1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

Unlimited Wireless Internet at low cost ($20-30/month)

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by John Navas, Sep 9, 2004.

  1. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

    Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.

    The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    now a reality:

    CDMA

    * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>

    * SprintPCS calls its similar CMDA 1X-based wireless data PCS Vision, but
    apparently offers no unlimited plan -- the $80/month plan is capped at 300 MB,
    with additional data at a pricey $2/MB (charged by the KB).
    <http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/servicePlansOptionsV2/DataPlans.jsp>
    Unlimited Sprint PCS Wi-Fi Access is available month-to-month for $50/month,
    but coverage seems more limited than T-Mobile.
    <http://www.sprint.com/business/products/categories/wifi.jsp>

    GSM (GPRS/EDGE/UMTS)

    The real news is that GSM carriers, led by T-Mobile, have now pushed the price
    of unlimited data much lower:

    * T-Mobile Internet Unlimited is available both alone at $30/month (with 20
    cents/minute calling), and as a voice plan add-on for $20/month. Based on
    GPRS, typical speeds are 40-50 Kbps. Faster EDGE is not currently available.
    <http://www.t-mobile.com/plans/default.asp?tab=internet> Unlimited T-Mobile
    HotSpots (Wi-Fi, widely available) can be added for another $30/month on a
    1-year contract ($40 month-to-month). <http://www.t-mobile.com/hotspot/>
    If all you need is unlimited WAP and email, T-Mobile has Unlimited t-zones at
    only $5/month (WAP + Internet email) or $10/month (WAP + Internet and
    corporate email).
    <http://www.t-mobile.com/info/opt_services/t-zones/basic.asp>

    * Cingular responded to T-Mobile with its MEdia Works unlimited data (plus
    1500 Text/Instant Messages and 200 Multimedia Messages) voice plan add-on for
    $20/month <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_purchase>. Both GPRS (typical
    speeds of 40-50 Kbps) and EDGE (typical speeds of 120-150 Kbps) are included
    and widely deployed. Wi-Fi service to Cingular customers is to be provided by
    SBC FreedomLink, with unlimited access at $20/month on a 1-year plan, but
    coverage (e.g., UPS Stores) seems more limited than T-Mobile.
    <http://www02.sbc.com/Products_Services/Residential/ProdInfo_1/1,,1315--1-3-3,00.html>

    * AT&T Wireless is priced between T-Mobile/Cingular and Verizon, with enough
    unpleasant fine print to choke a horse. Mobile Internet Unlimited for Laptops
    (which has the least restrictions) is $80/month (voice plan add-on).
    <http://www.attwireless.com/personal/features/mmode/plans.jhtml> There's also
    less expensive $25/month Unlimited mMode (voice plan add-on), but it has a
    surcharge of $.001/KB ($1/MB) with a connected device (e.g., laptop, PDA)
    <http://www.attwireless.com/personal/features/mmode/plans.jhtml>. UMTS
    (typical downlink speeds of 220-320 Kbps, available in six major metro areas
    including San Francisco) is available on both of these plans, albeit only with
    a carrier-supplied device, in addition to EDGE and GPRS (which are widely
    available). Like T-Mobile, AT&T Wireless has unlimited Wi-Fi available,
    $35/month as an add-on to a data plan, or $40/month as an add-on to a voice
    plan, but coverage seems more limited than T-Mobile.
    <http://www.attwireless.com/smallbusiness/solutions/laptop/wifi.jhtml>
    AT&T Wireless is expected to become part of Cingular by roughly the end of the
    year, and be completely switched to the Cingular brand within the following
    six months. In the meantime, Customer Service is somewhat chaotic.

    iDEN

    Nextel Packetstream Gold Service offers unlimited data at $55/month.
    Coverage is more limited and speed (19.2 Kbps, plus compression like Cingular
    Data Acceleration) is slower than CDMA or GSM (GPRS/EDGE/UMTS).
    <http://nextel.com/services/nextelonline/packetstream_gold.shtml>
    Nextel just introduced high-speed Wireless Broadband (based on FLASH-OFDM
    <http://www.flarion.com/>) with claimed low latency and unlimited data at
    typical down-/up-link of 1.5 Mbps/375 Kbps for $75/month, 1.0 Mbps/200 Kbps
    for $65/month, and 750 Kbps/200 Kbps for $50/month. Availability is currently
    limited to the Research Triangle (Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill) in North
    Carolina. <http://www.nextelbroadband.com/>

