Apple and AT&T Edge Network Cards?

Discussion in 'MacRumors News Discussion (archive)' started by MacRumors, Dec 4, 2003.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    PowerPage claims that Apple is working on a "wireless laptop card/solution" that supports AT&T's Edge Network.

    The Edge network claims to be "the fastest national wireless data network" and offers burst speeds up to 200Kbps and average speeds of 100-130 Kbps.
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    g30ffr3y

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    buffalo ny
    #2
    this sounds like a killer idea...
     
  3. macrumors 65816

    1macker1

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Location:
    A Higher Level
    #3
    AT&T sucks. I bet they will be trying to bundle this service with their LD service.
     
  4. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA, USA
    #4
    Wow! Great! I live in one of the Edge areas, this is a great network!
     
  5. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    #5
    15k/sec?

    That's like ~15k/sec isn't it? Why is that considered fast?
     
  6. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    Paris
    #6
    it's considered fast because it is a long-range network similar to the cellphone network... dunno, here in europe we have different names for the systems - i think the equivalent is GPRS or something.
     
  7. macrumors regular

    pcp_ip

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2002
    #7
    too bad the EDGE network sucks at this point. Review here

    Quote: "While downloading large files, I had a sustained download speed of about 2.1K"
     
  8. macrumors 68020

    mainstreetmark

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Location:
    Saint Augustine, FL
    #8
    well, just today, I exhausted cable modem and DSL as a potential high-speed data provider at my new home, and today I was going to order a phone line and a dialup plan. I would never use the phone line for anything but dialup, and hate the idea of a $30/mo phone plus a $20/mo dialup.

    So, then, my plan was to take this 56k signal and route it through my 54,000k 802.11g wireless router. How massively sucky.
     
  9. macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #9
    Yeah. We have GPRS over here, but that speed is max. around 50 Kb/s.
    So this should be faster...
     
  10. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    #10
    Actually EDGE is the follow on spec to GPRS. EDGE utilizes 8-PSK modulation as opposed to GPRS's QPSK. Should be double the through-put of GPRS. Realizable throughput may be higher because of how slot's are allocated between users.

    EDGE radios actually revert back to a GPRS when they experience weak signal and poor BER at the 8-PSK modulation.

    I'm surprised that AT&T has a network build-out issue. When AT&T was installing their GPRS network they could have purchased EDGE ready networks for a small additional cost ( 10%?). Then they would only have to flip the switch and start utilizing EDGE ( it is 100% backward compatible with GPRS ). Seems like they did not take this route.

    There are other limitations on receive speed besides what the network can support. There may still be issues on what the card can process ( ASIC/backend processing can limit decoding speeds ). Also, AT&T will probably limit multiple slot ( the only way to get to the 128kbits ) to high paying users.
     
  11. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2003
    #11
    Wasn't there something faster 3GP? But then, I get allot of cool-sounding acronyms thrown at me, and I have no idea wtf they mean.
     
  12. macrumors 68020

    idkew

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2001
    Location:
    where the concrete to dirt ratio is better
    #12
    who cares? where's 3G?

    i can get close to this with bluetooth and a gprs cell phone. gimme 3g baby!
     
  13. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #13


    3G networks pose a threat to mass adoption of 802.11g and 802.11b

    The idea is to make hot spots all around the city to give us internet access anywhere we go... and take the lions share of the power away from the wireless telcos so that they will stop gouging us for wireless fees.

    Because of this fact, it is very unlikely that you will see companies that have a vested interest in 802.11b/g networks (Apple) supporting monolothic wireless network standards.

    WiFi is about giving power to the people. Lets keep it that way.
     
  14. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    #14
    I doubt that Apple would back a stopgap network like EDGE (on the way to WCDMA), not to mention I dont know anyone that takes mobile data seriously that actually HAS AT&T. They're the absolute worst in the industry hands down.

    Even though that review is bad, I dont believe for a second that it's faster than Sprint's CDMA 1X Vision network. 2.1K/sec for big downloads? I get regular speeds of 15K/sec+ in NYC using my Sanyo phone on Sprint's network. And so do many many others.

