A Wireless Carrier's Challenges in Managing Data Demand

Status
Not open for further replies.

computernerdforlife

Distinguished
Jan 5, 2012
45
0
18,580
0
Simply put: infrastructure is a part of these companies. Invest more in bandwidth, less problems. Invest as little as possible, like they are doing now, consumers will make fun of your company. For the record, it's not the government responsibility for YOUR coverage.
 

wardler

Distinguished
Jun 28, 2011
30
0
18,580
0
Anyone who believes this $%^& about there not being enough bandwidth is throwing money at these cell companies for nothing. I have talked to so many telecommunications experts (usually people who work for the cable, telco, and wireless companies) and they tell me the real problem is keeping people's speeds under what they are paying for.

Everything should be absolutely unlimited until we down their network IMO. Let's see what the real cap is.
 

wardler

Distinguished
Jun 28, 2011
30
0
18,580
0
Anyone who believes this $%^& about there not being enough bandwidth is throwing money at these cell companies for nothing. I have talked to so many telecommunications experts (usually people who work for the cable, telco, and wireless companies) and they tell me the real problem is keeping people's speeds under what they are paying for.

Everything should be absolutely unlimited until we down their network IMO. Let's see what the real cap is.
 

jawadshuaib

Distinguished
Jan 30, 2012
1
0
18,510
0
It is a catch-22 problem. Investing in infrastructure requires a lot of capital, which requires existing customers. But for a new entrant, there are no enough customers to take on this sort of expansion. The government should perhaps subsidize part of the investments required.

Jawad S
http://BudgetElectronics.ca
 

jacobdrj

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2005
490
0
18,930
0
I can TOTALLY see some company with a bunch of capital (google anyone?) who can invest in their own data-only network. Use the latest radio technology, and then have users be subscribed to some skype/oovoo/google voice type service for talk-time and sms... Give users what they want: Lots of data at high speeds...
The biggest catch is the lack of available of spectrum... But it was my understanding that old-school SDTV Chanel spectrum was practically unused...
 

ivyanev

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2011
26
0
18,580
0
Back in the days when first broadband internet appears, the speeds were 100-200 kbps, which was OK.But it happened that the company was having problems with user accounts, so everybody had to use the same speed for some time.The most interesting thing happened-speed was up to 8 MBytes per second.They didn't change their network for a night, so the bandwidth was there ,just hidden. My point here is that i just don't believe the company they have bandwidth issue.
 

aftcomet

Distinguished
Nov 25, 2010
162
0
18,630
0
As a consumer, I'm willing to be conservative with the network as long as I'm seeing progress. But here in Canada, we have such a large monopoly on telecommunications (internet, mobile, etc) that we're being left in the stone age. Our internet service is laughable considering the prices we pay and the service we get. Our internet is capped at 100GB on average. They'll sell you a 100Megabit connection for $150 a month, but put a 75GB cap on it which essentially makes it useless. Hell we still have half a megabit plans (some countries have faster phones than this) for $35 a month.

I find these companies in Canada are taking their sweet ass time in upgrading. The internet and mobile communication become a necessity in life that you can't go without it. Therefore if you're not happy with the big three here, there isn't much you can do except cancel, or switch to a inferior service that doesn't fit your needs. There is no competition.

Instead, we have the CRTC here. When big executives from Rogers, Bell, and Telus retire, they sit on this board which governs telecommunications policies. Of course they condone business which preserves the existing monopoly because after all, they have to protect their stocks in these organizations.

And it's all our government's fault whichever way you look at it. If you're going to allow something to be privatized you better as hell make sure many companies have access to the business, otherwise what incentive does a single organization with a monopoly in a necessary service have to improve it?
 

razor512

Distinguished
Jun 16, 2007
501
0
18,940
4
there is no bandwidth issue that requires a cap on the amount of data transferred because networks are not limited in that way. A network is limited by the hardware in terms of transfer speed, which is why an ISP will sell tiered speed.

if they don't oversell the service, then everyone can use their full speed 24/7 with no issues

caps on data transfered are false advertising because they allow ISP's to advertise high speeds but indirectly block services that can take advantage of the speeds.

also much of the current bandwidth issues for ISP's who want to avoid upgrading their network, are based on future projected use and not current use

I have beta tested 3g modems and contacted some of the developers during the test. They told me this about 3 years ago, most of the poor performance is intentional and due to ISP's wanting to have the same average transfer rates for each node that is connected to the backbone so when they add a new one, they know exactly how much bandwidth will be used at the high end.

depending on what test is needed, a company can apple to have a select few devices to be exempted from all caps on both speed and transfers (only being subject to the best effort that the network will do be default), giving users in the beta a solid 9mbit/s all the time even for me in NY while other 3g devices, such as my friends iphone would do 2mbit/s in the morning, then drop to near dialup speeds in the afternoon

anyway, ISP's have a lot of left over network capacity and their only issue is their estimated of future traffic finally exceeding the transfer rates of their current equipment, forcing them to spend a lot of money upgrading

 

mdillenbeck

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2008
283
0
18,930
0
As a consumer, my frustration comes when they advertise data intensive applications as a typical use for the phones they wish to sell - then they turn around and base usage limits based on several year old technology with very different data usage profiles.

