Jump to content
derrph

New Idea for Data...(just my thoughts)

Recommended Posts

I'm sure everyone remembers the free night and weekend minutes we had years ago. This morning I was thinking what if a carrier took that same idea but instead made for it data. I think that if a carrier was able to implement this that it would be big and a game changer. What do you guys think?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure everyone remembers the free night and weekend minutes we had years ago. This morning I was thinking what if a carrier took that same idea but instead made for it data. I think that if a carrier was able to implement this that it would be big and a game changer. What do you guys think?

It would turn out poorly for carriers. That's prime time to stream video, and if it's not being counted against metered plans then I bet the networks would get hammered even more during those times.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

What do you guys think?

Satellite providers do this already. Usually you have X amount of data, half of X available during normal hours and half of X available during off peak hours. Speeds go to hell during off peak because everyone is trying to download, stream, and update. For cellular this would be shooting themselves in the foot to do because the only people this benefits are those who are using or partially using their phones/mobile service as home isp's. However if they implemented this for actual hotspots, or granted 2gigs of free hotspot during non peak hours for the month on every mobile plan (counting separate from hotspot plans you already have) that could be a nice customer perk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, maybe if it was 11PM-5AM.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would turn out poorly for carriers. That's prime time to stream video, and if it's not being counted against metered plans then I bet the networks would get hammered even more during those times.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Yeah, I agree. Perhaps more realistically night hours like 11 pm - 5 am or a stricter set of hours like 1-4 am, but I'd also doubt ever excepting adoption of that. 

 

I'm thinking the future will be, or hopefully will be like others suggested in that the carriers offer realistic buckets of data like 2.5, 5, 20, 50 at far more reasonable prices. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never was a fan of the unlimited minutes after such and such time at night/weekends, as I find it unfair to those who have different usage periods and cannot take advantage of this. Same goes for data. I think it is better ultimately to convert unlimited data plans, along with high priced per gb data plans, to a per gb data plan that is much more reasonable and fair to everyone, such as $2-$3 per gb.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I wish carriers wouldnt do is after your allotment is instead of bringing you down to "2G" speeds, they should bring that up to "3G" now, that more and more people want LTE and lets face it "2G" speeds are terribly slow. I do see why they do this though, just would be nice. (This mainly applies to prepaid plans not just Sprint or Sprint branded). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I wish carriers wouldnt do is after your allotment is instead of bringing you down to "2G" speeds, they should bring that up to "3G" now, that more and more people want LTE and lets face it "2G" speeds are terribly slow. I do see why they do this though, just would be nice. (This mainly applies to prepaid plans not just Sprint or Sprint branded).

That sounds fair and is something I thought about, until I realized one particular problem with it. That is spectrum would need to be allocated specifically for that, something I use to think could hold both technologies together using the same spectrum, until I heard that is not the case. Surely some spectrum could be put aside for that use, though carriers seem to be on the path to getting all their spectrum using 4g LTE.

 

Speed caps could be used though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds fair and is something I thought about, until I realized one particular problem with it. That is spectrum would need to be allocated specifically for that, something I use to think could hold both technologies together using the same spectrum, until I heard that is not the case. Surely some spectrum could be put aside for that use, though carriers seem to be on the path to getting all their spectrum using 4g LTE.

 

Speed caps could be used though.

I dont mind data caps as long as its NOT a cut off data cap (unlimited), I would RATHER have reduced speeds until the monthly cycle ends than a hard cut off and then your stuck with no data at all unless you are on wifi. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont mind data caps as long as its NOT a cut off data cap (unlimited), I would RATHER have reduced speeds until the monthly cycle ends than a hard cut off and then your stuck with no data at all unless you are on wifi.

Same with me, though I'm not supportive of some of the speed figures I've heard for reduced speeds caps, such as anything in the range less than 1mbps, and even a number that may come as a surprise to people here, 9mbps. I use to talk a lot about how I supported a 9mbps speed cap, though my opinion of that changed when I saw a Netflix article stating that the base streaming nitrate of their 4k video streams is 15mbps.

