DSLreports - front page

Provided courtesy of:
http://www.dslreports.com

bbr disc

Verizon, Skype Fix Wi-Fi Bug In 'Exclusive' Client - Android users can now turn Wi-Fi on while using Skype over 3G...

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 09:47:13 EDT -

Verizon's "exclusive" agreement with Skype has created a Skype client that has a number of quirky restrictions -- including the fact that it eats your wireless minutes in some instances (conveniently keeping voice minutes relevant in the age of smartphone mobile VoIP). But Skype's specialized Verizon application also had a fairly nasty bug: Android users who used the Skype app over 3G couldn't turn on Wi-Fi -- at all.

In other words, they couldn't use Skype on 3G and browse the Internet via Wi-Fi. At the time, Verizon gave a roundabout explanation, admitting there was a bug, but also insisting that CALEA wiretap restrictions were partially to blame for the problem, as the Verizon-specific app runs over Verizon's traditional voice network. Whatever the cause, Verizon and Skype have apparently figured it out, and Skype for Verizon smartphones now works with Wi-Fi turned on.
read comment(s)

M2Z Free National Wireless Broadband Plan Finally Dies - CTIA pleased you won't be getting 'slow' free 768 kbps service

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 09:23:25 EDT -

You might recall that former FCC boss Kevin Martin and a company by the name of M2Z Networks had been cooking up a plan for a smut-censored free national wireless service with a free wireless component. We had predicted the plan would never actually leave the ground and that wound up being true, the project derailed by both politics and the fact that the plan itself while creative -- simply wasn't very good. After returning from the dead and being bounced around the halls of the FCC in slightly modified form, the FCC has finally dropped the effort completely. M2Z sent Broadband Reports an e-mailed statement lamenting the decision:

"The FCC s decision to delay the use of this valuable spectrum forgoes the consumer welfare and economic stimulus that would result from putting new spectrum into the marketplace," said John Muleta, CEO of M2Z Networks. A new nationwide broadband entrant that provided a free broadband service would have created tens of thousands of direct and indirect jobs throughout the country while giving all Americans an equal opportunity to participate in the digital economy. Despite the spectrum crisis facing the U.S. as documented by the FCC s National Broadband Plan, the AWS-3 spectrum will continue to lie fallow providing no economic value to American consumers."

Of course the plan always faced an uphill battle, and was heavily lobbied against by the wireless industry and their trade group the CTIA, who obviously didn't want the added competition for lower end customers. The CTIA sent us a statement saying they were "pleased" by the FCC's decision:

"As we had argued throughout the proceeding, a designer allocation auction that would be tailored for one company was not in the public s interest, especially when that company was offering broadband service that is slow by even yesterday s standards."

While 768 kbps is certainly slow, you probably would have a hard time beating the price, and M2Z did show a degree of vision in the plan's development. The plan itself was just always various degrees of bad, initially including a mandate that would require porn filters. Various versions were also based on seemingly unrealistic build out schedules, and the end result was never really going to offer particularly compelling speeds.
read comment(s)

OnLive Adding Wi-Fi To Game Streaming Device - Extends founding fathers deal for second time...

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 08:56:22 EDT -

Back in June broadband streaming video game service OnLive launched, offering users what's essentially a dumb terminal community-driven gaming service for $14.95 a month -- plus the cost of games. Reviews for the service so far have been mixed, and not too surprisingly dependent on the quality and speed of your broadband connection. Currently, the service only operates with an Ethernet connection -- but OnLive's considering adding 802.11n to the unit as a beta product sometime before October. They're also extending their Founding Members program for the second time, offering users a free year of service and a $4.95 monthly rate for life (theirs, or yours) to users who signs up before January 1, 2011.
read comment(s)

Verizon Unveils Limited New Prepaid Options - But they're of course designed to convince you to go postpaid...

