Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

AT&T Says 7.2Mbps Wireless Coming This Year

Posted by timothy on Wed May 27, 2009 01:46 PM
from the ubiquity-should-be-more-widespread dept.
CWmike writes "AT&T will upgrade to High Speed Packet Access (HSPA) 7.2 wireless networking technology later this year, offering faster (up to 7.2 Mbit/sec.) network speeds to new compatible laptop cards and smartphones due to be released at the same time, the company said today. Current HSPA download speeds can theoretically reach 3.6 MBit/sec, according to AT&T executives who commented on the planned upgrade in April. AT&T did not comment on which laptop cards and smartphones will be compatible with HSPA 7.2 other than to say it will introduce 'multiple' devices later this year. Could this be one of the big iPhone announcements to come from WWDC?"
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Theoretically... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by againjj (1132651) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @01:50PM (#28113337)

    Current HSPA download speeds can theoretically reach 3.6 MBit/sec,

    There is no difference between theory and practice in theory, but there is in practice.

    • Misquote (Score:2, Informative)

      The actual quote is: "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." Source is either Yogi Berra or Chuck Reid.
      • I had heard it said more than one way, and never attributed to anyone. I learn something new every day. Thanks.
    • Man, you butchered that saying.

      In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      That's your theory.

  • But they will still limit the kinds of traffic on their network.
    • back in the 1990's akamai had this great idea to position data all over the internet for better performance. in 2009 we have people whining that AT&T won't let them stream data from their DVR.

      the right way to do this is something like VZ's Get it Now. store the data on the telco network for better performance.

  • $$$ per 'tube' (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Locutus (9039) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @01:58PM (#28113449)

    sure, they'll let you use port 80, 8080, and maybe even 443 but what cost is the freedom to use the bandwidth for what _you_ want to use it for? Didn't I see where T-Mobile's G1 _unlimited_ data plan bills you extra for Chat and IM and I would guess they block the standard VOIP port(s) too.

     

    The Internet may be thought of by some as a "bunch of tubes" but these companies are carving it up so they control what you do on the "tube". Speed isn't the only thing that's important here.

     

    LoB

    • Re:$$$ per 'tube' (Score:4, Informative)

      by Andy Dodd (701) <atd7@PLANCKcornell.edu minus physicist> on Wednesday May 27 2009, @02:10PM (#28113603) Homepage

      AT&T has not historically done content filtering of any sort for wireless customers.

      I have never had any restriction on the ability to use IM, SSH, or other protocols when using my AT&T phone.

      I haven't tried VOIP because the latency of the cellular data connection is simply too high for VOIP.

      • that's good to know because it sure sounded like it was more than just texting that they were splitting out and charging extra for. Thanks for clearing that up.

        LoB

  • by yourassOA (1546173) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @02:08PM (#28113559)
    "New high speed internet" they said, "faster than anything you seen before". Now I could be wrong but for some reason cell service went to shit. Coincidence? I live 2 miles away from the tower with direct line of sight. And the problem isn't just signal strength but weird noises, echoes and interference.
    • AT&T moved voice and EDGE onto 1900Mhz to make room on 900Mhz for 3G service. Now EDGE service is so poor you can't stream music at all over it, works fine on T-Mobile EDGE.
    • Oddly enough, "direct line of sight" actually decreases the data rate of MIMO (multiple-input multiple-output) systems like HSPA. As MIMO uses the multiple physical wireless channels created by obstructions and reflections between a set of antennas at both transmitter and receiver to increase the bandwidth, a perfectly clear path hurts your data rate. Unless there are obstacles to bounce the signal around a bit, you only get one physical channel, as the path between any pair of antennas is essentially the same.

      In practice, such pure physical channels usually only appear out in the open countryside--and besides, if you are referring to AT&T's EDGE or non-HSPA 3G, then it isn't MIMO... just crappy AT&T.

      But it's nice to know, isn't it?
  • "New & Improved" pig in a poke, get yours today while supplies last!
  • As above posters mentioned, AT&T's service always comes with so many strings that it's hardly worth paying for. Plus their high speed coverage generally only extends to large urban areas.

    Anyone have any comments on Verizon's data service offerings? I'd potentially like to do a tethered modem or a MiFi type device. I'm tired of the iPhone and it's inability to anything truly useful without jailbreaking it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Plus their high speed coverage generally only extends to large urban areas.

      Oddly enough, this is where most people live.

      • Yes, that's exactly why it is so, the most people for the least cels. However, if you don't live in a big city (I don't) or are 'on the road' or like to travel around the rural areas and small towns of this great nation and have pretty consistent coverage, it's a poor option.

