PDA

View Full Version : AT&T On Track for Femtocell Deployment By End of 2009




MacRumors
Jun 25, 2009, 12:48 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/06/25/atandt-on-track-for-femtocell-deployment-by-end-of-2009/)

Unstrung reports (http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=178413) that AT&T is on track for deployment of its 3G MicroCell femtocell technology by the end of 2009. Femtocell technology connects to a user's existing broadband Internet service and provides enhanced 3G voice and data coverage within a 5000 square foot range.According to AT&T's executive director for radio access network delivery, Gordon Mansfield, who was speaking at the Femtocells World Summit in London today, about 200 users are testing the femto service in targeted customer trials.

In the coming weeks, he added, "we will expand that into a marketing trial of the AT&T-branded 3G Microcell, which will be open to customers through our AT&T stores… in a handful of cities.

"We're on track for a full national launch by the end of 2009."A carrier settings update (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/09/apple-issues-update-signaling-iphone-compatibility-with-atandts-microcell/) for the iPhone released in late February contained hints of MicroCell compatibility, and AT&T promised last month (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/05/27/atandt-announces-plans-for-7-2-mbps-3g-deployment/) that customer trials of the MicroCell technology were one of its priorities for 2009. Confirmation of plans for a full public launch of the service in 2009, however, will be welcome news for iPhone users suffering from poor reception in their homes.

MicroCell pricing remains unknown at this time, although similar offerings from other carriers require either an upfront purchase of $249.99 (Verizon Network Extender (http://www.verizonwireless.com:80/b2c/store/accessory?action=gotoFemtocell")) or an upfront purchase of $99.99 with additional monthly coverage and calling charges (Sprint AIRAVE (http://www.nextel.com/en/services/airave/index.shtml?id9=vanity:AIRAVE)).

Article Link: AT&T On Track for Femtocell Deployment By End of 2009 (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/06/25/atandt-on-track-for-femtocell-deployment-by-end-of-2009/)



bytethese
Jun 25, 2009, 12:58 PM
I'm all for this as my AT&T service in my apt SUCKS. I live in a 500 unit apt building on a small island in NYC and service is tough indoors.

With that said, given its 5000 foot range, will my neighbors be able to connect to my femtocell? Even tho I have a 20/20 FiOS connection in my apt, I don't want the whole building's cell phone traffic saturating my internet connection.

Wilbah
Jun 25, 2009, 01:00 PM
Miraculously, (and after two full years of ridiculously bad service) - I went ahead and updated to the 3Gs from my original iPhone (now dubbed the iPhone $600 - as we purchased on the original launch day) - and lo and behold..... my iPhone now rings in my house...

I still get the occasional dropped call, but by and large the phone works! I live in an older house -with no insulation in my home office; in a densely populated area of central NJ, I placed calls every month to the AT&T service department and was told that I was in a special "pocket" without consistent service; even though the map showed consistent call and data coverage.

I like the idea of this "micro" boost... but I have WiFi all around my house so I dont need the 3G... I just need to make and receive calls...why should I have to pay AT&T again to get service that actual works as advertised? -NO WAY will they get more out of me on a subscription basis, a one time purchase ? possibly.... IF it actually works.

I must love the iPhone to put up with this crap, and I do... but AT&T should really get it together, as outside of the phone, I think nearly every element of their operation suspect, and I'm very leery of buying anything from them.

W

PoitNarf
Jun 25, 2009, 01:02 PM
It better be just an upfront cost to buy the device and no additional monthly fees. The idea of a monthly fee for a device that is only needed because of the service providers crappy coverage is insane. If anything, they should give you a couple bucks off of your monthly bill since you're taking some of the strain off of their mobile towers.

iphones4evry1
Jun 25, 2009, 01:06 PM
So this is kind of like WiMax ?

Diode
Jun 25, 2009, 01:13 PM
With that said, given its 5000 foot range, will my neighbors be able to connect to my femtocell? Even tho I have a 20/20 FiOS connection in my apt, I don't want the whole building's cell phone traffic saturating my internet connection.

You can limit cell service to only your phone and other ones you pre-approve.

I believe it uses the IEMI number

So this is kind of like WiMax ?

