Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Set up my WiMax (Xohm?) 7 hours ago in Baltimore. At the moment, 3.5 down, 1.5 up. It'll be interesting to see how reliable this is, but if it works like my cell phone, its a steal at $25 a month with no contract.
The reason the important major cities have been left off is that people in those cities would actually use the service, crippling it. While some of those listed are fairly large, they aren't exactly technologically advanced as a whole. There wouldn't be many people who care enough or know enough about the service to actually sign up.
Edited by hodayathink has not forgotten about the 70s RnB at 08/02/09 12:56 AM
hodayathink has not forgotten about the 70s RnB was starred
hodayathink has not forgotten about the 70s RnB was unstarred
@crsrc: When I look at that schedule, what I see is a ramping up of tech-level of the cities. While stuff like West Texas isn't too heavy. Once you get to the fourth quarter, you have Chicago, Philly, and, while it doesn't look that impressive Salem/Charlotte/Raliegh/Greensboro, NC would probably cover a pretty big tech population, including, more than likely, the entire campuses of Duke, North Carolina, NC State, and Wake Forest.
@hodayathink is running for president of Naughty...: Thats pretty much the same thing I saw. But you really can't argue that they left off the cities in which people would most likely be eager to use 4G.
It could be also be a strategical move to bring in new customers. Maybe they have decided that the above cities have most room for growth as far as new customers are concerned and are rolling it out in those cities in hopes of luring them in.
But I still think it has to do with the fact they want to prevent from having any major congestion problems with the network. If too many people are using it, or if they had to turn away people because they were getting congested then it will likely be looked at as a fail for WiMax/Sprint which could greatly affect the public perception of a company that is already struggling to stay afloat.
@tande04: No, I mean 5 cities of more than 100,000.
West Texas refers to:
Amarillo, Abilene, Lubbock, Midland, Odessa all went active today. These are all Clearwire areas. Odessa has expanded coverage on Clear from the Clearwire coverage before.
I'm on Clear in Portland (needed some temporary Internet at a temporary living location, so the lack of a contract and not having to install anything was huge). Besides the terrible ping for gaming (300-400ms range) which is to be expected with wireless, it's actually quite good. I'm paying $40/mo for 3mbit/0.5mbit at home. For $50/mo it's 6mbit/0.5mbit. Not exactly cheap or a bargin compared to say cable, but no contract and no caps is nice.
Really though it's more for the people who need Internet on go than for people at home if you ask me. Cable/DSL/FiOS is a much better $/mbit option.
T-mobile broadband over here in the UK (England) it costs £10 - £15 ($15 - $23) a month to surf the web UNLIMITED with no mager restrictions, with speeds upto 3.6Mbs download and 1.5Mbs upload and thats pay as you (NO CONTRACT)
So yeah looking at prices in the USA look like a massive rip off
@almondrickrossroca: It's obviously not available where you are yet (that sounds like 3g). If you sign up with sprint you don't pay for the card, but do have to sign a contract.
@Digitallysick: You know there are way more companies involved than just Sprint right? I don't see all of them bailing out unless there is some catastrophic failure that kills the ability to provide the service…
@UnderLoK: Aye, but Sprint's in control. There are others involved, like Intel and Google, but they've collectively endowed the company with only like $2B... That is peanuts for a nationwide roll-out. Not exactly a huge vote of confidence from the deep pockets.
@AmphetamineCrown: I'm not sure what is in the FCC filing, but last I knew, Sprint, Intel, Comcast, Google, Time Warner, and Brighthouse were the investors during that last round of funding in that order (dollar wise). The FCC info might just be how much money they have sunk into the network rather than their monetary stake in the company?
No offense, but I don’t care enough to look it up, you could be right for all I know as the memory isn’t what it used to be… ;)
@draiko: Not really true. You have to take into consideration the fact that WiMax is considerably more expensive for carriers to roll out, and will soon be surpassed by LTE, which builds directly off of both existing GSM and CDMA networks. Verizon and AT&T, the largest carriers in the US, have already announced plans to commit to and roll out LTE as the 4G network of the future.
@UnderLoK: I'm aware they invest in it. I'd rather have an envelope that says "Sprint" or "Clearwire" instead of Comcast in my mailbox. I get enough smut in my mailbox as it is.
Will you have to be near a ketchup bottle to use it? How will a bottle of BBQ sauce affect performance? Does mustard enhance or diminish throughput? Will relish packets boost talk-time? Does standing the napkin dispenser improve reception? When will WiMax come to Roy Rogers restaurants? Will it work in Popeyes? Is a special red pepper shaker required or is it compatible with black and brown pepper shakers? Is WiMax available in larger diameter straw form for shakes? Can I get Oreo Cheesecake with my WiMax?
Your new iPhone 3GS is fast if you look to the past? Where else would you look to compare to? Thats like saying in 1900 that the Automobile is fast compared to the horse, but who the hell cares because the airplane will be way faster so it is already out of date, screw the car.
@Bon5ai: Wouldn't you normally compare to the present, not the past? WiMax is already rolled out in some cities.
By your logic we shouldn't compare the iPhone 3GS and the Pre, despite them launching in a similar window, we should only compare them to older devices. That makes no sense.