        Japan is 100% 3G even in outlying areas, though I am sure NTT DoCoMo probably has a lot of Government subsidy and assistance to pull that off and is something of a monopoly. Still, the relative cost of cel service with unlimited data

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          I don't want to make excuses for telcos, but do you mean the Japan that is half the size of Texas?
  • ...provided you are standing within spitting distance of a cellular tower.

    A new buzzword milestone: this new technology doubles the theoretical data rate that nobody actually sees!
  • by dziman (415307) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @02:13PM (#28113633)

    Some phones already have the HSDPA 7.2Mbps capability. AT&T has just neutered their firmware through various settings. Luckily, for some phones, you can just revert these settings, and in some places, receive 7.2Mbps today.

    For example, the HTC Fuze/Touch Pro can do 7.2Mbps after some registry tweaks.

    • Some phones already have the HSDPA 7.2Mbps capability. AT&T has just neutered their firmware through various settings. Luckily, for some phones, you can just revert these settings, and in some places, receive 7.2Mbps today. For example, the HTC Fuze/Touch Pro can do 7.2Mbps after some registry tweaks.

      *It's probably important to note that this does not include the iPhone: For those of you who own an iPhone, read this and get the warm fuzzies in your pants... :-) It simply doesn't have the hardware for it.

  • Yeah, okay (Score:3, Insightful)

    by elrous0 (869638) * on Wednesday May 27 2009, @02:15PM (#28113649)
    I have AT&T for my DSL and I can't even get their 6 Mbps DSL connection with a WIRE. And they want me to believe they're going to give me 7 Mbps on my cellphone?
  • One word... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ComboWombo (1427961) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @02:20PM (#28113719)
    Backhaul You can have 7.2Mbps to the base station, but from all accounts, the backhaul from said base stations SUCKS, so you won't get anywhere near that. Thats the sneaky trick. They offer UP TO 7.2Mpbs, but really its dependant on backhaul, and how said backhaul has been configured. Expect throughput of about 500kbps
  • My internet connectivity has always sucked on my phone, badly enough that it's never been more than a novelty, not an asset. If my real-world experience was even close to my "theoretical" service, I wouldn't give a damn about upgrading. Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining!
  • Of course, you still won't be allowed to use your iPhone as a modem (yes, I know it's possible, just not approved by AT&T).

  • great, even more ways to get to overage city even faster.

    now, if they are getting rid of the cap and make it truly unlimited...then fine.

  • by deisher (188389) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @02:42PM (#28113993)

    Even if we assume that their speed claims are true, the benefit of this new product will be severely limited if ATT Wireless retains their currently policy of charging $0.25/MB once users hit their monthly limit of 5GB. I finally gave up on ATT because it was such a pain to monitor my usage and stop normal broadband activity (e.g., youtube, etc.) near the end of every month when I got close to the limit.

    • 5GB a month is not enough? And you hit that mark watching youtube?
      My god man... why do you insist on subjecting yourself to the crapfest that is youtube?
      And even if they actually had something worthwhile, why can't you cozy up somewhere that offers wifi?
      3G access is slow as molasses on a cold day. I'm surprised you were able to even hit 5GB in a month on that joke of a network.

  • by RudeIota (1131331) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @03:00PM (#28114127) Homepage
    I know people are going to argue that cellular wireless suffers from awful latency, making this completely unviable for anything but light web surfing...

    I'd like to preemptively note that I've heard HSDPA has very good latency [wikipedia.org] for wireless... at least on paper.

    This is merely anecdotal, I also hear others talking about 60-80ms latency, which is *great* compared to other common cellular data technologies such as Edge and 3G. It might not be perfect for gaming, but it should be suitable for multimedia providing the cellular network has the balls to handle it.
  • According to this, the answer is yes - the new iphone will support 7.2MBps down.

    http://www.product-reviews.net/2009/05/27/new-iphone-2009-in-six-different-configurations/ [product-reviews.net]

  • by skrolle2 (844387) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @03:16PM (#28114283)

    What, don't you people have this already?

    I just moved, and since my slowpoke ISP is slow, I won't have ADSL in my new place until one or two weeks from now. To cover the meantime I ordered mobile broadband which is a USB 3G dongle that you can connect to your computer. It can do HSPA, and EDGE and "3G". I'm pretty close to a tower, but I got 2mbps down and 0.2 up, and a latency of about 300ms, so I think I'll keep borrowing my neighbour's wifi instead and just return this instead. The mobile provider also had a campaign right now, so the monthly cost is 0. There is a 5GB cap though (if you hit it, they throttle you to 60kbps), and the regular price is $30 a month.