No, this is a device that acts like a mini-cell site that allows your phone to make and receive calls. Essentially you plug this into an internet connection in your home and your phone thinks it's a normal cell tower.

bytethese
Jun 25, 2009, 01:17 PM
You can limit cell service to only your phone and other ones you pre-approve.

I believe it uses the IEMI number

Now that's what I'm talking about. Then I'd def be more interested in something like this. :)

iphones4evry1
Jun 25, 2009, 01:17 PM
this is a device that acts like a mini-cell site that allows your phone to make and receive calls. Essentially you plug this into an internet connection in your home and your phone thinks it's a normal cell tower.

Cool. Hopefully, people with the 3GS will be able to realize the 7.2Mbps data speed. :)

I just clicked on the link in the original post, and Sprint's current service costs $4.99 per month.
I'm not so sure I want to have to pay a monthly fee. I suppose if I lived in an area where my cell phone service was terrible, I would. But I get 3G just fine in my house (when I'm not on WiFi).

macduke
Jun 25, 2009, 01:24 PM
Car company to customer: Hey! Come buy our car.

Customer: Ok maybe I will. Can I test drive it?

Car company: No.

Customer: Ok, now that I bought this car...I see there is no engine. This is troubling to me.

Car company: Oh...so you actually wanted to drive the car? We can install the engine, but that will be a monthly fee. Also, the price of the engine isn't included with the car.

Customer: FML

Ok, so I'm not the best with analogies, but that's what I saw in my head when I read this post. I'm generally not for more government regulation...but when it comes to cell phone companies.....yeah lets go ahead with the beatdown.

DotCom2
Jun 25, 2009, 01:24 PM
I'm only interested in this if it's a one time charge that I can budget for and not a monthly subscription.
Even if it's $200-300.
I'm sick of monthy charges! :mad:

TXCraig
Jun 25, 2009, 01:27 PM
I have been waiting and waiting for this.

My reception in my house stinks. I wish they would roll this out ASAP. Would be willing pay what ever they want, i need a good signal!

iphones4evry1
Jun 25, 2009, 01:27 PM
I'm only interested in this if it's a one time charge that I can budget for and not a monthly subscription.
Even if it's $200-300.
I'm sick of monthy charges! :mad:

I was thinking the same thing. If it was like a WiFi router and I just plug it into my current internet connection, then fine. But now that I find out they want a monthly fee ... forget it! I already have WiFi and 99.9% of us have at least some form of voice cell phone signal in our homes, so this service is useless. If you live in the basement of a large building and have zero cell phone service, then I could see you using this, but for most of us, it seems pointless.

SqB
Jun 25, 2009, 01:28 PM
Cool. Hopefully, people with the 3GS will be able to realize the 7.2Mbps data speed. :)


I +1 that comment. I refuse to cripple my APEX-n by setting it back to A/B compatible just so that my iPhone can connect to it. It would be great if the 3g data would also work over the femtocell. I really prefer to keep the wi-fi turned off on the iPhone for battery savings.

I currently use a wilson wireless booster that cost over $400 with amplifier/antennas and cable. It's great because it works with all networks, but it's not great because it's a bit complicated and finicky. I hope to be one of the first ones in line for this device.

d21mike
Jun 25, 2009, 01:36 PM
You can limit cell service to only your phone and other ones you pre-approve. I believe it uses the IEMI number.

Are you positive? This would make since, but when I called Verizon to see how theirs worked (was helping a Verizon Customer) I was told that as long as they were within so many feet (like 10) then they would then be authorized and can then use it within a 5000 foot range. This is just what I was told, maybe the Verizon Guy did not know what he was talking about.

Cool. Hopefully, people with the 3GS will be able to realize the 7.2Mbps data speed. :)

Is the 7.2Mbps data speed only used for data? Or does it also help voice?

If only data, then why would you not just use your WiFi Connection since the Microcell runs over WiFi anyway? When I am in my house or the office it automatically connects to my WiFi Network so I only use AT&T Network for Voice in those locations. Of course while away from WiFi I am on the 3G Network.

johnntd
Jun 25, 2009, 01:41 PM
It better be just an upfront cost to buy the device and no additional monthly fees. The idea of a monthly fee for a device that is only needed because of the service providers crappy coverage is insane. If anything, they should give you a couple bucks off of your monthly bill since you're taking some of the strain off of their mobile towers.

