AT&T Optimizing EDGE Network Ahead Of iPhone

[MacRumors]

AT&T is reportedly optimizing its EDGE network ahead of the iPhone, according to Gizmodo.

EDGE is slow, but at least at AT&T, the implementation isn't limited by the protocol itself. Rather, the limiting factor is, according to our source, the data backend and the way the towers are configured to allocate bandwidth to data and calls. And according to an internal doc, they're dropping in more T-1s in their poorest performing towers, hoping to get that paltry 40kbps performance to a new minimum of 80kpbs. (EDGE's real world max is about 200kbps.)

The iPhone can perform web browsing from either EDGE networks or faster 802.11g WiFi networks when in range.

While 3G capabilities can be expected in future models, the tuning of AT&T's EDGE network looks to maximize the user experience for early adopters.

[jono_3]

here hoping they do the equivilent in canada!

[longofest]

Of course, this EDGE enhancement also means that other EDGE compatible phones will see the enhancement as well. But we don't care about them here unless they are comparable to the iPhone

[Badandy]

looks like no 3G for the iphone in 1st gen...

[Mac-Addict]

Ah well there you go then all the 3g moaners But somehow I still think they are going to continue moaning

[BengalDuck]

I know a lot of people criticize the iPhone with the lack of 3G, but I'm one of the few who wouldn't think it'll matter. I'm a student so my situation is a little different, but everywhere at my house and everywhere where I "work" (school) has wireless, and that'll surely continue to grow as more and more people and businesses go wireless.

So for the few minutes a day I actually use the EDGE server, I think the speed's will be more than fine. AT&T improving their speeds is good news, but I think their earlier speeds will be "fast" enough for me.

[miketcool]

I call BS on not going with the 3G as a technology in the phone.

Is it because of unit size, or limiting which carrier you can hack the phone to use?

My 3G on T-Mobile is OK, but I imagine using a K800i for mobile internet is silly anyways.

[longofest]

Originally Posted by miketcool

I call BS on not going with the 3G as a technology in the phone.

I only quote what Apple's arguments were. I made no assertation as to whether I felt those arguments were valid

[miketcool]

Originally Posted by longofest

I only quote what Apple's arguments were. I made no assertation as to whether I felt those arguments were valid

I won't be puting the blame solely on Apple either. This seems likely to be one of those negotiated things. ATT wanted the iPhone locked up for 2 years, gotta make Apple play the game a bit. Knowing Jobs and control issues, it will be interesting to see how the control comes back to center on Apple Inc.

[Morky]

I got my MPB online this weekend using my Blackberry Pearl (ATT/Edge) as a bluetooth modem. I was surprised that it pretty useable. I wouldn't try video, but nytimes.com was not painful to navigate.

[CHROMEDOME]

Sweet 80kpbs! I think I'll stick with my Treo and my EVDO.

[Sandfleaz]

The amazing thing is that AT&T is jumping through hoops to make this successful!

[heffeque]

Wow... EDGE is really slow :-S
Spain has got 3.6 Mbps availability via HSDPA for more than 70% of the population (not territory). Upload speeds are 300 Kbps right now, but they've been bumped up to 1.4 Mbps just recently. Later this year they'll be 7.2/1.4 Mbps. And if you're not in the lucky 70%... there are 64 Kbps speeds for more than 95% of the Spanish territory, virtually 100% of Spain's population has those speeds.

Pink is were there's 64 Kbps speeds, Yellow is were there's no connection at all:



Orange is were there's 12.2 Kbps speeds, Beige is were there's no connection at all:



There seems to be something really wrong with USA's broadband policies. Sure the US has less population density but... either way... WTF?

[Deanster]

sure looks like At&t is getting behind the iPhone in a BIG way - they seem to have decided that the amount of hype and buzz around the iPhone launch is going to be huge for them and their brand.

With their sped-up tranistion to the At&t brand, so that it's the one under discussion for all iPhone launch reports, and a moderately serious network upgrade, it's really looking like they want to be the 'iPhone network'...