    I'm bitter. :D
     
  15. macrumors 603

    whooleytoo

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Location:
    Cork, Ireland.
    #15
    Wow, what speeds are you getting?

    I don't have my GPRS details, so I had to resort to analog dialup/bluetooth, at 9.6kb. (But only while my DSL connection went down thankfully!)
     
  16. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    Paris
    #16
    3G-GPRS-EDGE-wtf?

    I thought 3G was referring to the UMTS standard. could someone clarify all these obscure abbreviations? as far as i know, UMTS is the fastest of all these standards, allowing streaming hi-res video and stuff. but i agree that we should stick with the grassroots-wifi-approach. in germany, the companies paid billions for the UMTS licences - so the services are definitely not going to be cheap, once they become available.
     
  17. macrumors 6502a

    Wonder Boy

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    South Windsor, CT
    #17
    at&t wireless sucks. i had their mobile service, that lasted about week. i switched to cingular and a (gasp) moto phone.
     
  18. macrumors 604

    scem0

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    back in NYC!
    #18
    AT&T gets really good (mobile phone) service where I live, so I'm betting wireless internet service would pwn.

    So this is good news for me. But I have heard numerous stories of horrible service with AT&T.

    But overall its a great idea IMO.

    scem0
     
  19. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2002
    #19
    slow

    Verizon and Tmobile offer the same speeds over their serivice. Sorry I don't know the technical jargon.

    What it comes down to is it's generally twice as fast as a 56k modem. Sometimes slower, sometimes faster. If you've been on DSL this will feel the same as a modem to you.

    Comcast cable has now doubled their internet speed. Where I used to get 2.1 or 2.2 megabits a sec, it now tests at upwards of 4.2 megabits a sec. That's pretty extreme considering 2.2 is the most I've ever seen out of my ifitl (fiberoptic dsl line) and usually it's around 1.5-1.7.

    Bandwidthplace.com is the best testing I've seen. Dedicated testing servers.

    So, for minor web browsing and email this new service is ok. But I'll betcha it costs as much as DSL like Tmobile and Verizon.
     
  20. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    #20
    Re: slow

    Verizon has started deploying the "next generation" high speed. Techical term is CDMA 1XEV-DO.

    From:
    http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/broadband/index.jsp

    Verizon Wireless BroadbandAccess, available today in the Washington, D.C. and San Diego areas.

    ...typical speeds of 300-500 kbps, capable of reaching speeds up to 2 Mbps...

    -MM
     
  21. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    #21
    Re: slow

    I can't comment directly since I've never tested out Verizon's current 'Express' service, but technically Verizon should be a lot faster than T-Mobile. Vzn uses CDMA 1X, TMo uses GRPS. 1X is faster than GPRS no matter what, no matter where.
     
  22. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    San Diego (Jamul), Ca
    #22
    I'm in San Diego (!!!), and a Verizon customer, but haven't found out if they make a card for my Powerbook . If they did, I'd get rid of Cox internet and move my phone and data to Verizon. Then I could walk all over the office with it, go over to the beach (5 minute drive from work)...THAT would be sweet!:D
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    mdntcallr

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #23
    I have great service on my 3g cell phone with Att, but this is a matter of huge concern to me

    I just bought a 15" powerbook, recently went into a t-mobile and sprint store to look at their laptop wireless cards. also ATT.

    NONE OF THEM ARE MAC compatible!!!!!!

    The salesperson said that many people come in asking for cards for their portable macs, and he has to turn away them all.

    THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM. I would have bought one today, but it wouldnt work with my mac. also, att is supposed to be faster than sprint, tmobile or cingular's system.

    But that wont help if it isnt mac compatible.
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2002
    #24
    You just use your verizon phone and a cheap cable.
     
  25. macrumors 68000

    Fukui

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    #25
    Not any more...

    There are others that you can find as well.
    Google is you friend. :)
     

Share This Page