Archive for the ‘4g’ Category

T-Mobile Project Dark Rumor Update: Financed Phones, Tiered Unlimited Plans [Rumor]

We’ve heard plenty about Project Dark lately, including new unlimited plans, 21Mbps HSPA, and new handsets. The newest rumors, courtesy of Boy Genius Report, are whispers of Rent-A-Center style, contract-free unsubsidized phone purchasing and tiered unlimited plans.

Obviously T-mobile is attempting to expand their customer base through Project Dark, and part of the approach is to entice customers who would normally be forced to prepay monthly dues as well as full retail for a device:

“Even More Plus” will give those who would otherwise qualify for FlexPay the option to finance a phone. [...] Our sources tell us that the phones will not be subsidized and so there won’t be contracts for the devices, which means you pay the full retail price over the course of a set amount of time (up to 20 months is what we’re told). Not bad – for a $500 device over that time is just $25/month, as an example.

The next step is offering the “Most Affordable Unlimited Rate Plans” in three flavors:

[U]nlimited voice, unlimited voice and text, and unlimited voice/text/data all priced at $40, $50 and $60, respectively.

All unconfirmed rumors, of course, but moves like this could definitely help T-mobile leap up from fourth place in the Great Battle of the Carriers. [Boy Genius Report]

Android rumor rodeo, starring Sprint’s first 4G phone, a delayed Eclair, INQ Mobile’s 2010 handset, and more

The gang at Android and Me seemed to have made quite a number of acquaintances on their sojourn through CTIA and MotoDev Summit. Specifically, there were three people along the way they reportedly talked to that led to the most tantalizing of rumors. First down the rabbit hole is a Sprint developer who claimed the first 4G (i.e. WiMAX) phone will be an Android device, which honestly wouldn’t be all that shocking given the company’s love for and recent history with the OS. Next up is a Samsung exec that intimated we shouldn’t expect Android 2.0 “Eclair” until Q2 2010 — interesting in its own right, but looks like those whispers of Sholes launching with anything beyond Donut isn’t gonna come to fruition now. Our third definitive individual is an INQ head employee who let slip its handsets would be finding its way onto a US carrier’s network in 2010 and would have a “pimped out” customized Android skin chock full of social networking the likes of Spotify, Skype, Facebook, etc. The rest of its report is much ado about nothing — no LG android phone this year, no TomTom app this year, and no standalone Google Maps navigation software. Yeah, that’s quite a number of Android rumors to digest, and unfortunately nothing definitive. Looking forward to the future?

[Via i4u]

Filed under: Cellphones

Android rumor rodeo, starring Sprint’s first 4G phone, a delayed Eclair, INQ Mobile’s 2010 handset, and more originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:29:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

T-Mobile Project Dark: A Hyperfast 21Mbps 3G Rollout? (Update: It’s Much More) [Rumor]

Boy Genius hears T-Mobile’s Project Dark (aka Black) contains two things: a bunch of phones launch, like the Cliq and BlackBerry 9700, and more importantly, a “very, very rapid expansion” of T-Mobile 3G network—the 21Mbps HSPA one. Update:

There’s actually more to it, possibly: A new “Everything Unlimited” plan that’ll be $50 for all-you-can-eat voice, SMS, MMS and data. Watch out, Sprint. Plus, T-Mobile employees will be getting a snazzy new uniform consisting of a black shirt and grey pants. We’ll see. [BGR]

Why the FCC’s Got AT&T and Verizon Scared Shitless [Fcc]

Remember net neutrality? Over a year after Comcast’s torrent-killing ways turned it into a rallying cry for chest-slapping geek solidarity, it’s back. But this time, it’s got AT&T and Verizon scared shitless—and it might actually screw us over.

A quick refresher: Net neutrality is, simply, the principle that all data gets treated the same by an ISP or service, whether it’s incoming email or HD videos of dudes getting socked in the nuts by a 4-year-old on YouTube. A real-world example of very non-neutral behavior would be what got Comcast slapped by the FCC: specifically sabotaging torrents.

Theoretically, this could go beyond policing piracy, for instance if, say, Time Warner competitively blocked or slowed down Hulu, or if Verizon struck a deal with Google to give its data priority over traffic from Bing, so people using Google would get a way better experience than people using Bing. Streaming video is a not-so-coincidental theoretical example, since the explosion of video traffic is what the ISPs say is swallowing up all of the internet.