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 08:45:09 EDT -

Just yesterday we were discussing how analysts believe Verizon wasn't truly competing in the prepaid space because they were concerned with diminishing the perceived value of the Verizon brand, and having to engage in price competition with smaller carriers. With a flood of recent new prepaid offers, Verizon has announced a new unlimited data package for select smartphone users priced at $30 per month, and a $10 plan with a 25MB monthly cap and 20 cent per megabyte overage fee. As PC World notes this is a mixed bag on value (see chart), with users paying more for their phone, voice minutes and monthly total bill than postpaid, but with no ETF. By restricting qualified phone models and making users pay a monthly premium for voice and data, Verizon's trying to actually discourage users from going prepaid.
read comment(s)

Thursday Evening Links -

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 18:58:06 EDT -

Cisco to Service Providers: Get Moving on IPv6 lightreading.com
Have we seen the last of M2Z? fiercebroadbandwireless.com
Rumor mill: AT&T could move to acquire C&W Worldwide fiercetelecom.com
U.S. Broadband Starts To Speed Ahead forbes.com
Former UK Communications Minister: Government was wrong to axe broadband tax pcpro.co.uk
Verizon Wireless Adds $30/Month Prepaid Unlimited Data Plan foxbusiness.com
90% of UK consumers confused by broadband advertising theregister.co.uk
Skype updates Android app for Verizon users, lets you keep the WiFi on engadget.com
FCC Gets Earful On Further Inquiries On Net Neutrality multichannel.com
IBM Introduces World's Fastest Processor: 5.2GHz Enterprise Chip hothardware.com
Wireless charger standard released electronicsweekly.com
Sony Shows Prototypes of a Planned 3-D VAIO Laptop mobile-tech-today.com
read comment(s)

Sonic.Net Treats Customers Well, Earns Praise - Carrier gets oodles of link love for new network build, customer service

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 17:50:49 EDT -

Sure, incumbent lobbyists and dysfunctional regulators may have crushed the majority of major, independent, residential broadband ISPs in the United States, but California-based ISP Sonic.net not only survived the indie ISP-pocalypse, but they're busily building their own network. As we've covered for years, Sonic's offering ADSL2+ (bonded, when possible) capable of providing speeds up to 40 Mbps downstream. Sonic's suddenly getting a lot of love this week, with Ars Technica profiling the company and their "bandwidth-hog friendly" policies:

The new network, called Fusion, allows Sonic.net to offer ADSL2+ service along with its own telephone service (this isn't VoIP, but actual POTS). The company currently sells one offering to residential users through Fusion: for $50 a month, they get uncapped ADSL that runs as fast as their line can handle (up to 20Mbps) along with free nationwide phone service. Users who want more bandwidth can order up a second telephone line and "bond" the two for speeds of up to 40Mbps by simply paying another $50.

Analyst Dave Burstein also doled out some Sonic love in his widely-read broadband industry newsletter:

Dane Jasper's Sonic.net is (finally) bringing the same "low price, maximum speed, high volume" model to California. Sonic.net is offering 100's of thousands of Californians "up to 20 megabits" + unlimited national phone service for $56, about the same price as Verizon is charging for the 10-15 megabit DSL service alone. Verizon charges about $75 for similar and AT&T probably $84, about 50% more. Unless you live far from the exchange, Sonic.net offers a better deal than any large U.S. carrier.

The man behind the plan, CEO Dane Jasper, is a regular here in our forums often helping customers personally. As we've seen with other, customer-service-focused ISPs (like Canada's TekSavvy) that kind of personal touch is welcome in an industry dominated by giants, and is helping fuel Sonic's fairly steller reviews by our users. Meanwhile, Yankee Group analyst Benoit Felten this week conducted an very interesting review with Dane on their new network, and life as a modern independent U.S. ISP in a sector dominated by giants.

Jasper (who you can follow on Twitter) is a breath of fresh air as a broadband industry CEO that understands the repercussions of putting quarterly investor satisfaction ahead of your network, your company, and the satisfaction of your customers. The result is an ISP that speaks to the fact that staying small -- and focusing on what's important -- isn't necessarily a bad thing. The problem is that the drive to get increasingly bigger (and go public) is an all-pervasive presence, and as an ISP grows -- customer service is usually the first thing lost in translation.
read comment(s)

Google Sued Over Nexus One 3G Bugs - Suit alleges Google made misleading claims, failed to provide adequate support

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:10:58 EDT -

While Google's Nexus One phone was supposed to rattle the wireless status quo by offering users unsubsidized phones via a Google store, the promised revolution never arrived. That was due to a number of factors, including the fact that the phone was initially only available via T-Mobile. However, the Nexus One also came with fairly awful 3G connectivity bugs and annoying fees -- but not with phone support (Google fixed the latter two eventually). But those 3G bugs never quite got fixed, and Google's now being sued for it:

On Tuesday, Google was slapped with a breach of contract class action lawsuit alleging that its Nexus One smartphone failed to maintain 3G connectivity and that the Mountain View company not only made misleading claims about the product's capabilities but also failed to adequately support customers in search of answers. . . The suit says Google basically failed to warn customers they would not receive faster 3G connectivity, even in areas where T-Mobile USA said such coverage was available.

