dunno how many of you saw this but i am very disappointed and pissed off about this little news if its true
http://pocketpc-live.com/top-stories/bad-news-for-pocketpc-sling-users.html
Not only have ATT 3G network crashed nurmious times but the fact that they bragging about having the fastest 3G nationwide is a bit of a over hyped statement if they cant simply handle data streaming of Sling Media but they could allow they crappy knock off *CV TV*
allthatinny said:
Not only have ATT 3G network crashed nurmious times but the fact that they bragging about having the fastest 3G nationwide is a bit of a over hyped statement if they cant simply handle data streaming of Sling Media but they could allow they crappy knock off *CV TV*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not that I'm a fan of the policy by any stretch, but I can't help but want to agree with them in targeting Sling.
It reminds me of when I was in college (around 2000) and the network admin was debating a ban on counterstrike communicating outside of the dorms because it took just 20 players to slow something as simple as web browsing to the point pages frequently timed out. Note, at the time Counterstrike's network code was a joke and the college didn't have a very good internet connection to the dorms anyway (the campus was on a different connection).
The comparison is easy to make, as Sling isn't well optimized at all. For network management, it uses Windows Media Video 9 (VC-1) to handle network transmissions, which (I'm told, I can't claim expert knowledge) is only good within local networks or a very small number of hops over the internet, otherwise it becomes confused and tends to fire more data than it should. There's also the issue of I-Frame intervals, which appear to be set rather low by default (meaning higher I-Frames). I-Frames take more data and cause higher bandwidth. Searching didn't turn up many positive comments about sling's video scaling (which obviously should be done if it's played on a screen small enough to fit in your pocket). I admit, this information comes from some quick googling, so it may possibly lack in accuracy, but it does hint that Sling isn't well suited to efficient use on a cellular data network.
I realize some people use Sling for home security cameras or possibly some other useful scenario other than watching TV, but let's be honest....if it's just about watching an episode of Grey's Anatomy on your phone while at work...then it's pretty lame. Obviously technology CAN support this, but only as long as it's a few people doing it. If the idea caught on, it would bring down any cellular network.
I admit, I'm not a Sling user, so perhaps I'm a little biased...
does that mean they've blocked sling's connection completely?
and i think it's b.s...we all paid the hefty fee for data plan so we should all be entitled to the 5GB or so soft cap. cut off the connection after the user has reached that limit! they can't just censor certain applications to help the network run more smoothly. they were supposed to provide a network that CAN sustain such traffic in the first place. If AT&T can't hold up to that much, they deserve to be and will be sued (unless of course they lower our data plan fees)
oh, and I think sling brought it upon themselves when they came out with the iphone app. i get the feeling AT&T only started this now because iphone users are feeling cheated ("the winmo users can watch sling, so why can't we?") this should teach iphone app developers a lesson! =p
Slingplayer is still working fine.
AT&T may just end up forbidding sling from working on their network in further software releases.
baboola said:
and i think it's b.s...we all paid the hefty fee for data plan so we should all be entitled to the 5GB or so soft cap. cut off the connection after the user has reached that limit! they can't just censor certain applications to help the network run more smoothly. they were supposed to provide a network that CAN sustain such traffic in the first place. If AT&T can't hold up to that much, they deserve to be and will be sued (unless of course they lower our data plan fees)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not really arguing here, I just wanted to point out that if you replace every instance of 'AT&T' with 'COMCAST' you will have the argument that was made by Comcast customers in 2007 about bittorrent traffic being blocked. Comcast backed down due to bad press, and a number of legal issues (primary reasons being that they didn't publicly admit to the censorship, and because their method of censorship was fraudulent...they were faking network packets, not just blocking them). Comcast didn't fully back down, but just adjusted their policy and tightened their methods of handling heavy customers. Note, this is a full sized ISP working over high speed cable, not a wireless provider that ALSO offers internet.
AT&T might back down, but I have the feeling this isn't going to draw enough ire to build the large public outcry that's necessary. I certainly doubt that they would lose any legal case regarding this. Even a legal case built around anti-competitive practices would fail since there's other methods to get video onto a phone via wireless.
