Slashdot Mirror


Cellphone Start-Ups Handle Calls With Wi-Fi

HughPickens.com writes Brian Chen writes in the NYT that two companies, Republic Wireless and FreedomPop, that reduce cellphone costs by relying on strategically placed Wi-Fi routers are at the forefront of a tantalizing communications concept that has proved hard to produce on a big scale, The concept championed by the two little companies in their nationwide services is surprisingly simple. They offer services that rely primarily on Wi-Fi networks, and in areas without Wi-Fi, customers can pull a signal from regular cell towers. "Wi-Fi first is a massive disrupter to the current cost structure of the industry," says Stephen Stokols. "That's going to be a big shock to the carriers." For $5 a month, customers of Republic Wireless can make calls or connect to the Internet solely over Wi-Fi. For $10 a month, they can use both Wi-Fi and a cellular connection from Sprint in Republic's most popular option. Republic Wireless's parent company, Bandwidth.com, a telecommunications provider with about 400 employees, developed a technique to move calls seamlessly between different Wi-Fi networks and cell towers. "You can't pretend these companies are major players by any stretch. But I think their real importance is proof of concept," says Craig Moffett. "They demonstrate just how disruptive a Wi-Fi-first operator can be, and just how much cost they can take out."

In major cities, the Wi-Fi-first network makes sense. People use smartphones frequently while sitting around their offices and apartments, and Wi-Fi can handle the job just fine. But once people start moving around, it is not so simple. The benefit of a cell service is that your phone can switch among multiple towers while you are on the go which wi-fi is not designed to handle. Google may be experimenting with a hybrid approach similar to the small companies'. A person briefed on Google's plans, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the conversations were private, says the company wants to make use of the fiber network it has installed in various cities to create an enormous network of Wi-Fi connections that phones could use to place calls and use apps over the Internet. In areas out of reach, Google's network would switch over to cell towers leased by T-Mobile USA and Sprint. Still many wonder if even the biggest companies could make a Wi-Fi-based phone network work. "There are just so many places where Wi-Fi doesn't reach," says Jan Dawson "and the quality of Wi-Fi that you can find is often subpar."

73 comments

  1. Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I might have to pick up a recent copy of 2600 to find out what their default password scheme is

    1. Re:Hmmm... by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      ...and what if they use certificates?

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
  2. Ricochet network from way back. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once it's cooking then why not car-to car? Or phone to phone? Etc?

    Who would need a carrier?

    1. Re:Ricochet network from way back. by wooferhound · · Score: 1

      I would, If I wanted to talk while driving on the interstate . . .

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    2. Re:Ricochet network from way back. by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      Phone to phone is theoretically feasible if a mechanism exists to locate the other phone on the Internet, and a mechanism exists to reach it. If one or both phones is behind a NAT gateway (which the probably will both be), then you kind of need the carrier as a rendezvous point.

      IPV6 may change the formula a little here, but I am not sure.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
  3. Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Informative

    Republic Wireless's parent company, Bandwidth.com, a telecommunications provider with about 400 employees, developed a technique to move calls seamlessly between different Wi-Fi networks and cell towers.

    That's been around forever. T-Mobile had this back in 2006 or 2007. It's called Generic Access Network. I played around with it back in the day when T-Mobile gave you unlimited calling if you subscribed to this, they even had a specially branded version of the WRT-54GL called the WRT-54TM, which I still have. It apparently did some power saving stuff that the standard WRT54GL didn't implement at the time,ich I'm just standard WMM; it makes for a nice dd-wrt router, since the T-Mobile model had more memory than the standard WRT-54GL, supposedly they requested that so they could add more features down the line. Ultimately they abandoned the concept of free wi-fi calling, there were only three phones that supported it back in the day, though it's my understanding that they still use the same technology so their customers can place calls while traveling aboard without paying roaming rates.

    Anyway, I digress. This reeks of a press release that was issued to generate buzz and stock purchases. Is this what /. has come to? There's nothing new here. These ideas were discussed in the early 2000s and largely moved away from. Voice minutes aren't a significant expense for cellular carriers these days.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    1. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

      I have a T-Mobile phone with Wi-Fi calling; it keeps turning the feature on by itself; and it sucks with dropped calls continually.

    2. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by Shakrai · · Score: 2

      I had the Nokia flip phone that implemented it back in 2006-2007. The Wi-Fi calling worked great in my experience, seamless handoff back and forth with the macro cellular network; it would even roam between different APs (my employer needed four APs to cover our entire building) without dropping calls. The problem was that Nokia was prone to crashing for other reasons, even with the Wi-Fi turned off, it had very buggy software and I eventually tired of it shutting down for no reason. They had two other phones that supported it, one of them a Blackberry, but I never got around to experimenting with them.