To me its like going to buy a sports car that includes one free tank a month of special fuel, then finding out they decided only to put a 1 liter tank in it. Sure it might have mind-boggling acceleration, a top speed that blows anything else away, and tons of extras... but what good is it if you can only drive it for 5 miles a month? (Assumption: special sports car = lots of money to buy.)
 

__-_-_-__

Distinguished
Feb 19, 2009
138
0
18,630
0
I've 4G @41.2mbps and I pay 20€. unlimited traffic. I usually download about 50gb per month. once month I reached 200gb. Lot's of other costumers like me. No problems.
 

Mathos

Distinguished
Jun 17, 2007
45
0
18,580
0
Here's what you gotta look at. With Wireless carriers the bandwidth available is limited by the spectrum they have available. That spectrum determines how much speed can be transmitted between towers to the base stations, which in turn limits how much bandwidth can be given per customer in an area. In low population area's the networks aren't under much strain. You can see that effect in area's like New York for example. Wired networks aren't generally constrained as much, but there are limits, just nowhere near what anyone can hit right now. Wired is mainly limited by available routing hardware in the line. Obviously the advent of Gigabit switches made more speed available in wired networks.

The problem comes with Wireless bandwidth when people are constantly streaming video for example, which maxes out a connection and keeps it there until you're done. And I hate to say it or be this way. But I'm gonna say that it's very unlikely for someone to use above 4-5GB on their phone unless they're streaming constantly, or using their phone as their primary internet through tethering.

I have grandfathered unlimited on my phone, and I've rarely gone over 3GB, and I've only got close to that when my regular home ISP was down and I was tethering to get online. But, I also rarely use my phone to watch streamed movies. Don't get me wrong, I do go on youtube often, or watch music vids.

Wired networks though, you have to remember cable companies offer their own TV services. A lot of people use cable internet to stream off of Netflix, Hulu, and other sites, thus making it not necessary for you to buy cable TV service, or sat service in regards to people with DSL.
 

house70

Distinguished
Apr 21, 2010
1,465
0
19,310
39
"For reference, Bell and Telus pooled their resources together to launch an HSPA network, allowing it quickly catch up to Rogers in having an iPhone-compatible 3G network."

What is an iPhone-compatible 3G network? How is it different from any 3G network (other than operator-specific frequencies)? Is the iPhone the only HSPA-capable handset available in Canada?
Maybe Marcus can enlighten us all.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
640
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]therabiddeer[/nom]Somebody get Jane that phone, she was robbed.[/citation]Those pricks! They should at least have given her a gift card or something.
 

Marcus Yam

Distinguished
Moderator
Jul 1, 2008
1,441
0
19,230
0
[citation][nom]house70[/nom]"For reference, Bell and Telus pooled their resources together to launch an HSPA network, allowing it quickly catch up to Rogers in having an iPhone-compatible 3G network."What is an iPhone-compatible 3G network? How is it different from any 3G network (other than operator-specific frequencies)? Is the iPhone the only HSPA-capable handset available in Canada? Maybe Marcus can enlighten us all.[/citation]
Before Telus/Bell banded together to build its HSPA network, it was running CDMA technology like Sprint and Verizon in the U.S. This meant that Rogers was the only one running a GSM/3G network compatible with the iPhone and iPhone 3G, not unlike how things were with AT&T.

Bell and Telus were in the process of building HSPA and went with the same 850/1900 bands as Rogers/AT&T even though the 1700/2100 AWS spectrum (the same that T-Mobile uses in the U.S.) were on the auction block.

So, this doesn't mean that Bell/Telus built a network specifically for the iPhone, but the biggest marketing push by both companies when they launched their HSPA network was that they too could offer the iPhone just as Rogers had been doing for years. Obviously this also meant that they could offer the same plethora of GSM-compatible devices that are afforded by the massive 850/1900 buying power of AT&T.

I didn't mean to mislead by saying it offered only the iPhone when it launched its HSPA network, but that was the most immediate benefit to consumers who didn't know the difference in network technologies as most other smartphones at the time were also offered on the Bell and Telus' CDMA and EV-DO -- riding on the same selection as Verizon and Sprint.

Today, Rogers, Bell and Telus have a very similar selection of phones since they run on the same network technology. The new entrants, notably Mobilicity and Wind run on the AWS band. Canada is having its own 700MHz auction soon, and that could potentially shake things up.
 

Anomalyx

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
195
0
18,630
0
The reality that is hitting many consumers today is that bandwidth cannot be freely had.
The reality that has yet to hit providers is that it's being paid for and not delivered! This isn't an issue of "freely had" bandwidth. This is an issue of customers paying for bandwidth, then providers crying when the customer actually uses the bandwidth they paid for. It's like goofing off at work all day and expecting to get paid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
G Streaming Video & TVs 1
PhilipMichaels Streaming Video & TVs 3
G Streaming Video & TVs 3
PhilipMichaels Streaming Video & TVs 1
G Streaming Video & TVs 5
G Streaming Video & TVs 10
G Streaming Video & TVs 6
CherlynnLow Streaming Video & TVs 3
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 4
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 29
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 7
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 6
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 22
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 7
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 36
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 3
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 24
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 7
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 8

ASK THE COMMUNITY