Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SPCS announces EV-DO release

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 8:06:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Just came across this news ditty and thought that some of you folks might be
interested ...

http://tinyurl.com/8c8jt

Bob ::Noticing that they have put a cap on the expense for personal accounts
@ $90/mo.::

More about : spcs announces release

Anonymous
July 7, 2005 8:59:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:06:59 GMT, "Bob Smith"
<usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:

>http://tinyurl.com/8c8jt
>
>Bob ::Noticing that they have put a cap on the expense for personal accounts
>@ $90/mo.::

Heh. Nice guys, huh? $90 a month!

I think Verizon's EV-DO is pretty much a lot less than that. Not that
there aren't other problems with them.

I think all the cellular carriers are on drugs or something. We don't
want this stuff, jammed down our throats this way. We want what we
want. Not all these scams and schemes.
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 8:59:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:

>>Bob ::Noticing that they have put a cap on the expense for personal accounts
>>@ $90/mo.::
>
> Heh. Nice guys, huh? $90 a month!
>
> I think Verizon's EV-DO is pretty much a lot less than that. Not that
> there aren't other problems with them.

Does Verizon do unlimited for individual/non-business accounts? (or for
businesses, for that matter.)

I mean, think of this. This essentially means you can use as much data as
you want and not pay more than $90 if you're an individual or $80 if you're
a business.

I agree with some of the other stuff you've posted about Sprint, but I think
you're off base here.

I think what we really have to do is compare apples to apples. T-Mobile and
Cingular have data plans, right? T-Mobile has a $30 wifi plan too, but
that's not cellular, it's wifi. :) 

--
JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)

"Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Related resources
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 8:59:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Verizon has the SAME price of $80. I switched from Verizon to Sprint and
previously used their data services. Sprint Rules! (Especially the phone
selection and coverage in Southern California)

"Steve Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:D ajsvj$mnv$2@ratbert.glorb.com...
> Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>>>Bob ::Noticing that they have put a cap on the expense for personal
>>>accounts
>>>@ $90/mo.::
>>
>> Heh. Nice guys, huh? $90 a month! I think Verizon's EV-DO is pretty
>> much a lot less than that. Not that
>> there aren't other problems with them.
>
> Does Verizon do unlimited for individual/non-business accounts? (or for
> businesses, for that matter.)
>
> I mean, think of this. This essentially means you can use as much data as
> you want and not pay more than $90 if you're an individual or $80 if
> you're a business.
>
> I agree with some of the other stuff you've posted about Sprint, but I
> think you're off base here.
>
> I think what we really have to do is compare apples to apples. T-Mobile
> and Cingular have data plans, right? T-Mobile has a $30 wifi plan too, but
> that's not cellular, it's wifi. :) 
>
> --
> JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
> Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
> temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)
>
> "Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 10:31:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:59:47 GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com"
<steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:
>I think all the cellular carriers are on drugs or something.

As that statement pertains to pricing for EV-DO, I'd have to agree.
From the article that Bob posted, the charge will be $40/month for 40
megabits (Mbits) of data.

40 Mbits * 1024 kbits/Mbit = 40960 kbits
40960 kbits / 400 kbits/s =~ 102 seconds

So, I'd be paying $40 dollars for less than two minutes of data
transfer per month. Perhaps I'll pass on that. Instead, I'll pay a
few bucks for WiFi in the airport if I really need it, or use
Vision/laptop for a few minutes, or wait until I get to the hotel,
where Internet access is free (it's getting *much* easier to find
reasonbly priced hotels that offer free Internet access).

Joe Huber
huber.joseph@comcast.net
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 12:16:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:nbnqc1l0l4158viceg5rqaskft1up74ha4@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:06:59 GMT, "Bob Smith"
> <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/8c8jt
> >
> >Bob ::Noticing that they have put a cap on the expense for personal
accounts
> >@ $90/mo.::
>
> Heh. Nice guys, huh? $90 a month!
>
> I think Verizon's EV-DO is pretty much a lot less than that. Not that
> there aren't other problems with them.
>
> I think all the cellular carriers are on drugs or something. We don't
> want this stuff, jammed down our throats this way. We want what we
> want. Not all these scams and schemes.

Scams & Schemes? Maybe this EV-DO service doesn't interest you, but there is
a multitude of folks out there that does interest them, to have the ability
to email to the home office, client, friends or family while on the road.
Or, for those folks who like to surf the net while away from their home or
business isp.

If I start getting on the road a bit more, I'll be subscribing to the
service, as a $90 monthly cost is cheap, when it comes to passing on data
from clients to home office or visa versa, in getting new business or
maintaining current customers.

Bob
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 6:26:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 11:50:39 -0700, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:

>Does Verizon do unlimited for individual/non-business accounts? (or for
>businesses, for that matter.)

$44.99 a month unlimited according to Verizon on the phone right now.
You have to have a blackberry or palm treo or other pda phone

$59.99 unlimited with a ev-do phone like an LG-VX8000

$5/month for mobile web, it comes out of your minutes on a regular
phone. If you have lotsa minutes that might be the cheapest.

Not sure what the difference is. I tried several at verizon, they all
seemed to be same speed for what I looked at. EV-DO seemed no better
for regular websites. Admittedly it was a brief test.
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 6:26:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:

> $44.99 a month unlimited according to Verizon on the phone right now.
> You have to have a blackberry or palm treo or other pda phone

Is that a promo? If not, I'm shocked that Verizon actually undercut Sprint
on price.

> Not sure what the difference is. I tried several at verizon, they all
> seemed to be same speed for what I looked at. EV-DO seemed no better
> for regular websites. Admittedly it was a brief test.