    REAL WORLD RESULTS

    I've been using Cingular MEdia Works, currently at GPRS speeds by means of a
    Bluetooth connection from a Windows XP notebook computer to a Sony Ericsson
    Z600 handset. Cingular supports both "Data Acceleration" (see below) and raw
    connections. Over a raw connection, my typical speeds (50 Kbps down/12.5 Kbps
    up) and throughput (5 KBps down on compressed data) have been comparable to a
    good V.90 dial-up modem, although latency at roughly 700 ms (as measured by
    ping) is much worse. (Bluetooth does not significantly contribute to
    latency.) Overall I'm pleased with both coverage and performance. I'll be
    comparing faster EDGE speeds (widely available) as soon as I get an
    EDGE-capable handset or PC Card (e.g., Sony Ericsson GC82).

    Cingular's Data Acceleration (DA) uses compression to improve the throughput
    of web (HTTP) and email (POP3, IMAP) downlink traffic. The primary benefit
    seems to come from greatly compressing graphics; the visual result is
    significantly degraded, but still quite usable, and the performane boost is
    substantial, on the order of 2x for typical graphics-heavy web pages. In
    addition, compressible email attachments larger than 8K bytes are compressed
    into .CAB files, which raise some possible issues (e.g., with anti-virus
    scanning), but I personally haven't found it to be a problem. Overall, DA
    works well enough that I normally use it rather than a raw connection.

    VOICE OVER IP

    Given unlimited data, and a willingness to put up with high wireless latency,
    with Skype you should be able to make unlimited Skype-to-Skype voice calls at
    no additional cost, to a landline in the USA or other Global Rate countries
    for only about 2 cents/minute, or to other overseas landlines at rates far
    below cellular carrier rates. Vonage, which has a variety of calling plans,
    would presumably be another option. Caveat: I haven't yet tried this.

    POTENTIAL GOTCHAS

    * Handsets (and PC Cards) do not all have the same data performance! In
    general, all reasonably recent GPRS/EDGE-capable devices from Ericsson and
    Sony Ericsson support Class 8 (4+1) and Class 10 (4+2, max of 5), whereas most
    Nokia devices are limited to slower Class 4 (3+1) and Class 6 (3+2, max 4).
    Motorola has both Class 4 and Class 8 devices. (The first number is the max
    downlink slots, and the number after the "+" is the max uplink slots.) This
    can translate into a substantial difference in throughput -- if supported by
    the carrier, Class 8 is 33% faster on downlink than Class 4.

    * Connections between handsets and "tethered" devices (e.g., notebook
    computer, PDA) are typically implemented as a serial port, either real or
    virtual, and port speed usually defaults to 115 Kbps. (My own Bluetooth stack
    is implemented as a virtual serial port that will go as fast as 921.6 Kbps,
    but which runs at only 115.2 Kbps by default.) While 115 Kbps is generally
    fast enough for GPRS and CDMA 1X, it can be a bottleneck for EDGE, UMTS, and
    CDMA EV-DO. In general, I recommend port speed of 230 Kbps for GPRS and CDMA
    1X, 460 Kbps for EDGE, and 920 Kbps for UMTS and CMDA EV-DO.

    * Pricing above is based on plans available in the San Francisco Bay Area.
    Plans and prices may vary in other areas.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
    CABLE MODEM/DSL GUIDE: <http://Cable-DSL.home.att.net/>
     



    › See More: Unlimited Wireless Internet at low cost ($20-30/month)
  2. Gee John- looks like some anecdotal information to me. According to you,
    that would make it unreliable. A little hypocritical on your part, or are
    we to believe that your experiences are truly the only honest ones out
    there>

    And what's with the followup to ba.internet? Trying to avoid posts like
    this appearing in the groups the original was sent to? Or is it because you
    realized the post was off topic and ba.internet would be the more
    appropriate group? Between this and your little tit-for-tat nonsense with
    Elmo, you are making me realize that you have the social and behavioral
    skills of a rock- add personality to the list as well.