      My favorite T-Mobile phone was the Motorola v195s; that thing had a radio in it that could hold the weakest signal without dropping calls (always a consideration for T-Mobile customers in suburban/rural markets), as well as an eight hour talk time with the factory battery. It was just a phone, didn't even have a camera, but it was and in some ways still is my favorite cell phone out of the dozens that I've owned over the years.

      I really liked T-Mobile, they introduced me to the awesomeness of GSM, amongst other things, and it was with a heavy heart that I switched back to Verizon when my job took me to a city where T-Mobile had no coverage. If Verizon ever yanks my unlimited data plan I'll be back on T-Mobile in a New York Minute; I've thought about doing it anyway but their coverage is grossly inferior around these parts, which would be worth putting up with if they could save me money, but with my grandfathered Verizon pricing + employee discount I'm paying less with Verizon than anything T-Mo can offer me. Hard to justify paying more for less, no matter how awesome they are or how much of an asshat Verizon can be.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    3. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      I have a T-Mobile phone with Wi-Fi calling; it keeps turning the feature on by itself; and it sucks with dropped calls continually.

      T-Mobile has had this service for years, and it used to work really well. In-call switching between cellular and WiFi, etc..

      My current phone has the same feature, but I can set it to use the cell network if possible and only make calls over WiFi if the cell network isn't available. Because of this setting, I don't use the WiFi calling very much, but it is great for making and receiving calls while abroad without paying huge roaming fees.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    4. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by Dorianny · · Score: 2

      This is also the same technology being used to switch voice over LTE calls back to legacy Circuit Switched networks (3G, Edge).

    5. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      I believe that T-Mobile still charges you for the minutes even if you go over WiFi. That's what I think the fine print at the bottom of their TV advertisements say. I can't exactly read it fast enough when the commercial is playing.

    6. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by jones_supa · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The problem was that Nokia was prone to crashing for other reasons, even with the Wi-Fi turned off, it had very buggy software and I eventually tired of it shutting down for no reason.

      That highlights perfectly one of the core reasons why Nokia ultimately failed in the cell phone business (and that started long before the Microsoft merger). The competitors could offer a phone that had a sleek, stable and responsive user interface, unlike Nokia which clinged forever to the crusty Symbian, the "Windows 95" of mobile phone operating systems.

    7. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      No, they never did me. WiFi calling was always free minutes, though they disclaim this in advertising in case they change their mind.

      And WiFi calling worked well for me always. Lucky I guess.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    8. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by Defenestrar · · Score: 2

      Was in Berlin recently and saw that they had figured out a solution to the modern pay-phone dilemma. Pretty much every pay phone I saw was also a wi-fi hotspot. For example the T-mobile pay phones were also free hotspots for T-mobile subscribers but also sold bandwidth to anyone without a T-mobile SIM. I don't doubt that the telecoms used these strategically to extend coverage and also compete for customers.

      Of course comparing internet/mobile between the US and anywhere else is... well about as stupid as the way mobile networks work in the US.

    9. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      It counts against your minutes if you are on a pay-as-you-go non-unlimited plan. For unlimited pre-paid and postpaid plans, they are not counted for billing purposes.

    10. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They dropped the UMA hardware that made possible and apparently the back end support. I think you can (or eventually will be able to) do seamless transition from Voice over LTE calls to Wifi. I don't know how/if it will go the other way.

    11. Re:Is This a Pump And Dump Press Release? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Voice minutes aren't a significant expense for cellular carriers these days.

      And yet they charge so much for them. Best example is tmobiles monthly plans. You can get a $30/month plan with unlimited data (first 5GB at 4G speed), unlimited text, and 100 minutes. If you want the same plan but with unlimited minutes, it's $60/month. So the cellular service accounts for over half of the $60 plan cost.

  4. One small problem... okay, two: by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

    Even here in wifi-heavy Portland, OR, you're going to have a hard time finding wifi signals you can glom onto w/o either knowing the WPA2 password, or going through some sort of web-based login screen - especially in the suburbs.

    The second problem will arise when all those wifi WAP owners decide that they don't want their bandwidth sucked down by non-customers and/or other people (for legal liability issues, etc.) This will likely strangle the idea entirely (or some unscrupulous ass like Verizon will offer it as a plan with a massive mark-up for every minute/kB you use over their cell towers...)

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:One small problem... okay, two: by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      Every comcast, optimum, and others routers are putting out a pile of SSID's and will authenticate via mac address alone. The vast majority of home and small business users end up using whatever the provider gives them.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    2. Re:One small problem... okay, two: by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Even here in wifi-heavy Portland, OR, you're going to have a hard time finding wifi signals you can glom onto w/o either knowing the WPA2 password, or going through some sort of web-based login screen - especially in the suburbs.

