Techdirt. Stories filed under "4g" Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us Techdirt. Stories filed under "4g"http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Fri, 9 Nov 2012 13:56:55 PST AT&T Admits That The Whole 'Spectrum Crunch' Argument It Made For Why It Needed T-Mobile Wasn't True Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20121109/07434820984/att-admits-that-whole-spectrum-crunch-argument-it-made-why-it-needed-t-mobile-wasnt-true.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20121109/07434820984/att-admits-that-whole-spectrum-crunch-argument-it-made-why-it-needed-t-mobile-wasnt-true.shtml accidentally posted some documents to the FCC which admitted that the company could fairly easily expand its coverage to 97% of the population of the US without T-Mobile (and, in fact, that it would cost about 10% of what buying T-Mobile would cost). Suddenly, the argument that it absolutely needed T-Mobile rang hollow -- even as the company continued to insist exactly that. Still, the FCC suddenly was skeptical and AT&T, seeing the writing on the wall, gave up on the merger.

So, it probably shouldn't have been seen as much of a surprise that just 11 months after the T-Mobile deal fell through, AT&T has announced plans to expand its LTE footprint to cover 97% of the population of the US. In other words, the internal document was exactly correct, and AT&T's public claims? Hogwash.

Even the mainstream news media is now mocking AT&T's obviously bogus claims during the merger fight. AT&T's response to this is to claim that it "chartered a new direction," doing something like 40 new deals for spectrum. However, as Broadband Reports notes, all of this seems to make clear that there is no spectrum crunch -- that's just a bogeyman story that the telcos tell the government when they want a handout. In fact, AT&T is now saying publicly that there is no spectrum crunch. It has more than enough.
Speaking to analysts, AT&T's chief strategy officer John Stankey yesterday acknowledged the company is now well-positioned on the spectrum front -- even before the company starts moving on their new plan to use WCS spectrum for LTE deployment.

"Even under ideal circumstances, getting new spectrum on the market in the next five to seven years is aggressive," Stankey said. "But what we do know is that AT&T is well-positioned now...These deals give us confidence that we can meet our LTE objectives for next two years and they will allow us to deliver competitive performance."
Of course, I'm sure the next time AT&T needs something from the government, or wants to wipe a competitor off the map, we'll be right back to that story about how they're in desperate need of spectrum.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> well,-implicity http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121109/07434820984 Thu, 6 Sep 2012 13:13:00 PDT Disruption Starts With A Foot In The Door: Amazon's New Data Plan Is Limited But Potentially Revolutionary Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120906/12200520304/disruption-starts-with-foot-door-amazons-new-data-plan-is-limited-potentially-revolutionary.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120906/12200520304/disruption-starts-with-foot-door-amazons-new-data-plan-is-limited-potentially-revolutionary.shtml 4G LTE mobile data plan on the Kindle Fire HD. It's $49.99 for the year, though it's limited to just 250MB per month -- which is tiny. Amazon has included mobile data before in its Kindles, but those were strictly for books (which don't take up that much data). As they go further into the fully functional tablet world, this starts to become more interesting. That's because mobile data continues to be something of a racket, with just a few national providers: Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint (and there are limitations there). The pricing offered by those guys always seems to border on collusion (amazing how closely they track each other's pricing changes) and is always focused on keeping the prices very high.

Amazon's offer here is a way to tiptoe into that pool with something of an alternative. Yes, they're just piggybacking on someone else's network via some sort of MVNO (mobile virtual network operator) agreement, so you're still really using one of the national carriers' networks. But from a consumer standpoint, it is offering something of an alternative for mobile data, at much more reasonable prices (though, obviously, the super low caps match that super low pricing). That, alone, doesn't revolutionize mobile data pricing, but it does seem like a way for Amazon to get its foot in the door and expand over time. Amazon has a long history of figuring out ways to do things in a consumer-friendly manner, even if it means undercutting others to do so (which has made it a few enemies). In the presentation itself, Jeff Bezos noted that they're focused on making money elsewhere -- basically as people buy things via the device -- and thus the company has tremendous incentive to keep the prices of the devices and the service quite low. And that has the potential to be quite disruptive.