 

While I'm not saying people should be streaming lots of 4k video on LTE when they could do it on WiFi, a few 4k videos here and there using LTE when they cannot access WiFi, is certainly normal use, which people ought to have speeds to accommodate that with limited to no buffering. So now, I'm supportive of a typical range of 15mbps to 18mbps with the latter being a maximum typically. Although going back to a post I made a while ago about congestion aided speed caps, someone gave me a great idea to have a special speed cap exclusion for during times with very little congestion, as to take advantage of an otherwise unused network. With that in mind, along with the reasonable rate idea I've been discussing with some people here, 30mbps as a maximum to that is reasonable, though going back down to 18mbps when the network gets a bit busier, yet stabilizes at 15mbps.

 

I'll leave it at that for now, as there are issues I realize will bring the number lower than 15mbps, which then gets into the issue of network improvements needed to prevent further decreases in speed during congestion. Simply said though, I do support the Artemis pcell idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I have no doubt the market will provide it, and that users will (want to) use it, I doubt anyone *needs* 4k on any type of mobile device.

 

Heck I still have doubts on the need for 1080 mobile.

 

In any case, when the max on sector is around 35mbs, that pretty much limits the number of active 4k streams to 2 (assuming the 15mbs netflix 4k stream) per sector.

 

b41 and bonding will help, but not much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I have no doubt the market will provide it, and that users will (want to) use it, I doubt anyone *needs* 4k on any type of mobile device.

 

Heck I still have doubts on the need for 1080 mobile.

 

In any case, when the max on sector is around 35mbs, that pretty much limits the number of active 4k streams to 2 (assuming the 15mbs netflix 4k stream) per sector.

 

b41 and bonding will help, but not much.

Hi dedub, I like many of your posts and while I agree with you that people don't need 4k on their wireless device, many people will want it, partly because many of those who have 4k televisions and such will have an expectation for it on their wireless device, as with most new technology becoming mainstream in demand. Once that demand is met by device manufacturers, it will be the responsibility of the carriers to have networks that provide well enough for it, based on that demand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, if they want 4k streaming on their device, they need to pay their appropriate share. Since 4k streaming uses ~16x the data per frame than 1080p, people who use 4k streaming can pay 16x more for their data. Sounds about right. :)

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, if they want 4k streaming on their device, they need to pay their appropriate share. Since 4k streaming uses ~16x the data per frame than 1080p, people who use 4k streaming can pay 16x more for their data. Sounds about right. :)

 

Using Nexus 6 on Tapatalk

Yep, you nailed this.  Who really needs 4k??  What good is it on a 5 inch screen??  I am totally in favor of increasing the prices when somebody decides they need 4k streaming.  This is on cell networks, cable networks, Directv/Dish, etc.   1080P is fine on the average big screen TV in our homes. If a bar owner wants to place a giant screen in his bar and show the Super Bowl in 4k, it should cost him more for the stream no matter how it is delivered.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one needs 4k on their phone. If they do like Robert said pay for your share. As far as capped data I don't agree with overages. I feel you should be slowed to 1mbps. If you need more high speed data you should upgrade to a higher GB tier for more $$$.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I am not saying anyone needs 4k. I know many of my posts are long, but I've made a good effort here lately to post no more than two or three medium length paragraphs. Many of my posts lately only being one medium length paragraph, which I can tell when they are being read now by the responses and the likes I receive in the notifications area.

 

However, some of you are misreading what I'm saying. I'm not even advocating people watch 4k on their devices. The fact is that many people are going to do it no matter what anyone, including people on S4GRU have to say about it. Also, if the carriers currently offering unlimited remove unlimited and start charging over $5 per GB, many of these customers will leave for cheap MVNO Voice service along with buying tablets they can download 4k on using unlimited WiFi. While many here will be thrilled by that, these carriers won't want to lose that business. So, they'll either keep unlimited plans as is (or possibly raise the rate slightly), or they will go to a less expensive per GB data rate model of around $2 to $3 per GB, though I'm not discounting the possibility of it starting off at $5 per GB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Once that demand is met by device manufacturers, it will be the responsibility of the carriers to have networks that provide well enough for it, based on that demand.