I do think ATT should take off a $10 per month of our wireless bill because we off load ourselves into our broadband networks. It makes every sense if they ask me.

DotCom2
Jun 25, 2009, 01:49 PM
I do think ATT should take off a $10 per month of our wireless bill because we off load ourselves into our broadband networks. It makes every sense if they ask me.

Logic does not prevail in this case.:(

iSee
Jun 25, 2009, 02:02 PM
...within a 5000 square foot range.

What, exactly, does that mean?

5000 square feet is equivalent to a circle with a 40 foot radius. So will these have a range of about 40'?

Diode
Jun 25, 2009, 02:10 PM
Are you positive? This would make since, but when I called Verizon to see how theirs worked (was helping a Verizon Customer) I was told that as long as they were within so many feet (like 10) then they would then be authorized and can then use it within a 5000 foot range. This is just what I was told, maybe the Verizon Guy did not know what he was talking about.

Not 100% but according to Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/25/details-on-atandts-3g-microcell-everything-but-the-date-and-pric/) the specs list:

* Device is secure - cannot be accessed by unauthorized users, easy and secure online management of device settings

No more details listed ... but it seems you can limit the number of people with access.

Something else interesting that's not listed is the device has a built in GPS.

The GPS serves two purposes:

1. Limits it's use to where AT&T has service ... IE no bringing it over sea's with you to make calls home (Boooooo)
2. Allows your phone to use cell-tower assistance for the GPS (very cool) ... IE your A-GPS.

dsn112
Jun 25, 2009, 02:13 PM
Miraculously, (and after two full years of ridiculously bad service) - I went ahead and updated to the 3Gs from my original iPhone (now dubbed the iPhone $600 - as we purchased on the original launch day) - and lo and behold..... my iPhone now rings in my house...

I still get the occasional dropped call, but by and large the phone works! I live in an older house -with no insulation in my home office; in a densely populated area of central NJ, I placed calls every month to the AT&T service department and was told that I was in a special "pocket" without consistent service; even though the map showed consistent call and data coverage.

I like the idea of this "micro" boost... but I have WiFi all around my house so I dont need the 3G... I just need to make and receive calls...why should I have to pay AT&T again to get service that actual works as advertised? -NO WAY will they get more out of me on a subscription basis, a one time purchase ? possibly.... IF it actually works.

I must love the iPhone to put up with this crap, and I do... but AT&T should really get it together, as outside of the phone, I think nearly every element of their operation suspect, and I'm very leery of buying anything from them.

W


Same thing with my 1st gen, little to no service in my home, now 3g s, service is pretty good.

The only thing this is good for is people who need to use the phone in there home to make and recieve calls that only have there cell.

I have a home line, so although it sounds good in theory, iits not worth paying for it.

jholzner
Jun 25, 2009, 02:16 PM
Wow...so ATT is going to let me pay to make their crappy service better? Gee, thanks.

Eso
Jun 25, 2009, 02:16 PM
The point of this device should really be to allow for unlimited VoIP mintues through your home broadband connection. If it is just to enhance the signal, it needs to be free.

iphones4evry1
Jun 25, 2009, 02:22 PM
If we have to pay for this service, then it isn't going to subtract from our wireless minutes, right?

according to Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/25/details-on-atandts-3g-microcell-everything-but-the-date-and-pric/) the specs list:
* Device is secure - cannot be accessed by unauthorized users, easy and secure online management of device settings

No more details listed ... but it seems you can limit the number of people

So, this means you aren't going to knock on the door of the apartment next to you and find 40 guys working in a "call center." Lol. :D

Stargaze
Jun 25, 2009, 02:23 PM
It better be just an upfront cost to buy the device and no additional monthly fees. The idea of a monthly fee for a device that is only needed because of the service providers crappy coverage is insane. If anything, they should give you a couple bucks off of your monthly bill since you're taking some of the strain off of their mobile towers.

