Slashdot Mirror
T-Mobile Releases New Card, Outlaws VoIP and IM
An anonymous reader writes "T-Mobile has launched a new 3G data card in the UK, and banned users from using it for VoIP or instant messaging applications." From the article: "Lock cast doubt on the sustainable viability of a mobile operator banning VoIP from its network. 'I think that eventually, if there's customer demand for this, it will happen," Lock said. "Other organizations will come along allowing VoIP. Who do you think is going to win?'"
Such high speeds would seem to make the new data card ideal for applications such as Internet telephony and instant messaging.
I have a feeling that 7mbps is a tad overkill for instant messanging.
First of all, the summary failed to mention this is a flat-rate plan, and it's currently on internal trial. So this gives possibilities of a data-usage plan which allows VoIP, or when the service finally rolls out, the company will simply drop this restriction if the trial indicates a negative support.
Please stop entering code 2,2,7,6,6,4
A ban on IM alone will ensure that no one uses their product. I think that I am currently the only person in the US who isn't on AIM/MSN/Yahoo/IRC. I would love to be able to listen to their customer support calls: "C: AIM isn't working. S: We don't support AIM. C: We seem to have a bad connection, you don't what?!" Do they have their own private IM service they are planning on offering?
Philosophy.
cheap local government-backed citywide wifi will win
you don't make money as a telephone carrier by allowing people to have telephone conversations without paying you. you don't make money going form a 0.99/ min model to a 39.99/ mo model. so you don't let them use voip
so you drive your customers to wifi
the customer is always right, and the customer has discovered he can pay less
who wants to make the next must-have killer gadget? who wants to make the next must-have ipod?
you, whomever you are, who makes a small, sexy, cheap voip via wifi phone wins that distinction and that wad of cash
gentleman, start your engines, the race is on
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I currently use Agile Messenger for IM on my t-mobile GSM phone (in the U.S.) -- banning that would suck, and using SMS to send IM msgs is the most braindead stupid idea ever, well, except if each one sent costs money and you are a mobile operator.
I can understand banning VOIP. Not that everybody's going to like it, but it's at least rational. They're in the business of providing telephone service, after all. But I can't even imagine being online without having IM service running in the background, it's so central to how I work now. Why would you provide internet service and then ban that? Just because you get $.10 a text message, which nobody is going to be sending and receiving with a laptop anyway?
It seems likely that a large percentage of the people who get this service will end up violating the agreement without even thinking about it, just because it's habit.
Can someone explain this to me??? I read the whole article and I'm still not sure what super-3G is... is it an unlimited-use wireless broadband service? That's my best guess from the article but I'm still not sure... Can someone clue me in?
I'm assuming T-mobile doesn't want to allow IM/VoIP because that cuts into their mobile phone business. Encrypted traffic, anyone?
My bicyles
TMobile says that they are doing this for business reasons up front. That's much better than inventing some legalistic bs about how blocking IM is a vital part of network security and war on terror.
I would like to be the first one to say this:
*** Screw you, T-Mobile! ***
I do whatever I want with my hardware. I won't let a company dictate terms to me. Period. I will either find some competitor of yours, or I will hack my way through your restrictions, thumb my nose at you, and help others do the same.
I am not alone in this. Ignore these sentiments at your peril.
Since the telephone cash cow has died, I feel like the telecoms aren't coming around. This is great news! They still get to charge you for the connection, usually at a higher price, while someone else provides the service!
More money and less work doesn't seem like it's enough for T-Mobile or Verizon. They want more. They want the right to prevent competition and continue charging customers for services that are completely free on today's Internet. This is so 1990's. I haven't heard an idea this bad since Beenz.
because all those "cell companies" in the UK simply resell T-mobiles networks (Virgin Mobile/CarphoneW etc etc) they are known as "Virtual Mobile Network Providers" virtual as in they dont own anything except a room full of salespeople, T-Mobile own towers, real bricks and mortar infrastructure, and they also have the largest network which leaves Vodaphone and Orange and i doubt they will bend over if there is cash to be made
the UK cell market is an oligolopy due to there are only so many places to put the towers and nobody wants a cell tower near them (NIMBY)
Well as long as ssh isn't blocked they'll never know someone isn't using an IM/IRC client (thanks to naim/irssi/screen on a remote server).