      That's one of the things I miss about Finland; the lion's share of the public wi-fi networks don't waste your time with a stupid disclaimer/logon webpage. You connect to them, get an IP address, and you're off and running. The only one out of the dozens that I used where I can recall a logon webpage was on OnniBus.

      Add this to the list of things that our sue happy culture has ruined. You'll never see that duplicated here, because some jackass will sue if little orphan Annie uses your hotspot to look at porn, or his laptop picks up malware, or even just because Saul Goodman has nothing better to do today and needs a new suit jacket or bluetooth headset.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    3. Re:One small problem... okay, two: by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Dunno about the others, but the Comcast ones require that you be an existing Comcast customer and log in with your user ID before using it.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    4. Re:One small problem... okay, two: by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      Thats just comcast sucking like usual. My optimum linked devices log into comcast routers (transmitting the optimum SSID next to their own) automatically via the sharing agreement they have.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    5. Re:One small problem... okay, two: by skids · · Score: 1

      There's help on the way for that in the form of a standard called 802.11u (and a couple systems implemented on top of that with buzzword-friendly names.) It allows a hotspot provider to advertise multiple authentication mechanisms, so you would just need one account with a central IDP to get on the hotspot. It's already out in enterprise-level gear bought recently enough; the challenge is now for IDPs to take up the mantle and offer a RadSec service, and for those IDPs to work deals with commodity equipment vendors and managed-cloud-service vendors to get their IDs inlcuded in the published beacons.

      Oh yes, and also waiting on MS Surface tablets to either get fixed to not choke on long beacons, or die a well deserved darwinian market death.

    6. Re:One small problem... okay, two: by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Even here in wifi-heavy Portland, OR, you're going to have a hard time finding wifi signals you can glom onto w/o either knowing the WPA2 password, or going through some sort of web-based login screen - especially in the suburbs.

      The second problem will arise when all those wifi WAP owners decide that they don't want their bandwidth sucked down by non-customers

      The cable companies are hard at work "solving" that problem. They'll turn your home cable modem into a wifi hotspot whether you want to or not.

      http://www.cablewifi.com/

      It's a weird situation because cable companies suck, and cellular carriers suck. But if the two were to begin fighting each other, magic things could happen.

    7. Re:One small problem... okay, two: by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      I use republic and I have no such problem. At work, I use a password, and home, I use a password. But it really doesn't matter, Republic charges me $10 per month (maybe $11 or $12 with taxes?) and I still get unlimited calls and texts. If I upgraded to 3G, I'd be paying $25 (I think just under $30 with taxes).

  5. For the second option... by bondsbw · · Score: 1

    So, essentially we get $10/month Sprint access (plus Wi-Fi calling if you're into that sort of thing)?

    --
    All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    1. Re:For the second option... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you not have wifi in your home or office? 80% of my phone calls are made from my home or office, so not having wifi while I'm out and about is hardly a problem thanks to the Sprint backup.

      Full disclouse: I'm a Republic customer - I've been on the $10 plan for over a year.

    2. Re:For the second option... by tepples · · Score: 1

      Do you not have wifi in your home or office? 80% of my phone calls are made from my home or office, so not having wifi while I'm out and about is hardly a problem thanks to the Sprint backup.

      I don't have Wi-Fi while riding the city bus, and most of my calls that aren't made on a landline are made from the bus or somewhere else that doesn't have open Wi-Fi.

    3. Re:For the second option... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would that be your problem? As I understand it, Republic will pay Sprint to let you make the call from the bus.

  6. didn't comcast want to share out people's wifi by alen · · Score: 1

    and everyone said they were evil? but when google does the same it's awesome?

    1. Re:didn't comcast want to share out people's wifi by daniel142005 · · Score: 1

      That entirely depends on how Google plans to implement it. From what I understood, Comcast took routers people already had and created a separate WiFi off of them. With all of the security vulnerabilities in routers these days, who's to say they couldn't gain access to the actual network? Then there's also the question of whether it shares the same external IP address, bandwidth cap, speed, etc.. Plus, if they were to put the public hotspots outside of the home but still attached to their equipment it would be a whole different story.

      Personally I think it's kind of funny. The wireless giants decided to regulate us with bandwidth caps and nickel/dime us to death, now it's biting them in the ass. If they do pull this off then you know every ISP out there will try something similar, putting a huge strain on the wireless industry and maybe even forcing them into an infrastructure provider instead of service provider.

      I say screw em, sign me up for the first alternative that works.