1xEVDO is supposed to be up to 400-500Kbps througput. 1xRTT tops out at a
theoretical limit of 115Kbps (ISDN speeds).

--
JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)

"Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 6:26:26 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Verizon EVDO is a lot faster than 1XRTT! I have used one of the Verizon
EVDO cards in the San Diego area and therefore have firsthand experience
with the performance. Verizon did not roll-out EVDO in all markets. Maybe
you were in a market where EVDO was not available.

"Steve Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:D aku2o$s2n$1@ratbert.glorb.com...
> Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>> $44.99 a month unlimited according to Verizon on the phone right now. You
>> have to have a blackberry or palm treo or other pda phone
>
> Is that a promo? If not, I'm shocked that Verizon actually undercut Sprint
> on price.
>
>> Not sure what the difference is. I tried several at verizon, they all
>> seemed to be same speed for what I looked at. EV-DO seemed no better
>> for regular websites. Admittedly it was a brief test.
>
> 1xEVDO is supposed to be up to 400-500Kbps througput. 1xRTT tops out at a
> theoretical limit of 115Kbps (ISDN speeds).
>
> --
> JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
> Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
> temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)
>
> "Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 8:25:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Joseph Huber wrote:
> So, I'd be paying $40 dollars for less than two minutes of data
> transfer per month. Perhaps I'll pass on that. Instead, I'll pay a
> few bucks for WiFi in the airport if I really need it, or use
> Vision/laptop for a few minutes, or wait until I get to the hotel,
> where Internet access is free (it's getting *much* easier to find
> reasonbly priced hotels that offer free Internet access).

Yep. I stayed at a Comfort Suites hotel recently, and the whole
chain has free WiFi in all rooms. Even if you're not a payin guest,
you can go sit in the lobby and use their WiFi.

--
John Richards
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 9:41:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 04:25:40 GMT, "John Richards"
<jr70@blackhole.invalid> wrote:

>Joseph Huber wrote:
>> So, I'd be paying $40 dollars for less than two minutes of data
>> transfer per month. Perhaps I'll pass on that. Instead, I'll pay a
>> few bucks for WiFi in the airport if I really need it, or use
>> Vision/laptop for a few minutes, or wait until I get to the hotel,
>> where Internet access is free (it's getting *much* easier to find
>> reasonbly priced hotels that offer free Internet access).
>
>Yep. I stayed at a Comfort Suites hotel recently, and the whole
>chain has free WiFi in all rooms. Even if you're not a payin guest,
>you can go sit in the lobby and use their WiFi.

Perhaps slightly OT for this group, but how did they provide WiFi in
each room? The reason I ask is that I recently spent a night at a Days
Inn where they initially claimed that every room had WiFi available. I
couldn't get squat so I called the Front Desk and the guy said he had
a Linksys WRT-54G down in the lobby. Hmmm, I thought, that means there
are about 40 walls to pass through, so no wonder I didn't see any
signal up in my room at the far end of the building. I'm just curious
how they get a usable signal into each room at Comfort Suites.

--
Paul Miner
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 9:43:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

In article <n4gze.6007$aY6.5088@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Scams & Schemes? Maybe this EV-DO service doesn't interest you, but there is
> a multitude of folks out there that does interest them, to have the ability
> to email to the home office, client, friends or family while on the road.
> Or, for those folks who like to surf the net while away from their home or
> business isp.
>
> If I start getting on the road a bit more, I'll be subscribing to the
> service, as a $90 monthly cost is cheap, when it comes to passing on data
> from clients to home office or visa versa, in getting new business or
> maintaining current customers.

A couple years ago, I would have jumped on that, and I never travel.
For the first year I lived in my current apartment, the best internet
connection I could get was 128 kbit/second ISDN.

For the next year or so, the best I could get was 144 kbit/second IDSL,
for around $100 month.

That EV-DO at $90/month would have been a much better deal.

(Since then, Sprint started offering real DSL here, and the cable
company started offering internet service, so $90/month EV-DO is no
longer exciting, since, like I said, I never travel).

--
--Tim Smith
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 9:50:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:15:36 -0700, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:

>Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>> $44.99 a month unlimited according to Verizon on the phone right now.
>> You have to have a blackberry or palm treo or other pda phone
>
>Is that a promo? If not, I'm shocked that Verizon actually undercut Sprint
>on price.
>
>> Not sure what the difference is. I tried several at verizon, they all
>> seemed to be same speed for what I looked at. EV-DO seemed no better
>> for regular websites. Admittedly it was a brief test.
>
>1xEVDO is supposed to be up to 400-500Kbps througput. 1xRTT tops out at a
>theoretical limit of 115Kbps (ISDN speeds).

For me, the difference between EV-DO and 1xRTT is like night and day.
I typically run Outlook over a VPN, against an Exchange mail server,
and while it's dog slow over 1xRTT it's extremely usable over EV-DO.
Sharing a document via NetMeeting also illustrates the improvement.

--
Paul Miner
July 8, 2005 11:22:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

John Richards wrote:
> Joseph Huber wrote:
>> Vision/laptop for a few minutes, or wait until I get to the hotel,
>> where Internet access is free (it's getting *much* easier to find
>> reasonbly priced hotels that offer free Internet access).
>
> Yep. I stayed at a Comfort Suites hotel recently, and the whole
> chain has free WiFi in all rooms. Even if you're not a payin guest,
> you can go sit in the lobby and use their WiFi.

I travel a lot on business. Most all of the hotels I've stayed at that
offer free WiFi use a proxy server-based authentication system. You are
given a password at check-in, and sometimes the password must be used
with a username (generally, your room number).

In fact, the last Comfort Suites I stayed in did exactly that (password
only). So while I could certainly use WiFi in the lobby, someone
wandering in off the street without a password could not (as, IMO, it
should be).