In some ways, I look at it as similar (in a very different context) to Google's fiber effort in Kansas City. In both cases, you have companies sort of dipping their toes in the water of ancillary markets that make their primary markets more valuable. They're very limited at this time, and many people may brush them off as being useless. But that's what always happens with The Innovator's Dilemma. Offer something simple and small, and the legacy players brush it off as too small or too limited to matter. But keep improving on that, and you undercut legacy providers without them fully realizing what's happening -- often because you're using your tiny and "weak" efforts there to actually enhance your primary market, where the traditional players have no presence.

Lots of people are reasonably mocking the 250MB limit. It is kinda useless. But, look at it as a wedge, and the beginning of the climb up the innovation slope, making Amazon's core business more valuable... and things could actually get quite interesting.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> need-pressure-from-somewhere http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120906/12200520304 Fri, 17 Feb 2012 00:01:39 PST A 4G iPad Requires A Sensible Shared Data Plan Derek Kerton http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120216/06585817780/4g-ipad-requires-sensible-shared-data-plan.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20120216/06585817780/4g-ipad-requires-sensible-shared-data-plan.shtml wrote that the upcoming iPad would feature a smaller 8-inch screen, and would be LTE-enabled. LTE is the latest, fastest network technology available from Verizon, AT&T, and other network operators. But the intention here is not to pile on to the speculation of what Apple might deliver. The intention is to speculate instead as to what the carriers might have up their sleeves with respect to an LTE tablet pricing plan.

When the LTE iPad hits the market, expect to see it sold with a "shared data plan", or a plan that is connected to a smartphone plan, and share a common pool of MB of traffic per month. Verizon, in particular, has hinted that just such plans will be emerging soon. Lowell McAdam said in December that such plans would emerge "sometime in 2012" to accommodate the increasing number of people with multiple mobile Internet devices. Such devices include smartphones, laptops, tablets, and others. More and more, subscribers are adding devices, and are getting frustrated at having to open a separate account, with a ~$50/month price, just because they choose to browse on their tablet instead of their smartphone. Most customers, rightly, assume that it should make little difference to the operator whether they access the net on their tablet, laptop, or phone. This is just a substitution of the access device. Because of the current punitive billing, owners of multiple connected devices are defecting from the cellular game, and instead opting to use Wi-Fi only on laptops and tablets...and liking it!

Research from The NPD Group has shown how the attach rates (portion that sign on to cellular service) for cellular-ready tablets have been less than stellar, and decreasing over time. In April 2011, NPD says that 60% of tablets only connected via Wi-Fi, but by December 2011, that number had jumped to 65%, showing how Wi-Fi has been winning out over the more expensive and contract-laden cellular offerings. Tablets like the Kindle Fire are sold as Wi-Fi only, contrasting with the earliest Kindles which all had cellular radios embedded. The carriers are at extreme jeopardy of losing the connected device market (and embedded market and M2M) simply because they have lagged in offering the kinds of flexible plans that make sense.

Once a trend away from cellular connection takes hold, it becomes harder to stop. Wi-Fi networks will respond with increased capacity and increased hotspots, OEMs will respond with more Wi-Fi-only devices, and consumer behavior will respond by considering tablets as "portable" Wi-Fi devices, not fully mobile like smartphones. The strategic cost to the carriers is significant. While the trend won't be stopped, it is certain that carriers could retain significance by offering pooled data plans at sensible bundled prices. This means selling data to a consumer, not to a consumers specific device. And what better way to launch such a new pricing plan than with a device that the market has proven to love - a new iPad?