    And yes- I realize that I'm probably being rude and obnoxious. You don't
    have the market cornered on that

    > I've been using Cingular MEdia Works, currently at GPRS speeds by means of

    a
    > Bluetooth connection from a Windows XP notebook computer to a Sony

    Ericsson
    > Z600 handset. Cingular supports both "Data Acceleration" (see below) and

    raw
    > connections. Over a raw connection, my typical speeds (50 Kbps down/12.5

    Kbps
    > up) and throughput (5 KBps down on compressed data) have been comparable

    to a
    > good V.90 dial-up modem, although latency at roughly 700 ms (as measured

    by
    > ping) is much worse. (Bluetooth does not significantly contribute to
    > latency.) Overall I'm pleased with both coverage and performance. I'll

    be
    > comparing faster EDGE speeds (widely available) as soon as I get an
    > EDGE-capable handset or PC Card (e.g., Sony Ericsson GC82).
    >
    > Cingular's Data Acceleration (DA) uses compression to improve the

    throughput
    > of web (HTTP) and email (POP3, IMAP) downlink traffic. The primary

    benefit
    > seems to come from greatly compressing graphics; the visual result is
    > significantly degraded, but still quite usable, and the performane boost

    is
    > substantial, on the order of 2x for typical graphics-heavy web pages. In
    > addition, compressible email attachments larger than 8K bytes are

    compressed
    > into .CAB files, which raise some possible issues (e.g., with anti-virus
    > scanning), but I personally haven't found it to be a problem. Overall, DA
    > works well enough that I normally use it rather than a raw connection.
    >
    > VOICE OVER IP
    >
    > Given unlimited data, and a willingness to put up with high wireless

    latency,
    > with Skype you should be able to make unlimited Skype-to-Skype voice calls

    at
    > no additional cost, to a landline in the USA or other Global Rate

    countries
    > for only about 2 cents/minute, or to other overseas landlines at rates far
    > below cellular carrier rates. Vonage, which has a variety of calling

    plans,
    > would presumably be another option. Caveat: I haven't yet tried this.
    >
    > POTENTIAL GOTCHAS
    >
    > * Handsets (and PC Cards) do not all have the same data performance! In
    > general, all reasonably recent GPRS/EDGE-capable devices from Ericsson and
    > Sony Ericsson support Class 8 (4+1) and Class 10 (4+2, max of 5), whereas

    most
    > Nokia devices are limited to slower Class 4 (3+1) and Class 6 (3+2, max

    4).
    > Motorola has both Class 4 and Class 8 devices. (The first number is the

    max
    > downlink slots, and the number after the "+" is the max uplink slots.)

    This
    > can translate into a substantial difference in throughput -- if supported

    by
    > the carrier, Class 8 is 33% faster on downlink than Class 4.
    >
    > * Connections between handsets and "tethered" devices (e.g., notebook
    > computer, PDA) are typically implemented as a serial port, either real or
    > virtual, and port speed usually defaults to 115 Kbps. (My own Bluetooth

    stack
    > is implemented as a virtual serial port that will go as fast as 921.6

    Kbps,
    > but which runs at only 115.2 Kbps by default.) While 115 Kbps is

    generally
    > fast enough for GPRS and CDMA 1X, it can be a bottleneck for EDGE, UMTS,

    and
    > CDMA EV-DO. In general, I recommend port speed of 230 Kbps for GPRS and

    CDMA
    > 1X, 460 Kbps for EDGE, and 920 Kbps for UMTS and CMDA EV-DO.
    >
    > * Pricing above is based on plans available in the San Francisco Bay Area.
    > Plans and prices may vary in other areas.
    >
    > --
    > Best regards,
    > John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
    > CABLE MODEM/DSL GUIDE: <http://Cable-DSL.home.att.net/>
     
  3. Gee John- looks like some anecdotal information to me. According to you,
    that would make it unreliable. A little hypocritical on your part, or are
    we to believe that your experiences are truly the only honest ones out
    there>

    And what's with the followup to ba.internet? Trying to avoid posts like
    this appearing in the groups the original was sent to? Or is it because you
    realized the post was off topic and ba.internet would be the more
    appropriate group? Between this and your little tit-for-tat nonsense with
    Elmo, you are making me realize that you have the social and behavioral
    skills of a rock- add personality to the list as well.