I am interested in the cards that tmobile has to offer for laptops. I want an expresscard for my macbook pro. I have the sidekick and love it and would hate to have a mobile phone provider and a mobile data provider.
They currently have an older pcmcia style card, but I have seen nothing about the next generation of cards. I would have thought enough vendors have the newer, faster standard on their laptops (mostly more professional level laptops) that the datacom people would follow suit.
-I just work here... how am I supposed to know?
The point of cards like this from the standpoint of the cell companies, is to enable business workers. They won't get away with outlawing VPN connections, and thus my own use of VoIP would simply transit the VPN. FOK THEM.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
At 2.5x less than the market rate for such services, I'll subscribe and then tunnel my traffic via OpenVPN.
when you could only get cell phone reception in midtown manhattan, and cable in rural pennsylvania
networks based on new technology, if it is superior, only grows
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
maybe i don't understand the issue, but i see it like this: if you're using their phone, you're presumably paying them for IP services on that device, right? so even though voip is a "conflict" for them, you're still paying through the teeth for high-bandwidth IP functionality on the phone, right? so they'd still make money
or is there something i'm missing?
When you don't want to offer a service your customer wants, how do you pull that stunt off? By making sure nobody offers it.
Over here, we pay by the minute. For cell as well as for landline. Why? Because no Telco ever offered a flat phone fee. Would we buy it? You bet. But you can only buy what is offered.
No Telco will offer VoIP or IMs. That's where their money comes from, phone and SMS services. Allowing VoIP or IM on a flat data connection would kill their main source of income.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
it is the death of american productivity and economic growth if shortsighted entrenched corporate interests are allowed to squash innovation with armies of lawyers
then the sun will set on the usa, defeated not from without by terrorism, but defeated from within by rapacious greed consuming american ingenuity and therefore economic growth
you know the telcos, riaa, mpaa, and cable companies would squash arpanet in the 1970s if they saw where we were going
i'll say that again: if it were up to entrenched corporate interests, there would be no internet
entrenched corporate interests would rather no more technological progress happen
it messes with their entrenched business models
god forbid uncertainty and risk enter their accounting sheets
no, we should all give up progress so there is no uncertainty in large corporation's financial outlook, right?
they are working hard to squash innovation, and given enough time and pressure, they might succeeed
and then it is good morning india and china, new captains of industry, with more pragmatic approaches to ip law and technological innovation
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Radio bandwidth is limited, and the fantastic speeds of 3G can't overcome nature.
Even if a monetary (price-based) solution is rejected nevertheless in one form or another we will pay for the privilege of the limited slice of air that is available and that we desire.
They are also going out of busness becose they ban users to use something they may want to use (IM and VOIP).
It won't put them out of business if all the other cartel members that provide mobile phone service in the same geographic area impose the same ban. It's the same way that the lockout chip business model on Nintendo consoles doesn't put Nintendo out of business when Sony and Microsoft do the same thing in their consoles.
I couldn't think of a better subject line, but that about sums it up. Banning VoIP is one thing, but banning IM? That is a big tool in enterprise communications!
I wonder how they're gonna catch you using those apps anyway... there must be a few people with no social life watching over you...
Get Less. :)
Its like Locks or DRM.
Then can never ever stop a dedicated person from doing that. But it does stop the majority of "joe nextdoor" users from doing it.
They have been giving people network locked Cell phones. Everyone knows its possible to unlock them. However few take the pain to do so. Thats what they want. I bet they never ever even thot about 100% compliance.
I believe that wants to be "bated".
Now a cat which just ate cheese might have baited breath.
How long until a carrier (either existing or new) comes along and simply sells raw mobile IP service...nothing else. They could sell devices to be used on it (VoIP capable phones, cards, etc.) if they like, but in essence they're just an ISP of sorts. If you want voice, buy Vonage. If you just want e-mail/web...you've got it. Plain vanilla commodity mobile IP. That's what I want. T-Mobile was (of those I've used) the closest to that, but it sounds like they're moving in the wrong direction now. Sigh.
