Slashdot Mirror


AT&T Won't Do In-Flight Wi-Fi After All

jfruh writes In-flight Wi-Fi services tend to be expensive and disappointingly slow. So when AT&T announced a few months ago that it was planning on getting into the business, with customer airlines being able to connect to AT&T's LTE network instead of slow satellite services, the industry shook. But now AT&T has announced that, upon further review, they're not going to bother.

35 comments

  1. AT&T is slipping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You think they would have at least bilked the government for a few billion in tax dollars for before not bothering to do anything.

    1. Re:AT&T is slipping by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      No, they will sue the government if it ever tries to compete

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:AT&T is slipping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, this is Murica, you don't mess with a corporations jernopoly.

  2. Same thing here in Europe by vikingpower · · Score: 3, Interesting

    LTE was touted as the Next Big Thing by telco providers. Not any more now. Telcos have become fairly conservative, technology-wise. Is that a worldwide trend ?

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Same thing here in Europe by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Less is more. Artificial scarcity = artificially inflated prices.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:Same thing here in Europe by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Here in the US (at least near a major city), LTE is last gen tech.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    3. Re:Same thing here in Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be conservative too, investment wise, if I had virtually no credible competition and got to sit back and collect rents either way.

    4. Re:Same thing here in Europe by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      Here in the US (at least near a major city), LTE is last gen tech.

      This. Now, with "XLTE" I can blow past my monthly data cap in 13 minutes of full speed downloading! The future has arrived.

    5. Re:Same thing here in Europe by slazzy · · Score: 1

      We're way ahead here, I can blow through my cap in about 45 seconds!

      --
      Website Just Down For Me? Find out
    6. Re:Same thing here in Europe by LoverOfJoy · · Score: 1

      We're way ahead here, I can blow through my cap in about 45 seconds!

      That's what she said?

    7. Re:Same thing here in Europe by Krojack · · Score: 1

      Here in the US (at least near a major city), LTE is last gen tech.

      This. Now, with "XLTE" I can blow past my monthly data cap in 13 minutes of full speed downloading! The future has arrived.

      I don't really even understand the point in XLTE anyways. I can pull 50mbit on my LTE. Why would anyone need faster over a cell phone?

      My speeds range from 15 to 65mbits. I would guess average around 20.

    8. Re:Same thing here in Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There exists a bank of IP addresses for all of the phones on the network NAT.
      As more devices go online there are two ways to keep the NAT working.
      Add more IP addresses, or reduce the time a device is actually using the IP addr.

    9. Re:Same thing here in Europe by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      Here in the US (at least near a major city), LTE is last gen tech.

      This. Now, with "XLTE" I can blow past my monthly data cap in 13 minutes of full speed downloading! The future has arrived.

      I don't really even understand the point in XLTE anyways. I can pull 50mbit on my LTE. Why would anyone need faster over a cell phone?

      My speeds range from 15 to 65mbits. I would guess average around 20.

      XLTE isn't really a thing, it's Verizon marketing-speak for extra bands of regular LTE spectrum with which they make data move really really fast. The difference is really noticeable, but only because most of their LTE markets are saturated and the extra bands are needed to maintain true LTE speeds.

  3. With customer airlines being able to connect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF is a customer airline?

    1. Re:With customer airlines being able to connect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An airline company that subscribes to AT&T's LTE network for airlines.

      I imagine that the airlines would then sell in-flight access the service to their customers (you know, "passengers").

  4. AT&T by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

    In-flight Wi-Fi services tend to be expensive and disappointingly slow

    Gee, AT&T would have fit right in then. Nobody does crappy, overpriced internet service like them.

    Maybe Comcast will do in-flight wifi instead?

    1. Re:AT&T by operator_error · · Score: 2

      Sounds like a classic FUD move, by a huge player with vested interests in the Dumb Pipe market.

    2. Re:AT&T by OhSoLaMeow · · Score: 2

      Maybe Comcast will do in-flight wifi instead?

      The cable costs alone would be prohibitive.

      --
      They can take my LifeAlert pendant when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
    3. Re:AT&T by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

      Maybe Comcast will do in-flight wifi instead?

      The cable costs alone would be prohibitive.

      It would bring a whole new meaning to the term "tethering".

    4. Re: AT&T by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      flagged for excess entertainment

  5. AT&T? Effort? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No wonder they're running nigh-constant ads about how they're "improving their network."

