modem with, say, a maximum potential speed of 56k, that normally means being within a mile of your exchange on a good line (most of the time I get connect rates of 40-48kbps). In the case of packet data on a mobile network, your base station provides a fixed number of data "slots". Your phone can negotiate for up to the maximum number of slots it can handle at once (for example, in GPRS the Nokia 7650 handles 4 "down" slots and 1 "up" (or maybe 3/1). If your cell is busy, you may only get 3, 2 or even 1 "down" slot (this direction is the one which sends data to you, and so directly influences your experience of network "speed"). Also, data rates fall off as a reciprocal of the distance to the base-station. Combine these two factors and it's easy to see that you're fairly unlikely to achieve the maximum theoretical rate, no matter what the operator tells you :-) EDGE may work slightly differently (the previous relates to GPRS) but I suspect that the principal's the same.
It's too late for me to die young
Facts:
AT&T 100-130 Max 200 Kbps avail to 215 Million Customers.
Sprint 50-70 Max 144 Kbps avail to 230 Million Customers.
Verizon Wireless 60-80 Max 144 avail to 230 Million Customers.
Verizon Wireless' NationalAccess has average speeds of 60 - 80 kbps, peaks at 144 kbps and is available to nearly 230 million. BroadbandAccess,
Verizon Wireless's faster EVDO service at 300 - 500 kbps on average (2 Mb peak), is offered in the San Diego and Washington D.C. markets.
EDGE makes its debut after nearly two years' delay due to technology issues. With no evolution path, EDGE is seen as a stop gap before AT&T has to invest in yet another technology like WCDMA. In addition, EDGE does not improve voice capacity and due to deteriorating data speeds over great distances from the base station, requires greater base station density thus adding to AT&T network costs.
Neither Sprint or At&T wireless is in position to provide any broadband services past their initial offerings. Vzw will be expanding the market for EVDO in 2004 to other major cities (I hope Dallas) Also sprint and verizon's speeds are slower due to technology limits with the initial offerings but compared to CDPD which was most times at best 14.4 speeds it's a leap ahead. I would expect to see 10-100Mbit wireless within the next 5 years in larger cities to compete with landline DSL and Cable which both have limits well under 40Mbit.
It's easy... and sort of touched on in the article itself.
Instead of installing the Connection Manager from Sprint, call you need to do in is make a new PPP connection, and for the phone number, put in the #777.
This directs the base station at the cell site to direct the call to the PDSN and make a data connection. Then your phone acts just like a 70k modem. This will work in any OS that can make a PPP connection, no proprietary software needed.
I have T-Mobile "all you can eat" with the VPN option (public IP and no blocked ports). The plan is called "T-Mobile Unlimited Internet VPN" if you're curious. It costs $20 per month, and I get data rates comparable to a 56K modem connected at near full speed. I go through my Sony Ericsson T610 with bluetooth for the connection.