  7. Who's Wi-fi? by jythie · · Score: 2

    I am a bit confused here. Are they installing wifi infrastructure linking back to their own network, or at they depending on the consumer to piggy back on random people's base stations?

    I have a hard time picturing wi-fi being all that good for calls since all a cell phone network is, really, is a specialized wi-fi network designed from the ground up to deal with the cell phone use-case. So if they are just spreading base stations around their coverage area then all they are really doing is setting up cheap crappy cell towers, and if they are piggy backing then yeah, it is easy to offer a low price when someone else is picking up the tab, which I can not imagine will last long.

    1. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing I don't get is the walled gardens. I don't know what wifi is like in the USA today, but I live in London, and although Central London is littered with networks, every McDonald's, every Starbucks, every "cloud" municipal access point requires a login. Not just a saved cookie apparently, but clicking around in a login with the web browser.

      So how could this possibly work??

    2. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by punkr0x · · Score: 1

      I'm confused by this too. Initially I thought as you did, they were setting up access points in heavy traffic areas to supplement Sprint's cell service. But based on the articles it looks like they expect you to connect to your own Wi-Fi networks. At which point I don't understand the $5 a month Wi-Fi only plan at all; couldn't I do the same thing with Google Voice for free?

    3. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by magarity · · Score: 1

      You have to find your own WiFi; your house, Starbucks, McDonald's, etc. If you haven't connected to one, then it falls back to a cell tower. The assumption is the user has a wide variety of hotspots to which the phone is already set to auto connect.

    4. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by Tokolosh · · Score: 2

      Republic Wireless has built-in auto-accept of TOS (not technically a login) for otherwise open hotspots. The phone will attempt to "click-through" to get internet access, and if you confirm it has succeeded, it will remember the settings for future use. Now this is somewhat experimental and not perfect, but it does remove much of the hassle. RW is working to improve this all the time.

      The problem is that many hotspots are severely crippled, with tiny bandwidth, blocked port and services. For example, all the big stores in the local mall have them, but I suspect their only purpose is to track you, not to provide a decent internet connection. They are therefore not useful for calling.

      --
      Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
    5. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Wi-Fi is entering the Gb/s range. Even cheap routers claim to carry 300Mb/s.

      Voice calls are in the 56Kb/s range.

      Do the math.

      That 300Mb/s router can (theoretically) carry 5,357 voice connections (there is more to it than just bandwidth, like the number of simultaneous connections.)

      A voice call consumes MUCH LESS bandwidth than does watching a YouTube video at 320x240 resolution.

      2. They are routing calls to any Wi-Fi You choose to connect Your phone to. They are definitely NOT putting Wi-Fi antennas on cell towers. This solves problems with dead zones. This is typically Your Wi-Fi at home or your boss' Wi-Fi at work. Occasionally it is a McDonnalds' Wi-Fi at lunch, but only rarely.

      3. An intelligent question would be: Why does the FCC believe the lying lawyers of the cell phone companies who claim they are out of bandwidth, when (most of) those same companies refuse to roll out free (or very low cost) Wi-Fi calling.

      4. An intelligent question would be: Given the number of companies that snoop on their "free" Wi-Fi, and the laws against wiretapping, how many companies will be busted for wiretapping Wi-Fi phone calls? It is illegal, but we can also be assured there are tools to snoop.

    6. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      I am a bit confused here. Are they installing wifi infrastructure linking back to their own network, or at they depending on the consumer to piggy back on random people's base stations?

      The latter, of course! Why spend money improving your own cellular network or building out wi-fi when you can trick people into using their own internet bandwidth (and leaching off others) to carry their communications.

    7. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The folks at Republic Wireless put software on phones that

      (1) learns how to log onto Wi-Fi hotspots, and sends that back to the home office, then

      (2) every Republic Wireless phone will automatically log into "free, public" Wi-Fi hotspots without bugging you.

    8. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by skids · · Score: 1

      I have a hard time picturing wi-fi being all that good for calls since all a cell phone network is, really, is a specialized wi-fi network designed from the ground up to deal with the cell phone use-case

      Mostly fixed on newer installations and newer clients. Right now the industry is more or less in a holding pattern waiting for older devices to age out and for device producers to stop making crap radios, because if you turn on a lot of the voice quality features (e.g. 11k,11r for seamless roaming and CAC), a lot of clients devices cannot deal. It is getting easier and easier for corporations to design their campus WiFi for phone use because they control which devices the users are using, but for networks that serve any old commodity device a customer walks in with, a few pieces have to fall into place before voice SSIDs are anything but experimental. 11ac is one of those big pieces because it mandates a 5GHz antenna.