Sling might stand to get some trouble since a lot of people surely bought into the equipment and iPhone app at the same time, and now won't get much use from either.
Of course, Sling may also consider suing AT&T if this becomes a protocol block...They actually stand a chance of winning that fight.
reason why i said they not up to par is due to the fact that technology is changing, we are streaming almost everything over networks now, its like att said "Your world connected"
movies is being streamed over networks, communcations, video feeds, audio, data, near everything and another big factor, is HD (Hi-Def) everyone wants HD cuz the quality is awesome but some companies complain about heavy usage when in reality streaming a full size HD movie is not easy, can we be blame cuz they network cant handle the traffic, NO! not like we not paying our monthly service fees but putting softcaps and all these stupid things is just plan out stupid and its stopping use from evolving.
hell i had my ISP put a cap on me once for hosting a game server from my PS3 console, i was hosting a TF2 server i think, and they told me that i cant do it cuz its agaisnt policy yet the feature is in video games to use and to allow us to play, what if every ISP in the world were to enforce that rule then all servers will have to be run by software companies and we will be changed for it to maintain they servers.
i personally think att NEEDS to upgrade they network to meet with todays demand, cuz when Hi Def really settles, what will happen then, ATT will change they policy just to hold us back.
allthatinny said:
Movies is being streamed over networks, communcations, video feeds, audio, data, near everything and another big factor, is HD (Hi-Def) everyone wants HD cuz the quality is awesome but some companies complain about heavy usage when in reality streaming a full size HD movie is not easy, can we be blame cuz they network cant handle the traffic, NO! not like we not paying our monthly service fees but putting softcaps and all these stupid things is just plan out stupid and its stopping use from evolving.
...
i personally think att NEEDS to upgrade they network to meet with todays demand, cuz when Hi Def really settles, what will happen then, ATT will change they policy just to hold us back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree completely with your end-point that AT&T needs to upgrade and they are under-performing given the price point we pay.
However, I think your reasoning is completely wrong. HD Video? If we had any phones that could REALLY handle HD video, it might be a different subject. You're talking about 2 things that are kind of absurd at this point, streaming HD over cellular wireless and actually being able to identify a measurable difference on a phone once you have it. Wired ISPs are having enough trouble with streaming HD, a wireless provider can't compete with them. Keep in mind, HSDPA's (not 3g) highest realistic transmission speed is only barely capable of meeting the lowest acceptable speed for streaming 720i video. Please also remember, the NEW cool toys for home theater is hardware capable of short range streaming of HD, you're talking about very long range. Second, what phone is going to display HD video substantially better than decently encoded standard def video? On screens this small, HD video is a waste of time. Once TV-Out is adopted and displays something other than a pure screen copy (which automatically displays only the phone's resolution), then the subject can be brought back up. Keep in mind, I'm talking about current phones, not those that are coming eventually with the Tegra chip or other future implementations. In a year, the technological realities could shift enough that a very small percentage of users could be talking about this stuff, but today it's not a part of the real use case scenarios.
In my opinion, here are the real reasons this news should be bad and we need to push AT&T to improve their network:
a) The point of forcing iPhone users to get a data plan was to fund improvement of the 3g and hsdpa capabilities of their network. We've suffered through the poor performance caused by the iPhone, now it's time to see the network improve beyond the point it was at BEFORE the evil phone came.
b) The solution to the problem should never be banning a protocol/service/feature. Raising cost or putting limits on it would be reasonable, but completely blocking something is absurd and unreasonable.
c) I know I had another reason, but I forgot it while typing....
speed_pour said:
I agree completely with your end-point that AT&T needs to upgrade and they are under-performing given the price point we pay.