[Tara Davis]

What I would like to know is, can I buy the iPhone with no "data" contract at all, and simply use the Internet features at 802.11 hotspots, as I would with a laptop?

$30 a month over-and-above a voice contract is a lot of money to use features which will be widely available for free at higher speeds.

[TheSlush]

Originally Posted by Tara Davis

What I would like to know is, can I buy the iPhone with no "data" contract at all, and simply use the Internet features at 802.11 hotspots, as I would with a laptop?

$30 a month over-and-above a voice contract is a lot of money to use features which will be widely available for free at higher speeds.

AT&T's Glenn Lurie said in an interview that "people are going to be asked to have an unlimited package — people are going to have to have a package with us to browse (on iPhone)."

This could be interpreted in several ways, so perhaps Wi-Fi browsing will indeed be possible without an AT&T data contract. (Would it even be technologically possible for AT&T to somehow "block" the Wi-Fi capability of iPhones not on their data contract?) Still, Lurie's comments seem to imply that AT&T might be roping us into a data contract... we may need to sign-up with AT&T for calling AND browsing, not just calling.

[jhedges3]

Originally Posted by Tara Davis

What I would like to know is, can I buy the iPhone with no "data" contract at all, and simply use the Internet features at 802.11 hotspots, as I would with a laptop?

$30 a month over-and-above a voice contract is a lot of money to use features which will be widely available for free at higher speeds.

I asked someone at an ATT store this same question earlier today. He said it should be possible. According to him some stores allow people to get Treos with voice only plans. He said it's harder for this to happen in ATT stores, though, since in most cases they will pressure (or force) customers into getting data plans for such devices.

[ISMPlus]

Originally Posted by Tara Davis

What I would like to know is, can I buy the iPhone with no "data" contract at all, and simply use the Internet features at 802.11 hotspots, as I would with a laptop?

That's what I was wondering... I'm in NYC! I have wireless access and hotspots all over... And I'm also wondering if you have to pay $30 per phone in your plan???? Too much $$$$$!! If so, then we would have to delay or purchase of the iPhone. Or maybe we could purchase a limited data plan for use when we're traveling.

[jhedges3]

Originally Posted by Thanatoast

What he's saying, I believe, is that the "various factors" that have gotten us to this point (behind Europe and Asia in overall broadband adoption and speed) were short-sighted and profit-driven decisions made by our government in favor of the telecoms and not in the best interests of the consumers.

In Europe and Asia, (correct me if I'm wrong) government took on the responsibility of promoting, even pushing broadband. It required a large capital outlay that private industry was not willing to risk. In the US, the telecoms argued that they could roll out broadband much more quickly and efficiently than if the feds stepped in, like when we electrified the country. They tooks billions in subsidies, pocketed it, and we the consumers are stuck with technological marvels that sip data through drink stirrers.

Originally Posted by jhedges3

Ok, but wait. Any good references for the first paragraph (books, reviews, articles, researchers)? Is Wikipedia enough? What were the steps? Who were they made by? What makes those steps the primary factor in getting us to this point?

I'm confused about the end of your second paragraph. So the telecoms argue to the feds (which feds and when?) that they can do just fine getting broadband out by themselves? Then what happens. If they got what they wanted how does that get us to your last point. They argue they'll do it by themselves and then they get "billions in subsidies?" I thought by themselves meant sans subsidies. Plus if they could get the subsidies for not going at it alone why would they asking for going at it alone?

Originally Posted by Thanatoast

According to this article in Businessweek (2004) the major reason the US is falling behind isn't subsidies. I was wrong. It's monopolies.

The argument is backed up by this article from ArsTechnica (2007) which also mentions the lack of competition.

I googled "us behind broadband" to find these articles.

Sorry I was wrong about the subsidies, but I still claim I was right about the greed.

Interesting retraction.

I think you did the wrong search, though. The original post by heffeque, which I was responding to, was about mobile phone standards. And not about broadband. I guess your response to mine was where the topic of broadband was introduced. I didn't notice until your last post.