E
...but it is THEIR network. Just remember who needs who here.
"Lock said. "Other organizations will come along allowing VoIP. Who do you think is going to win?'"
I'm guessing it will be the one with the best marketing campaign.
Oh an Anonymous Coward. I'm sure T-mobile are quaking in their boots right now.
It's their network, they can apply all the restrictions they like. You don't like it? Go elsewhere.
Deleted
The way it works in the states with T-Mo is that you have SMS which allows you to use SMS or AIM only, at least on my phone. Then there's T-Zones, which comes in two flavors. There's one where you pay an exorbitant amount per megabyte, and only get up to a few megs. Then for $30, you get GPRS (woo hoo, max of ~41kbps) plus access to any T-Mo wifi hotspot, which includes starbucks and kinko's. Unlimited text is $10 on a family plan for everyone on the plan, don't know if that offer has been disco'd or not yet, but I just got it. However I'm on my ex's phone plan right now, so I probably won't have it soon... she's giving me a hard time again. Pretty sure it's $10 on an individual plan, too. 200 messages costs $3 or $4, something like that.
T-Mo used to offer unlimited GPRS for $20, or a data-only plan for $25, but I guess they decided they needed to sell hotspot access, in which I am not particularly interested. If I need to make a high speed download I'm not going to use my phone to locate a T-Mo hotspot and drive there, unless I know I'm close to one anyway. I'm going to fire up netstumbler and find the nearest open AP with parking next, and sit in my car for a bit.
Looks like my info on T-zones is out of date, though i'll double check the site. My phone is telling me $5.99 for some unlimited access "T-MobileWeb" plan, but it's too vague to know exactly what it is. In fact, that's one reason I've not bothered to switch plans... they have clear titles but the descriptions are too vague and what I presently enjoy works.
Regarding AIM only though... I lost my cheepo Nokia and replaced it with another which wasn't pre-set for MSN/ICQ/Yahoo, but lucky for me I can plop in the GPRS address and the text bearer ID number and poof, feature enabled.
MSN settings don't seem to work for me, but yahoo and icq on the other hand work just fine.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
i can see how they can block ports to the AIM and other messenger clients, but what about the java (or whatever) web-based AIM Express?
I have no clue what I'm talking about in this realm of technology, but knowing VoIP and IM, perhaps T-Mobile is aware of their shortcoming on realtime application support over their new G3 data network?
But overall, doesn't wireless companies make most money off business users making ridiculous amount of calls and charging them with surcharges and what not? VoIP would definietly cut them off from the cash cow?
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
I generally like T-Mobile. Unlike Verizon, they don't hobble the BlueTooth on their phones. I can upload and download files to my computer without using the network. I can take all the MP3s on my computer and use them for ring tones. I can use my phone to transfer files. Most importantly, I can sync my cellphone with the phonebook on my computer. Verizon makes all sorts of excuses why they can't let you connect your BlueTooth phone directly to your computer, but it mainly has to do with selling ringtones and charging you for sending pictures back and forth between your phone and your computer.
Unlike ATT/Cingular, T-Mobile also haven't changed my terms of service multiple times without telling me, "extended" my contract without telling me, or charged me for things that are suppose to be included in my service. Last time I had ATT, they suddenly decided that my house was located in a "roaming" area and charged me 50 cents per minute for using my cellphone.
At least T-Mobile is being pretty up front about the whole thing -- not allowing IM and VOIP is strictly a business decision. They've concluded that most business users aren't heavy users of IM and VOIP, and by not offering these services, they can prevent non-business users from signing up. I bet its more to make sure they don't oversubscribe the network more than anything else. Allowing VOIP and IM would probably more than double the number of people who'd want to sign up.
I also find hope that T-Moble says this is not necessarily a permanent decision. If their customers demand it, they'll open up the service to VOIP and IM. I bet you they do this with in 12 to 18 months. Once the service gets going, and they increase the available bandwidth, they'll start to welcome non-business users.
http://webmessenger.msn.com/
:)
Uses standard HTTP over port 80.