    9. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by antdude · · Score: 1

      I don't know anyone who's (who is) a Wi-fi.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    10. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought you can't use Google Voice without a "real" phone number. Did that change recently?

    11. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by gumbi+west · · Score: 2

      I use Republic and the wifi is more for when you're parked at your house or office (as far as I can tell). I haven't had any problems with it, except if I receive a call right as I'm exiting wifi range it will take about 10 seconds to respond.

    12. Re:Who's Wi-fi? by tepples · · Score: 1

      The problem is that many hotspots are severely crippled, with tiny bandwidth

      Does a voice call with modern codecs (such as Opus) really need more than 16 kbps?

  8. Big companies need to leave off our WiFi spectrum! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There are many places where WiFi spectrum is already quite crowded. Big city apartment buildings come to mind. I realize that many companies have been doing public, for-profit hotspots for years. I noted that last year Comcast decided to force a public hotspot onto everyone's Comcast WiFi cable modem/router. So now I have twice as many nearby WiFi networks to deal with. Now Cell Phone companies are looking to place WiFi hotspots all over to augment their cell phone spectrum.

    The thing is that the WiFi spectrum is unlicensed and it was kind of left to individuals and small businesses to use for WiFi, cordless phones and the like. People were already starting to have some difficulties with interference. What is it going to be like when major corps decide that there is all that spectrum that is free for the taking?

  9. Re:works great on campuses by turning+in+circles · · Score: 1

    I had a phonne that did this; very helpful on campus where, due to instruments/equipment, whatever, you can't cell a cellular signal in many buildings, including the med school, but you can easily get wifi. Now my kid is in college, I signed him up for Republic because hey, he's nearly always around wifi and he can afford the monthly fees.

    --
    Might as well face it I'm addicted to data.
  10. There are so many places the cell towers don't rea by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

    And the quality is horrible even if you find one. This is inevitable. Even if the solution was WiFi first only when I'm at home or the office, it's still a good solution. No more home and office numbers and people calling my cell phone when I'm at my desk. It may not be tomorrow, but this type of solution is overdue. Voice is a low bandwidth application.

  11. Re:There are so many places the cell towers don't by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

    And at the risk of replying to myself, why does it have to be WiFi only? Why not allow an Ethernet dongle on the phone that also charges. I think that SlimPort devices can do this. Then all I need is good Ethernet managed by somebody competent. Not realistic in a coffee shop, I realize. But at airports, hotels, or offices this would be ubiquitous.

  12. Amazing by Jodka · · Score: 2

    from the summary:

    "There are just so many places where Wi-Fi doesn't reach," says Jan Dawson "and the quality of Wi-Fi that you can find is often subpar."

    I bought the Republic first-generation Android Moto X phone about a year ago and have used their 4G/$40.00 a month plan since. The only wireless networks which I connect to are my home network, work network, and free networks in airports and hotels when I travel. Republic will throttle the data rate if I exceed 5GB of cell data usage in one billing period, about a month.

    So now for the million dollar question: Does that work? With only those connection, do I break the caps because too much of my data travels over cell towers instead of wifi? Ya, it works. I never get even close to the caps. Partly this is because the phone is smart about deferring low-priority high-bandwidth tasks until it picks up a wifi network. The big one here is auto synching photo and video to my google photo account. The other thing is my usage pattern is normally not to gobble up a lot of data while in transit because I commute to work by driving. If I were streaming Netflix or Amazon Prime video daily on an Amtrak commute then I might have a problem, depending on how severely they throttle.

    There is more to Republic than just their wifi/cell tower technology: They work really hard not to be assholes about billing. There are no lock-in contracts and amazingly, you can conveniently change your cell plan up to twice a month, from $5.00 wifi-only policy to higher data rates at $10, $25 and $40 per month plans. The amount you are billed never exceeds those limits, regardless of your usage, they just throttle data rates instead of adding more to your bill.

    I have only one gripe: I use my Republic phone with Google Voice and mostly the voice lag was insanely long. Seems to have improved a lot recently though. Not sure if that is attributable to the phone, to Google Voice, or to the two in combination.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature.
    1. Re:Amazing by WhiteKnight07 · · Score: 2

      This closely mirrors my own experience with Republic Wireless. I have been using their Moto G on the $25 a month plan for about a year and it has been flawless. The only wifi networks I use are at home and at the office (and the occasional free wifi at a a coffee shop, hotel, or the like) but that covers something like 70% of my phone usage anyway. I stream Pandora over the cell network every day while commuting to and from work and I have never even come close to data cap. Call hand-offs between wifi and cell and seamless and the phone is very smart about avoiding bad wifi connections or access points with blocked ports. The only real downside is the limited selection of phones. The Moto X, Moto G, and Moto E are all they offer so if you are in love with the latest iPhone or Samsung Galaxy you are out of luck. However the Moto phones are reasonable high end, mid range, and entry level devices respectively.