    And yes- I realize that I'm probably being rude and obnoxious. You don't
    have the market cornered on that

    > I've been using Cingular MEdia Works, currently at GPRS speeds by means of

    a
    > Bluetooth connection from a Windows XP notebook computer to a Sony

    Ericsson
    > Z600 handset. Cingular supports both "Data Acceleration" (see below) and

    raw
    > connections. Over a raw connection, my typical speeds (50 Kbps down/12.5

    Kbps
    > up) and throughput (5 KBps down on compressed data) have been comparable

    to a
    > good V.90 dial-up modem, although latency at roughly 700 ms (as measured

    by
    > ping) is much worse. (Bluetooth does not significantly contribute to
    > latency.) Overall I'm pleased with both coverage and performance. I'll

    be
    > comparing faster EDGE speeds (widely available) as soon as I get an
    > EDGE-capable handset or PC Card (e.g., Sony Ericsson GC82).
    >
    > Cingular's Data Acceleration (DA) uses compression to improve the

    throughput
    > of web (HTTP) and email (POP3, IMAP) downlink traffic. The primary

    benefit
    > seems to come from greatly compressing graphics; the visual result is
    > significantly degraded, but still quite usable, and the performane boost

    is
    > substantial, on the order of 2x for typical graphics-heavy web pages. In
    > addition, compressible email attachments larger than 8K bytes are

    compressed
    > into .CAB files, which raise some possible issues (e.g., with anti-virus
    > scanning), but I personally haven't found it to be a problem. Overall, DA
    > works well enough that I normally use it rather than a raw connection.
    >
    > VOICE OVER IP
    >
    > Given unlimited data, and a willingness to put up with high wireless

    latency,
    > with Skype you should be able to make unlimited Skype-to-Skype voice calls

    at
    > no additional cost, to a landline in the USA or other Global Rate

    countries
    > for only about 2 cents/minute, or to other overseas landlines at rates far
    > below cellular carrier rates. Vonage, which has a variety of calling

    plans,
    > would presumably be another option. Caveat: I haven't yet tried this.
    >
    > POTENTIAL GOTCHAS
    >
    > * Handsets (and PC Cards) do not all have the same data performance! In
    > general, all reasonably recent GPRS/EDGE-capable devices from Ericsson and
    > Sony Ericsson support Class 8 (4+1) and Class 10 (4+2, max of 5), whereas

    most
    > Nokia devices are limited to slower Class 4 (3+1) and Class 6 (3+2, max

    4).
    > Motorola has both Class 4 and Class 8 devices. (The first number is the

    max
    > downlink slots, and the number after the "+" is the max uplink slots.)

    This
    > can translate into a substantial difference in throughput -- if supported

    by
    > the carrier, Class 8 is 33% faster on downlink than Class 4.
    >
    > * Connections between handsets and "tethered" devices (e.g., notebook
    > computer, PDA) are typically implemented as a serial port, either real or
    > virtual, and port speed usually defaults to 115 Kbps. (My own Bluetooth

    stack
    > is implemented as a virtual serial port that will go as fast as 921.6

    Kbps,
    > but which runs at only 115.2 Kbps by default.) While 115 Kbps is

    generally
    > fast enough for GPRS and CDMA 1X, it can be a bottleneck for EDGE, UMTS,

    and
    > CDMA EV-DO. In general, I recommend port speed of 230 Kbps for GPRS and

    CDMA
    > 1X, 460 Kbps for EDGE, and 920 Kbps for UMTS and CMDA EV-DO.
    >
    > * Pricing above is based on plans available in the San Francisco Bay Area.
    > Plans and prices may vary in other areas.
    >
    > --
    > Best regards,
    > John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
    > CABLE MODEM/DSL GUIDE: <http://Cable-DSL.home.att.net/>
     
  4. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello John -

    I notice the Cingular $20/mo option for unlimited data.
    Are tethered laptops officially permitted?
    If not, sounds like they are permitted, but not supported?