For what it's worth to you, I see nothing in your other post about greed. Did I miss something?

Regardless of the market (mobile data or broadband) I'm not sure that I'm with you. It seems like since you didn't find subsidies as being the culprit for why the US has lagged you're inclined substitute in lack of competition.

For broadband, the Businessweek article does make the claim that policy (or a lack of it) has contributed to what it considers a significant and negative disparity for the US in broadband penetration and speed. It makes this claim rather weakly, but anyway.

With respect to competition, the article suggests that the US adopt policies to encourage it. It points to Korea and Japan as examples where such policies have been successful.

The Ars Technica article casts doubt on the data that it focuses on. Interestingly the UK seems to be significantly behind the US if one believes their data on broadband speed. It also makes a couple of policy recommendations. Notice that it does not, especially in any sort of comprehensive way, suggest that subsidies or lack of competition is the primary or singular factor in the state of the US broadband or mobile phone markets.

I sort of like this post on differences between European and American mobile phone use.

Although it is somewhat anecdotal, it considers a diversity of factors that have gotten these markets to where they're at. According to his post many of the differences are cultural and historical. He makes no mention of policy and or subsidy and or monopoly has having a role, which isn't to say that either of those aren't significant factors. As you know, there may be many other articles on the matter that suggest as much.

He also provides a counterexample to the idea that differences in density can account for the differences in coverage between US and Europe:

The usual American excuse for its poor coverage is that US population densities are low. That doesn't hold up to close examination – Norway has about 15 people per square kilometer, the same density as Arizona, which is not exactly crowded. The US overall has about 33, more than double Norway's density. I think Europe is just more dedicated to universal mobile coverage.

I'm not suggesting that a single counterexample settles the density explanation. Density may have a role and it would seem like a more thorough analysis of the differences in coverage would include density among other factors.

[jhedges3]

Originally Posted by ISMPlus

That's what I was wondering... I'm in NYC! I have wireless access and hotspots all over... And I'm also wondering if you have to pay $30 per phone in your plan???? Too much $$$$$!! If so, then we would have to delay or purchase of the iPhone. Or maybe we could purchase a limited data plan for use when we're traveling.

I asked someone about this at the AT&T store on Broadway and Astor Place today. He said that the data packages will probably be bundled and will be different than those for other PDA's and smartphones. To your point, his impression was that you will be able to get it with voice only. Obviously, though, he could be wrong.

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[BayAreaMacFan]

Let's think about it for a second: the iPhone has WiFi so they are doing anything but shutting out the business market that cares about 3G. The speed differences are not nearly as huge as some are making it out to be, especially with the limited rollout of 3G in the US. It is mainly available in major cities which, hey have WiFi. It would be good to have 3G just for more options and the latest tech, but for me personally it's useless especially with the tradeoff with battery life and size.

[pagansoul]

I also want the phone but would love just the ipod and internet without the phone. I will wait a little while to see if a new ipod is in the works for 2007. In the mean time I await what at&t's setup on how the current iphone will be used and for how much. I know the people that are 'chomping at the bit' will be taken advantage of but sometimes you just want to have the new toy in your hand right from the get-go. I will control my urge.

[Philsy]

It's been rumoured elsewhere that the iPhone will have a different form factor in Europe. That could mean it will have a slightly larger case to accommodate 3G. Let's hope so.

[anastasis]

If Motorola can stuff HSDPA in to a Razr, Apple can stuff it in an iPhone. A new PDA/Smartphone launch with anything less than 3G is idiotic.

[CJD2112]

Originally Posted by anastasis

If Motorola can stuff HSDPA in to a Razr, Apple can stuff it in an iPhone. A new PDA/Smartphone launch with anything less than 3G is idiotic.

I tend to agree, especially with the heavy bandwidth needed for Safari browsing and data bit-rates. Although I have it on notice from a few AT&T/Cingular friends that this Autumn will see the second generation iPhone with 3G/HSDPA technology.