      --


      We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
    2. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought the Republic first-generation Android Moto X phone about a year ago and have used their 4G/$40.00 a month plan since. Republic will throttle the data rate if I exceed 5GB of cell data usage in one billing period, about a month.

      That doesn't seem such a great deal,since I'm getting unlimited talk & text, plus 2.5GB LTE data with Cricket for $35/month. With an unlocked 2013 Moto X, too!

    3. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I concur RW has been great for the family. My wife and 2 kids are on the $10/month plan I use the $25/month plan. At work I am on the sprint network all day and web browsing and calls are no different than I had before. My son can stream you-tube on the highway with my phone so no complaints there. Never came close to the 5GB/mo limit. The $10 plans have unlimited text/voice on cell network and unlimited data on wifi. Everybody has been very happy with this. So for $55/mo we have 4 users with unlimited talk/text. I have the 1st gen Moto-x, with 2 Moto-G's and 1 Moto-E. If you have good Sprint coverage i highly recommend RW.

  13. And they think they're getting it cheap... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Meanwhile in countries with some competition, you don't have to do without a proper mobile phone network to get those prices. Are you guys still paying for incoming calls and SMS? What these companies are isn't a proof of concept. VoIP over Wifi will always be a shitty hack. These companies are the desperately needed market corrective, although I wouldn't dare call them competition.

  14. National WiFi? Yes... by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    Google WiFi just showed up at the Starbucks around here. Faster, and if this is Google's entre into a mobile play, then seeding the nation with WiFi is a clever idea.

    Starbucks now, then McDonalds, etc, and they will be in business. I would expect lots of retailers could hop on this. And Google gets the first bite of call data.

    Pricing 1, Privacy 0.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  15. Google Voice/Skype/VOIP does this for free by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 1

    If there is already a free solution to make calls over WIFI, why should I pay someone 5$ for it. Or maybe this service isn't for me. Maybe it is a "technical ignorance tax". Hey there are even cell phones you can pay 8$/month for now and make calls anywhere without being restricted to wifi.

    1. Re: Google Voice/Skype/VOIP does this for free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Skype and MagicJack on my iPhone for 99% of my calls, all over WiFi. I ripped out my SIM card and dropped in a Tracfone card (jail broke) for those occasions I'm not on WiFi. For about $150 I got over 600 minutes and almost 2 years if service. I've been doing this for 10 months. I don't have data service without WiFi, but in the last 10 months that's never been an issue. My total phone costs are way below $10 a month and I spend a considerable amount of time on the phone. Suck on that AT&T!

  16. Couldn't existing cell companies offer this? by swb · · Score: 1

    I don't really see how this is "disruptive" to cellular carriers. Couldn't they at some point just start transitioning over to a VoIP service that was data based and as long as the handset had the software capabilities they could just be VoIP whether it was over LTE or loca wifi?

    In theory they could open up a lot of new features this way such as multiple presentation so you could treat any data connected device with a mic and speaker as a phone. I know a lot of modern PBXs can do this now and some VoIP providers provide variants on this now, like smartphone and pc apps for making calls that can traverse whatever ip network you're connected to.

  17. DIY by eriks · · Score: 1

    I use a similar solution (formerly using sipdroid) with a free Google Voice number (there are other free or almost free providers too) -- calling is now built into hangouts -- though it's buggy, it does work, and you can have your google voice number forwarded to your mobile number for when you're not connected to wifi.

    It's a clunky solution, but works well enough for me, since I still do 90% of my voice calling on a landline...

  18. freedompop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ive beeen using freedompop 14 months. 4g cell service for free. Based on rooted galaxy s2 and google voice. I dont actually use freedom pops voip. Lately its even neen working in rural areas awesome. Free broadband cellular for 60$ ccost of phone.

  19. I wish my phone did this by vux984 · · Score: 1

    Cellular reception is lousy in my basement, Wifi however is top notch. It would be REALLY nice if my phone switched to wifi even if it only did it when it was at home.

    For me its not about saving money, its just about working well.

    It could also be a nice feature for traveling etc; I could probably avoid paying for roaming in a lot of situations. (In this case, it would be about saving some money. Roaming is ludicrous.)

    As it is, my carrier (Rogers) does have "Rogers One" which is a voip app that you can use with your phone service to send and receive calls and text messages over wifi from smartphones, tablets, and there's even a (usable but not great) browser based version for desktops. Its ~great~ in theory, but its a little klutzy since I basically have two separate phone apps on my phone the real one for 'real calls' and the rogers one for 'wifi calls'. And its bit clumsy handing calls off between them or selecting which one to use receiving a call when i am on wifi and cellular. So I don't actually have the app on my phone (an S5).

