Representatives of businesses lie all the time. Only a fool would think otherwise. It is standard practice and strategy.
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.
Sling Media Denies Collaboration With AT&T on 3G Streaming
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, the original EyeTV app had an Easter egg that allowed streaming video over 3G (and I can still use it since I've retained the 1.0 version of the app). In fact, EyeTV currently has a website that allows video streaming from your Mac to your iPhone over 3G.
I'll assume you meant to say less not last, and that's a fact I'm well aware of. They where adding 3g to the added spectrum's which wasn't expensive but time consuming. It's not doubt they need extra manpower nation wide.
I guess people expect investing in a wireless infrastructure something that happens over night. I guess it depends on what your talking about. Adding 3g to more markets? Increasing capacity to the denser markets? They all have their own hurdles that have to be overcome and it's one far to fall to discuss off topic in this thread.
Not sure if your last point was directed at me, which was what I already said in several of my earlier post if you had actually read the entire thread.
Not sure why you quoted me. Maybe you didn't read this thread, but I already said all that.
Last consumer rating show the big 3 a few point apart, they were all low. Yes, they make billions and it doesn't cost them anything to operate. People need to look at the bigger picture. In your denser markets you have HOA that try to block the adding of towers. In rural areas reception and service is great but the time and money it take to upgrade 100,000 towers takes time. I'm not saying they shouldn't add the manpower to speed up the process, we know people need the work, but I also understand that it will take a number of years because the work isn't easy or quick while not being cheap.
AMEN! This so called "news" for most users is moot. At 350kbps its useless.
More interestingly,
I'd like to find out the root answer to these questions... if AT&T killed the sling app early on. It's because of BW at the time. Now they say that they worked with Sling... Sling says that they didn't.... and so on....
Any one remember Google Voice app? Google, AT&T, & Apple... There really seems to be too much he said she said...
So with all this BW issues and BS going on... Still, again as of today I still get crappy connections and dropped calls. for what its worth, I'm just outside of LAX.
How is this going to help in T-minus 90days... that AT&T is up to the task of the iPad? Can anyone answer. No BS replies, hope somebody from AT&T tech Staff can answer. My bet is call quality or 3G service will suffer.
It is unlikely that enough iPads will be activated in any particular location at first to have any effect. The bandwidth used by iPads in the first year will be a tiny fraction of that used by all the other existing iPhones, other smartphones, aircards and netbooks already in any geographic region.
Again, let me say this so it's clear:
LTE doesn't solve the CDMA problem. CDMA is not going away for at least another 10 maybe 15 years. Why do you ask?
Because phones have to be backwards compatible. So, even when LTE is rolled out under VZW, any phone would STILL need to be CDMA compatible.
That being said, qualcomm and other companies ALREADY have CDMA/GSM chips that do both. Apple would not need to develop 2 types of phones anymore once these are rolled out. Are you saying that Apple would *never* consider going with VZW even with this chipset available?
Apple is not going to wait 10-15 years just to hop on board the LARGEST WIRELESS CARRIER in the UNITED STATES.
Apple going with VZW is an EVENTUALITY. Why is this such a hard concept to grasp? Why does it have to be a fanboi battle for everything Apple? Do you really love AT&T that much? Really?
Remember, Apple is in the business of SELLING HARDWARE. Denying going with the LARGEST CARRIER IN THE US prevents them from fully achieving that goal. You can BET that EVENTUALLY VZW (and other U.S. Carriers) will be able to carry the iPhone.
w00master
Most cable services? My rural cable is 10/1Mbps or 20/2 for the tiers. They are rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 now with 50/5 in 25% of their market and in a few others 105/10. Basic FIOS is 15/5 up to 50/20. Most people who are interested in sling have more then basic DSL.
Stop buying into the commercials. Both companies are on equal footing in the size of networks and within a few million in subscribers. If you have $5 in your pocket and I have $6, I'm richer then you, just not by much..
I don't need to "buy in the commercials." I've experienced reality, which is that I travel to SF and NYC often. At least 3 or 4 times bi-monthly (or is it bi-weekly? Never get that straight). AT&T service in these 2 cities are truly horrifying.
Now, I will state that I'm from Atlanta. So, I do get the best of AT&T as well. Atlanta is AT&T country, so 3G service is super solid for me. However, seeing it from other city's perspectives, you would think that AT&T would try it's hardest in the largest city in the US with the highest profile: NYC.
w00master
By the way, VZW *is* the largest wireless carrier in the U.S. They have the most subscribers - that is what wireless carriers refer to when they use that phrase "largest wireless carrier." AT&T *used* to be the largest until Jan '09 when VZW acquired AllTel.
