4G is here. Albeit in limited quantity but it is here. Now that the good ship 4G has been launched, what happens to 3G? It keeps getting better.
You've heard me complain about the whiners (with no cheese) and Sprint's $10 "4G fee". We know it's not just for 4G but the what the device's intended use and the demand it will put on 3G and 4G networks. So let's say we ignore 4G for now and take a look at how cheap 3G is.
I'll start with Sprint as usual and note a few capable phones with usable operating systems. Microsoft Windows Mobile and Google Android. These phones have scalable O/S and have large app markets with a touch screen and some without a touch screen. Some come with a slide-out keyboard while others have an on-screen keyboard. The idea here is to see that for less than $100, you can have a fully functional smartphone with a high level connection on a new two contract.
Sprint
Google Android:
HTC Hero - $ 79.99
Samsung Moment - $99.99
MS Windows Mobile:
HTC Snap - $49.99
Other Windows phones are priced above the $100 mark.
Verizon
Google Android:
LG Ally - $99.99
Motorola Devour - $79.99
HTC DROID Eris - $49.99
MS Windows Mobile:
Samsung Omnia-II - $49,99
HTC Ozone and Touch Diamond - $29.99
Samsung Saga - $ Free
AT&T - They won't show you phone prices unless you'll buy from their site. Data below is from wirefly.com with new 2 year contract.
Google Android:
Motorola Backflip - $ Free
MS Windows Mobile:
HTX Pure Black, HTC Tilt 2 Mocha and LG eXpo Black are all Free.
It seems that AT&T is afraid you'll be turned away if you see their prices before you're ready to buy. They don't seem to have embraced Android quite so well since they have had the iPhone market exclusively so why bother?
Verizon is scrambling to get their 4G network squared away and maybe make a bigger splash in the pond with more 4G areas than Sprint initially started with. Sprint customers have been jumping ship to be sure and it appears they are hopping carriers to get the best deals with the best or the most features. Are they really saving money? Who knows with all the penalties the carriers assess on broken contracts. But I digress.
The idea here is that 3G is affordable and everywhere most people live, work and play. So does everyone looking for that latest bleeding edge tech phone need one only to whine about a $10 fee? Don't whine. Just get a 3G phone and be happy. 4G will be big enough later. After all, 3G wasn't built in a day either.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
What's in a fee?
Wow!
That's what I said to myself when I saw how many people were complaining (want some cheese with that whine?) about Sprint's $10 charge for "4G". Ok. Now I can understand that those not yet in a 4G environment wouldn't want to pay more for something they can't get access to. But to think themselves so isolated from other geographical locations so as to "wish" Sprint to take into consideration they shouldn't pay for the access rights to 4G is ludicrous!
Consider this:
Sprint is not charging for 4G.
Sprint is charging a fee because of the device's designed demand on a data network. The $10 is a pre-determined penalty for using the device as it was intended to be used. As a stand-alone data use device.
Now take a look at AT&T. They were ill-prepared to handle the data demands when iPhone came on the market. If they hadn't snapped up Cingular, they would have had capital to meet the demands of the iPhone. Instead, they carried a liability in an attempt to gain market share.
Verizon is still reeling from their purchase of Alltel with a high liability of Alltel equipment. A friend of mine was an Alltel customer and his data speeds were fast, calls were clear and didn't have any holes in service in the areas he works. When his phone died and had to replace it, Verizon told him he could keep his plan but it had to be through Verizon. So he did and ever since has had untold headaches with data access and call quality. To be fair, a new tower was installed (about four months later) so he could use his phone reliably from his home again, but only upstairs.
Sprint has had the longest time since their purchase of Nextel to get straightened out. How much so seems to some to be yet determined. When they bought Nextel, they knew Nextel's system was incompatible to their own and since it was to be Sprint's business class of communication, it didn't matter much. Sprint installed equipment to allow their regular customers to push a button and use their phone like Nextel's walkie-talkie style set up. and communicate with those Nextel phones!
Later, Their 3G service expanded. I know as up in Nebraska I noticed I still had Sprint service between Grand Island and Kearney along I-80 where I didn't before. North Platte, Nebraska still doesn't have a Sprint signal but it now is within Sprint's included roaming area so I don't get charged for the calls anymore. Even now I can get phone service most of the way between Salina, Kansas and Limon, Colorado where only two years ago it was either totally void or an non-contract roaming zone.