At the (few) hotels I stayed at that had didn't use proxy
authentication, WiFi was generally poorly setup, and of course very
insecure--as were the users (just as a test, I was able to get full
access to some clueless user's C: drive). Amazing...


--
Mike
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 12:25:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Perhaps Sprint is pricing to EV-DO to cover it's intital rollout.....??

I wonder if Sprint will support voip with EV-DO...??

Another question is what will happen with Sprint PCS- Vision.....??

In any case things will very interesting...??
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 1:17:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospam.net> writes:

>Verizon has the SAME price of $80. I switched from Verizon to Sprint and
>previously used their data services. Sprint Rules!

I purchased a 1xRTT connection card from Sprint awhile ago. I was
disappointed by the performance so I returned it within the trial
period.

I really want EV-DO performane (low latency, specifically). I called
Sprint this week and asked about picking up one of the EV-DO-capable
cards (the S620). After getting swatted around a few times (and
dropped altogether) I was finally told that I'd have to provide a
business tax ID to get one.

Apparently they only like my money for the three phones I've had with
them for years.

I've been advised to use Verizon and that VZW will have EV-DO here (in
West Lafayette, IN) before Sprint.

--kyler
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 1:34:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Sprint EVDO is not anymore expensive than Verizon EVDO. It is $80.00 per
month. I will be upgrading the wireless card in my laptop next week to
support EVDO. I do not know what you guys are bellyaching about.

-mij

<hizark21@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1120879536.303110.178270@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Perhaps Sprint is pricing to EV-DO to cover it's intital rollout.....??
>
> I wonder if Sprint will support voip with EV-DO...??
>
> Another question is what will happen with Sprint PCS- Vision.....??
>
> In any case things will very interesting...??
>
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 6:56:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:15:36 -0700, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:
>Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>> $44.99 a month unlimited according to Verizon on the phone right now.
>> You have to have a blackberry or palm treo or other pda phone
>
>Is that a promo? If not, I'm shocked that Verizon actually undercut Sprint
>on price.
No, I don't think so.

For some reason I had thought that unlimited web was less than that if
you had an EV-DO phone on VZW. That is the price that was quoted me
as a non customer on the phone yesterday.

I think Sprint is overcharging. Maybe their network has low capacity
so they are not being price competitive to keep the problems from
manifesting themselves. I can believe that.
>
>> Not sure what the difference is. I tried several at verizon, they all
>> seemed to be same speed for what I looked at. EV-DO seemed no better
>> for regular websites. Admittedly it was a brief test.
>
>1xEVDO is supposed to be up to 400-500Kbps througput. 1xRTT tops out at a
>theoretical limit of 115Kbps (ISDN speeds).

I didn't watch any videos.

What I did was look at the same exact ebay auction page with an LG
VX8000 (EV-DO), an LG VX7000 (same phone but no EV-DO) and another
phone that was there on the kiosk. They all seemed to load that page
at a similar speed. The EV-DO didn't seem to help at all!

I expected the VX8000 to be way faster. But it wasn't.
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 1:31:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

hizark21@yahoo.com wrote:

> I wonder if Sprint will support voip with EV-DO...??

Why? There's no point.

--
JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)

"Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 2:15:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:34:50 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospam.net>
wrote:

>Sprint EVDO is not anymore expensive than Verizon EVDO. It is $80.00 per
>month. I will be upgrading the wireless card in my laptop next week to
>support EVDO. I do not know what you guys are bellyaching about.

Sprint's EV-DO may not be more expensive than Verizion's, but they are
both significantly more expensive than competing high-speed internet
technology such as DSL and cable. EV-DO costs twice as much per month
as my cable internet connection, three times as much as DSL would
cost me, is 3-5 times slower than my cable interent, and initially, at
least for Sprint, is going to very limited geographically as to where
I could actually use it.

Given that WiFi is available for a few bucks in most airports, many
reasonably priced hotels have some type of high-speed Internet access,
and the fact that right now, there's a better chance of me, as a
business traveler, not being able to use EV-DO at any given location
than being able to use it, how does one justify paying $80/month for
this service? It makes no economic sense.

Joe Huber
huber.joseph@comcast.net
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 2:15:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Joseph Huber wrote:

>>Sprint EVDO is not anymore expensive than Verizon EVDO. It is $80.00 per
>>month. I will be upgrading the wireless card in my laptop next week to
>>support EVDO. I do not know what you guys are bellyaching about.
>
>
> Sprint's EV-DO may not be more expensive than Verizion's, but they are
> both significantly more expensive than competing high-speed internet
> technology such as DSL and cable.

This is what I don't understand, Joseph. You and many other people keep
complaining about the pricing being higher than DSL and cable. Yet Sprint's
Terms of Service *and* Verizon's Terms of Service PROHIBIT their wireless
data services from being used as an always-on Internet connection like DSL
and cable. The whole point is that with the EV-DO services you get
high-speed mobile data, not that you keep the phone or data card at home and
use it all the time from home.

You can't go from Los Angeles to Cleveland, for example, plug in your cable
modem or DSL modem from your LA cable provider and expect it to work in
Cleveland without setting up service in Cleveland.

You can't even drive to a house down the street that doesn't already have
cable (for example), and plug in the cable modem and make it work.

The mobility inherent in wireless data is why it's higher-priced. Why do you
think a gallon of milk is priced higher at a gas station convenience store
than at a grocery store? You don't have to wait in line for ten minutes at a
gas station. You can get in, find what you need pretty much instantly, and
get out at the C-store.

And convenience is definitely worth the extra money to some people,
otherwise gas stations wouldn't sell milk. :) 

The same principle applies here.