    But... I DO have it installed it on my old galaxy s3, and turned the cellular radio off. And its become a wifi-only extension of my cell phone which works great anywhere in my house. (Plus with only wifi-on and the cell radio off... battery life of the S3 ... my only real complaint with the phone is quite good.) Its better than call forwarding to a home line or voip because -outgoing- calls are still identified with my number -- this is really valuable to me. It can also send/receive SMS to/from my usual cell number... which is also really handy.

    And when I was travelling, I took it with me. And use it where I was staying on wifi... where again it was nice to be able to just make and receive calls to and from my normal number via wifi. Without having to mess around with forwarding, or people screening out my calls because they were coming from some random unknown-to-them-voip number. (I've used free/low-cost voip services in the past with travelling, and that was always a hassle.)

  20. Freedom Pop .. no thanks by ITRambo · · Score: 2

    Personal anecdote here. I signed up for Freedom Pop last year. After three weeks the phone arrived. After using it for five weeks I gave up. Each and every call had drop outs, severe distortion, or a disconnect. Freedom Pop ignored all my email and phone calls about the poor service. I was asked to call different numbers that did not resolve their poor VOIP implementation. The issue is Freedom Pop has a great idea but horrible implementation. I use the phone as a Square register now. Every now and then I check the call quality. It's still horrible over both WiFi and Sprints 4G data network. I advise others to skip Freedom Pop if you plan to use the phone with the intention of having conversations that are intelligible by both parties.

  21. RepublicWireless.. for a good service in bad areas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes, my family has 3 1st gen MotoX phones with the RepublicWireless roms. Switch for two reasons: 1) monthly cost for 3 smartphones is running 1/4th the cost of the 3 feature phones we had on sprint 2) both our previous house and the new house were/are cellphone signal holes (the old house in valley at the intersection of 3 different towers way out at the edge of the range, and the new house has radiant barrier roofing).

    With RW, we get good service in the house from the wifi network and yet can still leave the house while on a call and have it switch from wifi to cell (very seldom does either party notice).

    The only real downside, that I've found, is buying the phone outright. Big cash outlay. Not a problem for me, but for a lot of people I know it is.

  22. Wi-Fi calling sucks by jgotts · · Score: 1

    T-Mobile offers Wi-Fi calling, but it sucks.

    Let's say that I want to download something for a few minutes. My call turns to garbage.

    I could theoretically configure my AT&T hardware to prioritize Wi-Fi calling traffic, but there is no insight given by T-Mobile or AT&T into doing that. I'm not wasting my time to save gigantic multinational corporations a few pennies.

  23. Sprint cellular ad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I check Republic wireless, there is no wifi on the map (but there is an entry in the map key): https://republicwireless.com/t...

    So this is just a wifi femtocell for people who live in basements? Sprint provides the cell service.

  24. Great low-cost plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can comment from a first hand experice;
    I switched to it a few months back, and I am very satisfied so far.

    I am on $10/month plan, and I have no complains about phone calls at any time,
    nor about internet most of the day (I am within home or office Wi-Fi most of the day anyhow).

    There is nothing else on the US market which gives me this kind of service at this rate.
    May not be news, but I am more than happy they exist.

  25. Cheap phone for DIY home VOIP? by glitch! · · Score: 1

    The other day, I saw a Droid phone on the WM web site for $20 or so and it got me thinking about getting one to play with. In particular, putting a VOIP client like 3CX or CsimpleSIP on it and connecting to my Asterisk server over Wifi. So I went off to WM to ask questions.

    My big question was, can I buy a cheap Droid phone that they sell for their prepaid plans and use the apps without actually buying a plan? Or if I have to buy a plan, can I still use the apps on the phone (and Wifi) after my plan expires? I could not get a good answer for this, but they "thought" that the phone would stop working for apps when the prepaid time expires.

    So, is there a really cheap way to get an Android device with Wifi that will run a VOIP client? It would be really fun to have one or two around the house to connect to my home VOIP system. Thanks.

    --
    A dingo ate my sig...
  26. Re:There are so many places the cell towers don't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because we already have Wi-Fi and USB everywhere.

  27. I used republic by clam666 · · Score: 1
    I had a pair of republic phones for awhile. They do work. Mostly. I started with their beta program, and they do switch back and forth between wifi and cellular at low rates, with the idea that you mostly are travelling to and from somewhere over cellular, but at home you most likely are on wifi. Like anything else, if you go to standard places you might set up wifi spots you use, and your phone switches to them automatically where you go.