The suit (correctly) also alleges that those who called either T-Mobile or Google for support got passed around like a hot potato, with the problems never really getting fixed. Google recently announced that the Nexus One experiment was over and there wouldn't be a Nexus Two, though Google considered the whole affair a success. Of course it was in the sense that it provided traction for Google's Android mobile OS -- Google just didn't make a very good phone retailer or a phone that could hold a reliable 3G signal.
read comment(s)

Samsung Unveils 'Galaxy Tab' Tablet - Will have embedded phone capabilities, likely sold through Verizon

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 13:56:28 EDT -

Samsung today unveiled their response to the Apple iPad: the Galaxy Tab. Unlike the iPad, the Android-powered device has two cameras, is a bit smaller (7.5 by 4.7 by .5 inches) and lighter (13.4 ounces), and actually operates as a phone. As such, the device will be offered through a phone partner, rumored to be Verizon. It's not clear yet if it's exclusive, given specs indicate it supports HSDPA and HSUPA (which could mean AT&T/T-Mobile, or it could simply mean European carrier support). Much like the recent netbook craze, you can expect this to be the opening salvo in a wave of subsidized tablets tied to carriers aimed at locking users into long-term contracts. Motorola and HTC are also rumored to be developing Android tablets for use on Verizon's network.
read comment(s)

AT&T Forgets They Began The Network Neutrality Debate - Then calls people "conspiracy theorists" for pointing it out

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:08:24 EDT -

Consumer group Free Press is apparently hitting some of AT&T's buttons this week, if this missive from AT&T lobbyist Hank Hultquist is any indication. Hultquist this week attacked the consumer group as a purveyor of "Da Vinci Code conspiracy theories" for a recent letter the group wrote to the FCC that points out how AT&T's long-standing dream of "paid prioritization" could be bad for consumers. In it, Free Press notes they don't oppose intelligent network management, just paid prioritization:

In a network where congestion is a somewhat rare occurrence, paid-priority treatment holds little value for third parties. Allowing ISPs to abuse their terminating access monopoly power by charging for paid prioritization directly produces the incentive to create scarcity. Policies that reward and encourage a steady state of scarcity are of course not a recipe for closing the digital divide through buildout and network expansion.

AT&T retorted by trying to conflate QOS network management (which, especially in more intelligent modern incarnations, few if any oppose) with paid prioritization, or an ISP charging content companies an extra surcharge if they wish to have their content reach AT&T customers more quickly. AT&T also accuses the group of being inconsistent conspiracy theorists -- simply for pointing out AT&T's long-documented ambitions on this front:

One sometimes hears...that the introduction of paid prioritization would enable ISPs to turn best effort Internet transmission into a "dirt road" and force virtually the entire Internet ecosystem to "pay extra" for prioritized transmission. Why would ISPs require such an elaborate scheme to raise rates if they have the market power attributed to them by the CoENN? Yet now Free Press seems to suggest that ISPs would restrict prioritization to only a few "deep-pocketed Internet giants." While I enjoy the Da Vinci Code conspiracy theories as much as the next blogger, I do expect at least some superficial consistency.

Why would an entrenched, incredibly powerful duopoly carrier impose an "elaborate scheme" to milk more money out of consumers and businesses that already pay for bandwidth? To make more money, of course. While the Free Press is certainly known for occasional hyperbole, suggesting that AT&T could abuse their market position using paid prioritization certainly isn't conspiracy material. It's not even controversial.

AT&T enjoys ignoring this fact: AT&T started the entire network neutrality debate in 2005 by proclaiming that they were going to charge content companies (who already pay for bandwidth) an extra, nonsensical toll to reach AT&T customers quickly. Thanks predominantly to lobbyist distortion, the debate has grown into a ridiculous, often-incoherent monster since then. However, it should be remembered that it was AT&T's vocalized desire to act as a bridge troll that began the network neutrality debate, and the original goal of network neutrality rules was to prevent AT&T from abusing its duopoly/monopoly power to extort passers by.