However, I think your reasoning is completely wrong. HD Video? If we had any phones that could REALLY handle HD video, it might be a different subject. You're talking about 2 things that are kind of absurd at this point, streaming HD over cellular wireless and actually being able to identify a measurable difference on a phone once you have it. Wired ISPs are having enough trouble with streaming HD, a wireless provider can't compete with them. Keep in mind, HSDPA's (not 3g) highest realistic transmission speed is only barely capable of meeting the lowest acceptable speed for streaming 720i video. Please also remember, the NEW cool toys for home theater is hardware capable of short range streaming of HD, you're talking about very long range. Second, what phone is going to display HD video substantially better than decently encoded standard def video? On screens this small, HD video is a waste of time. Once TV-Out is adopted and displays something other than a pure screen copy (which automatically displays only the phone's resolution), then the subject can be brought back up. Keep in mind, I'm talking about current phones, not those that are coming eventually with the Tegra chip or other future implementations. In a year, the technological realities could shift enough that a very small percentage of users could be talking about this stuff, but today it's not a part of the real use case scenarios.
In my opinion, here are the real reasons this news should be bad and we need to push AT&T to improve their network:
a) The point of forcing iPhone users to get a data plan was to fund improvement of the 3g and hsdpa capabilities of their network. We've suffered through the poor performance caused by the iPhone, now it's time to see the network improve beyond the point it was at BEFORE the evil phone came.
b) The solution to the problem should never be banning a protocol/service/feature. Raising cost or putting limits on it would be reasonable, but completely blocking something is absurd and unreasonable.
c) I know I had another reason, but I forgot it while typing....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok lets take HD out of the pic even though its not to far away, but lets say a netflix video streaming software for windows mobile.
if i pay my monthly service charge on att end and netflix, they put a 5G softcap, one movie alone will eat up alot of that 5GB of bandwidth
i moved from the iphone and i could tell u that iphone 3G has awesome streaming compatiblity there was this one site called PublicPost that had movies on there for free with limited about of user, got closed down due to legal reason but i use to be at work watching really hot movies at great audio and sound with no hiccup problem but the fact that att wanting to ban tv streaming is a bit over the edge
"Up to Par??" Never has been
I worked for Cingular right after AT&T bought them until the week they started rebranding their phones as AT&T.
Warning on my bias
As much as I appreciate their innovations as a company, like being the first company to offer simultaneous use of Voice & Data by way of 3G and having the most popular and innovative phone on their network... I was horribly dissappointed at a bunch of their choices.
-They transitioned too fast and incompletely. ie. They were still removing/upgrading old AT&T Wireless components on their towers as they began rolling out 3G in other areas.
-Many people I know, including myself, lost signal almost completely as they transitioned voice to higher frequencies (1900mHz) and WCDMA/3G to replace them on the lower freqs. (Lower frequencies, 850 & 900mHz, offer better penetration through solids like trees & buildings. T-mobile is still the only carrier I get 1-2 bars in my basement...underground). What a waste! Especially since there are already so many 3G phones overseas that only use the 2100mHz WCDMA.
-Infrastructure. Infrastructure. Infrastructure.
How does a telecommunication company not give itself the Infrastructure to support the demand that they knew the iPhone would bring.
I'm glad I'm not helping them deal with the nightmare they made for themselves. Someone would have to pay me to give up my Sprint TouchPro. Who, btw, had the first 3G ntwork and still has the fastest. I'm happy to see people leave Sprint to get an iPhone cause it makes the network even faster lol.
sc00basteve said:
I worked for Cingular right after AT&T bought them until the week they started rebranding their phones as AT&T.
Warning on my bias
As much as I appreciate their innovations as a company, like being the first company to offer simultaneous use of Voice & Data by way of 3G and having the most popular and innovative phone on their network... I was horribly dissappointed at a bunch of their choices.
-They transitioned too fast and incompletely. ie. They were still removing/upgrading old AT&T Wireless components on their towers as they began rolling out 3G in other areas.
-Many people I know, including myself, lost signal almost completely as they transitioned voice to higher frequencies (1900mHz) and WCDMA/3G to replace them on the lower freqs. (Lower frequencies, 850 & 900mHz, offer better penetration through solids like trees & buildings. T-mobile is still the only carrier I get 1-2 bars in my basement...underground). What a waste! Especially since there are already so many 3G phones overseas that only use the 2100mHz WCDMA.
-Infrastructure. Infrastructure. Infrastructure.