Lets see them block that
K Man
Just wondering...has 3G fixed the horrid latency on mobile networks? Almost any mobile network i have used has pretty bad latency which i would imagine would make VoIP a moot point anyways. Going to be a very annoying converstaion in VoIP with 200msec+ latency.
The $6.99 plan is quite useful. It gives you unlimited access to all data services on your phone, and lets you tether to your phone to use GPRS. The "catch" is that you can "only check e-mail" while tethered. Of course, with a SOCKS proxy running on port 110 in my office, it's basically unlimited Internet. Very helpful when you're at a coffee shop and want to surf, but don't want to pay $100/hr or whatever hotspots charge these days :)
My other car is first.
I see no reason why companies should refuse to embrace new technology. Failure to do so will just result in loss of profits and market share. Simple as that.
[...]while the Japanese are unable to duplicate the American films by a flank assault, they can destroy it by this video cassette recorder.
I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.
Jack Valenti, at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee 04-12-1982
So, one must be mad thinking that the cellphone companies will roll over for VOIP and lose their voice cashcow. Have you actually looked at how much they charge? $0.75/min for an international phonecall that costs $0.05 (PC-to-Phone, from Deltathree in my case). Considering it costs cell companies maybe all of $0.02, if that, to actually carry my call (which they ALSO do over the internet fiber, with a lossy compression, and not over the analog wire like the phone companies)
The companies are not going to adopt new technology when they are already making good proffits, they never have and never will.
Plenty of examples:
1) Europeans sticking to horses & wind sailing (until a whole new country, America, invented the steam-boat, the steam-engine/railroads, the radio, the light-buld, and the airplane
2) T. Edison, a DC power tycoon, squashing N. Tesla's AC until he got bitchslaped by competition
3) film industry decrying VCR in the 1980's
4) Apple getting cozy with their market share in the early 90's and cutting R&D,
5) oil companies in the 2000's squashing alternative fuel research
Why do people want to use VOIP to emulate a phone, when the phone has a built in phone? And why would they want to use an IM service when the phone has it built in?
Sounds like somebody's prices aren't very competitive.
The $6.99 plan is quite useful. It gives you unlimited access to all data services on your phone, and lets you tether to your phone to use GPRS. The "catch" is that you can "only check e-mail" while tethered. Of course, with a SOCKS proxy running on port 110 in my office, it's basically unlimited Internet. Very helpful when you're at a coffee shop and want to surf, but don't want to pay $100/hr or whatever hotspots charge these days :)
That's handy to know, though I don't know if for example it would let me run msn messanger on my phone over GPRS, or other Nokia 6820 net apps. I "imagine" it's limited but I honestly have no clue.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Surely any company using a VoIP solution has a VPN concentrator in their HQ. Remote workers connect via the VPN, encrypt traffic and do whatever their own company allows. As soon as those packets get wrapped in IPSec, T-Mobile can do nothing about it...
Now there's one hoopy frood who really knows where his towel is!
Why Verzion in the U.S. for $5 has unlimited SMS between Verizon customers. I know my daughter's bill for messages has dropped from $$$ per month to $5 and all her friends switched to Verizon to use this plan. I basically saved her allowance.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
The problem isn't whether or not they want to make money but what rules they don't want to follow to make that money. The government auctioned off spectrum without laying down any rules as to what has to be done with that spectrum. The trick now is to persuade others not to give the spectrum winners money if the spectrum owners break your rules.
...since King Canute tried to hold back the sea.
Sorry T-Mobile, the tide's a comin' in!
One of these days I'm moving to Theory - everything works there
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
2. It's a business plan. If you look at a regular "non-professional" plan then you'll notice that even more restrictive full fineprint says:
(emp. mine). Professional plan says nothing about "modem access for computers" (VPN) or downloads and such.
Given how much talking on the phone costs in UK I'd say it's very clear why they don't want to allow VOIP. Texting is not that expensive but still provides a nice revenue.
Hyperom.com
It would not -- if you want "real" internet access, as opposed to "email only" or "TMobile web" service, you need to ask for GPRS service as opposed to the TMobile Web service, and the cost is $30 as opposed to $6 per month or so.