So where is Sprint in the process of 4G? You guessed it right if you said "Building it up." I'll just bet most of these same whiners pitched a fit when they didn't have 3G in their town yet had to pay a higher price for a new plan that included "Power Vision". So let's look at the scale of things now.
I noticed that in the last two months, my phone no longer makes or receives calls in EVDO mode. All calls now are in 1x mode. With the coming demands on the data side of Sprint's network from the EVO, HD2 and Touch Pro 2, to name a few, it seems that Sprint is putting voice calls into the lowest common denominator as voice calls use the least amount of bandwidth. This would suppose that Sprint is making a pre-emptive move to ensure EVDO and 4G (where available) is unhindered for use by Sprint TV, web browsing, web-enabled apps and texting. This also may indicate that future phones will use the 3G side for simultaneous voice and data usage like video phone calls or looking up something on the web while talking to someone. We know 4G will do this better but it would seem that by moving the voice calls to 1x mode, it frees up EVDO for more demanding usage.
So what's in a fee? Capability and future growth. Not speed.
That's what I said to myself when I saw how many people were complaining (want some cheese with that whine?) about Sprint's $10 charge for "4G". Ok. Now I can understand that those not yet in a 4G environment wouldn't want to pay more for something they can't get access to. But to think themselves so isolated from other geographical locations so as to "wish" Sprint to take into consideration they shouldn't pay for the access rights to 4G is ludicrous!
Consider this:
Sprint is not charging for 4G.
Sprint is charging a fee because of the device's designed demand on a data network. The $10 is a pre-determined penalty for using the device as it was intended to be used. As a stand-alone data use device.
Now take a look at AT&T. They were ill-prepared to handle the data demands when iPhone came on the market. If they hadn't snapped up Cingular, they would have had capital to meet the demands of the iPhone. Instead, they carried a liability in an attempt to gain market share.
Verizon is still reeling from their purchase of Alltel with a high liability of Alltel equipment. A friend of mine was an Alltel customer and his data speeds were fast, calls were clear and didn't have any holes in service in the areas he works. When his phone died and had to replace it, Verizon told him he could keep his plan but it had to be through Verizon. So he did and ever since has had untold headaches with data access and call quality. To be fair, a new tower was installed (about four months later) so he could use his phone reliably from his home again, but only upstairs.
Sprint has had the longest time since their purchase of Nextel to get straightened out. How much so seems to some to be yet determined. When they bought Nextel, they knew Nextel's system was incompatible to their own and since it was to be Sprint's business class of communication, it didn't matter much. Sprint installed equipment to allow their regular customers to push a button and use their phone like Nextel's walkie-talkie style set up. and communicate with those Nextel phones!
Later, Their 3G service expanded. I know as up in Nebraska I noticed I still had Sprint service between Grand Island and Kearney along I-80 where I didn't before. North Platte, Nebraska still doesn't have a Sprint signal but it now is within Sprint's included roaming area so I don't get charged for the calls anymore. Even now I can get phone service most of the way between Salina, Kansas and Limon, Colorado where only two years ago it was either totally void or an non-contract roaming zone.
So where is Sprint in the process of 4G? You guessed it right if you said "Building it up." I'll just bet most of these same whiners pitched a fit when they didn't have 3G in their town yet had to pay a higher price for a new plan that included "Power Vision". So let's look at the scale of things now.
I noticed that in the last two months, my phone no longer makes or receives calls in EVDO mode. All calls now are in 1x mode. With the coming demands on the data side of Sprint's network from the EVO, HD2 and Touch Pro 2, to name a few, it seems that Sprint is putting voice calls into the lowest common denominator as voice calls use the least amount of bandwidth. This would suppose that Sprint is making a pre-emptive move to ensure EVDO and 4G (where available) is unhindered for use by Sprint TV, web browsing, web-enabled apps and texting. This also may indicate that future phones will use the 3G side for simultaneous voice and data usage like video phone calls or looking up something on the web while talking to someone. We know 4G will do this better but it would seem that by moving the voice calls to 1x mode, it frees up EVDO for more demanding usage.
So what's in a fee? Capability and future growth. Not speed.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Apple Owners! Prepare to meet the nemesis of Windows user's!
Spyware and viruses have not been exclusive to Microsoft users. Apple and Linux/Unix users have always gloated and made their smugness known to everyone that "they don't have any viruses!" Well, the "iron curtain" of Apple was nothing but vaporware after all. Seems that indeed there have been virus attacks and spyware attacks on Apple computers for over a decade. So why haven't we heard about them hardly at all? When you're as successful as Microsoft, you'll make enemies because of that success. So popular is the Windows operating system (either by market bullying by MS or actual desire for the product by its user base) that it couldn't help but scream "Challenge me all ye hackers!"
