A Cell Tower of Your Very Own | Hacker News Reader

A Cell Tower of Your Very Own

online.wsj.com

17 pointsgrellas22 comments

It's not really very much of a win for me, is it? I mean, basically I'm paying $250 for the privilege of paying AT&T dollars per gigabyte for traffic that goes through my own broadband connection that I'm already paying for.

I can't even begin to understand... why I would do that.

I have one. I recently moved to an area with very poor AT&T coverage. I am under contract with AT&T, and I wasn't pleased with the prospect of having to go outside every time I wanted to make or receive a phone call from my house, so this seemed good for me.

I bought one for $150 (not $250). It works, but not very well. On some calls I get fairly severe audio distortion that makes it hard to understand people. I'm not sure how to fix this yet. Still, though, it's better than not being able to make or receive any phone calls at home.

Data usage isn't an issue because I have wifi, and call time isn't an issue because I never get close to my limit anyway.

$150 is probably more than the early termination fee on your AT&T contract, after proration.

People who are desperate to have an iPhone but don't get AT&T reception in their homes would be more than willing to pay for this.

Heh,

So they all have the same range... Provides signal for data and voice up to 5,000 square feet and none of them want to admit it's ~40 feet from the base station. (40^2 * pi > 5000)

I'm coming up on 3 years of use for my T-Mobile Blackberry Curve 8320 w/ UMA support. Still waiting for an all-around better device and network setup for my usage pattern (messaging/emailing a lot, talking a lot, maps, occasional web browsing).

While the T-Mobile coverage has sucked plenty in certain areas, I've had nearly 3 years of satisfaction that if there's a wifi network, I have coverage -- in various apartments where coverage sucked, deep inside work buildings (where other service providers also can't penetrate), at other people's houses where there isn't great coverage... and it costs me nothing. Unlimited calls/data/messaging w/ UMA included: ~$90/month. Plus I can tether!

Anyone know if T-Mo is baking UMA support into any upcoming Android devices?

I've read rumors about a targeted Q3 release, though I'm not sure how they'd push that out.

What's going on with magic jack's femtocell device? It was getting hyped this past January... based on the PR, it's a femtocell that can hijack nearby GSM phones and bridge them to magicjack's VOIP network. seemed bizarre.

It's illegal according to FCC regulations to broadcast on the same frequencies that 3G carriers are licensed to use. You could probably buy some shady device like this and import it from Asia, but you're going to be stepping all over your neighbor's cell phone reception, or worse, sharing it out with them, if it even worked in the first place.

Do you know if this was the case specifically with the magicjack device?

An average press clipping from mid-january: "The company said its device is legal, arguing the spectrum licenses of GSM carriers such as AT&T Mobility and T-Mobile USA do not extend into the home." ( http://www.fiercewireless.com/ceslive/story/magicjack-using-... )

It's an interesting tack to take, and I'm very curious about whether the stalled product launch was due to regulation/legal issues, or if magicjack abandoned it for another reason.

I find this whole microcell thing amazing. Your operator tells you that since its service is sub-par and you can't get reception, you get the privilege of a) paying $250, b) supplying your own broadband, c) still paying your crappy operator, and d) being unable to move from within the cell to outside it without dropping the call.

I mean — seriously, what kind of a deal is that?

For all the author's sarcasm, it was not much a relief from the marketing-speak that the cell companies are plagued by. But I am still glad they are selling these. To me it is a symbolic gesture that says they actually care about solving the many technical problems that they still face.

To me it is a symbolic gesture that AT&T doesn't want to pay to upgrade their terrible network, so they would rather the customers pay to buy and install their own femtocells.

I, for one, will refuse to buy one. If AT&T on the other hand wants to provide one free of charge, and pay me a reasonable fee of $25 per month for 2 gigabytes of bandwidth, I will be happy to host it for them.

"And because the device relies on a global positioning system to confirm its location in a service area, it needs a clear line of sight to the sky. "

So, it doesn't work in a basement, or a garage, or really any place you might actually need it?

San Diego city proper has complete M-Cell coverage. 5 bars and snappy latency wherever I roamed. Still seems expensive when it's such a commitment to be with an operator, anyway.

I live overseas in an area with spotty wireless reception... any chance I could use a similar technology to improve signal?

Sure! Cell phone repeaters and boosters are widely available. http://www.google.com/webhp?#q=cell+phone+repeater

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_On_Wheels

I got one. Voice goes over M-Cell. Data goes over my wifi. 5 bars in entire house. Getting rid of the land-line covers the $20/month unlimited usage (and that gets you $100 rebate).

I'll give you a better idea: Instead of spending $149 to pay for an AT&T femtocell, buy an Ooma VoIP phone for about the same money, plug it into your cable modem, and never pay for a land line again. I bought Ooma 2 years ago and it paid for itself in about 6 months of phone bills.

If it's for the same money, I'd prefer only having one number. I love the fact that my cellphone is My Phone no matter where I am.

Google Voice is your friend...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com