    Thanks,
    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu
     
  5. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello John -

    I notice the Cingular $20/mo option for unlimited data.
    Are tethered laptops officially permitted?
    If not, sounds like they are permitted, but not supported?

    Thanks,
    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu
     
  6. Todd Allcock

    Todd Allcock Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    >


    Snappy opening line, but nowhere in your post did you point out any
    wireless carrier with a cost/performance ratio that matches Ricochet's
    150-200k for $25/month.

    Certainly Richochet's dream of a national data network for travelers
    is dead, but they are repositioning themselves as a cheap "almost
    broadband" solution in Denver for homes unserved by DSL or cable, as
    well as the best price/performance ratioed wireless data as long as
    you, like they say in 1930's detective flicks, don't try to leave
    town.
     
  7. Todd Allcock

    Todd Allcock Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    >


    Snappy opening line, but nowhere in your post did you point out any
    wireless carrier with a cost/performance ratio that matches Ricochet's
    150-200k for $25/month.

    Certainly Richochet's dream of a national data network for travelers
    is dead, but they are repositioning themselves as a cheap "almost
    broadband" solution in Denver for homes unserved by DSL or cable, as
    well as the best price/performance ratioed wireless data as long as
    you, like they say in 1930's detective flicks, don't try to leave
    town.
     
  8. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <RcydneBa5ZVGdN3cRVn-qQ@adelphia.com> on Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:40:18 -0600,
    "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote:

    >Gee John- looks like some anecdotal information to me.


    Correct -- some clearly identified anecdotal information of possible interest
    accompanying the hard information.

    >According to you,
    >that would make it unreliable.


    Correct again.

    >A little hypocritical on your part, or are
    >we to believe that your experiences are truly the only honest ones out
    >there>


    The difference is that I don't submit it as proof of anything -- it's just one
    data point.

    >And what's with the followup to ba.internet? ...


    That was just cockpit error -- sorry. (It happened because I reused a message
    originally posted to ba.internet.)

    >Trying to avoid posts like
    >this appearing in the groups the original was sent to?


    Nope.

    >Or is it because you
    >realized the post was off topic ...


    It's clearly on-topic.

    >Between this and your little tit-for-tat nonsense with
    >Elmo, you are making me realize that you have the social and behavioral
    >skills of a rock- add personality to the list as well.


    All that does is make you look childish.

    >And yes- I realize that I'm probably being rude and obnoxious. ...


    Indeed. But thanks for sharing. ;)
    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
     
  9. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <RcydneBa5ZVGdN3cRVn-qQ@adelphia.com> on Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:40:18 -0600,
    "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote:

    >Gee John- looks like some anecdotal information to me.


    Correct -- some clearly identified anecdotal information of possible interest
    accompanying the hard information.

    >According to you,
    >that would make it unreliable.


    Correct again.

    >A little hypocritical on your part, or are
    >we to believe that your experiences are truly the only honest ones out
    >there>


    The difference is that I don't submit it as proof of anything -- it's just one
    data point.

    >And what's with the followup to ba.internet? ...


    That was just cockpit error -- sorry. (It happened because I reused a message
    originally posted to ba.internet.)

    >Trying to avoid posts like
    >this appearing in the groups the original was sent to?


    Nope.

    >Or is it because you
    >realized the post was off topic ...


    It's clearly on-topic.

    >Between this and your little tit-for-tat nonsense with
    >Elmo, you are making me realize that you have the social and behavioral
    >skills of a rock- add personality to the list as well.


    All that does is make you look childish.

    >And yes- I realize that I'm probably being rude and obnoxious. ...


    Indeed. But thanks for sharing. ;)
    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
     
  10. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <de37a2e0.0409091952.65f80c56@posting.google.com> on 9 Sep 2004 20:52:25
    -0700, elecconnec@aol.com (Todd Allcock) wrote:

    >John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    >> Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.

    >
    >Snappy opening line, but nowhere in your post did you point out any
    >wireless carrier with a cost/performance ratio that matches Ricochet's
    >150-200k for $25/month.
    >
    >Certainly Richochet's dream of a national data network for travelers
    >is dead, but they are repositioning themselves as a cheap "almost
    >broadband" solution in Denver for homes unserved by DSL or cable, as
    >well as the best price/performance ratioed wireless data as long as
    >you, like they say in 1930's detective flicks, don't try to leave
    >town.


