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."
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."
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.
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?
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.
and everyone said they were evil? but when google does the same it's awesome?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
from the summary:
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 $40 per month plans. The amount you are billed never exceeds those limits, regardless of your usage, they just throttle data rates instead of adding more to your bill.
I have only one gripe: I use my Republic phone with Google Voice and mostly the voice lag was insanely long. Seems to have improved a lot recently though. Not sure if that is attributable to the phone, to Google Voice, or to the two in combination.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
Google WiFi just showed up at the Starbucks around here. Faster, and if this is Google's entre into a mobile play, then seeding the nation with WiFi is a clever idea.
Starbucks now, then McDonalds, etc, and they will be in business. I would expect lots of retailers could hop on this. And Google gets the first bite of call data.
Pricing 1, Privacy 0.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
If there is already a free solution to make calls over WIFI, why should I pay someone 5$ 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.
God spoke to me
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.
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...
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.)
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
Someone had to do it.
I would, If I wanted to talk while driving on the interstate . . .
We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
...and what if they use certificates?
www.wavefront-av.com
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
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.
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:
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.