--
JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)

"Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 2:38:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Joe,

You are correct regarding your comparison of EVDO to other high speed
alternatives. I travel frequently throughout the US and need constant access
to my email and other corporate network resources. Many folks at the company
that I work for have wireless laptop access that is provided by the company.

Regards,

-mij

"Joseph Huber" <huber.joseph@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1govc11h7k16hioqh3v32308nkum3alsc2@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:34:50 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospam.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Sprint EVDO is not anymore expensive than Verizon EVDO. It is $80.00 per
>>month. I will be upgrading the wireless card in my laptop next week to
>>support EVDO. I do not know what you guys are bellyaching about.
>
> Sprint's EV-DO may not be more expensive than Verizion's, but they are
> both significantly more expensive than competing high-speed internet
> technology such as DSL and cable. EV-DO costs twice as much per month
> as my cable internet connection, three times as much as DSL would
> cost me, is 3-5 times slower than my cable interent, and initially, at
> least for Sprint, is going to very limited geographically as to where
> I could actually use it.
>
> Given that WiFi is available for a few bucks in most airports, many
> reasonably priced hotels have some type of high-speed Internet access,
> and the fact that right now, there's a better chance of me, as a
> business traveler, not being able to use EV-DO at any given location
> than being able to use it, how does one justify paying $80/month for
> this service? It makes no economic sense.
>
> Joe Huber
> huber.joseph@comcast.net
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 2:39:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Why not? I am sure that you could use Skype because I have tried it on my
1XRTT Sprint laptop card and it works!. Assume that you have the $80.00 per
month EVDO from Sprint, you could make all of your phone calls from your
laptop with Skype and not pay for airtime minutes.


"Steve Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:D aotj2$lm6$1@ratbert.glorb.com...
> hizark21@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> I wonder if Sprint will support voip with EV-DO...??
>
> Why? There's no point.
>
> --
> JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
> Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
> temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)
>
> "Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 3:13:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Mij Adyaw wrote:
> Why not?

What point is there for the carrier that is already offering wireless CDMA
phone service to allow VoIP? Sprint bills per KB, not per minute, for data.
They'd not be able to bill a lot of airtime they otherwise COULD bill.

--
JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)

"Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 4:28:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 09:37:37 -0700, Steve Sobol wrote
>The mobility inherent in wireless data is why it's higher-priced. Why do you
>think a gallon of milk is priced higher at a gas station convenience store
>than at a grocery store? You don't have to wait in line for ten minutes at a
>gas station. You can get in, find what you need pretty much instantly, and
>get out at the C-store.

I don't dispute that the wireless mobile Internet should command a
premium, but the premium being asked is just way too high. Continuing
your analogy, the milk doesn't cost 2-3 times as much at the
convenience store, and it's of the same quality in both places
(sometimes, it's even the same brand!). Can you imagine a convenience
store trying to sell milk of lesser quality (whatever that would be)
at 2-3 times the price? I don't think it would work very well.

Also, I no longer have to wait in line 10 minutes at the grocery store
because they now have self checkout, the grocery store never runs out
of milk, it's open 24/7, and at least where I live, there are plenty
of conveniently located grocery stores. Buying milk at the
convenicence store makes no economic sense. I don't dispute that
people do it, I just don't understand why they throw their money away.

Similarly, EV-DO, at least right now, seems to me like I would just
be throwing money away. If I was actually going to use my laptop
while driving down the road, then EV-DO would serve a purpose,
provided there was actually service where I was driving. However, as
I've posted before, if I'm waiting for a flight and want to do some
work, airport WiFi is much cheaper. If I need to work at my hotel, I
stay at one that has free Internet. Every client or vendor that I've
visited recently has allowed me to connect up to their network if I
needed Internet access. In each case, I get a much faster Internet
access for cheap/free.

Right now, I just don't see that many instances where I could actually
use Sprint EV-DO that don't have a faster and much cheaper/free
Internet option. The little burger joint that I go to for lunch has
WiFi now. I guess it depends on your needs, but it seems to me that
for the majority of business travelers, who seem to be the ones that
Sprint is targeting for EV-DO, $80/month cannot be justified given the
availabity of other options.

Joe Huber
huber.joseph@comcast.net
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 4:28:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Joseph Huber wrote:

> Similarly, EV-DO, at least right now, seems to me like I would just
> be throwing money away. If I was actually going to use my laptop
> while driving down the road, then EV-DO would serve a purpose,
> provided there was actually service where I was driving. However, as
> I've posted before, if I'm waiting for a flight and want to do some
> work, airport WiFi is much cheaper.

I'd have to agree with you that in your situation, WiFi makes a lot more
sense. But if you're going to a big meeting with a client and you hop into a
cab and suddenly need to check my email or VPN into the office to do
something to prepare, *then* EV-DO starts to make more sense, no?

And in that case, having the $80-90 monthly access may save you a lot more
by allowing you to win the contract, keep the client, etc.

I believe Wi-Fi and mobile Internet technologies based on CDMA and GSM
*both* have their place. I'm also pretty sure there's a big market for
EV-DO, or Sprint and Verizon wouldn't have sunk millions of bucks into
preparing their infrastructure to offer it.

But for many people, Wi-Fi -- or maybe a Blackberry -- will be all the
connectivity they need.

--
JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the
temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638)

"Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe"
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 7:17:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

hizark21@yahoo.com writes:

>I wonder if Sprint will support voip with EV-DO...??

It's going to take awhile for me to understand why any mobile phone
*network* provider would want to do this (unless congestion is a
huge problem). If they really wanted to do VoIP (and I wish they
would), I'd expect them to use the existing voice channels over the
air. That would make all of the existing phones potential VoIP
phones.

