Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AT&T to Allow Skype and Google Voice to Operate on Its Mobile Network?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Now, if this newfound "openness" also leads to AT&T allowing us to use our Sling Player app over the 3G network, I'll stop planning to defect to Verizon when they get the iPhone. At the VERY least, let me use 3G to log into my SlingBox/Cable Box and set up a recording when I'm on the road and away from any WiFi signal.
Mark
Mark
Okay, Mr. Numbers...
AT&T has approximately 2.5 million iPhone subscribers. If you take the money from their data plan (not the voice, just the $30/mo data), that comes to $75M per month or $900M per year.
Yeah, I think someone could carve a budget out of that to do some network expansion. I believe AT&T is planning something on the order of $18M for network expansions. That's 2% of revenue from the iPhone data plans alone .
Make no mistake ... the revenue is there. AT&T has been pocketing it and has NOT been upgrading as they should. They got caught behind the curve. I have no pity for them. Time for them to suck it up and invest in their infrastructure.
I think you got it slightly wrong. It is $18B not $18M. The 'B' make a B-ig difference. So now how does the math work??
I think you got it slightly wrong. It is $18B not $18M. The 'B' make a B-ig difference. So now how does the math work??
Actually. His math was fine. He merely mistyped. Besides it isn't exactly fair to say that just the iPhone is causing issues with the network. It is merely the fact that AT&T is the biggest major provider with a fairly large selection of smart phones. The smart phone market probably seeing the biggest growth right now than any other cell provided market (normal handsets/data cards).
The sheer amount of money rolling into AT&T's coffers is more than you or I can fathom. They should be investing a lot more into their network than they are.
Probably true. Perhaps they can invest more. But I think we are all forgetting that throwing more money at it doesn't necessarily solve the problem. Forgetting about big bad greedy AT&T or the $ and cents for a moment and if we think logically, if AT&T opens up say Skype that will probably increase the data usage by may be double triple? I am dying to get Netflix streaming on my iPhone. So they open that and that will increase the bandwidth usage by probably 10 fold all of a sudden. Everybody is streaming movies. People want to be able to stream content from their homes via SlingBox and that is another 10 fold increase. There are providers out there who want to rent movies to you and stream it to your wireless device and that is another significant increase. The problem is you can't just flip a switch and double your capacity. There is a tremendous amount of work that needs to go in and a significant amount of infrastructure that needs to be built and I think we are all underestimating that effort. We take it for granted that to add an extra lane to the freeway that is always clogged up on our morning commute takes years but we expect that a provider can double bandwidth in a snap. I guess its human nature because we don't really see what is needed and what happens behind the scenes in this case but we see the construction workers working on the freeway everyday.
Not only do they look like good guys by doing this before they are forced to do so by the FCC but they are protecting themselves from civil suits (likely class action) filed against them by angry consumer groups. This would all be in the same vein as that which happened to the Cable Operators who's former network policies enforced blocking P2P data transfers.
THANK YOU.
how many people need to state this before people start to understand it?
do that few people actually have Google Voice accounts in that a wide swath of people still believe it's some sort of VOIP system?
The answer to that question would be "Yes." I too am frustrated by so many online journalists and bloggers referring to GV as a VOIP app when it is anything but.
I think the issue is that people recognize that technology soon will make bandwidth "virtually free". Fiber can send so much data so cheaply that costs quickly reduce down to zero. There is a one-time investment in the infrastructure, but once that's paid, there is relatively little maintenance required and major profits to be made. Once a cell tower is constructed, the upgrades are cheap to spit out more bandwidth.
GV gives you unlimited free calls to canada and $.02/minute calls to most developed parts of the world. It is pretty much the same as VoIP, except it uses your local cell minutes instead of a data plan.
Question
Can someone enlighten us....why do we want Google Voice? What are the features....what are the limitations?
Thanks in advance.
Can someone enlighten us....why do we want Google Voice? What are the features....what are the limitations?
Thanks in advance.