So whatever the shape of the new iPad, and the fantastic new features that fanbois laud while naysayers explain how they were just repurposed from other devices, we should fully expect an LTE iPad with a new kind of cellular pricing model, which drives up the attach rate, increases device utility at a reasonable price, and creates greater carrier loyalty and long-term gains. If Verizon and AT&T do this right, we could all win.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> cellular-operators-losing-the-battle-for-connected-devices http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120216/06585817780 Thu, 25 Aug 2011 19:00:00 PDT FCC Asks AT&T To Explain Discrepancy Over Claimed Need For T-Mobile vs. Internal Discussions Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110825/03135515677/fcc-asks-att-to-explain-discrepency-over-claimed-need-t-mobile-vs-internal-discussions.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110825/03135515677/fcc-asks-att-to-explain-discrepency-over-claimed-need-t-mobile-vs-internal-discussions.shtml accidentally revealed that it had a plan to cover 97% of the population with its 4G/LTE service. That's a big deal, because a big part of the rationale for the T-Mobile merger was that it simply could not deliver that kind of coverage without the merger. AT&T has worked furiously since then to basically deny what the filing clearly stated. They've been doing so by trying to change around what basic words mean (which is kind of funny). However, it looks like they haven't convinced one rather important player. The FCC is now asking for evidence that AT&T actually needs T-Mobile as it keeps claiming. It's still pretty likely that this all gets approved, but it definitely has presented pretty clearly how the rationales being given for why this deal is "necessary" are hogwash. No one denies that it will be much easier for AT&T, but that's not the same thing as necessary.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> oops http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110825/03135515677 Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:10:35 PDT Irony: FBI Says Apple Letting You Remotely Kill iPhones They've Taken Is 'Big Brother-ish' Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110802/14030515367/irony-fbi-says-apple-letting-you-remotely-kill-iphones-theyve-taken-is-big-brother-ish.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110802/14030515367/irony-fbi-says-apple-letting-you-remotely-kill-iphones-theyve-taken-is-big-brother-ish.shtml specialized points us to a report at Wired concerning a released (via the Freedom of Information Act) report from the FBI as it prepares for dealing with smartphones and faster 4G and beyond mobile data networks. Not surprisingly, the FBI is concerned about what this will mean for law enforcement. Not too long ago, we noted that the feds had been sending documents to local police forces, warning them of the ability of iPhone owners to remotely wipe the devices, using a tool designed to deal with thieves. But the FBI instead describes a future possible addition to this -- using voice or facial recognition characteristics to activate this -- as "Big Brotherish" (you can see it on page 79 of the embedded document below):
In a move that seems Big Brother-ish, Apple has a patent in the works that could use voice and facial recognition technology to activate a "kill switch" on its popular iPhone, shutting it down when hackers "jailbreak" or unlock the phone to install unauthorized programs on it, or try to steal information from an unsuspecting iPhone user.
Apparently the FBI doesn't quite recognize that "Big Brother" is the government.

And, speaking of "Big Brotherish," it seems quite concerning that the feds main issue with LTE 4G networks is that since they can send more data through, it means a bigger "firehose" of data to deal with.
One notable impact is that Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) will need to deal with significantly higher data rates than in current wireless network intercepts.
I recognize that they're just describing the problem, but isn't this effectively admitting that they get way too much info. If you're getting a "firehose" of data, you're doing it wrong (and potentially illegally).

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> look-in-the-mirror http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110802/14030515367 Tue, 25 May 2010 20:54:09 PDT T-Mobile Claiming '4G Speeds' To Pretend It's Offering 4G Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100525/1203219567.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100525/1203219567.shtml any speed below that is covered, even if you'll never get a speed anywhere near the defined "x."

The other popular tactic is to lie about what kind of wireless network you're actually offering. There were the claims that any wireless broadband solution was "WiMAX" back before the WiMAX standard was even set. So you started to get companies calling their solution "WiMAX" and then including all sorts of fine print about how it was "pre-WiMAX" and would certainly be upgraded to WiMAX once WiMAX actually existed.

Similarly, nearly a decade ago, when all the talk was about the upcoming "3G" networks, the mobile carriers all started pushing claims that they were offering "3G" when they absolutely were not. There were some interim "2.5G" steps, and some aggressive marketers just decided to round up. And, it looks like they're doing that again. T-Mobile is going around claiming its HSPA+ network offers "4G speeds," which, of course, is not to be confused with actual 4G. And, of course, this is an "up to" situation, where the network could, theoretically, sorta, kinda touch on "4G speeds," but probably won't for most people.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> nice-try http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100525/1203219567