+1 they should be giving you the box for next to nothing or a discount as a Thank you for reducing load on their 3G network!

bytethese
Jun 25, 2009, 02:24 PM
What, exactly, does that mean?

5000 square feet is equivalent to a circle with a 40 foot radius. So will these have a range of about 40'?

It means I have a lot less to worry about. :)

I didn't even think to convert 5000sqft, means only about 5-6 apts would "intrude" on my connection rather than half the building. :)

JonB3Z
Jun 25, 2009, 02:26 PM
Something else interesting that's not listed is the device has a built in GPS.

The GPS serves two purposes:

1. Limits it's use to where AT&T has service ... IE no bringing it over sea's with you to make calls home (Boooooo)
2. Allows your phone to use cell-tower assistance for the GPS (very cool) ... IE your A-GPS.

So this is targeted for use in places that do not see the cell towers but do see the satellites? Good luck, apartment dwellers, apparently you will be installing this on your window pane or balcony!

I suspect reason (2) has more to do with the FCC requirement that cell phones be locatable than it does with neat location-dependent apps.

iphones4evry1
Jun 25, 2009, 02:26 PM
Wow...so ATT is going to let me pay to make their crappy service better? Gee, thanks.

I don't think this service is intended for 99% of of the population. I think this service is intended for the 1% of the population that live in such remote areas that they do not have a cell phone tower anywhere near them, and for people that live (or work) in basements of buildings and in urban locations where the geography of buildings is blocking them from cell phone reception. Yes, all of these people could use a land line, but maybe they want to use their cell phone (for obvious reasons; contacts, caller id, lists missed calls, voice mail, texting, etc, and it's all on the device they can walk out the door and go somewhere with).

Stargaze
Jun 25, 2009, 02:29 PM
What, exactly, does that mean?

5000 square feet is equivalent to a circle with a 40 foot radius. So will these have a range of about 40'?

my house is 4200 Square feet (3 floor home including "basement)

so its about the size of a home

so with that number their Microcell should cover your entire home and yard and somewhat into your neighbours yard / house

1Zach1
Jun 25, 2009, 02:30 PM
How is this different than something like this http://www.wi-ex.com/Page3427.aspx ? Or do you not need any service from AT&T for the Microcell?

Enigmafan420
Jun 25, 2009, 02:51 PM
Someone probably already posted this but here goes:

You have got to be KIDDING me if you think I am going to pay ANY MORE MONEY because your network sucks AT$T.

Sorry-but this is a crock-just like tethering. What, because you are going to tether you have to pay yet ANOTHER $30 month. I have never exceeded 1 GB data on my iphone and this includes the occasional unofficial tether.

AT$T should build a network that doesn't require me allowing them to use my broadband, which I PAY FOR. That being said, the idea is nice, just don't charge me for it. I am already paying AT$T and Comca$T serious bucks each month. And, at least in AT$T's case, paying for a network not quite up to par.

WeirdBal
Jun 25, 2009, 03:43 PM
Someone probably already posted this but here goes:

You have got to be KIDDING me if you think I am going to pay ANY MORE MONEY because your network sucks AT$T.

Sorry-but this is a crock-just like tethering. What, because you are going to tether you have to pay yet ANOTHER $30 month. I have never exceeded 1 GB data on my iphone and this includes the occasional unofficial tether.

AT$T should build a network that doesn't require me allowing them to use my broadband, which I PAY FOR. That being said, the idea is nice, just don't charge me for it. I am already paying AT$T and Comca$T serious bucks each month. And, at least in AT$T's case, paying for a network not quite up to par.

In some cases, it's not a lack of the carrier wanting to extend service in an area, it's finding a place where a new tower can be erected. We are just about to move into a new house, and the reception there is so-so to non-existent at times. Speaking to a neighbor, they tried to have another tower erected in town, but the residents near the proposed location shot it down since they didn't want it there. What do you do then? I am eager to have this as an option to get good reception in our house, though I don't think I would pay any additional monthly charges for something like this. If it is a one time fee to purchase the device, then I may go for it.