How does a telecommunication company not give itself the Infrastructure to support the demand that they knew the iPhone would bring.
I'm glad I'm not helping them deal with the nightmare they made for themselves. Someone would have to pay me to give up my Sprint TouchPro. Who, btw, had the first 3G ntwork and still has the fastest. I'm happy to see people leave Sprint to get an iPhone cause it makes the network even faster lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about? Really? You're wrong on a half a dozen counts.
AT&T bought absolutely nothing, in any part of their weird buyout ridden last 5 years. From Wikipedia: "Formerly a joint venture between SBC Communications and BellSouth, Cingular Wireless soon acquired the old AT&T Wireless; SBC later acquired the original AT&T and re-branded as "the new AT&T". Cingular became wholly-owned by the new AT&T in December 2006 as a result of AT&T's acquisition of BellSouth." The 3G rollout was already underway before anyone bought anything, I remember hearing about it when I signed up for AT&T Wireless in 2004. They didn't transition incompletely or anything, they've got the "world's fastest 3G network" running on a backbone barely fit for an MMORPG player.
T-Mobile is 1900 MHz ONLY, and uses 1700 MHz for 3G; you just get good signal in your basement because the tower is nearby.
Sounds like Sprint needs to pay you a little bit more to plug them like a salesman.
To the OP: Yes, AT&T sucks. I hate them for that too, blocking Sling because they know their network would crumble like a stack of cards if even 10% of us started seriously using our 3G.
sheik124 said:
To the OP: Yes, AT&T sucks. I hate them for that too, blocking Sling because they know their network would crumble like a stack of cards if even 10% of us started seriously using our 3G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, just asking for a bit of a quantification of this statement. It's true AT&T would flop and die like a fish out of water, but what carrier wouldn't?
In the interest of staying on topic, and reissuing my question more contextually; since Verizon is possibly going to gain sales rights to the iPhone, does anybody think that with a mass purchasing of the iPhone under Verizon that they may also suffer serious network degradation with regular uptake of the Sling app? Would they have a different response? Given Verizon's history, I think they would likely demand to filter appStore apps, which almost certainly includes the Sling app.
It's not that I disagree on the problems with AT&T, and I'm not trying to be an apologist for them (I swear, I really don't mean to be), but I see a lot of negative comments which seem to ignore that all of the other carriers are just as bad/incapable/inadequate/incompetent. Normally I ignore all of it, but today seems to have brought it out of me.
gee i think they should work on the cell sites handling handoffs' before they go worrying about much else. Constantly losing calls/data when i hit a new cell site outside of boston. Its getting old.
At&t sucks
same thing happens to me when am entering and leaving staten island, happens on both the ferry and on the bridge
Not sure if those who are interested have seen this, but over the in the Kaiser forum the same subject was brought up (albeit, more relevant subject line). A possible work-around is described for interested parties (assuming AT&T actually does any filtering on the protocol). Here's the thread: Slingbox users beware...At&t limiting 3g access
speed_pour said:
Sorry, just asking for a bit of a quantification of this statement. It's true AT&T would flop and die like a fish out of water, but what carrier wouldn't?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umm. Definitely Sprint.
I'm on a Sprint SERO plan and they have never complained about my data usage. That probably why they haven't said anything, but seriously. I will repeat: I'm happy to see people leave Sprint to get an iPhone cause it makes the network even faster lol.
I did 2.7+ gigs of data last month and 6+ the month before that.
Last night I tested this:
'nuff said
sc00basteve said:
Umm. Definitely Sprint.
I'm on a Sprint SERO plan and they have never complained about my data usage. That probably why they haven't said anything, but seriously. I will repeat: I'm happy to see people leave Sprint to get an iPhone cause it makes the network even faster lol.
I did 2.7+ gigs of data last month and 6+ the month before that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Somehow I suspect you live on the East Coast. My whole time growing up and living on the West Coast, there's only a few people I know that didn't complain about Sprint. Actually, Sprint is the only carrier that people around here have a serious problem with. I worked for a company for a short time that had a lot of people travel from Tennessee to here and each of them used Sprint, they all said that they had the best experience with it until they came here, then it was nearly unusable. Obviously, it's just like radio versions, quality depends entirely on the circumstances.