    It does pretty well. As you're mostly home it's on wifi 99% of the time (for me) or the few after work places I go have wifi spots so I almost never was on cellular. They work pretty well.

    Problems though, and its beta so I was giving it a long leash on this. Texts would randomly seem to appear at random times, so if you were texting a lot, I had problems using real time texting as it would sometimes get lost or appear an hour later. Also, they can't do MMS for some reason yet. The phones were older Motorola android phones with a wifi software package. They took forever to boot up, I'm assuming because they were getting a lot of telemetry and signing into their system. It was helpful because I get almost no cell reception at home, so I could at least make calls, although on occasion people calling me would go directly to voice mail.

    For a cheap service, if you rarely use it, its worked more or less fine. Mixed with unlimited everything on cell it was a fairly good deal, but they had no price supports for the phones though. They have newer phones coming out.

    The customer service is, however great. They interact with you quite a bit, a lot of community and shared support with each other. They are very friendly if you need help and if you want to leave, they make it easy and no hassle. So I hope they succeed or the hybrid tech gets more widespread.

    --
    I'm a satanic clam.
  28. I'm on Republic Wireless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use Republic Wireless. I'm on the $10 per month plan. You have to use one of their four phones (Moto phones). My entry level device has a little trouble staying connected to WiFi. Flipping back and forth between WiFi and Sprint results in a pretty crappy call.

    However.

    When the call stays on WiFi, or when it stays on Sprint, it is just fine.

    It relies on my home WiFi signal, along with any others I connect to (work, library, etc.). If there is a terms and conditions "agree to" button, it knows this and will allow me to go into the site and click the "I agree" button. Its a little bit of a hassle, but $10 a month buys a LOT of tolerance.

  29. Re:Big companies need to leave off our WiFi spectr by skids · · Score: 1

    The problem with congestion is mainly due to most of the crap you could buy up until now only haveing a 2.5GHz antenna and even the 5GHz stuff did not support using DFS channels because radar avoidance is tricky stuff to implement. The problem with beacon pollution (too many SSIDs) will be solved by 11u allowing multiple services on the SSID. Eventually you'll be looking at having a single AP in every room, even for living-room setups, but some of them will be built into computers and appliances because they will also have an 11ad node on there for short range (e.g. "wire free" from cable box to TV) uses. The radios will be turned down low so the signal barely leaves the room, and there will be overlap between cells on different channels.

    For a while in the middle of all this, the "11ac Wave 2" stuff will come out and ruin everything. Then people will either stop using that, or the FCC will roll over and open more bandwidth so it can be something other than crap.

  30. I make all outgoing calls with SIPdroid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I have a geographical incoming SIP number too, which is cheaper for people to call.

    I didn't realise this was a new thing. In the UK, having a mobile number except for emergencies is a waste of money.

  31. If the majority of calls roam on Sprint by tepples · · Score: 1

    As I understand it, Republic will pay Sprint to let you make the call from the bus.

    Even if 2-minute calls from buses (or otherwise away from Wi-Fi) end up being a majority of my outgoing calls? I seem to remember AT&T terminating subscribers back when the iPhone was exclusive to AT&T if the subscribers happened to live in an area where AT&T had no towers of its own. This meant that most of these subscribers' usage was on roaming.

  32. Re:works great on campuses by userw014 · · Score: 1

    3 years ago, my son went off to college with a Republic Wireless WiFi phone and subscription (early adopter.) His mother got a Republic Wireless subscription too. The lack of a multi-year contract and the low price were the appealing features to them, and there wasn't much in the way of competition back then for something that included a data plan.

    My observations are as follows:

    • Young people don't use a phone, they use a portable communications and entertainment device. Voice calls are one of multiple communications methods, and not a very important one. Therefore, voice quality doesn't matter much.
    • WiFi-phones don't work well in environments where the WiFi is locked down tightly (such as hospitals) and BYO Devices aren't supported.
    • My ex doesn't like accepting my calls.

    For now, I'm still old school enough to want a phone that'll work in an emergency, in some rural environments where the minor carriers haven't built out yet. But that might change in a few years as I find myself hardly traveling anymore. I don't use a phone as a multi-media communications and entertainment device, but that might change when I replace my old iPhone-4.

    A WiFi based phone service with cell-network backup would work for me 99% of the time, but I'm old enough and conservative enough to want a few more '9's.

    Another thing I believe is that if WiFi based phone service expands and becomes common for large venues (such as sports stadiums, hotels, etc.), it could result in cell-network based phone service not growing in depth. The combination would reduce the service level expectations of voice service, displacing to more communications via. instant messaging/social networking.