NorfolkMustard
Jun 25, 2009, 04:21 PM
FYI Vodafone in the UK will offer a similar service from Wednesday

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8114857.stm

It seems there are a few ways of getting it. You can get the hardware for free as part of a monthly mobile tariff. Alternatively, there's a monthly rental @ GBP5/month, or you can buy the hardware outright for GBP160.

ilfn143
Jun 25, 2009, 05:04 PM
just wait for google voice with push

X86BSD
Jun 25, 2009, 05:32 PM
people think this is a great idea. I'm AT&T. My network fuggin SUCKS!!!
I have the solution! Let's make customers pay for devices to help build out our network! We win twice! God, come on folks. If the carrier is such **** you have to PAY them to build out THEIR network something is seriously, seriously, SERIOUSLY wrong.

theBB
Jun 25, 2009, 05:44 PM
I don't get it, either. They expect me to pay $250 for one of their boxes, so that AT&T can use my broadband connection that I pay for in order to route the phone calls that it charges me for? Wouldn't it be easier to use a landline or Skype phone at home?

kas23
Jun 25, 2009, 05:54 PM
I don't get it, either. They expect me to pay $250 for one of their boxes, so that AT&T can use my broadband connection that I pay for in order to route the phone calls that it charges me for? Wouldn't it be easier to use a landline or Skype phone at home?

I know. This whole thing just feels very wrong. We are paying AT$T to use something we already pay for, just because AT$T's isn't willing to pay to upgrade their own network. When is this insanity going to end. And people are welcoming this. I would just love to have these peoples' business.

Confirmation of plans for a full public launch of the service in 2009, however, will be welcome news for iPhone users suffering from poor reception in their homes.


Actually, thinking about it some more, if someone is stupid enough to pay for a service that doesn't even work in their very own homes, I guess they would be stupid enough to pay for it 2 more times (for the unit and again for their broadband). These people deserve to be taken advantage of.

swingerofbirch
Jun 25, 2009, 06:03 PM
Hold on....

How does ATT sell the idea of customers paying to build the cellular network they're already paying to use?

With ATT's new slogans:
No, YOU raise the bar!
More bars, if you just put your back into it.
Reach out and hold up this antenna for us. (reach out and touch someone)

I've gotta go...you guys come up with some more....

BryanLyle
Jun 25, 2009, 06:19 PM
More bars in fewer places where you actually need them. That should be AT&T's slogan.

Kwill
Jun 25, 2009, 07:27 PM
Is is really possible for AT&T to charge customers even more money?
Are people prepared to pay for an iPhone what is approaching a vehicle lease payment. Turn-by-turn navigation, Internet access and now femtocell (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATT-Femtocell-Service-Website-Goes-Live-100445)? If necessary, one could live in a car -- but a phone?

mozmac
Jun 25, 2009, 09:45 PM
Who the hell do they think they are? "Hey, our coverage sucks, so how about you pay to make it better? Oh, and by the way, can we use your bandwidth?" I wonder if they are giving a percentage of the money to your ISP. Still seems lame to charge for it.

NightStorm
Jun 25, 2009, 10:15 PM
Who the hell do they think they are? "Hey, our coverage sucks, so how about you pay to make it better? Oh, and by the way, can we use your bandwidth?" I wonder if they are giving a percentage of the money to your ISP. Still seems lame to charge for it.

You make it sound like they're the first wireless provider to do this in the states... Verizon and Sprint already offer similar devices.

AndrewWx
Jun 26, 2009, 12:12 AM
My dad lives out in the sticks of Connecticut. I bought him a Sprint Airave. He set it up himself in 5 minutes. The Airave is on the Second floor and he can use his sprint phone anywhere on the first two floors ( I don't know about the basement) Sprint charges 3$ a month to use it with minutes applied to use (you can pay more and not have minutes deducted, but since Sprint to Sprint is free minutes its no big deal for me) It works great.

The one thing that some Sprint users are not happy with is that it does not provide the phone with data, just voice and text. But you get data from your home network I figure.

gotzero
Jun 26, 2009, 12:24 AM
I for one am looking forward to them getting one. I am on all cell phones at this point, and I live in a Stone House with 18" thick walls.