If I could find a company to give me cheap (~$10/month) VoIP-only
(no PSTN) wireless service I'd get several and ditch all of my
current phones. I'm not holding my breath for that though; I just
bought a couple more Sipura adapters.

I'll be less surprised if Sprint specifically forbids VoIP over
EV-DO and/or takes steps to ensure that it doesn't work (well).

--kyler
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 11:03:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 10:39:54 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospam.net>
wrote:

>Why not? I am sure that you could use Skype because I have tried it on my
>1XRTT Sprint laptop card and it works!. Assume that you have the $80.00 per
>month EVDO from Sprint, you could make all of your phone calls from your
>laptop with Skype and not pay for airtime minutes.
Guy, that's just ridiculous. Why doesn't Sprint provide wireless
service that is competitive to the cost of your home phone for local
calls? They don't have to, they don't want to. They are not
competing with home phones on local calls. Wireless service is MUCH
more expensive. They happen to like it that way.

I understand it would be good for you if they would let you use skype,
or even provide free voip service for you. But they are gonna be
dragged kicking and screaming to that. It could happen. Just not yet.
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 11:07:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 10:15:27 -0500, Joseph Huber
<huber.joseph@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:34:50 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospam.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Sprint EVDO is not anymore expensive than Verizon EVDO. It is $80.00 per
>>month. I will be upgrading the wireless card in my laptop next week to
>>support EVDO. I do not know what you guys are bellyaching about.
>
>Sprint's EV-DO may not be more expensive than Verizion's, but they are
>both significantly more expensive than competing high-speed internet
>technology such as DSL and cable. EV-DO costs twice as much per month
>as my cable internet connection, three times as much as DSL would
>cost me, is 3-5 times slower than my cable interent, and initially, at
>least for Sprint, is going to very limited geographically as to where
>I could actually use it.
Neither wireless carrier is competing with home DSL or cable data
service. The mobile service costs a hell of a lot more.

Some day they may try to sell that to you to compete with home DSL and
cable, just not now. Pointing out that a mobile service costs more
than a fixed service is just pointless. Naturally, it is more.

Cellular providers provide the highest price service of their type all
the time. It costs more than any alternative. But it is MOBILE. Such
as it is.......
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 4:02:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Joseph Huber wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 09:37:37 -0700, Steve Sobol wrote
>> The mobility inherent in wireless data is why it's higher-priced. Why do you
>> think a gallon of milk is priced higher at a gas station convenience store
>> than at a grocery store? You don't have to wait in line for ten minutes at a
>> gas station. You can get in, find what you need pretty much instantly, and
>> get out at the C-store.
>
> I don't dispute that the wireless mobile Internet should command a
> premium, but the premium being asked is just way too high. Continuing
> your analogy, the milk doesn't cost 2-3 times as much at the
> convenience store, and it's of the same quality in both places
> (sometimes, it's even the same brand!). Can you imagine a convenience
> store trying to sell milk of lesser quality (whatever that would be)
> at 2-3 times the price? I don't think it would work very well.

Agreed, that was not a good analogy.
The reason cellular/PCS data is expensive is because of the limited/scarce
bandwidth of radio channels, compared to the much greater/much cheaper
bandwidth of fixed copper wires (DSL/cable).

--
John Richards
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 4:17:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Paul Miner wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 04:25:40 GMT, "John Richards"
> <jr70@blackhole.invalid> wrote:
>> Yep. I stayed at a Comfort Suites hotel recently, and the whole
>> chain has free WiFi in all rooms. Even if you're not a payin guest,
>> you can go sit in the lobby and use their WiFi.
>
> Perhaps slightly OT for this group, but how did they provide WiFi in
> each room? The reason I ask is that I recently spent a night at a Days
> Inn where they initially claimed that every room had WiFi available. I
> couldn't get squat so I called the Front Desk and the guy said he had
> a Linksys WRT-54G down in the lobby. Hmmm, I thought, that means there
> are about 40 walls to pass through, so no wonder I didn't see any
> signal up in my room at the far end of the building. I'm just curious
> how they get a usable signal into each room at Comfort Suites.

There were no visible devices, but I assume that they had WAPs
(wireless access points) acting as repeaters at various locations.
I was on the third floor, at the end of a wing that was farthest away
from the lobby, yet the signal strength picked up by my laptop's
PC Card (PCMCIA) adapter was fair to good.

--
John Richards
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 4:17:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Tinman wrote:
> John Richards wrote:
>> Yep. I stayed at a Comfort Suites hotel recently, and the whole
>> chain has free WiFi in all rooms. Even if you're not a payin guest,
>> you can go sit in the lobby and use their WiFi.
>
> I travel a lot on business. Most all of the hotels I've stayed at that
> offer free WiFi use a proxy server-based authentication system. You are
> given a password at check-in, and sometimes the password must be used
> with a username (generally, your room number).
>
> In fact, the last Comfort Suites I stayed in did exactly that (password
> only). So while I could certainly use WiFi in the lobby, someone
> wandering in off the street without a password could not (as, IMO, it
> should be).

The Comfort Suites I stayed at (Oakbrook Terrace, IL) did not
require any sort of password or login to use the WiFi.

--
John Richards
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 5:39:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 21:17:02 GMT, Kyler Laird <Kyler@news.Lairds.org>
wrote:

>I really want EV-DO performane (low latency, specifically).

Sprint's EV-DO latency is the same or slightly worse than 1xRTT
latency in most cases. The main EV-DO benefit is significantly higher
throughput than 1xRTT (in most situations, not all), not lower
latency.