I do have to say, several months ago I drove from southern California most of the way up the west coast, downloaded a few movies and tv shows, then did the same on the trip back 2 weeks later. While I didn't count total amounts, the video alone had to be at least 4 gigs. That didn't count any of my data usage with web browsing or any time between trips. I also only had 3 dropped signals in more than 1000 miles (once in the desert, once at shasta mountain, and once in a mountain pass in southern oregon). On this coast, in my experience, AT&T is pretty rock solid and Sprint is difficult to use. Not sure about Verizon or TMo though, not many friends on either of those.
That makes sense
It does make sense. I was out in San Francisco a couple of years ago, when I had ATT, and it was really solid.
But Sprint users, fear not. I was talking to a teir2 tech a couple month ago and he was part of the citywide testing for WiMax in Seattle. I think it was Seattle, at least. Anyway, Baltimore rollout is functional and rollout + testing in many cities is an awesome sign.
ahhahaha sprint. Yea go for sprint, if you want a network that will be bought up soon. I cannot tell you how many sprint people have been laid off in the past 5 months. (cell techs+) They are almost ready to go belly up. And the 4g is a joke.
First they plopped all the 4g's on teh ground and started hooking them up. Then they went out and pulled them all and now they are beginning to put them back.. (my guess is so whoever buys them will see the numbers)
bottom line.... i wouldnt touch sprint w/ a 10foot pole right now.
At least MetroPCS is transparent. They are basically building verizon's new sites. hahahah Cdma2000 and 4g ready. lolz
well this is a bit off topic but here we go again, att practically embrass themself at the apple WWDC, no MMS support of iPhone, NO TETHERING,
and if ur a existing att customer and want to buy the new iphone u gotta pay any where from 299-399 with a new 2 YEAR CONTRACT, pfft not going through that again if i cant even stream sling media over they network, att can kiss my a$$
allthatinny said:
well this is a bit off topic but here we go again, att practically embrass themself at the apple WWDC, no MMS support of iPhone, NO TETHERING,
and if ur a existing att customer and want to buy the new iphone u gotta pay any where from 299-399 with a new 2 YEAR CONTRACT, pfft not going through that again if i cant even stream sling media over they network, att can kiss my a$$
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kinda hoped to be done with this thread, but I was already reading the WWDC coverage and got a huge laugh and the coverage (the fact that they described the entire hall laughing at the tethering support issue). In point of fact, Apple is lying...a LOT.
MMS support is missing because Apple implemented the MMS protocol differently than virtually every handset maker in the world. The "upgrades" aren't performance upgrades, they are functional upgrades to support the alternate implementation. The story I heard from one of the techs is that AT&T wasn't made aware of this until just a few months ago and they weren't given time to implement software upgrades.
Tethering support has nothing to do with performance (though that's obviously going to be an issue). It's all about Apple and AT&T STILL discussing the pricing for the tethering plan. My theory, worth little more than a grain of salt, is that apple is trying to take a cut of tethering on top of the profits they already get from each plan...why else does apple need to negotiate when at&t already has set prices for this feature.
As to pricing...I don't see why everybody is throwing a huge fuss...Does every iphone user think they are god's children? If they want to upgrade their phone every year, they need to either be ready to pay a high price or have an upgrade coming. If Apple expects people to do this, then they should either create an trade-in plan, or some special mail-in rebate offer to existing iphone owners. That's not a carrier's job, not when the handsets are already subsidized so heavily.
The hardware upgrades for apple are laughable anyway. The new handset only comes with an upgraded camera and they finally flipped the switch on video recording that every jailbroken phone already had. Apple is just soaking their fanboys for money. I'm expecting 3G owners are going to see a tutorial in 2 months on how to replace the existing camera with the 3 megapixel one from the 3gs. Combined with jailbreaking, 3g owners will be able to have a 3gs at the cost of throwing out their warranty and buying a $30 replacement camera component.