    By any measure, Ricochet is dead. The service is uneconomic and obsolete.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
     
  11. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <de37a2e0.0409091952.65f80c56@posting.google.com> on 9 Sep 2004 20:52:25
    -0700, elecconnec@aol.com (Todd Allcock) wrote:

    >John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    >> Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.

    >
    >Snappy opening line, but nowhere in your post did you point out any
    >wireless carrier with a cost/performance ratio that matches Ricochet's
    >150-200k for $25/month.
    >
    >Certainly Richochet's dream of a national data network for travelers
    >is dead, but they are repositioning themselves as a cheap "almost
    >broadband" solution in Denver for homes unserved by DSL or cable, as
    >well as the best price/performance ratioed wireless data as long as
    >you, like they say in 1930's detective flicks, don't try to leave
    >town.


    By any measure, Ricochet is dead. The service is uneconomic and obsolete.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
     
  12. Mike58

    Mike58 Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    >
    > The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    > computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    > now a reality:
    >
    > CDMA
    >
    > * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    > Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    > BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    > Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    > <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    > Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    > Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>


    I checked the coverage map for the DC area. Pretty small. I live in
    Gaithersburg, MD and I am outside the coverage area.

    From a cell phone point of view, what would be my costs? Unlimited
    cell phone usage? If so, in what coverage area?

    --Mike

    >

    [snip good stuff]
    >
    > POTENTIAL GOTCHAS
    >
    > * Handsets (and PC Cards) do not all have the same data performance! In
    > general, all reasonably recent GPRS/EDGE-capable devices from Ericsson and
    > Sony Ericsson support Class 8 (4+1) and Class 10 (4+2, max of 5), whereas most
    > Nokia devices are limited to slower Class 4 (3+1) and Class 6 (3+2, max 4).
    > Motorola has both Class 4 and Class 8 devices. (The first number is the max
    > downlink slots, and the number after the "+" is the max uplink slots.) This
    > can translate into a substantial difference in throughput -- if supported by
    > the carrier, Class 8 is 33% faster on downlink than Class 4.
    >
    > * Connections between handsets and "tethered" devices (e.g., notebook
    > computer, PDA) are typically implemented as a serial port, either real or
    > virtual, and port speed usually defaults to 115 Kbps. (My own Bluetooth stack
    > is implemented as a virtual serial port that will go as fast as 921.6 Kbps,
    > but which runs at only 115.2 Kbps by default.) While 115 Kbps is generally
    > fast enough for GPRS and CDMA 1X, it can be a bottleneck for EDGE, UMTS, and
    > CDMA EV-DO. In general, I recommend port speed of 230 Kbps for GPRS and CDMA
    > 1X, 460 Kbps for EDGE, and 920 Kbps for UMTS and CMDA EV-DO.
    >
    > * Pricing above is based on plans available in the San Francisco Bay Area.
    > Plans and prices may vary in other areas.
     
  13. Mike58

    Mike58 Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    >
    > The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    > computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    > now a reality:
    >
    > CDMA
    >
    > * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    > Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    > BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    > Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    > <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    > Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    > Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>


    I checked the coverage map for the DC area. Pretty small. I live in
    Gaithersburg, MD and I am outside the coverage area.

    From a cell phone point of view, what would be my costs? Unlimited
    cell phone usage? If so, in what coverage area?

