Posts: 31,861
Threads: 708
Joined: Jun 2024
Reputation:
0
Miss an article?
ITU capitulates, admits that the term '4G' could apply to LTE, WiMAX, and 'evolved 3G technologies'
"Of course, none of these carriers had ever planned to bow to the ITU's recommendations anyway, so the ruling has little practical relevance -- just know that the true 4G speeds are still a few years off."
AT&T 3G has been measured over 2Mbps. When can we expect to see 100 times faster from LTE?
Posts: 21,452
Threads: 243
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation:
0
Manlove wrote: I still send e-mails as well!
Me too. I send and receive emails. How quaint of us.
I must confess that I do own a cell phone. Family plan for three people $120ish/month (that's an all the taxes/fees figure). Not cheap, but not bad for three lines. Unlimited calling, unlimited text, 300MB pooled never expiring roll over data was a new customer bonus. If we use all the data, refills are $10 for 100MB shared data. MMS use data not the unlimited messaging bundle. Again, that data doesn't expire, it rolls over month to month. A $40/month Virgin Mifi is a nice addition and alleviates the need to ever purchase more data. I don't pay every month for the MiFi, just for months of increased out of the home office time.
Posts: 21,452
Threads: 243
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation:
0
Filliam H. Muffman wrote:
Miss an article?
ITU capitulates, admits that the term '4G' could apply to LTE, WiMAX, and 'evolved 3G technologies'
"Of course, none of these carriers had ever planned to bow to the ITU's recommendations anyway, so the ruling has little practical relevance -- just know that the true 4G speeds are still a few years off."
AT&T 3G has been measured over 2Mbps. When can we expect to see 100 times faster from LTE?
I already made reference to that article in the last thread. Doesn't that say exactly what I've already posted? The debate is over. The ITU isn't going to put up a fight, the carriers clearly weren't going to listen to the ITU anyway since there was no codified standard for these much faster than 3G, but not quite 4G networks. But these almost 4G speeds are getting quite fast, so it isn't all crying puppies and rainclouds.
Your numbers still don't make sense. The improvement from one generation to the next is measured by the previous baseline to the next baseline. 3G is 384kbps, 4G was supposed to be 100Mbps. Do the math, what sort of jump is that?
Oh and I forgot an  at the end of my earlier post.
Posts: 10,000
Threads: 626
Joined: Jul 2020
Reputation:
0
silvarios wrote: The improvement from one generation to the next is measured by the previous baseline to the next baseline.
Oh! Standards can't evolve!!
So, if the first official metric system measures a meter as an arbitrary percentage of an arbitrary meridian-line crossing through Paris and then later all authorities change the definition of a meter to the distance traveled by light in vacuum over 1/299,792,458th of a second then I should always measure a kilometer based upon a Parisian street-map because that was the original definition!!
Got it. Thanks!
Posts: 5,630
Threads: 1,061
Joined: Oct 2018
Reputation:
0
Black wrote:
[quote=Manlove]
I had a cell phone once...I lost it around 2001.
Don't seem to miss it.
Most people seem to rely heavily on them these days.
I'd be interested to hear what's unique about your lifestyle that makes having one not seem beneficial.
I could easily do without a cell phone. I can't recall one significant conversation that I've had that was absolutely necessary and could not have waited.
Posts: 2,418
Threads: 122
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 31,861
Threads: 708
Joined: Jun 2024
Reputation:
0
I read of a demo of WiMax in a large city almost 3 years ago predicting speeds of 4Mbps to 12Mbps depending on signal and tower congestion at somewhat lower prices. It was so long ago in internet time that I am having problems searching back that far to find it. Based on that review, I mentioned a few weeks later that I hoped to be able to watch TV shows on some future phone. Someone replied he thought that not only would AT&T never support the bandwidth for it, but that I had no idea how cell networks operated. Fast forward to November 2010 and I see AT&T ads that seem to imply it can be done on their current network.
I was disappointed last year when I saw the first plans for "4G" capable phones were more expensive and required a charge for a data plan on top of that. As mentioned in other threads, the US pays more, has data caps, is behind other countries for rollout of 4G, and people are going to be lucky to get data rates on the low end of early predictions with what is technically a more modern network. Did I calculate this right? If users actually got 12Mbps with LTE, they could hit a 5 GB cap in under two hours? I have a hard time understanding how someone can defend the cell companies when it seems so obvious to me that we are getting screwed.
Posts: 21,452
Threads: 243
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation:
0
Filliam H. Muffman wrote: I was disappointed last year when I saw the first plans for "4G" capable phones were more expensive and required a charge for a data plan on top of that. As mentioned in other threads, the US pays more, has data caps, is behind other countries for rollout of 4G, and people are going to be lucky to get data rates on the low end of early predictions with what is technically a more modern network. Did I calculate this right? If users actually got 12Mbps with LTE, they could hit a 5 GB cap in under two hours? I have a hard time understanding how someone can defend the cell companies when it seems so obvious to me that we are getting screwed.
I wasn't defending the cell phone companies, I was simply illustrating the fallacies of the presented anti-carrier argument. Outright lies (not from you, I've since decided to cheerfully ignored that user) and hyperbole won't make things better.
What's funny is that we mostly agree. Here's what I posted in the thread you were referencing:
me wrote: I want faster mobile Internet, but the problem isn't speed, it is latency and data caps. Until we work those problems out, the 4G certification won't matter.
I should have added net neutrality rules for mobile broadband are also important.
Where we disagree is that the USA is necessarily worse than the rest of the world (in many ways the USA is worse, in someways it sucks slightly less). There are data caps outside of the USA, yes even in Europe, I know for a fact that the UK has data caps (for those who like to separate the island from the mainland). Even lower data caps than the States in some cases. The "4G lie" was not a USA only occurrence. The price of wireless service is definitely worse in Canada than the USA (and quite possible other places as well, I don't track pricing as much as I used to).
Stating that doesn't make me a fan of the carriers. I refuse to sign a contract and generally buy unlocked phones where possible (generally GSM) or non subsidized carrier locked phones when required (generally CDMA phones where the unlocked phone market is much smaller). I don't think any of the contract postpaid plans are particular attractive, not Verizon, Sprint, AT&T, nor T-Mobile (T-Mobile's Even More Plus is pretty nice and contract free, but T-Mobile has gone out of their way to disavow its existence).
The prepaid and contract free postpaid carriers are better. Boot Mobile is great at $50 unlimited everything ($60 for Blackberry) if you get a CDMA phone with EVDO data instead of an iDEN phone. Virgin Mobile has a great unlimited messaging, unlimited data, 300 minutes for $25 entry level plan (add $10 for a Blackberry). Walmart Family Mobile is $45 for unlimited SMS and calliing which isn't that great, but three lines for $95/month ($125ish after fees/taxes) of unlimited SMS, calling, and 300MB bonus data is hard to beat. T-Mobile prepaid has a $50 unlimited messaging and calling with 100MB data option. That's not bad either, especially if you want a GSM phone. Three lines for my family would cost more at $150 plus sales tax, but we would get 100MB of data per line per month on the T-Mobile prepaid plan.
|