Guess who else is successful and drawing the attention of those same hackers now? I won't mention any names but their initials are APPLE. cnet.com has an article regarding spyware now showing up on Macs. If you decide to search for more information about virus or spyware on Macs, stay away from Apple proponents or opinion sites. They may still be in denial.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20006502-245.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
Guess who else is successful and drawing the attention of those same hackers now? I won't mention any names but their initials are APPLE. cnet.com has an article regarding spyware now showing up on Macs. If you decide to search for more information about virus or spyware on Macs, stay away from Apple proponents or opinion sites. They may still be in denial.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20006502-245.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
No Injection of Thought This Time
I'd like to present you with this article on cnet.com about tablets and smart-phones. You decide if, in the end, our children will wind up thinking laptops a curiously odd piece of equipment they will be glad not to have to lug around.
Monday, May 31, 2010
The Mobile Information Age
Seemingly from the dawn of the written word, Man has endeavored to "take it with him" and "spread the word". With some thought to the history of technology, it isn't surprising to see how important it is to us to have certain information at our disposal. 3x5 cards, a Rolodex, PDA's and SmartPhones make up the bulk of the most important information to have at hand. Contacts.
On the larger scale of technology you see portable file cases, then FAX machines, data tapes, Hollerith Cards (look it up if you don't know what they are) and disc packs. These made information in a more permanent state more portable but still used a lot of room for the contacts and more detailed information businesses needed to have at hand.
Between these two sets lay the most robust industry to rise up. The personal computer set a level of expectations that gave a lot of us access to a wide range of information from a single machine. It wasn't a main frame or a mini-computer. It really wasn't portable but could be moved if needed though cumbersome to do so. It could connect through the telephone system or a dedicated line like a terminal from an office or home to connect to an even larger repository of information that might be needed.
Out of the PC environment came the need to "take it with you" to visit clients on site or demonstrate new applications or make presentations. The portable PC was created to satisfy that need and it was a PC with a built-in monitor and disk drives. From then it was a matter of making it smaller, faster and more powerful. Miniaturization was the buzzword of the day and computer manufacturers took it to literal proportions and thus was built the PDA. At first it was a kind of set back due to its limited capabilities but it did put our contacts and some other types of information quite literally at our fingertips. As we got used to using these devices and learning to reliably synchronize them to our laptops and desktop systems, we began to demand more of the little gem.
As the technology progressed, so to did the demand for more power, memory, speed and connectivity options. InfraRed (IR) by now was too slow but remained on most portable platforms as the only or more reliable wireless solution available. Bluetooth technology was to increase wireless security but kept running into issues with initial connectivity causing many to forego the security and go back to a wired solution which still proved faster and more secure even today.
Now the wireless communications companies or "cell phone" companies if you prefer, are offering far more powerful devices that do a great deal more than make phone calls and keep contacts at your fingertips. These are miniature computing platforms running one of three main-stream operating systems. Apple's iPhone, Microsoft's Windows Mobile and Google's Android. Which is the best solution? That's a trick question that depends on far too many factors that must be taken into account sans personal preferences. And since the consumer is not shy about making their preferences known, it would be impossible to say which is best for all people everywhere. So that questions won't be answered here. On the other hand, I'll make my preferences and opinions known knowing that it may stir up dissent and strife among the masses.
I can sum up all of my opinions and observations with the following:
Palm OS was but no longer a serious contender.
Microsoft CE/Windows Mobile stripped down windows to fit in the limited confines of the hardware rather than build a purely mobile solution and strive for a standardized hardware hook list. Good for many things but now outdated as of version 6.5. No real improvements in mobile computing and seems to lag in available apps for the masses.
Apple iPhone was the most significant and directed improvement in mobile computing for a hand-held device. Though Apple's anally strict application rules for "their" device severely restricts true open platform choice by the masses, their strict adherence to these rules have produced very fine apps. It's interesting to see how Apple and Apple owners have for years complained about Microsoft's attempts to "control" the market with a closed operating system (Windows) while Apple does control the market with their own stringent and anal-like adhering to a finite set of rules. Seems to me that's how Sony lost the Beta/VHS battle and Apple lost the PC market.