    --Mike

    >

    [snip good stuff]
    >
    > POTENTIAL GOTCHAS
    >
    > * Handsets (and PC Cards) do not all have the same data performance! In
    > general, all reasonably recent GPRS/EDGE-capable devices from Ericsson and
    > Sony Ericsson support Class 8 (4+1) and Class 10 (4+2, max of 5), whereas most
    > Nokia devices are limited to slower Class 4 (3+1) and Class 6 (3+2, max 4).
    > Motorola has both Class 4 and Class 8 devices. (The first number is the max
    > downlink slots, and the number after the "+" is the max uplink slots.) This
    > can translate into a substantial difference in throughput -- if supported by
    > the carrier, Class 8 is 33% faster on downlink than Class 4.
    >
    > * Connections between handsets and "tethered" devices (e.g., notebook
    > computer, PDA) are typically implemented as a serial port, either real or
    > virtual, and port speed usually defaults to 115 Kbps. (My own Bluetooth stack
    > is implemented as a virtual serial port that will go as fast as 921.6 Kbps,
    > but which runs at only 115.2 Kbps by default.) While 115 Kbps is generally
    > fast enough for GPRS and CDMA 1X, it can be a bottleneck for EDGE, UMTS, and
    > CDMA EV-DO. In general, I recommend port speed of 230 Kbps for GPRS and CDMA
    > 1X, 460 Kbps for EDGE, and 920 Kbps for UMTS and CMDA EV-DO.
    >
    > * Pricing above is based on plans available in the San Francisco Bay Area.
    > Plans and prices may vary in other areas.
     
  14. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <b19f7766.0409100215.6a0454d5@posting.google.com> on 10 Sep 2004 03:15:53
    -0700, n00spam@comcast.net (Mike58) wrote:

    >John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    >> Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    >>
    >> The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    >> computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    >> now a reality:
    >>
    >> CDMA
    >>
    >> * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    >> Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    >> BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    >> Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    >> <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    >> Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    >> Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>

    >
    >I checked the coverage map for the DC area. Pretty small. I live in
    >Gaithersburg, MD and I am outside the coverage area.
    >
    >From a cell phone point of view, what would be my costs? Unlimited
    >cell phone usage? If so, in what coverage area?


    I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are outside the coverage
    area, what's the point? And note that "unlimited" refers to data, not voice.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
     
  15. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <b19f7766.0409100215.6a0454d5@posting.google.com> on 10 Sep 2004 03:15:53
    -0700, n00spam@comcast.net (Mike58) wrote:

    >John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    >> Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    >>
    >> The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    >> computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    >> now a reality:
    >>
    >> CDMA
    >>
    >> * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    >> Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    >> BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    >> Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    >> <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    >> Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    >> Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>

    >
    >I checked the coverage map for the DC area. Pretty small. I live in
    >Gaithersburg, MD and I am outside the coverage area.
    >
    >From a cell phone point of view, what would be my costs? Unlimited
    >cell phone usage? If so, in what coverage area?


    I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are outside the coverage
    area, what's the point? And note that "unlimited" refers to data, not voice.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
     
  16. Mike58

    Mike58 Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<1vj0d.13024$54.182588@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    > In <b19f7766.0409100215.6a0454d5@posting.google.com> on 10 Sep 2004 03:15:53
    > -0700, n00spam@comcast.net (Mike58) wrote:
    >
    > >John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > >> Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    > >>
    > >> The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    > >> computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    > >> now a reality:
    > >>
    > >> CDMA
    > >>
    > >> * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    > >> Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    > >> BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    > >> Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    > >> <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    > >> Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    > >> Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>

    > >
    > >I checked the coverage map for the DC area. Pretty small. I live in
    > >Gaithersburg, MD and I am outside the coverage area.
    > >
    > >From a cell phone point of view, what would be my costs? Unlimited
    > >cell phone usage? If so, in what coverage area?

    >
    > I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are outside the coverage
    > area, what's the point? And note that "unlimited" refers to data, not voice.


    I was making one point and asking a question. I agree that one doesn't
    follow well from the other. Stream of consciousness is no excuse for
    poor editing. :)

    You answered my question however so thank you.

    --Mike
     
  17. Mike58

    Mike58 Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<1vj0d.13024$54.182588@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    > In <b19f7766.0409100215.6a0454d5@posting.google.com> on 10 Sep 2004 03:15:53
    > -0700, n00spam@comcast.net (Mike58) wrote:
    >
    > >John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > >> Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    > >>
    > >> The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    > >> computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    > >> now a reality:
    > >>
    > >> CDMA
    > >>
    > >> * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    > >> Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    > >> BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    > >> Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    > >> <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    > >> Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    > >> Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>

    > >
    > >I checked the coverage map for the DC area. Pretty small. I live in
    > >Gaithersburg, MD and I am outside the coverage area.
    > >
    > >From a cell phone point of view, what would be my costs? Unlimited
    > >cell phone usage? If so, in what coverage area?

