Voicestream Quietly Releases GPRS In The U.S. 141
hidden72 writes: "Voicestream quietly rolled out their iStream GPRS wireless data service in the United States last week. More information is available from Voicestream's website. General information about GPRS can be found here. Theoretically, GPRS data rates can reach close to 170k. Voicestream's per-packet charges are quite expensive, ($40 for 10MB) but it's an always-on 28k-56k data connection available in most metropolitan areas."
US joins the rest of the world... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is the US always at least 2 years behind the rest of the planet for Wireless ?
Re:Costs (Score:2, Insightful)
As I suggested in my original post, I would prefer a payment plan for a QoS (Quality of Service). In other words, I buy a bandwidth. Let's say I buy 256kbit/s. If the system doesn't use the capacity, I will get the full speed, but if a user with 1Mbit/s needs the bandwidth, I have to live with my 256kbit/s. The same would be a piece of cake (actually easier) with GPRS and the likes. I recommend anyone who wants to know to read up on GPRS (I am sure any other system would be fairly similar).
The worst part will be the sob stories in the media about people with huge bills. Why can't the phone companies stop peoples services before they ruin themselves?
Why GSM Sucks for America (Score:2, Insightful)
If America needs national coverage (and I think they do) CDMA is the obvious choice.
It's the pricing, stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
When are the American companies going to learn that what is holding the cellular market back is not so much the technology as the bass-ackwards system of purchasing a calling plan for a whole year with a certain number a minutes a month and a preposterous number of restrictions while still having to pay for incoming calls. It's overly complex, intimidating, and autocratic. These idiotic games are precisely the reason I do not yet own a mobile phone. I don't mind paying more for the phone, but I won't pay for more minutes/data than I use, and I hate playing guessing games.
It irritates me to see US technology so far behind Europe and Japan for such a stupid, greedy reason. As far as I'm concerned, a mobile phone should work anywhere in the world that a network exists, and have consistent, per-use billing regardless of where you are. Until we have something approaching that in America, I'm not buying. Here's hoping Sprint or ATT figure it out.
Re:cellular technology (Score:3, Insightful)
Your Verizon CDMA phone may get service everywhere, but it is not digital service everywhere. GSM phones with analog roaming also exist. Microcell in Canada sells (or at least used to sell) Nokia phones with that capability.
Lastly, UMTS is going to be WCDMA. There are of course patent issues as Qualcomm is claiming to own "relevant" IP.
Re:US joins the rest of the world... (Score:2, Insightful)
So yes, it does use the same digital standards, but on different frequencies. You are still stuck with multi-band phones for international use, but if they can get rid of the analog requirements from the old US standards, phones will be simpler.
Re:Why GSM Sucks for America (not) (Score:3, Insightful)
The infrastructure in the US sucks, its disjointed, fractured and a pain. A classic example of where a lack of goverment direction restricts choice. Having such a disjointed network has put a heavy dampner on the development of wireless in the US.
Roll on standards, even if they are goverment decreed.
It's the availability, stupid (Score:3, Insightful)
These features make casual web/wap browsing more appealing than the old way (dial up, wait, connect, read web page, pay while reading, hang up).
There are two main uses for cellular data connections: (1) apps in the phone, like email and wap (2) use as a modem, connected to a laptop. GPRS will make #1 a lot better. The effect it will have on #2 will be that you pay for bits and not time (which is good for activities like web browsing, which have download-and-read usage patterns).
It's a shame that the cellular infrastructure companies (see my email address) have marketed GPRS as a "high bandwidth" solution instead of an "always on" one. The carriers are just selling what they've been told.