    There, feel free to be envious, rant about how AT&T are screwing the US consumers, curse us Europeans, and possibly, just possibly start the whole broadband country ranking debate again. :-)

  • What about HSPA+ (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Erich (151) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @03:16PM (#28114293) Homepage Journal
    In Australia they're getting 21Mbps from HSPA+: http://www.fiercebroadbandwireless.com/story/australias-telstra-launches-hspa/2009-02-22 [fiercebroa...reless.com]

    And they claim they'll double it by the end of the year (with multicarrier HSPA+?)

  • Could this be one of the big iPhone announcements to come from WWDC?

    Yes, it could be.

    It's also possible that Apple won't mention anything about this. Next question?

  • bah (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Thaelon (250687) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @04:01PM (#28114939)

    Can we please ban the use of "up to" in advertising? The same goes for "as much as" and all their ilk.

    How it isn't simply declared false advertising is beyond me.

    It's like those super soakers that were advertised as shooting "up to 30 feet!". Yeah, right. Only if you whip your arm about before firing to impart some momentum to the water, then fire downwind at a 37 degree angle in a category 4 hurricane. Otherwise it was more like 10 feet.

    How about if the mean average performance of the product isn't at least 80% of the advertised "up to" figure, you don't get to use that figure. Or require that all "up to" claims be accompanied with a bell curve that show people that most of them will be getting significantly less 100% of the time?

  • by EQ (28372) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @08:49PM (#28118201) Homepage Journal

    AT&T loses.

    AT&T is smoked if Apple allows Verizon or any other LTE carrier to get their hands on the iPhone ahead of AT&T's network rebuild 3 years down the road. AT&T is doing this because Verizon is supposedly getting ready to get iPhones as part of their changeover from CDMA to GSM in 2010 (and thus gain LTE capability) - plus Verizon is *already* testing LTE in a couple of markets.

    AT&T's foot dragging with coverage problems, their denial that they need better endpoint bandwidth, etc - its now coming back to bite them in the ass.

    AT&T is about a year and a half behind Version in LTE testing for deployment (they are projecting 2011-2012 for LTE at AT&T). So they are stuck with 7.2Mbit HSPA.

    Verizon will skip HSPA and go straight to the higher speed LTE in 2010, long before AT&T can get there. And that upgrade comes at about the same time Apple's exclusivity with AT&T dies, what a coincidence. hmmmm.

    WHats LTE mean for data rates? Here: 60mbits at less than 100 mW demonstrated December by LG at NTT DOCOMO [engadget.com].

    Ericsson already has an operational LTE net in Stockholm [engadget.com] that runs 50Mb/s supposedly.

    And look at this: 170mbits -- in a moving car! [engadgetmobile.com]

    DO WANT!

    • Re:Wireless (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 0100010001010011 (652467) on Wednesday May 27 2009, @01:50PM (#28113335)

      Haha. This is AT&T. You'll be limited to 3GB a month. 7.2 is burst not sustained. And if your neighbor thinks like you do, you'll both be using the same tower. Somehow I doubt AT&T is going to run fiber to each tower to support a large number of users.

      • Re:Wireless (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 27 2009, @01:54PM (#28113395)

        Not only that, but there aren't enough circuits, so even though your phone will show 5 bars... as soon as you try to make a call, send a text, or transfer any data, it will immediately drop to 0 or 1 bars, and then say no service.

        Yes, this happens on the north side in Chicago all the time.

        Who cares if their towers are supporting some new transport/band between the tower and your phone... if they don't have enough circuits, or they don't have enough bandwidth going to each tower in the first place, it is pretty much worthless -- and that has been my experience for the past year in Chicago with my iPhone.

      • You'll be limited to 3GB a month.

        No, it'll be "unlimited", but the 7.2 is the whole tower. Fun times ahead.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        5gb a month actually. Shared local OC3. To most in cities anyway.
    • No, not going to happen. We moved out to the boonies, where cable and DSL were not an option, but the ATT coverage map said we had the best 3G signal available.

      Bought the 3G card, tried it at work. Got 5 bars, worked great. I could download 1.5Mb/sec all day long. Move to the house... 5 bars, still says 3G. IF I could get speedtest.net to give me the page, I would usually show about 100k. It would drop constantly. I had to return during the buyers remorse period.

      Went to alltel and quickly got a new a