SPCS announces EV-DO release

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.::
62 answers Last reply
More about spcs announces release
  1. 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.
  2. 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"
  3. 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:dajsvj$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"
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. 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.
  7. 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"
  8. 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:daku2o$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"
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. 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
  12. 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
  13. 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
  14. 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...??
  15. 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
  16. 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...??
    >
  17. 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.
  18. 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"
  19. 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
  20. 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"
  21. 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
  22. 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:daotj2$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"
  23. 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"
  24. 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
  25. 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"
  26. 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
  27. 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.
  28. 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.......
  29. 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
  30. 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
  31. 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
  32. 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
  33. 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
  34. 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
  35. 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
  36. 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
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. 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
  40. 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
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. 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.
  45. 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
  46. 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.
  47. 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.
  48. 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
  49. 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
Ask a new question

Read More

Sprint PCS Internet Service Providers