I would prefer a (reasonable)one time fee, since as others have noted, I will be putting bandwidth on another company because of AT&Ts incomplete penetration in my home. However, not dropping important calls because of the still-not-fixed 2G/3G handoff will sure help.

Even better would be a way to disable 3G voice in certain places. Especially the home where I always have a computer handy...

nozebleed
Jun 26, 2009, 12:37 AM
I was actually just selected for the trial of this product. I get it in about a week, I get to use it for a month, my minutes using it are free, i get to keep it after the trial, i get 100 bucks for doing it. Really could care less about the minutes, i roll over ridic amounts every month anyways, but i cant wait to test it.

Although its (AT&T) the BEST service ive EVER had, I live in a hole. I have verizon work phone and it is crap too. you people bitching about service, i dont know where you live but it is rare that i have any less than 4 bars. I even went on a cruise this past spring and had full 3G service on the US Virgin Islands! i work in a skyscraper, my work phone (verizon) is dead 35 floors up. I have full AT&T throughout, except the basement, which i wouldnt expect to have service.

In a perfect world, there wouldnt even be "bars". Unfortunately, it is still a CELL PHONE. Its not a landline, nor will it ever be. AT&T would hope you understood this, but they want to help even for those shortcomings. So while you all are sitting here flaming AT&T on the internet, I will be enjoying full service almost everywhere i am now. :cool:

iphones4evry1
Jun 26, 2009, 02:40 AM
In some cases, it's not a lack of the carrier wanting to extend service in an area, it's finding a place where a new tower can be erected. We are just about to move into a new house, and the reception there is so-so to non-existent at times. Speaking to a neighbor, they tried to have another tower erected in town, but the residents near the proposed location shot it down since they didn't want it there. What do you do then? I am eager to have this as an option to get good reception in our house, though I don't think I would pay any additional monthly charges for something like this. If it is a one time fee to purchase the device, then I may go for it.

You should contact AT&T and tell them they can put the full cell tower in your backyard. All of the cell phone carriers pay royalties (rental fee) to the land owners for every cell tower. (ahh! that's another expenditure for AT&T and where part of your cell phone bill goes - nationwide network and each antenna requires a rental fee lease agreement) In an urban area, like New York city, they have millions of people sharing those antennas, but if you live on a farm in "the middle of nowhere" along a major highway, then at any given moment the maximum number of people using a given antenna is likely only five or so. But along a major interstate highway that runs along hundreds of miles of farm fields, those antennas have to be paid for by the rest of us. When AT&T started pushing the "Nationwide" plan for cell phone service, they knew what they were doing. They were getting the people in urban cities to help pay for the millions of antennas that stand in corn fields in the Mid West, and in the desert in the South West. My guess as to the rental fee you could get ... maybe $100 a month, but I really don't know. It's only a guess.

wakeborder556
Jun 26, 2009, 05:43 AM
they should be paying us to use this to get off their network. There is no way I am going to be paying for this when they are supposed to be providing a service. I could understand paying for the hardware but it is using the existing broadband its nothing more than a voip switch..

RonD69
Jun 26, 2009, 06:53 AM
I haven't read every post on this thread, but I'm sure it's crossed people's thoughts. Why would I pay AT&T a subscription model for this new technology if I'm tapping into my ISP's bandwidth that I've already paid for? It's like paying to use the same bandwidth twice.

But I'm sure the bandwidth used to boost your cell signal is neglible, depending on the monthly minutes usage.

SqB
Jun 26, 2009, 07:31 AM
Wow, this has been interesting seeing what some folks expect from a cellular carrier. I live out in the country. I believe that if you don't pass cows on the way to work, you just don't live far enough away from town. I am on the fring e of service for every single cellular company (att, sprint, verizon doesn't even work here). I can easily use my phone outdoors, but my 5300 sqft house seems to be a nearly perfect faraday cage. Once I walk inside, I lose all signal. Right now I'm using a cellular booster that is a bit flaky. This microcell device is the answer to my problem and I don't personally have a problem paying a one time fee to purchase it.