Google Android. It's new and looks cool. It's a young and undeveloped total mobile package platform as compared to Apple's iPhone. However, that is changing very rapidly. It seems that Google foresaw the need for a true open platform that offered just about everything you could want in a mobile device app list. So being the new kid on the block isn't about how well it does now but how well it does it in the future. If Google stays on course, Android will easily out-distance iPhone forcing Apple to make a couple of hard choices. With Sprint's focus on the HTC EVO 4G device running Android 2.1 and the build-up of the 4G infrastructure Sprint may very well become the embodiment in a single package of a single company that Apple and Microsoft can only do part way each.
The culmination and melding of Google Android, devices by HTC, a huge ready-to-make-it-better base of companies that have accepted the operating system and Sprint's relentless progress to increase capability nationwide is unmatched. Come June 4, 2010, Sprint looks to be in the position to take the hill and keep it.
On the larger scale of technology you see portable file cases, then FAX machines, data tapes, Hollerith Cards (look it up if you don't know what they are) and disc packs. These made information in a more permanent state more portable but still used a lot of room for the contacts and more detailed information businesses needed to have at hand.
Between these two sets lay the most robust industry to rise up. The personal computer set a level of expectations that gave a lot of us access to a wide range of information from a single machine. It wasn't a main frame or a mini-computer. It really wasn't portable but could be moved if needed though cumbersome to do so. It could connect through the telephone system or a dedicated line like a terminal from an office or home to connect to an even larger repository of information that might be needed.
Out of the PC environment came the need to "take it with you" to visit clients on site or demonstrate new applications or make presentations. The portable PC was created to satisfy that need and it was a PC with a built-in monitor and disk drives. From then it was a matter of making it smaller, faster and more powerful. Miniaturization was the buzzword of the day and computer manufacturers took it to literal proportions and thus was built the PDA. At first it was a kind of set back due to its limited capabilities but it did put our contacts and some other types of information quite literally at our fingertips. As we got used to using these devices and learning to reliably synchronize them to our laptops and desktop systems, we began to demand more of the little gem.
As the technology progressed, so to did the demand for more power, memory, speed and connectivity options. InfraRed (IR) by now was too slow but remained on most portable platforms as the only or more reliable wireless solution available. Bluetooth technology was to increase wireless security but kept running into issues with initial connectivity causing many to forego the security and go back to a wired solution which still proved faster and more secure even today.
Now the wireless communications companies or "cell phone" companies if you prefer, are offering far more powerful devices that do a great deal more than make phone calls and keep contacts at your fingertips. These are miniature computing platforms running one of three main-stream operating systems. Apple's iPhone, Microsoft's Windows Mobile and Google's Android. Which is the best solution? That's a trick question that depends on far too many factors that must be taken into account sans personal preferences. And since the consumer is not shy about making their preferences known, it would be impossible to say which is best for all people everywhere. So that questions won't be answered here. On the other hand, I'll make my preferences and opinions known knowing that it may stir up dissent and strife among the masses.
I can sum up all of my opinions and observations with the following:
Palm OS was but no longer a serious contender.
Microsoft CE/Windows Mobile stripped down windows to fit in the limited confines of the hardware rather than build a purely mobile solution and strive for a standardized hardware hook list. Good for many things but now outdated as of version 6.5. No real improvements in mobile computing and seems to lag in available apps for the masses.
Apple iPhone was the most significant and directed improvement in mobile computing for a hand-held device. Though Apple's anally strict application rules for "their" device severely restricts true open platform choice by the masses, their strict adherence to these rules have produced very fine apps. It's interesting to see how Apple and Apple owners have for years complained about Microsoft's attempts to "control" the market with a closed operating system (Windows) while Apple does control the market with their own stringent and anal-like adhering to a finite set of rules. Seems to me that's how Sony lost the Beta/VHS battle and Apple lost the PC market.
Google Android. It's new and looks cool. It's a young and undeveloped total mobile package platform as compared to Apple's iPhone. However, that is changing very rapidly. It seems that Google foresaw the need for a true open platform that offered just about everything you could want in a mobile device app list. So being the new kid on the block isn't about how well it does now but how well it does it in the future. If Google stays on course, Android will easily out-distance iPhone forcing Apple to make a couple of hard choices. With Sprint's focus on the HTC EVO 4G device running Android 2.1 and the build-up of the 4G infrastructure Sprint may very well become the embodiment in a single package of a single company that Apple and Microsoft can only do part way each.
The culmination and melding of Google Android, devices by HTC, a huge ready-to-make-it-better base of companies that have accepted the operating system and Sprint's relentless progress to increase capability nationwide is unmatched. Come June 4, 2010, Sprint looks to be in the position to take the hill and keep it.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