The end result of the threat of government-mandated net neutrality regulations for ISPs was a mixed “win” for consumers: AT&T, Comcast and Time Warner all responded with monthly data caps on their internet service in at least some of their markets. (Comcast limited it in all markets.)

As for the FCC telling ISPs to be more explicit about network management practices, Comcast started straight-up telling people heavy internet users would have their entire connections slowed down. While they suck for consumers, these are all “net neutral” practices, since no particular kind of data is discriminated against. The net neutrality debate fizzled down, though in some ways people were worse off than before.

With a new president, comes a new FCC chair, Julian Genachowski. Unlike his predecessor, who regularly reamed the cable industry but was a little too snuggly with the telecoms and against “hard and fast” net-neutrality rules, Genachowski is all about rules for everybody. Including the wireless carriers.

As you’re probably well aware, mobile broadband is treated way differently than the internet that’s piped into your house. It’s considered fragile. There’s far less of it to go around, with a less developed infrastructure and limited wireless spectrum to use. The rules for using it are tighter, like dating a nun. Restrictions abound, like no p2p. You don’t want the network to break, after all. That’s why, for instance, AT&T previously blocked Skype and SlingPlayer from running on 3G on the iPhone—and continues to block Sling—and why Apple rejects every torrent app that even tries to cross into the App Store.

In the past weeks, Genachowski has made it clear that he thinks that should change, that openness should “apply to the Internet however accessed.” He’s not saying they shouldn’t be able to manage the network to make sure it runs smoothly, to be clear. But if you were scratching your head about why AT&T conceded and opened their network up to VoIP on the iPhone, look no further than this nugget from Genachowski, from a speech he gave three weeks ago:

We’ve already seen some clear examples of deviations from the Internet’s historic openness. We have witnessed certain broadband providers unilaterally block access to VoIP applications (phone calls delivered over data networks)…”

AT&T very much does not want the government to tell it how to run its networks, particularly the mobile one. AT&T Mobility CEO Ralph de la Vega this week responded pretty clearly to the FCC’s plans:

“Before we begin ‘fixing’ what isn’t broken, we need to be thoughtful about the consequences. We believe the marketplace today is vibrant, and there is no need to burden the mobile Internet with onerous new regulations.”

So what’s going to happen?

Well, the FCC is clear about what it thinks. This week, at a wireless telecom conference, Genachowski reiterated that net neutrality should apply to mobile broadband too. If those regulations pass, we’ll likely see the same thing we saw with the landline providers: Caps (not just on 3G cards like there are now) and “transparent” network management. Goodbye unlimited mobile broadband like the iPhone has. You will pay for every ounce of data that you use. And if you’re “crowding” the network by downloading a bunch of stuff, you’re gonna get slowed down because that’s the easy “net neutral” way to keep users in check. How much better is that, really?

So iPhone users, enjoy your “unlimited” wireless connections now. Pay-per-byte data—for both wired and wireless broadband networks—may well be the road we’re going down. Verizon is the last major landline broadband provider who has held back from capping or throttling its services (looove my FiOS), but even its CTO says that eventually, “we are going to reach a point where we will sell packages of bytes.”

Hopefully those packages will come cheap.

You Always Wanted a Cell Tower in Your Backyard, Right? [Fcc]

While disappointing carriers by reiterating the FCC is all about net neutrality, chairman Julius Genachowski also offered them some consolation: To get more 4G goodness in the air, the FCC’s going to a “shot clock” style rollout for cell towers.

That means when a new cell tower site is proposed, there’s just a short period for a community to protest it—the idea being more towers going up even faster will help speed up the rollout of crazyfast 4G wireless. The FCC’s also working to free up more spectrum for carriers to use for 4G, though that’s not exactly easy, since wireless spectrum, while invisible, is a pretty limited resource. (It’s why Verizon paid a kabillion dollars for a chunk of it.)

Even if you’re not happy about the shot clock timing for towers, on the upside, the FCC’s committed to having net neutrality apply to mobile internets as well as the stuff your cable company provides, the wireless carriers won’t be able to terribly restrict what you do with all of that mobile broadband, beyond very basic network management to keep it all running. [Cnet]

« Older Entries    Newer Entries »