@wagedomain: The term "the past" in this article is directly referencing yesterday as the past, as in the immediate past, not 1 or 5 or 10 years ago.
If you want to get all technical the Pre is in the past, as it was released in the past comapred to the present, which is today, which is when the iPhone 3GS was released.
So by your logic, we can create totally subjective "windows" to compare with? Alright then, well I select my present as the window in which electricity has been in use. Who knew the present could span more than 100 years.
@Bon5ai: well, in john's defense -- you're an idiot.
he is trying to emphasize the point the new iPhone is not impressive when looking at download speeds. the fact that the actually speeds don't reach the advertised speeds make them, more or less, "out of date." not even considering the fact at&t is late to the party with their half ass 3g
09/01/09
So who do I have to kill to get 4g/wimax in Houston?
09/01/09
Why are they releasing it in cities which are smaller than suburbs in our bigger cities....
09/01/09
08/18/09
08/03/09
While I have mad respect for B-ham I'd have expected them to try for Redmond/Bellevue/Seattle first.
08/01/09
08/01/09
08/02/09
08/02/09
No. Yes.
08/02/09
08/02/09
08/02/09
08/02/09
It could be also be a strategical move to bring in new customers. Maybe they have decided that the above cities have most room for growth as far as new customers are concerned and are rolling it out in those cities in hopes of luring them in.
But I still think it has to do with the fact they want to prevent from having any major congestion problems with the network. If too many people are using it, or if they had to turn away people because they were getting congested then it will likely be looked at as a fail for WiMax/Sprint which could greatly affect the public perception of a company that is already struggling to stay afloat.
08/01/09
08/01/09
Are they (and you) saying "West, TX" or "West Texas, TX"? Is it the city or the region? You're saying city right?
08/01/09
West Texas refers to:
Amarillo, Abilene, Lubbock, Midland, Odessa all went active today. These are all Clearwire areas. Odessa has expanded coverage on Clear from the Clearwire coverage before.
08/02/09
07/22/09
Really though it's more for the people who need Internet on go than for people at home if you ask me. Cable/DSL/FiOS is a much better $/mbit option.
07/22/09
07/22/09
GO here: www.clearwire.com and look at these plans. They're a f*in joke.
I typed in a fake address to see the prices for Stockton, CA. (I'm in Sacramento which is up the road 40 miles...
49.00 per month for, get this, "UP TO 1.5 Mbs download".
Plus a $50 activation fee
Plus $260 for a card
Plus 1 year contract.
Why is this service good and who is stupid enough to go for it?
07/22/09
Big rip off
T-mobile broadband over here in the UK (England) it costs £10 - £15 ($15 - $23) a month to surf the web UNLIMITED with no mager restrictions, with speeds upto 3.6Mbs download and 1.5Mbs upload and thats pay as you (NO CONTRACT)
So yeah looking at prices in the USA look like a massive rip off
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
No offense, but I don’t care enough to look it up, you could be right for all I know as the memory isn’t what it used to be… ;)
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
Until there is a mass demand for a wireless internet connection with throughput of more than 70 mbps, LTE is just useless.
Here's what 2012 is going to look like...
People will be used to a 30-80 mbps data connection...
WiMax at 70 mbps for $30 per month with no contract needed, no roaming, more coverage, etc...
-OR-
LTE at 100 mbps for $100 per month + roaming fees + hidden surcharges (all other telecoms want to treat LTE as another wireless standard)
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/22/09
07/06/09
Will you have to be near a ketchup bottle to use it? How will a bottle of BBQ sauce affect performance? Does mustard enhance or diminish throughput? Will relish packets boost talk-time? Does standing the napkin dispenser improve reception? When will WiMax come to Roy Rogers restaurants? Will it work in Popeyes? Is a special red pepper shaker required or is it compatible with black and brown pepper shakers? Is WiMax available in larger diameter straw form for shakes? Can I get Oreo Cheesecake with my WiMax?
And, of course, how much is a patty melt?
06/19/09
06/19/09
I should mention that I'm running an HTC Kaiser with a cooked MinMo 6.5, and probably a nonstandard radio. But, 12.5 Mbps over AT&T all the same.
06/19/09
06/19/09
Opera 9.5. Then again, it says 'H' where it used to say '3G', so I may just be too dumb to realize that the 3G speeds discussed might not apply.
06/19/09
06/19/09
Your new iPhone 3GS is fast if you look to the past? Where else would you look to compare to? Thats like saying in 1900 that the Automobile is fast compared to the horse, but who the hell cares because the airplane will be way faster so it is already out of date, screw the car.
I swear to god writers here are on drugs.
06/19/09
By your logic we shouldn't compare the iPhone 3GS and the Pre, despite them launching in a similar window, we should only compare them to older devices. That makes no sense.
06/19/09
If you want to get all technical the Pre is in the past, as it was released in the past comapred to the present, which is today, which is when the iPhone 3GS was released.
So by your logic, we can create totally subjective "windows" to compare with? Alright then, well I select my present as the window in which electricity has been in use. Who knew the present could span more than 100 years.
06/19/09
he is trying to emphasize the point the new iPhone is not impressive when looking at download speeds. the fact that the actually speeds don't reach the advertised speeds make them, more or less, "out of date." not even considering the fact at&t is late to the party with their half ass 3g