I can't expect ATT to build a cell tower out in the boondocks for the 50-60 of us that are out here. It costs tens of thousands of dollars to put in a new tower. Like most cellular companies, they don't guarantee in building coverage, check your contracts. Anybody who expects a cellular company to provide blanket coverage that can penetrate any building is just expecting too much. I've been very impressed with some of the things these companies have done (i.e. putting antennas in tunnels, putting repeaters in large public use buildings, deploying mobile repeaters to events) to improve coverage at their own expense. I choose to live out in the boonies so as a result, I recognize that I'll have to pay a bit more for certain things like gas, internet, and in this case, cell service.

I think that $250 is reasonable for this device considering my Wilson amplifier setup was over $500 and I still have to stand near my laundry room to use it. Now, if they try to charge me a monthly fee, we're going to have problems...

mdntcallr
Jun 26, 2009, 10:30 AM
I do think ATT should take off a $10 per month of our wireless bill because we off load ourselves into our broadband networks. It makes every sense if they ask me.

I agree, my service is so bad where i live, in central Los Angeles (Bel Air), that if i have to pay extra just to use my cell phones I am going to be unhappy.

The real reason why this is good is AT&T's crappy coverage in some areas. sorry.. its the truth. Just silly that AT&T may overcharge consumers just so they can get their cell phones working properly.

also, if i get one of these. i'd like to have a function that we can open up cell phone coverage at my house to guests who visit. why should i have to enter the IMEI code for each phone for it to work on the system? im not in an apt building so i aint too worried about my neighbors.

Oilbrnr
Jun 26, 2009, 12:20 PM
I was actually just selected for the trial of this product. I get it in about a week, I get to use it for a month, my minutes using it are free, i get to keep it after the trial, i get 100 bucks for doing it.

I thought that the trials had already begun? How did you get on the 'list'?

beej69
Jun 26, 2009, 01:07 PM
The GPS serves two purposes:

1. Limits it's use to where AT&T has service ... IE no bringing it over sea's with you to make calls home (Boooooo)
2. Allows your phone to use cell-tower assistance for the GPS (very cool) ... IE your A-GPS.

i'm sure it also helps with E911 :)

beej69
Jun 26, 2009, 01:11 PM
I refuse to cripple my APEX-n by setting it back to A/B compatible just so that my iPhone can connect to it. It would be great if the 3g data would also work over the femtocell. I really prefer to keep the wi-fi turned off on the iPhone for battery savings.

I currently use a wilson wireless booster that cost over $400 with amplifier/antennas and cable. It's great

you're logic is inconsistent. you're willing to pay $400 for a signal booster and would rather use a femtocell for data usage?! a $30 cheapo 802.11g AP is a much cheaper solution for data. also, wi-fi data uses much less of your precious battery life than HSPDA.

iphones4evry1
Jun 26, 2009, 07:32 PM
I don't know if you guys have seen this, but it's kind of the opposite concept.

It converts a 3G connection to a WiFi hub.

jimboutilier
Jun 27, 2009, 09:41 AM
I understand the concept as I was given one FREE by sprint years ago when I had poor service at home.

But why anyone would PAY for one to fix problems with a carriers poor network is beyond me. Choose a better carrier.

Perhaps they should take the route T-Mobile has where for $10/month you get unlimited hotspot calling. If you are anywhere with WiFi you make and receive VOIP calls seamlessly for no per minute cost.

Oh yeah, why do that when you can charge customers extra to make up for your crappy network AND still get them to use their minutes using bandwidth they are paying for. Brilliant.

Hope T-Mobile gets in on the iPhone next year and AT&T doesn't find a way to bribe Apple into continued exclusivity.

jviphone
Jun 28, 2009, 12:48 AM
Why wouldnt I just go out and get an extender to own and fix this issue, instead of paying att a monthly fee:

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=1829799&sku=H529-0002&srkey=h529-0002

BryanLyle
Jun 28, 2009, 07:55 AM
Why wouldnt I just go out and get an extender to own and fix this issue, instead of paying att a monthly fee:

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=1829799&sku=H529-0002&srkey=h529-0002

The problem with these extenders is, you have to have a good signal outside the house. I live in an area that I can get 1 - 2 bars outside if I stand in the right spot. These extenders, unfortunately, don't work for me.