A company’s responsibility is to its shareholders.

 

As a shareholder, my view is that no one needs 4k on their phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A company’s responsibility is to its shareholders.

 

As a shareholder, my view is that no one needs 4k on their phone.

 

Carriers must have compatibility with devices also, vice versa, in agreements between carriers and the device manufacturers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I am not saying anyone needs 4k. I know many of my posts are long, but I've made a good effort here lately to post no more than two or three medium length paragraphs. Many of my posts lately only being one medium length paragraph, which I can tell when they are being read now by the responses and the likes I receive in the notifications area.

 

However, some of you are misreading what I'm saying. I'm not even advocating people watch 4k on their devices. The fact is that many people are going to do it no matter what anyone, including people on S4GRU have to say about it. Also, if the carriers currently offering unlimited remove unlimited and start charging over $5 per GB, many of these customers will leave for cheap MVNO Voice service along with buying tablets they can download 4k on using unlimited WiFi. While many here will be thrilled by that, these carriers won't want to lose that business. So, they'll either keep unlimited plans as is (or possibly raise the rate slightly), or they will go to a less expensive per GB data rate model of around $2 to $3 per GB, though I'm not discounting the possibility of it starting off at $5 per GB.

1) carriers charge mvnos wholesale rates, not retail. The diff is that retail rate is higher to pay for advertising so if 'everyone' flees to mvnos, fine. Carriers still make money.

 

2) if (1) analysis is incorrect, carriers will just raise the rate they charge to mvnos. Simple.

 

Mvnos are basically the carriers' bitches.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carriers must have compatibility with devices also, vice versa, in agreements between carriers and the device manufacturers.

There can be compatibility. But carriers can still throttle the video stream to 1080p. Problem solved.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There can be compatibility. But carriers can still throttle the video stream to 1080p. Problem solved.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or manufacturers are putting 4k support into their devices because you can put your own videos on your devices. You don't have to stream them to watch them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or manufacturers are putting 4k support into their devices because you can put your own videos on your devices. You don't have to stream them to watch them...

I wish all the cell carriers would agree that nobody would be able to run 4k streaming over their cell network unless they buy a special costly plan.   There is really no need for the average person to tie up the network with a 4K stream.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should have added something to my mention of the MVNO part, when I said people might leave for an MVNO. I'm only referring for the wireless voice service, not the data. MVNO rates for data certainly are quite a bit higher than the carriers on any higher level data package.

 

My opinion is that people who need unlimited at a reasonable rate, those unwilling to pay current per GB data rates , likely would restructure the process of using data by preparing their device with whatever they need for while they are away from WiFi, by downloading content in advance. Sure it can be a hassle, unlike streaming, but its either that or pay higher rates. If there are a lot of people deciding the extra effort is worth it, carriers might lose enough customers to where they'll bring back unlimited data at a price that will be satisfactory enough to not completely lose these customers, or they will lower the per GB data rate.

 

I tried looking at some of Sprint's per GB plans a moment ago, but the some of the sections there are being updated. However, a list of the business share plans were visible. Sprint has a plan with 40gb for $135, which is only $15 over the equivalent rate of $3 per GB. I think that is a pretty good deal which quite a lot of unlimited data users would go for, and it includes tethering. If only that plan were available for consumers. Regarding 4k, if the carriers wish to block it, they will. I suppose we'll see if they do, and how consumers will respond to that. If it helps any, I have no desire to use 4k with wireless service, though I want a device with a 4k display that will be used for VR, like in the Samsung Galaxy VR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish all the cell carriers would agree that nobody would be able to run 4k streaming over their cell network unless they buy a special costly plan. There is really no need for the average person to tie up the network with a 4K stream.

More importantly, how big does a screen have to be before 1080p is insufficient?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More importantly, how big does a screen have to be before 1080p is insufficient?

http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter/  Use the form under the article and above the comments to see when an average person with 20/20 vision could see all the detail on screens of different sizes at different resolutions and different distances. 