I spent a while talking to some braindead rep at a TMobile store a while back about this. I kept telling her that I wanted internet access through my phone, and it took a while to pound through that I wanted more than just to be able to use that idiotically lame browser that's built into the phone, I wanted to connect my PC to my phone and use it as a modem for internet access, to everything on the internet. Needless to say, that costs more.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I propose a new class of near-instant messaging clients. They will act just like IM clients, but will have latencies imposed upon them by their ambient network conditions and the conditions of all the hops between the two end points in the chain.
What? How is this different from IM? Because the messaging ISN'T instantaneous SILLY! You've got to wait tens to hundreds of milliseconds for a message to get through.
Moreover, as protection against instant messaging, the user won't be able to see the message text until the person typing it out finishes and actually invokes a SEND action.
See! Foolproof!
Additionally, I propose a new protocol, EV-COIP (Encrypted Verbal-Communication Over IP)...
Oh yeah and one last thing I just have to get out of the way.
Fuck T-Mobile!
When are these crusty cock-knobs going to finally catch Clue #1?
The more you restrict your user base, the more you cut your user base!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I personally love tmobile. Unlike all the other US carriers they actually let you get stuff done with your phone. I have their unlimited data plan, and while its not high speed, tmobile lets me hook it up to my computer as a modem, and it works fine for ssh sessions and limited browsing when I'm on the road or not in a hot spot. It's only $20/mo for unlimited data, Verizon charges $60/mo for unlimited data, and then to use the phone as a modem they charge another $30.
I don't know how good actual "3G" is, is it better than verizon's evdo network? Is Verizon's evdo considered 3g or is it 2.5g?
My point is, VoIP doesn't work over the evdo network, latencies are just too high, and call quality is horrible, also, you can't do any QoS over the link.. basically unless actual 3G is a whole lot better than evdo, VoIP wouldn't work anyway, so the fact that they are "disallowing" it is like someone saying "Don't jump a car off a cliff" its just not a good idea.
Now, IM being outlawed is another story, but I use IM on my phone all the time in the US across their low speed plan... I think UK customers should get angry, but T-Mobile US seems much nicer, and is the best wireless carrier in the US as far as I'm concerned (been with Verizon, ATT, Cingular, Qwest, and Tmobile).
You should check out the opera mobile browser. It's much better than the built-in Nokia browser. Although, using your mobile as your modem to would of course be even nicer.
Didn't even know T-Mobile offered a GPRS plan.
Je ne parle pas francais.
A few people have suggested hiding voip and im in different protocols. The point isnt blocking private voip calls but rather voip services offered by their competitors.
Why don't they also prohibit talking about switching to a different carrier?
--
make install -not war
I wonder if they will consider in game taking and typing to be considered IM and VoIP.
If so, a lot of games will be rather annoyed.
I have the $6 plan and by editing some of the settings on my Razr I'm able to use Google Local and the Opera browser on my phone with no restrictions. It takes a little "hacking" but, especially with the Opera browser, it's a GREAT feature with a great price for unlimited data use. T-mobile is great with this feature enabled. A google search should bring up the appropriate info for enabling this stuff.
How many fulltime jobs can one man have?
The 2600 radio show, Off the Hook, regularly features a guy named Bernie S who calls into the show on his cell phone. They frequently discuss how voice quality of phones has dropped significantly as the cell phone networks went all digital and crammed as many conversations as they could into the smallest amount of bandwidth possible. Thus, like everyone else on a cell phone these days, Bernie's high-tech whiz-bang phone makes him sound like crap to everyone on the other end of the line.
Evidently, his phone is one of these that you can connect to your computer and get high-speed Internet access. One day, he called into the show via Skype and they discovered that when using VoIP through the phone's Internet connection, the voice quality was FAR better than when he just calls with the phone itself. (I imagine it wasn't any cheaper, though.)
Of course, after marveling at the voice quality, they went off into conspiracy theory land, but it makes you wonder what kind of service cell phone providers *could* be providing if they actually had an interest in providing any sort of quality to their customers.