    >
    > I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are outside the coverage
    > area, what's the point? And note that "unlimited" refers to data, not voice.


    I was making one point and asking a question. I agree that one doesn't
    follow well from the other. Stream of consciousness is no excuse for
    poor editing. :)

    You answered my question however so thank you.

    --Mike
     
  18. Mike58

    Mike58 Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<1vj0d.13024$54.182588@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    > In <b19f7766.0409100215.6a0454d5@posting.google.com> on 10 Sep 2004 03:15:53
    > -0700, n00spam@comcast.net (Mike58) wrote:
    >
    > >John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > >> Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    > >>
    > >> The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    > >> computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    > >> now a reality:
    > >>
    > >> CDMA
    > >>
    > >> * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    > >> Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    > >> BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    > >> Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    > >> <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    > >> Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    > >> Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>

    > >
    > >I checked the coverage map for the DC area. Pretty small. I live in
    > >Gaithersburg, MD and I am outside the coverage area.
    > >
    > >From a cell phone point of view, what would be my costs? Unlimited
    > >cell phone usage? If so, in what coverage area?

    >
    > I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are outside the coverage
    > area, what's the point? And note that "unlimited" refers to data, not voice.


    I was making one point and asking a question. I agree that one doesn't
    follow well from the other. Stream of consciousness is no excuse for
    poor editing. :)

    You answered my question however so thank you.

    --Mike
     
  19. Mike58

    Mike58 Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<1vj0d.13024$54.182588@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    > In <b19f7766.0409100215.6a0454d5@posting.google.com> on 10 Sep 2004 03:15:53
    > -0700, n00spam@comcast.net (Mike58) wrote:
    >
    > >John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > >> Or why Ricochet <http://www.ricochet.com/> is dead.
    > >>
    > >> The reason: Affordable wireless (cellular) data, usable with a notebook
    > >> computer (or PDA, etc.), with broad coverage at decent or better speeds, is
    > >> now a reality:
    > >>
    > >> CDMA
    > >>
    > >> * Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    > >> Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    > >> BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    > >> Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    > >> <http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    > >> Verizon Wi-Fi is currently only available to Verizon Online DSL and dial-up
    > >> Internet customers. <http://www.verizon.net/wifi/faqs/>

    > >
    > >I checked the coverage map for the DC area. Pretty small. I live in
    > >Gaithersburg, MD and I am outside the coverage area.
    > >
    > >From a cell phone point of view, what would be my costs? Unlimited
    > >cell phone usage? If so, in what coverage area?

    >
    > I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are outside the coverage
    > area, what's the point? And note that "unlimited" refers to data, not voice.


    I was making one point and asking a question. I agree that one doesn't
    follow well from the other. Stream of consciousness is no excuse for
    poor editing. :)

    You answered my question however so thank you.

    --Mike
     
  20. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.data - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <Br00d.12852$54.180986@typhoon.sonic.net> on Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:31:13 GMT,
    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

    >* Verizon was an early leader in this area with its $80/month CMDA-based
    >Unlimited NationalAccess (CDMA 1X, typically 40-60 Kbps, broad coverage) and
    >BroadbandAccess (CDMA EV-DO, typically 300-500 Kbps, but thus far only in
    >Washington DC, San Diego and Las Vegas).
    ><http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/nationalaccess/>
    >...


    UPDATE:

    BroadbandAccess was initially launched in three markets - Washington D.C.
    and San Diego in October 2003 and Las Vegas in July 2004 - and is currently
    being deployed in more than 11 additional markets and 20 additional airports
    from coast to coast. In addition to the initial three markets, business
    customers can now use BroadbandAccess in Atlanta; Austin, Texas; Baltimore;
    Kansas City, Kan.; Kansas City, Mo.; Los Angeles; Miami; Fort Lauderdale,
    Fla.; Milwaukee; New York; Philadelphia; Tampa and West Palm Beach, Fla.

    Verizon Wireless plans to deploy the technology in additional markets by the
    end of 2004, giving BroadbandAccess a national coverage of 75 million
    people. Market expansions will continue through 2005.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?