I wasn't necessarily talkin' about coverage. That's a separate topic.
w00master
A few millions in the almost 200 million between them. Like I said 6 is larger then 5 but 6 isn't hugely bigger then (I was going to use one and two but I'm sure someone would point out that it's twice as big!). I just find it silly to claim to be larger when your just slightly larger.
So, what you're saying then is when AT&T was larger than VZW, they shouldn't have bothered advertising this? or, the wireless industry to acknowledge this?
It's just a fact, VZW is the largest. No need to get bothered by it. It's just reality.
w00master
Shall we take a poll? Users just need to try a benchmark site like the following:
http://www.speedtest.net/
I'm sure some or even quite a few users will see upload speeds over my quoted 350Kbps, but there will also be many who have never even considered the fact that uploads will generally run much slower than downloads and with the SlingBox the upload speed is the key.
Here is the breakdown for national Road Runner service (from Wikipedia):
Thus, you'd need Turbo with Power Boost or perhaps even Extreme to even begin to make use of 3G speeds (upload).
Just used Speakeasy.net/speedtest and got great results
16997kbps Down and 4225kbps UP
Love Verizon FIOS
Chris
are you guys seriously ragging on Sling for this?
Imagine you built an App 1 year ago and spent a bunch of money making it good and making it work for the App Store.
Then AT&T blocks your App because it doesn't meet their network "guidelines" that aren't published anywhere.
Then a year later AT&T finally decides to allow your App to function as intended, and instead of saying "we are going to allow Sling now" they say "Sling changed their software to work better with our network".
If I were Sling, I'd be setting the record straight, too.
Imagine you built an App 1 year ago and spent a bunch of money making it good and making it work for the App Store.
Then AT&T blocks your App because it doesn't meet their network "guidelines" that aren't published anywhere.
Then a year later AT&T finally decides to allow your App to function as intended, and instead of saying "we are going to allow Sling now" they say "Sling changed their software to work better with our network".
If I were Sling, I'd be setting the record straight, too.
iPad's- true 1st year adoption. but you missed both points.
#1 its a he said she said topic per sling vs apple. google vs at&t vs apple.
#2 its already a taxed system, with the addition of bw demand from sling and iPad, how can at&t step up to the already taxed system?
From Engadget. Seems that AT&T wasn't exactly making things up. I'm not sure what Slings motive here was to be honest. Who cares if you did or didn't make changes with or without ATT. What matters is that your app(Sling's) app got much more appealing to some number of people.
Update: Sling just called us to clarify the above statements -- while it didn't make any specific changes to iPhone SlingPlayer, its engineers did work with AT&T to make sure the app didn't interfere with other customers and clog up the network. Sling says that once AT&T was involved in the testing process and "saw how the app worked," things went smoothly, and that the app was "refined" to meet AT&T network requirements -- refinements we were told would come to other platforms over time. Sounds good to us, although we're still wondering why this wasn't the party line in the first place.
Update: Sling just called us to clarify the above statements -- while it didn't make any specific changes to iPhone SlingPlayer, its engineers did work with AT&T to make sure the app didn't interfere with other customers and clog up the network. Sling says that once AT&T was involved in the testing process and "saw how the app worked," things went smoothly, and that the app was "refined" to meet AT&T network requirements -- refinements we were told would come to other platforms over time. Sounds good to us, although we're still wondering why this wasn't the party line in the first place.
I'm not sure what type of quality you are looking for. It's not HD, not 720P, it's viewable. You keep talking about upload, which is important, however do you even know the Kbps needed for slinging? I could be mistaken but if I remember its 500. Video looks fine at lower than 350. Do you even own a sling 'cause from the way your talking you sound like a theorist, not a user.
I believe it was silly when both did it. So your saying if for a second that AT&T could gain one more sub then VZ that they should claim to be the biggest?
Yes, I know what speedtest.net is. Most people how are really into sling don't go cheap on their internet connection. The question for AT&T was never how much of our bandwidth we can use it, it was how much of theirs we would use up. Your point is moot if we cap our uploads we would be adding to AT&T total needed capacity. Yes, some would not be pulling 3g's full speed because their uploads at home are low, it's still content that was having to go over AT&T's before.
I don't know what you're saying - the words make no sense.
In any event I was responding to:
This clearly asks if the release of iPad with 3G in 3 months will cause AT&T's service to further degrade. My answer, which I maintain is correct, is no it won't.