You have to pay extra to get VPN data on a T-Mobile US phone.
The issue is deeper than that; its the fact that capitalism has failed. We should just cut our losses and put an end to this miserable system before we're really screwed.
Yes, let's jump out of the frying pan and into the fire (socialism, communism for example). Capitalism is not perfect, far from it actually. Considering all the alternatives that have been tried, capitalism is the most successful and still continues to be so.
You are right about one thing however, something has failed. It's the people that have failed. They've failed to give a damn about their future. Such attitudes of complacency will destroy a civilization regardless of the forms of governance that it embodies.
For freedom to succeed, we all must be ever vigilant!
Life is not for the lazy.
Think about it. The only limitation of VoIP at the moment is mobility - you need to have much more widespread wireless access & when you hit one of those wireless access points, you need to be able to contact a SIP registration gateway to confirm your presence.
However, in both cases, it is traditional ISPs that are in the best position to provide that infrastructure, the cellular phone companies won't even get a look in.
Personally, I long for the slow painful death of all the rip-off mobile phone companies - they've been able to price fix and overcharge us for mobile phone calls for far too long and now they realise their days are numbered.
Give it 5 to 10 years and T-Mobile, O2, Vodaphone, etc. will all be dead - and good riddance to them.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Networks will disable various features on the phone at their whim.
In the case of Bluetooth, one of the most common things to disable is the OBEX (object exchange) protocol, which prevents standard computer drivers from exchanging files with the phone, or other profiles like the modem profile, the headset profile, etc.
This ties you into using the provider-supplied software, which is often a crippleware "lite" piece of crap ; surprise, you can upgrade it for *only $39.99*!
So having a Bluetooth transceiver in your phone is not necessarily synonymous with having Bluetooth features, depending on your provider.
Hey, it's almost enough bandwidth to start carrying Net Neutrality rants - if anybody pays attention, they'll get spanked pretty fast, and deservedly so.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
But with IM, it's not only just as obvious that it's about losing the revenue from 10-cent SMS messages, but the application is very tolerant of delay and the performance impact is very very low. If you're using this in a PC, you could theoretically be typing at 100 wpm, which would be 100 baud for your payload plus lots of IP overhead, with lots of gaps for think time. How often does an average IM session actually transmit? If it's every 20 characters (probably low), that's 2/3 overhead so 300 baud and 0.5 pps; if it's every 60 characters, that's 40% overhead so 166 baud and 0.166 pps. If you're having an average teenager conversation, maybe you're transmitting after fewer characters, but with more "think" time in between (for whatever definition of "think" applies to kids these days...) "like, hey" "lol" "brb" "l8tr d00d" and it's still not more than a packet every couple of seconds.
If you're really using the IM system as a P2P file sharing system, that's going to be heavier usage, but it's pretty apparently about those cell minutes and SMS Texts.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Second, aside from what the _standards_ say, calls don't become "functionally useless" above 150ms - just a bit slower, and if they're much slower you might not want to use that cheap speakerphone. Back in the old days, when we used to walk 20 miles barefoot to the schoolhouse uphill both ways, satellite was the standard way to talk across oceans and sometimes even within the same continent, and they were ok. Not great, and sometimes annoying, but ok.
Direct-dialed calls from California to Tennessee almost certainly *are* carried on POTS, though calling-card calls to India usually aren't. POTS isn't just analog-on-copper - the call gets digitized to 64kbps PCM at your first telco office, switched through circuit-switches, and carried on T1 lines (1.5 Mbps synchronous channelized stuff). The T1s get muxed together onto fiber, of course, and the fiber's usually DWDM stuff that puts 16-64 2.5-10Gbps channels on each pair, but with the major US telco carriers, most of the calls are still old-school as far as switching goes. LA to Nashville is about 2000 road-miles, so if you get a good fiber route it should be about 20ms one-way.
That'll be changing a lot within the next 5 years - the old phone switches are becoming obsolete, and soft-switch technology is getting a lot cheaper, and it'll be the costs of switches (including parts and labor) that drives a lot of the change - fiber bandwidth is so cheap that it's cheaper to haul intra-US calls uncompressed compared to deploying telco quantities of compression equipment. Another big driver is mobile phones, since they already use a compressed-voice infrastructure.