--
Paul Miner
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 5:44:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 02:56:51 GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com"
<steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:15:36 -0700, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
>wrote:
>>Steevo@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>>> $44.99 a month unlimited according to Verizon on the phone right now.
>>> You have to have a blackberry or palm treo or other pda phone
>>
>>Is that a promo? If not, I'm shocked that Verizon actually undercut Sprint
>>on price.
>No, I don't think so.
>
>For some reason I had thought that unlimited web was less than that if
>you had an EV-DO phone on VZW. That is the price that was quoted me
>as a non customer on the phone yesterday.
>
>I think Sprint is overcharging. Maybe their network has low capacity
>so they are not being price competitive to keep the problems from
>manifesting themselves. I can believe that.

Low capacity? Do you just make this stuff up?

>>> Not sure what the difference is. I tried several at verizon, they all
>>> seemed to be same speed for what I looked at. EV-DO seemed no better
>>> for regular websites. Admittedly it was a brief test.
>>
>>1xEVDO is supposed to be up to 400-500Kbps througput. 1xRTT tops out at a
>>theoretical limit of 115Kbps (ISDN speeds).
>
>I didn't watch any videos.
>
>What I did was look at the same exact ebay auction page with an LG
>VX8000 (EV-DO), an LG VX7000 (same phone but no EV-DO) and another
>phone that was there on the kiosk. They all seemed to load that page
>at a similar speed. The EV-DO didn't seem to help at all!
>
>I expected the VX8000 to be way faster. But it wasn't.

Your "testing" was flawed, which led to your disappointment.

--
Paul Miner
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 5:44:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:44:23 GMT, Paul Miner wrote:
>>I expected the VX8000 to be way faster. But it wasn't.
>Your "testing" was flawed, which led to your disappointment.

What kind of comparison should be done???

Joe Huber
huber.joseph@comcast.net
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 6:07:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

I don't know the local cost of roadrunner, but my dsl is around $50, so
how is evdo 3 times the cost? Besides that it is apples to oranges.
dsl does not get me data on my phone.


Joseph Huber wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:34:50 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospam.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Sprint EVDO is not anymore expensive than Verizon EVDO. It is $80.00 per
>>month. I will be upgrading the wireless card in my laptop next week to
>>support EVDO. I do not know what you guys are bellyaching about.
>
>
> Sprint's EV-DO may not be more expensive than Verizion's, but they are
> both significantly more expensive than competing high-speed internet
> technology such as DSL and cable. EV-DO costs twice as much per month
> as my cable internet connection, three times as much as DSL would
> cost me, is 3-5 times slower than my cable interent, and initially, at
> least for Sprint, is going to very limited geographically as to where
> I could actually use it.
>
> Given that WiFi is available for a few bucks in most airports, many
> reasonably priced hotels have some type of high-speed Internet access,
> and the fact that right now, there's a better chance of me, as a
> business traveler, not being able to use EV-DO at any given location
> than being able to use it, how does one justify paying $80/month for
> this service? It makes no economic sense.
>
> Joe Huber
> huber.joseph@comcast.net
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 6:07:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 02:07:41 GMT, Jerome Zelinske
<jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote:

> I don't know the local cost of roadrunner, but my dsl is around $50, so
>how is evdo 3 times the cost? Besides that it is apples to oranges.
>dsl does not get me data on my phone.

DSL (unlimited 1.5 Mbps down / 384 kbps up) is being offered for
$25/month by SBC and $30/month by Waymark in this market (before
taxes). 80/30 = 2.67 ~= 3. These are the long-term prices, not the
introductory short-term prices. Comcast is offering cable Internet
for $42/month to cable customers.

I'm not talking about getting data on my phone, I'm talking about
getting data on my laptop. DSL, or cable, or whatever it is, gets me
high speed Internet on my laptop when I'm in my hotel room while
traveling, and that is where I'd be using EV-DO most
frequently...seems like apples-to-apples to me.

Joe Huber
huber.joseph@comcast.net
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 6:17:35 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On 8 Jul 2005 20:25:36 -0700, hizark21@yahoo.com wrote:

>Perhaps Sprint is pricing to EV-DO to cover it's intital rollout.....??

As with most technological advances, they follow the Everett Rogers
Diffusion of Innovations theory and let the early adopters bear the
brunt of the load.

>I wonder if Sprint will support voip with EV-DO...??

The network has always supported VoIP, or do you mean support as in
offering or marketing a specific type of service?

>Another question is what will happen with Sprint PCS- Vision.....??

EV-DO isn't related to Vision any more than 1xRTT is. Both are simply
access methods that get you to the same place. Initially, all or most
of the (Vision) applications will be exactly the same. Over time, new
apps will be introduced that take better advantage of EV-DO's
increased throughput.

--
Paul Miner
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 6:21:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:34:50 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospam.net>
wrote:

>Sprint EVDO is not anymore expensive than Verizon EVDO. It is $80.00 per
>month. I will be upgrading the wireless card in my laptop next week to
>support EVDO. I do not know what you guys are bellyaching about.
>
>-mij

Be sure you upgrade knowing that EV-DO will not completely overlay the
1xRTT network, and that depending on your specific location at any
given time, you might be limited to 1xRTT even though you're using an
EV-DO card. Initially, airports and business districts in selected
cities will be upgraded. Other areas will follow, but it's unlikely
that EV-DO will ever completely cover the current 1xRTT area, and at
the fringes of the EV-DO coverage areas it's conceivable that 1xRTT
will provide better or more reliable service. In areas served by
EV-DO, though, it definitely rocks, at least in my experience.

--
Paul Miner
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 6:24:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 10:15:27 -0500, Joseph Huber
<huber.joseph@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:34:50 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <mijadyaw@nospam.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Sprint EVDO is not anymore expensive than Verizon EVDO. It is $80.00 per
>>month. I will be upgrading the wireless card in my laptop next week to
>>support EVDO. I do not know what you guys are bellyaching about.
>
>Sprint's EV-DO may not be more expensive than Verizion's, but they are
>both significantly more expensive than competing high-speed internet
>technology such as DSL and cable.