Update: The IETF also thinks AT&T's conclusions are misleading:

The current chair of the IETF, Russ Housley, disagrees with AT&T's assessment. "AT&T's characterization is misleading," Housley said. "IETF prioritization technology is geared toward letting network users indicate how they want network providers to handle their traffic, and there is no implication in the IETF about payment based on any prioritization."

read comment(s)

Virgin Mobile's New $40 Prepaid Data Plan Has Huge Issues - Fluctuating speeds, page load issues...

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 10:02:24 EDT -

While that new Virgin Mobile $40 unlimited prepaid data plan looks great on the surface, users in our forums note that they're having a lot of problems not only ordering the plan, but actually using the plan for web browsing. Not only did Virgin Mobile botch the initial launch, but users are reporting inconsistent and often pathetic speeds with the service (as in, sometimes struggling to best dial-up era speeds). One consistent complaint by users is that routing or caching server overload is resulting in incomplete page loads during browsing:

There are definitive problems with Virgin Mobile's unlimited offering now. I can confirm the problems exist whether you use their usb modem or their mifi. I bought the usb modem, and I had trouble, so I exchanged it for a mifi, and I continue to have trouble. Pages will not load at times. When they do load, it is usually after having to refresh several times. Images do not load well, and Flash-heavy sites bog down. I have Millenicom, too, and I am not having any of these issues with Millenicom. Seriously, the Virgin service is so poor, that I am considering cancelling after only two days.

A consistent complaint among Virgin Mobile users is that despite running on Sprint's network, Virgin Mobile service is immeasurably poorer than using Sprint's network directly. Many users in the same location find no performance issues when using Millenicom, another Sprint-powered no contract prepaid operator. We've dropped a line to Virgin Mobile to inquire about some of these problems. Impacted users (many of whom complain the company does not respond to e-mail support requests) may find some help by contacting Virgin Mobile's Twitter representative.
read comment(s)

Thursday Morning Lnks -

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 09:19:29 EDT -

Google Sued Over Nexus One 3G Connectivity Issues ubergizmo.com
Should public Wi-Fi access be 'free'? zdnet.com
Global broadband cost disparity must be addressed itpro.co.uk
NJ Transit hoping to add Wi-Fi to commute northjersey.com
Apple's iOS beats Android 6:1 on the Web networkworld.com
Is Falsely Being Accused Of File Sharing With An Automated Pre-Settlement Letter A Form Of Harassment? techdirt.com
AT&T calls net neutrality advocate a conspiracy theorist theinquirer.net
Intel goes all in on wireless with Infineon deal, but will it pay off? fiercewireless.com
Rumor Mill: Verizon bringing prepaid to Blackberry. Android phones fiercewireless.com
(Not so) Crazy Microsoft Rumors: A new Zune HD? zdnet.com

Can't Get Verizon 15 Mbps DSL? You're Not Alone. - That 7,000 foot drop off is a real doozy

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 09:03:44 EDT -

For many people in our forums, Verizon's new announcement of 15 Mbps ADSL2+ service doesn't mean a whole lot, given they're beyond the 7,000 foot range the service is restricted to. Many are already barely able to get 1.5 Mbps downstream; Rob Pegoraro of the Washington Post tested the addresses of thirteen friends in the DC area, none of which are able to get the upgrade. Sector analyst Dave Burstein reiterates that those who can't get these faster speeds -- probably shouldn't hold their breath:

Given that the majority of customers are beyond the 7,000 foot cutoffs for the 10-15 meg service, that means they have ADSL2+ to about a third of the network. Most of the rest are behind remote terminals or connected to DSLAMS 5-12 years old, neither of which are scheduled for volume upgrades. . .Experience from Britain, France and the UK has been that almost no one gets the 20 & 24 megabits possible with ADSL2+ and only a minority can even get 10 megabits down.

So with no DSL upgrades planned, and FiOS deployment halted with the exception of several large cities, 1.5-7 Mbps DSL is as good as it's going to get for millions of Verizon customers. If you're in a FiOS neighborhood, or are able to get 10 Mbps downstream via Verizon ADSL2+, consider yourself lucky.
read comment(s)