  6. I don't know that I'd call it expensive and slow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes it's slow, but it's usable as long as it's over $5 (seems to be the right price to limit demand). I consider $8 for a 5 hours not a terrible price at all, about 5% of a cheap tick, or 2% of a last minute one, for immense improvement of flight quality. Though when it used to be $5 on southwest, I always marveled they made it not worth the five dollars, the recent price increase brings it in line with others.

  7. Not going to bother by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    But they will find the money to sue the government if it ever tries to provide the service.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  8. LTE speed limit by Smerta · · Score: 2

    I don't know exactly how this would have worked anyway.

    It's been a while since I worked on LTE (call processing, not RF or hardware or even baseband), but I thought that with UTRAN there was a 350 km/h "speed limit" (perhaps up to 500 km/h under certain circumstances) with motion relative to the base station.

    (Now that I spent 5 seconds thinking about it, I suppose the sine of the angle (from base station to aircraft, relative to vertical) would reduce the velocity that the plane was moving away from the base station... I think?)

    I'm sure there are many other effects such as transmit power, interference, fading & multipath, etc. Sheesh I'm getting rusty...

    1. Re:LTE speed limit by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      It's been a while since I worked on LTE (call processing, not RF or hardware or even baseband), but I thought that with UTRAN there was a 350 km/h "speed limit" (perhaps up to 500 km/h under certain circumstances) with motion relative to the base station.

      Yeah, and that's about half the cruising sped of a modern aircraft. They would probably have to use a modified LTE with wider guard bands on either side of the expected frequency range, and they'd probably need to modify the radio firmware on both ends to do so, at which point it wouldn't technically still be LTE, but some variant thereof. Of course, they could enable that mode only when talking to aircraft, so it wouldn't be dramatically reducing the spectrum for everyone.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  9. Re:I don't know that I'd call it expensive and slo by jeffmeden · · Score: 2

    Yes it's slow, but it's usable as long as it's over $5 (seems to be the right price to limit demand). I consider $8 for a 5 hours not a terrible price at all, about 5% of a cheap tick, or 2% of a last minute one, for immense improvement of flight quality. Though when it used to be $5 on southwest, I always marveled they made it not worth the five dollars, the recent price increase brings it in line with others.

    It used to be worth it, until they made the seats so damn close together that laptop use is excruciating unless you're in first class. Heaven forbid the sod in front of you reclines his seat, in which case there literally isn't room for the laptop to fully open unless you suck your chest in. Nah, I would rather get my work done in the relative comfort of the terminal, and use the in flight time for catching up on podcasts or reading.

  10. It was staged rhetoric.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AT&T made the announcement to get some kind of perk, somewhere.

    Once they received the perk, they dropped the plan.

    End of story..

    Sort of like the guy who became head of a major credit card firm, built a new facility in Florida for all the tax benefits, hiring a bunch of people in Florida to clench the multi-year, multi-million tax credit, then off-shored all the jobs to an Indian Outsourcing company that he either owned out-right or was a majority stake holder.
    He received his huge golden parachute from the CC company, bonuses for stealing tax payers dollars in FL, as well as huge bonuses from the Off-shoring company in India as well.
    End result? Asshole got richer, CC company got screwed by switching to incompetent cheats that don't know enough to graduate American High Schools without thugs and bullies to force the teachers to pass them and Florida was bilked for millions of dollars in tax revenue.

  11. In the US, for AT&T by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comment directed at AT&T in the US, not all of Europe

  12. Re: I don't know that I'd call it expensive and sl by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    I meant worth it as entertainment (op here, I haven't figured out how to post a too level comment on the mobile site, and the main site doesn't login after typing). There's definitely not enough space to do work, but for fucking around in places such as this on a tablet or a phone it's great.

    By the time you're allowed to take your laptop out, you practically need to put it away anyway.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  13. inflight wifi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i actually had a pretty good experience on a recent Delta flight from EWR to JAX -- sure you can't use Netflix or FaceTime -- but everything else I was doing was pretty decent.

  14. Re: I don't know that I'd call it expensive and sl by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    By the time you're allowed to take your laptop out, you practically need to put it away anyway.

    None of my flights are that quick. I'm driving if the travel distance is that short.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  15. Ob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And nothing of value was lost.

  16. Re: I don't know that I'd call it expensive and sl by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    I found my cross country trips (with change in Denver) had a lot of dead time between take-off to smooth enough air for a laptop and landing.

    I am a definite 12 hours or less drive person though, because I can pack sloppy.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  17. Re: I don't know that I'd call it expensive and sl by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    Also, the airplane internet is too lame to work on, even when it's well worth it, if I'm going to do work, it would have to be local, or just emailing.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg