judgecorp writes "Femtocells have been on the horizon for a while, but the UK just got the first 3G femtocell launch in Europe, by Vodafone. The device connects to handsets in the room and links them to the cellular network over broadband. It's a classic win-win, because it gives the user better coverage and takes traffic off the service provider's network. The only complaint might be from the broadband provider, who could be carrying traffic for a rival. Vodafone isn't pushing the data angle, but since it has HSPA, the product could work just fine with laptops and dongles. Femtos have been in limbo waiting for serious launches, but judging from the list of speakers at the World Femtocell Summit in London, Vodafone might not be the only one."
If you're going to alter a company's name for ironic effect, at least do it in a way that makes sense. Personally I find it immature and annoying, and wish people wouldn't do it at all.
Slashvertisement it may be but as a former employer of Vodafone I know that they have the best voice and 3G coverage of any mobile operator in the UK. That's why they are the government's preferred operator. And no I don't have any affection for the company.
As for yourself, getting coverage in your mother's basement would be a challenge for any network.
I agree that Vodafones coverage isn't what it could be but that is a criticism that could be made of any of the mobile providers. In my experience Vodafone isn't much better or worse than any other provider it really depends on where you are. What we really need is for some Government intervention to allow the mobile providers a bit more freedom in putting up masts. They have bent over backwards to placate pressure groups and it's left us with beautifully hidden but rather patchy mobile phone system. More p
Don't know about the UK but in the Netherlands Vodafone is one of the best in terms of coverage. It's still not all that great everywhere, but in general it's one of the best you can get.
And yes I'm a Vodafone customer, and no I'm not that satisfied (they gave me a 50MB limit per month which doesn't even cover my monthly mail traffic).
This seems to be targetted at home users, which isn't what I was expecting.
There are lots of old buildings in Europe, and some of them have really, really thick stone walls. Some of them only have moderately thick stone walls. Something that provided a signal in buildings like this would be useful.
It's a classic win-win, because it gives the user better coverage and takes traffic off the service provider's network.
Uhhh, no. It's a classic fuck-the-consumer, what-the-fuck-were-they-smoking, you-have-to-be-fucking-kidding-me deal.
I got this spiel from Verizon (USA) a little while back. Unlucky enough to have marginal service where I live, I asked a Verizon store rep what could be done about it. He then came back with a nice box and said, "It's really cool. It's called a thingmajiggy and it will boost your cellphone service through your Internet connection." I thought, "Wow, that's pretty cool of them".
Just one thing everyone forgets or wants to gloss over in this massive techno-wankathon over how cool it is.... Verizon tried to charge me $250. Two-Hundred-And-Fifty-Bucks.
This is what you are getting for $250. The ability for ANY Verizon phone within range, which from what I understand is about as good as an access point, to PREFER your "femtocell" and place the calls across your Internet connection back into Verizon. Everyone still gets charged for their usage.
Why would I PAY Verizon to basically expand their own coverage area? Why would I incur the bandwidth costs for unknown cellphone users around me? Yeah, I couldn't fucking figure it out either.
Before anybody gets real hot about how cool these things are, just realize that you are paying these people directly to expand their service coverage. That's just plain nuts. If it was $40 or $50 bucks like a cheap router and I could restrict access by IMEI, *maybe* it might be an interesting deal.
from outright purchase at £160, to bundling with contracts around £15 per month. ------- Femtos will first be deployed to offer better indoor coverage and keep customer loyalty ----- an Shepherd, consumer director, Vodafone UK. "We are committed to delivering the best, most reliable network and this is another step towards maintaining a seamless service."
Wow. In the UK it seems, not only will you pay to increase their service coverage, but monthly as well. I hope a reach-around comes with that deal. Gotta admit, that's one hell of a commitment to increasing coverage and creating a reliable network. Let's make everyone pay multiple month's of service up front along with an additional monthly service cost to put them to work for us.
With this Vodafone one, "The device will support up to four voice calls, and users will register the handsets they want to use it on the web", so only you and your family/friends can use your picocell.
If this is using your broadband connection to allow GSM mobiles to connect to Voda's network, would you pick up anything interesting with Wireshark? Could you (for example) put the femtocell into "promiscous" mode and get neighbours' phones to automatically prefer to connect to it?
For £150 you can buy a Nokia E51, SIM free (change network whenever you want) which supports VOIP over Wi-Fi.
That's £10 less AND all your calls will be a lot cheaper (VOIP prices are much less than mobile phone prices) when you're in range of your Wi-Fi router.
You can even configure your VOIP to forward calls to your mobile phone number when you're not in range.
Nice idea - but in the UK it is illegal to record a conversation (including text web chat such as IRC) without the permission of the people involved. You could listen in, maybe, but not record it. Even then you might be infringing some telecommunications regulations by deliberately snooping on a telephone conversation even if it is using your infrastructure (and by setting up their phone number as being specifically allowed, you can't even claim ignorance)
I would agree with you entirely, were it not for the fact that Voda appear to be locking this box down to certain handsets.
However, I agree entirely - why should I pay an additional monthly fee to Voda just so I can use their service from my house when I can walk fifty yards down the street and not have to pay? Further, not only am I paying Voda for the privilege of saving them money, but I then have to fork out for additional bandwidth on my home broadband.
All that having been said, one of only two reasons my company has an office is for mobile coverage. If I can get coverage at home (and those of my staff), there's no reason not to move to home working any more. The additional cost of the cells would still result in a saving if we don't have to pay for the offices.
When you're at home just redirect your mobile to you landline FFS! Or is using a phone that plugs into the wall just so uncool these days that you'd sooner be with no phone service at all?
Not everyone has a landline telephone service. Some folks have the physical line, but it's only used for their broadband connection. Here in Australia, it's called naked ADSL, and it's becoming quite popular. (local customs may vary)
Okay so you live in an area with shitty reception. Now you got a device that you can use to use your cell phone at home. But as soon as you leave your home you're in a dead zone. So maybe you are lucky and where you work/hang out has reception and now home has reception too so you can now justify a cell phone. But chances are you can't use your cellphone when you are at work anyways, and if you can it is a work phone and you aren't supposed to use it for personal calls. I wouldn't go out and by a cellphone
I have to say, from what you've described, this device sounds like something I could really use. The mobile signal in my house is attrocious. In the US, you can use repeaters to extend coverage within your own house, but those devices are completely illegal in the UK. If this offers a viable, legal alternative, I'd definitely consider it.
Of course, 1. I'm on 3, not voda, and 2. I can't afford to drop the cash on it. But, in principle...
If you bothered to RTFA, you would see that you can register (via web site) what phones can use your box and that you buy the box OR pay a monthly fee for it. You do NOT pay for the box and then pay an extra monthly fee on top of it.
Your entire rant reads like you think this is for *home* users. It's primarily targetted at business users. Probably those that have bought everyone Blackberrys and then find they don't work in basement etc.
> Why would I PAY Verizon to basically expand their own coverage area?
For the exact same reason you PAY to have broadband, cable or phone lines installed in your house: Because you want to USE IT perhaps?! By paying them to install broadband in your house you're "paying them to extend their network"
I have one with Verizon and I'm fairly sure you can restrict access to it by handset if you like. I've never bothered because I really couldn't care less if some stranger uses a bit of my bandwidth. Furthermore, it only allows a limited number of calls at one time - 5 IIRC - so it's not like the entire neighbourhood will be using your internet connection. Lastly, the range isn't that great, (remember, this thing is using licensed spectrum) so if you live somewhere where you need this (ie in a non-densely populated area) I highly doubt your neighbours can connect to it anyway. Heck, I can't connect to it from more than a few feet outside my house.
I do agree the cost is kind of high (I feel less as bad for myself seeing as those in the UK really get screwed with a monthly fee) but if you need service, you need service. I'd rather cough up the extra cash to have good coverage and live where I want to live (aka bumfuck). The only other option would be a cellular repeater with an antenna mounted on your roof and that'd be significantly more expensive and dependant on the reception already available.
While the deal that you were offered is totally nuts I don't think this deal is the same sort of thing. The impression I got was it simply acts as a base station for up to four registered phones. Personally, I think there is some scope for the system you describe if the pricing and technology are put together in the correct package.
For example, imagine you live in a remote area with no / limited mobile coverage, your mobile provider offers you this deal: you buy your broadband and a mobile contract off them
What stops you from doing the exact same thing using wifi? You connect your phone through wifi to a VoIP gateway that will route the call to any phone number you want to call. You just need a VoIP client installed on your handset. If you have a open handset, for example an Android one, that's easy and you can use this today within any wifi network you have access to.
All "3" mobile phones have a skype client, the sticking point is the wifi.
On the other hand "3" seem to have gone completely off their rocker and aren't charging for the data skype uses on their wireless network. Net result? Free calls. Completely free calls.
Each VOIP call uses less bandwidth than a voice call, so it's a transition to get people to do this. You still have a monthly contract, so expect the price of that to go up as people use it more...
Perhaps they have a deal with Skype also, so they get a share of outcall and termination revenue, after all it's only Skype to Skype calls that are free, if I call my friends on their 'real' phones I still get charged.
In fact, that's part of their plan - once I start using it, I nag all my friends to get it too, s
Each VOIP call uses less bandwidth than a voice call, so it's a transition to get people to do this. You still have a monthly contract,
Urm, no I don't. I got 3 on PAYG. What I do need to fork out for is a handset that will run the skype software, which my phone won't. As I don't know anyone on skype it's kinda useless for me.
However, what is useful is that you also get "unlimited" free 3-to-3 calls, some free data and free texts on PAYG, providing you top up at least £5 every 3 months.
Each VOIP call uses less bandwidth than a voice call, so it's a transition to get people to do this. You still have a monthly contract, so expect the price of that to go up as people use it more...
Nope. http://threestore.three.co.uk/payg/default.aspx [three.co.uk] clearly shows these phones NOT on contract which have free skype calls. And it's being marketed as FREE CALLS FOREVER (so don't expect any price to appear). Three is a pretty cool company.
1. Skype on 3 goes via a gateway. From your handset to three is done via the mobile network, then they route it over Skype. 2. No Skype-out. Free calls to other Skype users are only of limited use.
Nothing, but if you want to use the same mobile number, there's no-one (as far as I'm aware) that allows that.
Ideally someone would come up with a single access number that finds me by the best method - cellphone when I'm out and about, over Skype/VOIP when I'm there, and voicemail when I'm not.
If I switch full time to Skype, I can use it at home, but it's a LOT harder when out and about - as far as I know, only '3' in the UK allow it explicitly on their handsets.
T-Mobile in the USA does just this with their Hotspot@Home service. You need to have a compatible handset with WiFi. The service costs about $10 a month and lets you make unlimited calls while you are on your WiFi network or T-mobile's WiFi hotspots in coffeeshops and such.
How is this different from, or better than, phones that automatically connect to wireless networks and use them for calls?
My Orange Nokia 6301 supposedly does this in the UK.
Lots of people seem to be assuming that this is you paying the network to extend their network for anyone to use.
It isn't.
If you read the article (I know, radical), you'll see that only four phones, which you need to register, will be able to use the femto-cell. So no, you won't be providing your neighbours with improved service over your own connection (unless you register their phone).
While it's pretty expensive, I'd actually be tempted by this. I can't get a reliable mobile signal in my flat, because of the construction of the building (mobile reception outside is fine).
Of course, it doesn't say if calls made over the femto cell are cheaper than over their network. I would hope they were, it would mean I could pretty much ignore my landline, which I only use because I can't be mobile reception.
"It's certainly the first of its kind in Europe, and I see Vodafone says it will work over every home broadband line,"
I had a Samsung Femtocell installed in my basement last November running over a residential DSL line. It's from a Slovenian mobile operator Mobitel - I even written a blog post [tablix.org] about it.
Can you elaborate? I thought 4G was going to be an all IP network. So IP must be superior enough compared to other protocols.
Bad assumption IMHO. What is far more likely to me, is that using the IP network is cheaper than the alternatives, not higher in quality. Remember that these companies are in business to make money, not provide quality service. Occasionally providing the later enables the former, but not usually.
Hmm, I am from the UK but I spend almost all my time living in Brussels. I maintain a UK cellphone for the times when I am back though. If possible it might be cool to get one of these and plug into my Belgian broadband. A local access point without the international roaming charges.
What a great idea! Can't believe I didn't think of trying this! That basically amounts to free international calling, and the ability to use my american cell phone (without a SIM card) overseas!
Sprint makes a device called the Airave [nextel.com] that acts as a mini-cell tower over a DSL line. I imagine it could be plugged into any DSL line overseas, and route calls and voicemails to my cell phone in another country. Even if Sprint had some geographical limitations as to where the traffic could come from, I could
According to a subsequent conversation [eweekeurope.co.uk] with Vodafone, if you have a £30 a month contract with Vodafone, you can ask for one free, or have it bundled into your new contract. It's £5 a month on other contracts, and £160 to buy if you are pay-as-you-go.
Yes, you are providing Vodafone with free backhaul, but you aren't paying vastly over the cost of the box for it.
And yes, you can do the same with Wi-Fi.
Why would you use a laptop and a dongle to transfer data over this thing? What was the submitter thinking, why wouldn't you just use wifi?
Because there won't be any wifi. Cellular networking won the battle when the iphone came out and phone companies started selling netbooks on contract. Ten years from now small to medium businesses won't have any networking gear in their offices at all. They will use cellular networks for all their traffic. Bigger businesses may have private networks or microcells like this.
then it should be easy enough to tunnel to the UK. Some Femtocells (no idea about this vodafone one) have built in GPS to the cell can locate itself. Officially I believe it's pitched to make sure the femtocell is licensed to be used, but everybody immediately pointed out it was to stop it being used for roaming. Was never quite sure how the GPS would work though, unless it was in the T&C that you had to balance your femtocell on a window ledge.
I love it! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's fucking win-win for big business.
Re:I love it! (Score:5, Interesting)
It's just another slashvertisement.
Chodeaphone sucks. their coverage sucks in particular, which is why they're pushing this.
I'm just waiting for someone to figure out how to hijack what is essentially a wireless connection to someone's broadband...
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Chodeaphone? What?
If you're going to alter a company's name for ironic effect, at least do it in a way that makes sense. Personally I find it immature and annoying, and wish people wouldn't do it at all.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So it does make sense
*cue "the more you know" splash*
Re: (Score:2)
Slashvertisement it may be but as a former employer of Vodafone I know that they have the best voice and 3G coverage of any mobile operator in the UK. That's why they are the government's preferred operator. And no I don't have any affection for the company.
As for yourself, getting coverage in your mother's basement would be a challenge for any network.
Re: (Score:2)
Check the latest poll, I live in an attic
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just waiting for someone to figure out how to hijack what is essentially a wireless connection to someone's broadband...
Yeah. What better way to get out of a RIAA lawsuit than "they hacked my router"?
Re: (Score:2)
Been there, done that.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that Vodafones coverage isn't what it could be but that is a criticism that could be made of any of the mobile providers. In my experience Vodafone isn't much better or worse than any other provider it really depends on where you are. What we really need is for some Government intervention to allow the mobile providers a bit more freedom in putting up masts. They have bent over backwards to placate pressure groups and it's left us with beautifully hidden but rather patchy mobile phone system. More p
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know about the UK but in the Netherlands Vodafone is one of the best in terms of coverage. It's still not all that great everywhere, but in general it's one of the best you can get.
And yes I'm a Vodafone customer, and no I'm not that satisfied (they gave me a 50MB limit per month which doesn't even cover my monthly mail traffic).
Old buildings (Score:2)
This seems to be targetted at home users, which isn't what I was expecting.
There are lots of old buildings in Europe, and some of them have really, really thick stone walls. Some of them only have moderately thick stone walls. Something that provided a signal in buildings like this would be useful.
Uh no.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Uhhh, no. It's a classic fuck-the-consumer, what-the-fuck-were-they-smoking, you-have-to-be-fucking-kidding-me deal.
I got this spiel from Verizon (USA) a little while back. Unlucky enough to have marginal service where I live, I asked a Verizon store rep what could be done about it. He then came back with a nice box and said, "It's really cool. It's called a thingmajiggy and it will boost your cellphone service through your Internet connection." I thought, "Wow, that's pretty cool of them".
Just one thing everyone forgets or wants to gloss over in this massive techno-wankathon over how cool it is.... Verizon tried to charge me $250. Two-Hundred-And-Fifty-Bucks.
This is what you are getting for $250. The ability for ANY Verizon phone within range, which from what I understand is about as good as an access point, to PREFER your "femtocell" and place the calls across your Internet connection back into Verizon. Everyone still gets charged for their usage.
Why would I PAY Verizon to basically expand their own coverage area? Why would I incur the bandwidth costs for unknown cellphone users around me? Yeah, I couldn't fucking figure it out either.
Before anybody gets real hot about how cool these things are, just realize that you are paying these people directly to expand their service coverage. That's just plain nuts. If it was $40 or $50 bucks like a cheap router and I could restrict access by IMEI, *maybe* it might be an interesting deal.
Wow. In the UK it seems, not only will you pay to increase their service coverage, but monthly as well. I hope a reach-around comes with that deal. Gotta admit, that's one hell of a commitment to increasing coverage and creating a reliable network. Let's make everyone pay multiple month's of service up front along with an additional monthly service cost to put them to work for us.
Total. Fucking. Insanity. /END RANT
Re:Uh no.... (Score:5, Informative)
With this Vodafone one, "The device will support up to four voice calls, and users will register the handsets they want to use it on the web", so only you and your family/friends can use your picocell.
Parent
wireshark? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For £150 you can buy a Nokia E51, SIM free (change network whenever you want) which supports VOIP over Wi-Fi.
That's £10 less AND all your calls will be a lot cheaper (VOIP prices are much less than mobile phone prices) when you're in range of your Wi-Fi router.
You can even configure your VOIP to forward calls to your mobile phone number when you're not in range.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice idea - but in the UK it is illegal to record a conversation (including text web chat such as IRC) without the permission of the people involved. You could listen in, maybe, but not record it. Even then you might be infringing some telecommunications regulations by deliberately snooping on a telephone conversation even if it is using your infrastructure (and by setting up their phone number as being specifically allowed, you can't even claim ignorance)
Re:Uh no.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I would agree with you entirely, were it not for the fact that Voda appear to be locking this box down to certain handsets.
However, I agree entirely - why should I pay an additional monthly fee to Voda just so I can use their service from my house when I can walk fifty yards down the street and not have to pay? Further, not only am I paying Voda for the privilege of saving them money, but I then have to fork out for additional bandwidth on my home broadband.
All that having been said, one of only two reasons my company has an office is for mobile coverage. If I can get coverage at home (and those of my staff), there's no reason not to move to home working any more. The additional cost of the cells would still result in a saving if we don't have to pay for the offices.
Ho hum.
Nick.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because you don't want to have to walk down the street in the off chance that someone might be trying to phone you.
Can't your mobile do redirection?? (Score:2)
When you're at home just redirect your mobile to you landline FFS! Or is using a phone that plugs into the wall just so uncool these days that you'd sooner be with no phone service at all?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have to say, from what you've described, this device sounds like something I could really use. The mobile signal in my house is attrocious. In the US, you can use repeaters to extend coverage within your own house, but those devices are completely illegal in the UK. If this offers a viable, legal alternative, I'd definitely consider it.
Of course, 1. I'm on 3, not voda, and 2. I can't afford to drop the cash on it. But, in principle ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your entire rant reads like you think this is for *home* users. It's primarily targetted at business users. Probably those that have bought everyone Blackberrys and then find they don't work in basement etc.
> Why would I PAY Verizon to basically expand their own coverage area?
For the exact same reason you PAY to have broadband, cable or phone lines installed in your house: Because you want to USE IT perhaps?! By paying them to install broadband in your house you're "paying them to extend their network"
Re:Uh no.... (Score:4, Informative)
I do agree the cost is kind of high (I feel less as bad for myself seeing as those in the UK really get screwed with a monthly fee) but if you need service, you need service. I'd rather cough up the extra cash to have good coverage and live where I want to live (aka bumfuck). The only other option would be a cellular repeater with an antenna mounted on your roof and that'd be significantly more expensive and dependant on the reception already available.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
While the deal that you were offered is totally nuts I don't think this deal is the same sort of thing. The impression I got was it simply acts as a base station for up to four registered phones. Personally, I think there is some scope for the system you describe if the pricing and technology are put together in the correct package.
For example, imagine you live in a remote area with no / limited mobile coverage, your mobile provider offers you this deal: you buy your broadband and a mobile contract off them
What about wifi? (Score:5, Interesting)
What stops you from doing the exact same thing using wifi? You connect your phone through wifi to a VoIP gateway that will route the call to any phone number you want to call. You just need a VoIP client installed on your handset. If you have a open handset, for example an Android one, that's easy and you can use this today within any wifi network you have access to.
Re:What about wifi? (Score:5, Informative)
All "3" mobile phones have a skype client, the sticking point is the wifi.
On the other hand "3" seem to have gone completely off their rocker and aren't charging for the data skype uses on their wireless network. Net result? Free calls. Completely free calls.
!?
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Each VOIP call uses less bandwidth than a voice call, so it's a transition to get people to do this. You still have a monthly contract, so expect the price of that to go up as people use it more...
Perhaps they have a deal with Skype also, so they get a share of outcall and termination revenue, after all it's only Skype to Skype calls that are free, if I call my friends on their 'real' phones I still get charged.
In fact, that's part of their plan - once I start using it, I nag all my friends to get it too, s
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Each VOIP call uses less bandwidth than a voice call, so it's a transition to get people to do this. You still have a monthly contract,
Urm, no I don't. I got 3 on PAYG. What I do need to fork out for is a handset that will run the skype software, which my phone won't. As I don't know anyone on skype it's kinda useless for me. However, what is useful is that you also get "unlimited" free 3-to-3 calls, some free data and free texts on PAYG, providing you top up at least £5 every 3 months.
Re: (Score:2)
Each VOIP call uses less bandwidth than a voice call, so it's a transition to get people to do this. You still have a monthly contract, so expect the price of that to go up as people use it more...
Nope. http://threestore.three.co.uk/payg/default.aspx [three.co.uk] clearly shows these phones NOT on contract which have free skype calls. And it's being marketed as FREE CALLS FOREVER (so don't expect any price to appear). Three is a pretty cool company.
Re: (Score:2)
And it's being marketed as FREE CALLS FOREVER (so don't expect any price to appear).
Yeah, and I was sold an unlimited broadband package.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Unless they have made drastic changes lately:
1. Skype on 3 goes via a gateway. From your handset to three is done via the mobile network, then they route it over Skype.
2. No Skype-out. Free calls to other Skype users are only of limited use.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I saw one of those "Free Skype for Life" 3 adverts the other day and couldn't help thinking of the old classic:
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing, but if you want to use the same mobile number, there's no-one (as far as I'm aware) that allows that.
Ideally someone would come up with a single access number that finds me by the best method - cellphone when I'm out and about, over Skype/VOIP when I'm there, and voicemail when I'm not.
If I switch full time to Skype, I can use it at home, but it's a LOT harder when out and about - as far as I know, only '3' in the UK allow it explicitly on their handsets.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
T-Mobile in the USA does just this with their Hotspot@Home service. You need to have a compatible handset with WiFi. The service costs about $10 a month and lets you make unlimited calls while you are on your WiFi network or T-mobile's WiFi hotspots in coffeeshops and such.
Already been done (Score:4, Interesting)
My Orange Nokia 6301 supposedly does this in the UK.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_Access_Network [wikipedia.org]
The 3G network "3" also claims to use Skype automatically to reduce call costs.
Only phones you register will be able to connect (Score:5, Informative)
Lots of people seem to be assuming that this is you paying the network to extend their network for anyone to use.
It isn't.
If you read the article (I know, radical), you'll see that only four phones, which you need to register, will be able to use the femto-cell. So no, you won't be providing your neighbours with improved service over your own connection (unless you register their phone).
While it's pretty expensive, I'd actually be tempted by this. I can't get a reliable mobile signal in my flat, because of the construction of the building (mobile reception outside is fine).
Of course, it doesn't say if calls made over the femto cell are cheaper than over their network. I would hope they were, it would mean I could pretty much ignore my landline, which I only use because I can't be mobile reception.
Re: (Score:2)
Good point, actually I'd pay extra for that :)
I had this back in 2008 (Score:5, Informative)
"It's certainly the first of its kind in Europe, and I see Vodafone says it will work over every home broadband line,"
I had a Samsung Femtocell installed in my basement last November running over a residential DSL line. It's from a Slovenian mobile operator Mobitel - I even written a blog post [tablix.org] about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Bad assumption IMHO. What is far more likely to me, is that using the IP network is cheaper than the alternatives, not higher in quality. Remember that these companies are in business to make money, not provide quality service. Occasionally providing the later enables the former, but not usually.
Rival? (Score:2, Insightful)
Er, no. They're carrying traffic for their (paying) customer.
Use abroad? (Score:2)
Hmm, I am from the UK but I spend almost all my time living in Brussels. I maintain a UK cellphone for the times when I am back though. If possible it might be cool to get one of these and plug into my Belgian broadband. A local access point without the international roaming charges.
That could be sweet!
-- Pete.
Re: (Score:2)
Well done for thinking of it.
Does the spectrum match up overseas? (Score:2)
Sprint makes a device called the Airave [nextel.com] that acts as a mini-cell tower over a DSL line. I imagine it could be plugged into any DSL line overseas, and route calls and voicemails to my cell phone in another country. Even if Sprint had some geographical limitations as to where the traffic could come from, I could
Clarification: This femto is given away free (Score:2)
Great for us travellers! (Score:2)
I often visit the USA for several weeks at a time.
With this device, I'll simply be able to plug the cell into my broadband in the US and have access as if I was home in the UK, without any worries!
I do begrudge the idea of paying Vodafone for traffic in the UK, but outside, this sounds ideal!
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you use a laptop and a dongle to transfer data over this thing? What was the submitter thinking, why wouldn't you just use wifi?
Because there won't be any wifi. Cellular networking won the battle when the iphone came out and phone companies started selling netbooks on contract. Ten years from now small to medium businesses won't have any networking gear in their offices at all. They will use cellular networks for all their traffic. Bigger businesses may have private networks or microcells like this.
If they just did IP checking (Score:2)