International's a lot different - bandwidth across oceans is expensive, so it's worth paying to compress the voice, especially if you either don't use IP or use trunked compression protocols that don't need to waste 40 bytes of IP/UDP/RTP header on a 10-byte voice sample. Those 1 cent calls to Asia are doing a lot of that.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
I imagine that they're well aware of the loophole but aren't doing anything about it for some reason. Maybe trying to keep people who wouldn't pay for their $30 service anyway happy.
it's wonderfully marketed as "unlimited" but comes with a sneaky fair use policy that effectively caps you to 2gb per month... let me find my dictionary definition of unlimited....!
Are the offereing broadband DATA or not ? The thing that is most unbeliveable about all this ? If they can provide 7mbs broadband service at a flat fee then they can provide phone plans for less than they charge now. IE they are offering that service ON TOP of the phone plan.
Phone companies, even cell phone companies, are rapidly moving into RIAA territory for trying to protect a business model that is rapidly becoming out moded. They do not have a right to make money selling limited minutes of voice communication or 10 cents a msg txting. Ah well sooner or later the market will iron this absurdity out. But in the long run they would be better off if they would just price their data plan accordingly and go ahead and do what Landlines did a long time ago and provide all you can eat voice. Could you imagine if T-mobile simply charged say 50 a month for access to its network for all you could eat call or data purposes and that was it? How many folks would that pull in ?
If they have no problem with you streaming video at high rates (presumeably you can use you 7mbs for something) then they should have no problem with voice. And IM service is a basic necessity. I mean hell... they going to ban e-mail ? Or access to web mail next ? I forsee web chat clients proliferating for a while again in the future. I mean sheesh... next thing you know they will say you can't use your data connection period because it allows circumvention of making calls or txts via their service.
Once again.... this is like the toll booth in the prarie in Blazing saddles... UTTER MADNESS.
I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
Here we have yet another pipeline owner trying to control what data can flow through their pipes.
This is just like the other pipeline owners who are trying to control the speed of different things passing through their pipes and for a fee you get better speed.
The pipeline owners need to get wise really quick to the fact that we are paying them for only one thing - a pipe of some certain size. They have no business whatsoever doing anything to what is flowing through that pipe.
If they can't figure it out, we are going to need government intervention to help them figure it out.
Steve
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
I've been on the lookout for a mobile data card in the UK ever since using a Verizon EVDO card in the US; it saved our arses at ETech when the network went down on the last day, and we had to demo our web service.
Up until now all the pricing for mobile data's been around 70 quid/month for 200MB, which is far enough from flat rate to make me worried about using it repeatedly. However, this is 20 quid for 2 gig, and that's fantastic. 20 quid is more than worthwhile insurance if I have to give even one demo a month - the fact that I can setup and get going with no futzing with local networks is a major boon.
When I bought it they said I could use it for anything. I may pop over the road at lunchtime and give the T-Mobsters a grilling about these restrictions. Mind you, I really can't see how they'll enforce this; so many people have their IM client set to start automatically on boot and sign-on on network connection that it's going to be a major pain, and T-Mob deserve all the problems they get if they think they can enforce it.
good-resolution videoconferencing could burn that much bandwidth
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
T-Mobile is a division of Deutsche Telekom AG, a telco giant that is notorious in Europe for its poor service. Death and destruction to all former state-owned conglomerates! (BT, Telefónica, TeliaSonera, Deutsche Telekom, France Télécom etc.)
Beauty is in the beholder of the eye.
The latency on this network will be so bad that VoIP won't work worth a crap anyway. Why give yourself the negative press?
Those evil greedy bastards already got your shift key. And period. Corporate bastards.
I am not a crackpot.
Interesting. I use a Motorola, however, so I'm not sure what the story is on installing additional software on it.