Since you're pointing out the obvious, I'll add another obvious
observation. Sprint's EV-DO is not intended to compete with
terrestrial Internet access methods such as DSL or cable, so pointing
out that EV-DO costs more than DSL/Cable is rather pointless. :) 

--
Paul Miner
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 6:28:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Jerome Zelinske" <jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Np%ze.5848$8f7.1104@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I don't know the local cost of roadrunner, but my dsl is around $50, so
> how is evdo 3 times the cost? Besides that it is apples to oranges.
> dsl does not get me data on my phone.

Nor can you take your DSL down the street, across town, or anywhere else one
can go with the coverage area.

Bob
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 6:28:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 02:28:15 GMT, "Bob Smith"
<usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Nor can you take your DSL down the street, across town, or anywhere else one
>can go with the coverage area.

Since Sprint is marketing EV-DO to business users, perhaps we should
look at some places where business users might realistically need data
access, instead of these ambiguous places like "down the street" or
"across town":
1) Hotel room
2) Airport
3) Convention center/public meeting place
4) Client's company
5) Taxi cab/other transportation
6) ???

In my experience, most of 1-3) are now covered by WiFi or wired
Internet, which is much cheaper than EV-DO, and in some cases free.
Your clients might let you use their network, or they may not. If
they don't EV-DO is nice. EV-DO would be a great for 5). I would say
the majority of usage would be with 1-4).

Maybe I just work for a small company where expenditures are
scrutinized, but there's no way I could justify to my employer a
charge of $80/month for a service that I can get free/much cheaper in
most of the places I need it, not to mention the fact that with the
present limited coverage area of EV-DO, if I did need EV-DO, there's a
very good chance I might not be able to use it for lack of coverage.
Maybe your employer is different.

Joe Huber
huber.joseph@comcast.net
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 7:11:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 21:13:21 -0500, Joseph Huber
<huber.joseph@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:44:23 GMT, Paul Miner wrote:
>>>I expected the VX8000 to be way faster. But it wasn't.
>>Your "testing" was flawed, which led to your disappointment.
>
>What kind of comparison should be done???

Downloading something more significant than simple web content. Large
objects such as bigger images, media files, email with attachments,
FTP transfers, etc. Remember, the claimed benefit is faster
throughput, not lower latency. The small objects that make up a
typical web site won't show much improvement, if any at all. Yes, the
OP used eBay as his test site, but without knowing which auction it
was, there's no way to know if the page included large photos or
images. Even if it did, you can't expect to make a buying decision or
comparative analysis after visiting just one (or even a few) web
sites.

--
Paul Miner
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 7:14:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 00:17:37 GMT, "John Richards"
<jr70@blackhole.invalid> wrote:

>Paul Miner wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 04:25:40 GMT, "John Richards"
>> <jr70@blackhole.invalid> wrote:
>>> Yep. I stayed at a Comfort Suites hotel recently, and the whole
>>> chain has free WiFi in all rooms. Even if you're not a payin guest,
>>> you can go sit in the lobby and use their WiFi.
>>
>> Perhaps slightly OT for this group, but how did they provide WiFi in
>> each room? The reason I ask is that I recently spent a night at a Days
>> Inn where they initially claimed that every room had WiFi available. I
>> couldn't get squat so I called the Front Desk and the guy said he had
>> a Linksys WRT-54G down in the lobby. Hmmm, I thought, that means there
>> are about 40 walls to pass through, so no wonder I didn't see any
>> signal up in my room at the far end of the building. I'm just curious
>> how they get a usable signal into each room at Comfort Suites.
>
>There were no visible devices, but I assume that they had WAPs
>(wireless access points) acting as repeaters at various locations.
>I was on the third floor, at the end of a wing that was farthest away
>from the lobby, yet the signal strength picked up by my laptop's
>PC Card (PCMCIA) adapter was fair to good.

No visible devices, so the mystery remains, but I assume you're right
about the multiple WAP's. Thanks. :) 

--
Paul Miner
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 8:32:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Cable internet tends to be rather pricey compared to DSL.
SBC DSL is $14.95 for 1500kbps and $24.99 for 3000kbps.
I agree that fixed broadband should not be compared to mobile
data services.

--
John Richards

Jerome Zelinske wrote:
> I don't know the local cost of roadrunner, but my dsl is around $50, so
> how is evdo 3 times the cost? Besides that it is apples to oranges.
> dsl does not get me data on my phone.
July 10, 2005 12:35:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

John Richards wrote:
> Tinman wrote:
>> John Richards wrote:
>>> Yep. I stayed at a Comfort Suites hotel recently, and the whole
>>> chain has free WiFi in all rooms. Even if you're not a payin guest,
>>> you can go sit in the lobby and use their WiFi.
>>
>> I travel a lot on business. Most all of the hotels I've stayed at
>> that offer free WiFi use a proxy server-based authentication system.
>> You are given a password at check-in, and sometimes the password
>> must be used with a username (generally, your room number).
>>
>> In fact, the last Comfort Suites I stayed in did exactly that
>> (password only). So while I could certainly use WiFi in the lobby,
>> someone wandering in off the street without a password could not
>> (as, IMO, it should be).
>
> The Comfort Suites I stayed at (Oakbrook Terrace, IL) did not
> require any sort of password or login to use the WiFi.