I am looking forward to getting one of these. I just hope I don't have to pay a monthly fee for the "privilege".

sebimeyer
Jun 28, 2009, 11:06 AM
This is rather asinine.

Step 1: Cell phone provider doesn't give you coverage.

Step 2: Cell phone provider doesn't invest in better coverage.

Step 3: Users have to BUY a widget that gives them better coverage, using the users internet connection.

Step 4: Cell phoneprovider gets payed twice. User has to pay twice.

SqB
Jun 29, 2009, 07:27 AM
you're logic is inconsistent. you're willing to pay $400 for a signal booster and would rather use a femtocell for data usage?! a $30 cheapo 802.11g AP is a much cheaper solution for data. also, wi-fi data uses much less of your precious battery life than HSPDA.

Sorry, I may not have been clear in my post. The $400 signal booster is not getting the job done for data OR voice. It's flakey at best. No fault of the fine people at Wilson as they are very clear about the fact that if your cell coverage is already marginal, you won't get much benefit out of the device.

I'm just trying to explain the point of view of the folks, like me, who are willing to pay a one-time fee for this device. I have absolutely no expectations that ATT come out to where I live and build a new tower. I live out in an area away from the population centers on purpose. Of course, I'd love to let them plonk a tower right in my backyard and get rental/consideration for it, but that's not going to happen. I'm more than willing to pay $250 for a device that will allow me to use my ATT phone indoors as it will provide a cost savings for me in the long run by letting me get rid of my voip phone.

Now, I agree, if they try to charge a usage fee or a monthly fee, we're going to have a fight on our hands. That would be absolutely ridiculous. However, I think they're going to be reasonable about the whole thing. I would imagine that the device will go for a one time fee and folks who spend a large amount per month (we have 3 voice/data and 3 voice phones on our account) may see a discount or even get the device for free. This seems to me to fit the way that ATT has handled things in the past.

jdechko
Jun 29, 2009, 12:18 PM
I can see two options for this that wouldn't outrage people:

1) $99* for device, no monthly fee, still uses your minutes.
2) $99* for device, small monthly fee (less than $10), unlimited minutes when on femtocell.

*Would be nice if it were only $49 though. If it were $49 with $10/month, I would consider buying it as it would still be cheaper than getting a dedicated land line. However, my wife and I use our phones as primary lines and still don't go over our minutes each month (and we have 4800+ rollover minutes). But I could drop down from 1400 minutes (too many) to 700 minutes (not quite enough) and the femtocell and save some money if it were priced as I speculated above.

TK2K
Jun 30, 2009, 12:36 AM
I feel like these things should be free or at least really discounted, right?

joro
Jun 30, 2009, 09:41 AM
I feel like these things should be free or at least really discounted, right?

You would think they would have an interest in getting users these boosters in areas where their signal isn’t stellar because after-all the more places they can get signal the more subscribers they can possibly have.

navigates
Jun 30, 2009, 10:39 AM
this approach will have a monthly fee but when the calls are made through the 3g-Microcell network will not be counted towards your monthly bill. This will be a huge benefit.

twilcoxen
Jun 30, 2009, 02:25 PM
I'm eager for one of these as I'd love to finally ditch my landline. However, I get really spotty reception in my home. I've looked at the signal boosters, but am pretty uncertain I have enough signal outdoors for them to do much good.

Pricing seems to be pretty speculative, but it sounds like there'll be an unlimited minutes option and something else. Hopefully the something else will be no monthly fee. I could see paying $10 a month for unlimited minutes through the MicroCell as that would be pretty favorable to a landline.

There's a lot of info on what these are and features we might see over at Engadget (http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2009/01/25/details-on-atandts-3g-microcell-everything-but-the-date-and-pric/).

ilko
Jul 2, 2009, 02:53 PM
So if I understand this correctly, femtocell only works as a booster. I have a vacation property up in the mountains where there is no cell phone reception. Femtocell won't help me there right?

bytethese
Jul 2, 2009, 04:02 PM
So if I understand this correctly, femtocell only works as a booster. I have a vacation property up in the mountains where there is no cell phone reception. Femtocell won't help me there right?

You understand incorrectly. :)

It routes your phone calls through your high speed Internet connection.