We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
1–10 of 51 posts
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#2I've been using Republic wireless (hyrbrid wifi phone) for about 6 months now. 99% of the time I forget it's anything other than a regular cell phone.
For me it works better than a regular cell phone, because it works in my basement workshop where I can't get reception from most carriers.
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#3Because Wi-Fi kinda sucks at roaming?
It's fine if you need a network connection at arbitrary end-points. But IME it's not so fine when you need a sustained connection while moving. (excluding on-train/on-plane wifi and the like , natch)
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#4Us centric nonsense.
Sent via mobile internet on a bus.
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#5I'd love to see some statistics from Apple regarding Wi-Fi only iPad sales versus 3G/4G iPad sales.
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#6Is this really what we want?
Let's say AT&T decides to go the author's suggested route, and let's also pretend that I'm a paying AT&T customer. I travel to an area where AT&T is delivering their data through WiFi, but several shop owners in the same area have set up WiFi access points and have overrun the available WiFi spectrum in the area. The quality of my data connection suffers significantly, and I get upset at AT&T for providing poor service.
Does anyone really think this is in AT&T's best interest?
By using licensed spectrum, wireless providers gain tighter control over the engineering of their networks. Yes, it's a double-edged sword, but I don't see an opportunity for improvment by moving to unlicensed spectrum.
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#7I almost never use wi-fi on my phone. It drains the battery too much.
edit: I'm not familiar with cellular hardware tech. My observation is true for my phone, necessarily, because my 3G reciever is active 100% of the time, and turning on wifi is just turning on another component. If this isn't the case for you, do you turn off your 3/4G while you're in a wifi spot? Does it manager this all automatically?
Do you have your wifi on while you're outside of a wifi spot? If so, how does that not cause a loss in battery life over never having it on?
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#8> “For example a cellular picocell costs from $7,500 to $15,000 whereas a much higher capacity carrier-grade Wi-Fi access point costs around $2,000,” Thanki wrote. “The cost of a Wi-Fi chipset for a consumer device is around $5, whereas 3G cellular chipsets costs around $30.
Won't a cell tower cover at least a couple orders of magnitude more area than a wifi access point? Is this analysis silly or am I missing something?
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#9Lol, carriers will never EVER willingly became "simple internet providers". EVER. They will scream and fight to the last dollar for their "right" to provide monopolized "services" - separate voice traffic, separate plaintext traffic, separate image traffic, and other "services". They'll cut and limit all generic internet connections, they'll filter unwanted packets (VoIP, iMessage etc.), they'll reroute traffic through their internal resources and inject ADs or spyware. They'll do lots of thing, except of cource becoming ISP.
Re: We already use Wi-Fi more than cellular; Why not continue the trend?
#10This article is misleading on several accounts. First, it completely ignores the incredible difference in range you can get with 4g vs. Wifi. This is directly related to the frequencies you are operating at.
Secondly, the reason that WiFi frequencies are not regulated the same was as cellular frequencies has to do directly with that limitation. If we suddenly had AT&T, Verizon, and other WiFi routers littering our streets every sixty feet, there would be a terrible amount of noise and it would interfere with people's home or business networks.
Suddenly, you would need to start licensing that spectrum. See how it works?