Then whoever contracted that installation didn't do a good job. "Free"
access is meant for guests, not people who happen to wander into the
lobby. One way or another, the cost of that access is eventually
trickled down to paying guests. OTOH you may have just happened to stay
there before the installation was complete. One manager told me they got
burned--their ISP/contractor either cut them off or increased their
rate--due to massive downloaders (locals) sitting right in the parking
lot.

Regardless, open access is the exception, not the norm, in hotels, and
I've stayed at every national chain. Certain high-end hotels don't even
offer it for free--you pay for it daily.


--
Mike
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 10:29:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:44:23 GMT, Paul Miner <pminer@elrancho.invalid>
wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 02:56:51 GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com"
><steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:

>>I think Sprint is overcharging. Maybe their network has low capacity
>>so they are not being price competitive to keep the problems from
>>manifesting themselves. I can believe that.
>
>Low capacity? Do you just make this stuff up?
No, why would you say that?

Surely you understand that Sprint has T1 lines to their cellsites.
If 2 million subscribers suddenly started subscribing to EV-DO and
watching video constantly would there be enough capacity on the
cellsite for the voice calls, of would it all grind to a halt? The
latter, obviously.
>
>>>> Not sure what the difference is. I tried several at verizon, they all
>>>> seemed to be same speed for what I looked at. EV-DO seemed no better
>>>> for regular websites. Admittedly it was a brief test.
>>>
>>>1xEVDO is supposed to be up to 400-500Kbps througput. 1xRTT tops out at a
>>>theoretical limit of 115Kbps (ISDN speeds).
>>
>>I didn't watch any videos.
>>
>>What I did was look at the same exact ebay auction page with an LG
>>VX8000 (EV-DO), an LG VX7000 (same phone but no EV-DO) and another
>>phone that was there on the kiosk. They all seemed to load that page
>>at a similar speed. The EV-DO didn't seem to help at all!
>>
>>I expected the VX8000 to be way faster. But it wasn't.
>
>Your "testing" was flawed, which led to your disappointment.

Heh. Hardly. I said I didn't watch any videos. I wanted to see if
with regular web browsing there was any advantage perceivable. There
wasn't. The testing was perfect. Since I don't want to watch
videos, that is.
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 10:29:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:mkp2d11tl9fhmdg0bti57vup9m1egcvsad@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:44:23 GMT, Paul Miner <pminer@elrancho.invalid>
> wrote:
> >On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 02:56:51 GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com"
> ><steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >>I think Sprint is overcharging. Maybe their network has low capacity
> >>so they are not being price competitive to keep the problems from
> >>manifesting themselves. I can believe that.
> >
> >Low capacity? Do you just make this stuff up?
> No, why would you say that?
>
> Surely you understand that Sprint has T1 lines to their cellsites.
> If 2 million subscribers suddenly started subscribing to EV-DO and
> watching video constantly would there be enough capacity on the
> cellsite for the voice calls, of would it all grind to a halt? The
> latter, obviously.

Can you point to a single cellsite (for any carrier) that regularly handles
2 million simultaneous subscribers?

The T1 line is very appropriate for the current environment- anything more
would be like sending the big school bus to pick up a single child. The
line can be upgraded as use necessitates it, and the company saves money
until then.
Anonymous
July 10, 2005 11:17:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Paul Miner <pminer@elrancho.invalid> writes:

>>I really want EV-DO performane (low latency, specifically).

>Sprint's EV-DO latency is the same or slightly worse than 1xRTT
>latency in most cases.

Dang! By "most cases" what do you mean? I've been hearing great reports
about EV-DO latency. Is Sprint doing something bad? Do you happen to know
if VZW EV-DO latency is different?

http://cent.syr.edu/projects_mobile_article.asp?id=66

Sprint only offers 1xRTT data service (50 to 70 Kbps) and plans to
deploy EV-DO next year. EV-DO is pretty hot, offering throughput in
excess of 500 Kbps and round-trip latency under 200 milliseconds, based
on our testing in the Washington, DC, area.

Thank you.

--kyler
Anonymous
July 11, 2005 12:07:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Joseph Huber" <huber.joseph@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:m621d1pm8di5gagqcc92uao3hh7uho3265@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 02:28:15 GMT, "Bob Smith"
> <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >Nor can you take your DSL down the street, across town, or anywhere else
one
> >can go with the coverage area.
>
> Since Sprint is marketing EV-DO to business users, perhaps we should
> look at some places where business users might realistically need data
> access, instead of these ambiguous places like "down the street" or
> "across town":
> 1) Hotel room
> 2) Airport
> 3) Convention center/public meeting place
> 4) Client's company
> 5) Taxi cab/other transportation
> 6) ???
>
> In my experience, most of 1-3) are now covered by WiFi or wired
> Internet, which is much cheaper than EV-DO, and in some cases free.
> Your clients might let you use their network, or they may not. If
> they don't EV-DO is nice. EV-DO would be a great for 5). I would say
> the majority of usage would be with 1-4).
>
> Maybe I just work for a small company where expenditures are
> scrutinized, but there's no way I could justify to my employer a
> charge of $80/month for a service that I can get free/much cheaper in
> most of the places I need it, not to mention the fact that with the
> present limited coverage area of EV-DO, if I did need EV-DO, there's a
> very good chance I might not be able to use it for lack of coverage.
> Maybe your employer is different.
>
> Joe Huber
> huber.joseph@comcast.net

Maybe you do ... But the point here is that every one of those places have a
separate charge, other than your home based DSL / Cable modem. There will be
times where you won't be able to get into a hotel/motel where the service is
provided or provided at no charge. WiFi providers @ airports charge a fee.
Same thing for the convention center.

Add to the fact that Vision EV-DO cost averages $3 / day or less. When
considering that just one use of that service, can more than pay for the
service, when signing up new clients or saving one you might be losing.

Bob
!