 

Just for fun, I plugged in a 7 inch diagonal screen which is larger than all telephones have.  7 inches is actually the size of the smaller tablets.  The form states that you need to have your screen 2 feet or closer to see all the detail at 480p resolution and 1 foot or closer to see all the detail at 1080p resolutions.  It says you have to have the screen 0 feet or closer to see the detail at 4K resolution.

 

I do not know how close you like to keep your telephone screen from your face but I am guessing that you keep it 1.5 to 3 feet away when looking at it when watching video on it.  This means that your eyes likely cannot see the difference between 480p and 4k resolution.  You would have an even more difficult time seeing the difference if you were on a smaller screen than 7 inches diagonal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By vanko987
      I'm new to this forum, and I've seen people mention cell sites with specific ID's (for example, SF33XC664). Is there any significance to these ID's, and is there a way to decode them? Also, how do I figure out what the cell site ID's are for towers near me?
      Thanks! I'm excited to start talking on this site more 😀
    • By lilotimz
      Samsung Network Vision equipment are highly distinct and fairly easy to spot compared to the equipment that other vendors are deploying. Sprint is Samsung's first extremely massive American contract (baring Clearwire) so there  should be no issues in confusing these equipment for another carrier which happens often with Ericsson NV equipment.

      Below are images of Samsung equipment which includes antennas, remote radio units, base stations, and their mounting configurations. 
       
      Samsung antenna with eSMR 800 RRU & PCS 1900 RRU

      A close look at a Samsung setup





      Next Generation Samsung Configuration
      RRH-P4 4T4R 1.9 GHz  | RRH-C4 4T4R 800 MHz| RRH-V3 2.5 GHz

      Next Generation 8 Port Dual Band Antenna Setup 
      4 port 800 MHz RRH-C4 800

      (source: dkyeager)

      (source: dkyeager)
      Narrow beam setup

      High Capacity Site with 2 Antennas & 3 RRUs (2x PCS & 1x SMR).
      Second antenna is PCS only for now.


      Canadian IBEZ (NO SMR)

      Special Case PCS Only Setup for Canadian IBEZ




      Close up of standard antenna connectors 

      Samsung Cabinets

       
       
      Powerpoint slides from Samsung / Sprint
      *disclaimer - all  powerpoint diagrams and images were found through public municipality online databases and is by no means misappropriated through malicious means*
      *Credit goes to those whom took pictures of these equipment. You know who you are*
    • By kckid
      Sprint announced at MWC trade show in Barcelona that 5G will go live with 4 cities starting in May  (Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas and Kansas City )
      https://phys.org/news/2019-02-sprint-5g-network-chicago-atlanta.html
       
    • By ActionJacksonWX
      Sprint announced the MVNO Google Fi will use its network for 5G in a press release (that is, once there are actually 5G capable phones compatible with Google Fi someday):
      https://newsroom.sprint.com/sprint-to-provide-5g-wireless-services-for-google-fi.htm
       
      This is the first I've heard about Fi and 5G so far. Google has pretty much kept mum on the topic, so I'm somewhat encouraged.
    • By lilotimz
      Samsung TDD-LTE gear which are being utilized in Clearwire priority sites. .   Clearwire - Samsung TDD-LTE RRH SLS-BD106Q & Antennas           Samsung TD-LTE RRUs mounted behind BRS/EBS Antenna     Sprint 2500-2600 mhz TD-LTE Setup Note the Antennas are much thicker and fatter than the antennas being utilized by Sprint Network Vision.  
       

       
      Clearwire TD-LTE Base Station / Cabinet
      May be subject to change as TD-LTE sites start being integrated into the Network Vision setups.
       

       

       

       
      Happy Hunting!
        I'll clean the post up this weekend when I have more time.   Courtesy of Sbolen from Missouri market. Samsung TDD RRH SLS-BD104Q1
      Samsung TDD RRH SLS-BD106Q
  • Posts

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...