This article is poorly written. AT&T is changing it's public policy to allow VOIP apps on all of it's phones on the network. However, Apple didn't reject the GV app on AT&T's request. So to imply that GV is coming to the iPhone because of this policy change is disingenuous at best. Unless Apple is going to back track and state it will allow it because of this change, nothing will happen on the GV/Apple front. If Apple does allow it based on this change, then it makes them look like a bunch of liars to the FCC since they said they are reviewing it but it duplicates functionality.
Thank you for noting this. I have a Google voice number and I use it exclusively (almost) to call family and friends in Canada without paying the international rate for Canada that AT&T charges. So, Google Voice is not merely a phone forwarding service, it is also a telecom service that offers cheaper rates that AT&T... not so innocuous a service now, is it?
I have three phone numbers, and i hate giving out all 3 to friends/businesses/etc. So google voice gives me a 4th number, but that number calls the other three at the same time, and i can answer on whatever phone is more convenient to me.
Example, I've been doing alot of business with the FAA for past two years, but I hate them calling my cell and using my minutes when i'm home, but i hate missing their calls when i'm not home. so the google voice number calls my home phone numbers AND my cell phone, and i can answer on whichever is more convenient. i can record the calls if i need to, and people can even text the google voice number which forwards it to my cell, or i can just text off the internet instead of my phone, or even through email. plus all my voicemails are transcribed and emailed and texted to me, or i can read them online when i can't listen to the voicemail (i.e. in class). another feature is that if i take an incoming call on my house phone but need to leave, i press * and my other phones ring, and transfers the call to whichever i answer so i can go from house phone to cell phone seamlessly and the calling party can barely tell.
limitations? well, the main one is that you can only record incoming calls, not outgoing. and, i can only transfer calls from one phone to another during incoming calls, not outgoing; again.
many other features, but you'll need to check their website.
All this FCC government interference in private contracts is going to do is more fully burden the AT&T network and prevent the rightful owners of that network from controlling their fee and service income for that network.
As VoIP for example becomes readily available, people will migrate away from voice contracts which constitute considerable revenue for AT&T, and more fully use the data portion of their service in exchange for no new fees there.
So one might claim it is good for consumers because some can eliminate voice usage fees, but it is bad generally for ALL AT&T network users since the network will be considerably more congested.
Furthermore as revenues drop in customer count specific terms, they will have less capital for network expansion and modernization.
Their prior policy was designed specifically to address all of these issues in an environment of extremely rapid uptake in customer count and even more rapid uptake in data usage.
There are no one-sided coins.
Rocketman
Who wants to bet if data plan prices rise on the back of this news? So those who still need/want voice service will simply be paying more, not less. Thank you FCC.
The Verizon 5gb wireless plan is $60/mo
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobilebroadband/?page=plans
The ATT iPhone data plan is about $30/mo
As VoIP for example becomes readily available, people will migrate away from voice contracts which constitute considerable revenue for AT&T, and more fully use the data portion of their service in exchange for no new fees there.
So one might claim it is good for consumers because some can eliminate voice usage fees, but it is bad generally for ALL AT&T network users since the network will be considerably more congested.
Furthermore as revenues drop in customer count specific terms, they will have less capital for network expansion and modernization.
Their prior policy was designed specifically to address all of these issues in an environment of extremely rapid uptake in customer count and even more rapid uptake in data usage.
There are no one-sided coins.
Rocketman
Who wants to bet if data plan prices rise on the back of this news? So those who still need/want voice service will simply be paying more, not less. Thank you FCC.
The Verizon 5gb wireless plan is $60/mo
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobilebroadband/?page=plans
The ATT iPhone data plan is about $30/mo
I pay $60/month for that broadband line to my door, and it sure as hell ain't fiber. I guarantee you Comcast makes money off of that, so no, you don't "know that for a fact."
For that matter, the line to my door was probably installed 2 decades ago.
OK...so how does this save me money on my cell plan? Does Google bypass my calling plan minutes?
Thanks.