At any rate, I've never been particularly interested in using the Internet, in any fashion, from my cell phone. I suppose maybe if I had it I'd find ways to use it, but I just don't have the desire to do google searches or look up sports scores while on the subway or in my car, and those are basically the only times that I'm more than twenty feet away from a computer in a typical day, and where it wouldn't be more desirable to pop open a laptop.
What interested me about GPRS was that I could plug the cellphone into my computer and get regular internet access on my laptop while travelling (I do a fair amount of long-distance train travel) -- so I could do email, access the corporate VPN, and do instant messenging with a full-size keyboard.
TMobile is pretty bad about advertising the GPRS service, but they do have it, as evidenced by the PCMCIA cards that they will happily sell you (along with a dedicated service plan) if you say you want cellular internet from your laptop. Basically I just wanted that service, but without the hassle or expense of buying a dedicated card for the laptop (with it's own SIM/phone number). I just wanted it on my regular phone, and then connect it to my computer via a cable or Bluetooth to get internet access.
They don't do a good job about advertising the GPRS addon plans, but they do exist. Pity it's kinda slow compared to Verizon's offerings, but I wouldn't go back to Verizon if they were selling $5 bills for $3.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Use proxy and encrypt (and/or hide) protocol in other data. Communicate privately with your Gaim/IM located at home desktop machine, send messages over it or receive them on your mobile device.
Let the bloody telco try stopping you.
Currently lots of people are uneducated to use IM or VOIP even at home, telcos want it to remain that way by upholding "hard-to-do" status of mobile IM/VoIP. We need a killer (mobile) application which will put an end to their income.
In Portugal we have TMN, which has around 50% market share, and they also lunched a new service with 1.8Mbs through your phone. According to their page, this service does not allow the use of VOIP.
I sent them an e-mail asking way, but they reply was "this service does not allow use of VOIP", i.e., they did not answer my question, just sent my question back as a statement.
1) Sign up for new service with T-Mobile
2) Choose the most valuable phone they offer for "free" with your service plan.
3) Sell that phone on eBay (unlock first if phone is locked to service provider).
4) Use money made on eBay sale to buy the phone you *really* want, factory unlocked.
5) Pop SIM card into your new phone and you're good to go.
I did this with T-Mobile and it worked great. I really liked T-Mobile's coverage and plans/pricing, but they phones they offered with Bluetooth sucked.
I wanted a Motorola flip-phone that was compatible with Mac OS X's Address Book and iCal programs so I could Bluetooth-sync back and forth. I decided the V620 was the best choice, so I ordered an "unbranded, factory unlocked" one from some cell phone store (NOT from NY, never do that).
When my nice, free Nokia phone arrived from T-Mobile, I promptly unlocked it (meaning it could now be used with any GSM network that runs on the phone's 3 frequencies) and sold it on eBay. Slipped SIM card into my V620 and BAM, it just worked. I think all I had to do was program in T-Mobile's voicemail number, as the phone didn't know it by default. The thing works like a charm, and I use OBEX all the time.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
I required yahoo messnger at my company because it was the only client that would connect through port 80, effectively circumventing our firewalls.
To use, go to preferences->Connection->Firewall with no proxies.
Hey T-Mobile, good luck stopping that.
SMS is only used for SMS. When you are GPRS attatched and logged into AIM, Yahoo, ICQ, etc you are connected to whatever services server, not to an SMS box. You make it sound like they are doing some kind of relay.
SMS is meant for one way communication and has a limited text length not to mention it isn't always instant.
If you are logged into any IM on your TMO phone your GPRS attatched and it will swap over if you get a phone call and then swap back.
Trust me, I work on the network.
hey, on the other hand this means:
;)
more bandwith to download pirated copies of music and movies...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
No real reason to reply to this, except that you're not really absolutely right. Probably to most places in the world, you won't get delays on your phone calls, but try calling Central Asia. I'd guess that most developing nations in far-away places have a pretty bad delay, if the call can be conneted at all.
Here, at least, 1-2 second delays are the best you can do.
(I often call and am called from North America)
Another FYI - some places route all of their internet traffic over one or two sloowwww links... imagine sharing a dsl line with a few thousand other browsers. (Aggressive caching is the answer... but of course the situation in these countries is changing all the time.)