You missed my point someplace. I agree with that 100%. However, just like Apple, I don't expect those new technologies to be given to me for free or at a loss for the company. For example, Apple had the Airport Base Station, right? Well that didn't cover my entire house. Later they came out with the Airport Express, which extended coverage to the corners of my house. I didn't demand that Apple give it to me for free because their Base Station was inadaquit to begin with (for my house), or that they should just make their base station better so that AE's aren't needed. This is the EXACT same radio wave technology. I don't think I need to explain this to you.
Your scenario is invalid, you are describing a device you paid for once not a service you pay for monthly, which is very different. Your scenario I expect them to continue to update their products driver/software as needed and as reasonable. The scenario of cell service I expect them to continue to grow, provide more services, be competitive, lower costs when applicable, etc...
And they will do so, only if it's a good business decision. Currently this thing, without rebate, isn't far off from the price of an Apple base station. What if you found out that AT&T was selling these things at a loss?
While I highly doubt they are selling them at a loss, I would still have the same opinion. Though it may help me feel more sympathetic and less annoyed.
I see this repeated over and over on here, and I think it's a common misconception. The POINT of the microcell as I see it is to provide service to locations that will never see service. They are meant to cover basements, and other areas where there is no cell reception. This does not mean that AT&T doesn't have a strong interest and incentive to put a tower up to provide cell service to your street.
People are viewing the microcell as a substitute for cell towers, and to me it's clearly not.
The “real” microcells in malls and such aren't just there because they might not be able to cover the entire area. They are designed to offload heavy cell traffic so that cars don't have issues when driving when they handover calls/data to nearby cell sites, thus reducing dropped calls and data loss when driving.
The potential for these femtocells is that they could eventually be used more commonly to also service not only our own homes and businesses but also others who are nearby thus further reducing the saturation on cell sites. It's just a question of how feasible it is, the main potential issue being that they're trusting the user's network connection not to fail.
That's true, microcells ( femtocells ) are not a replacement for towers, which is also why AT&T still needs to ensure they've got good coverage.
And if you are in the business as you say, I'm sure you are aware that this is exactly what is happening. In the functional sense, Repeaters and microtowers have been around for a while to provide a cell signal to places like the inside of malls and other locations where a cell tower is just never going to reach. Technology has advanced to the point where for only $150 (instead of thousands upon thousands) you can now do the same thing to your own home. This is exactly the kind of advancement in technology you are asking for. Why you think it's not worth paying for I don't honestly understand. But as with all new tech, if it's not worth it to you now, wait a year or two and the cost will come down.
It's worth paying a reasonable cost ( which isn't $150 ), but it's still in their best interest to provide them cheap or free because it will offload their cell resources which cost much more money.
...
And it does work in "most" places. It certainly works more places than it did 5 years ago, or even last year.
Actually I've found that they've gotten worse in some respects, not so much data wise. When Cingular bought AT&T Wireless is when they had great coverage. As time went on and AT&T bought Cingular ( yes confusing to those who don't know ) they started taking down the “redundant” cell sites. Which obviously was going to happen. The last time I went to the East coast a few years back it was much worse, dropped calls & spotty coverage on major highways. I almost thought I was using TMobile again, it was that bad.
As of lately I've been having delayed voicemail and text messages, mainly because I terrible service at home, but it was never this bad. When I get service back it sometimes takes hours to give me my voicemail indicator and text messages ( which is not acceptable ).
Certainly! And you should attempt to reason with your company on a business level to see if you can't create change that is beneficial to both parties. However there are people are here that are complaining to OTHER costumers, demanding free sh*t as if the heavens promised them at birth cheap free and perfect cell service, and somehow through the evil that is telco they have been cheated out of their birth right.
Oh yeah, I forgot one. You also try and influence other people and customers as well. I did this with AOL many years ago, many people canceled their service in my area directly due to me and my friend. Strangely we had no more busy signals when connecting after that.
