In-Home Wireless Vs. Mobile Broadband 199
mklickman writes "I've been hearing more and more about mobile broadband offered by the big wireless phone providers, and for the first time came to ask myself how it compares to using a wireless router. Since my wife and I both have laptops, and we're out a lot, would it be wise and/or worth it to do away with the standard cable-modem-plus-router setup and switch over to mobile broadband with (for example) AT&T or Sprint? I'm not really concerned about the cost of the PC cards themselves; they're not much more expensive than a decent router. Also, the cost of the wireless service per month is only (roughly) ten dollars more than my current ISP is charging me. Is it a good idea?"
Convenience vs Performance (Score:4, Informative)
How much do you download? (Score:5, Informative)
May lower class people use it to get broadband at the place they rent. They dont have to involve the landlord to get an cables installed and can take it with them when they move elsewhere.
The big killer is that here is Oz mobile broadband typically comes with transfer limits in the order of 1 - 4 GBs per month. After that it gets very pricey.
So assuming its the same in the US... I would only go mobile broadband if you dont plan on downloading movies/tv shows etc over the connection.
Depends. (Score:3, Informative)
1. How much data transfer do you do? A buddy of mine ran into trouble with Sprint for downloading craploads of ISOs on his connection. Your mileage may vary.
2. How good is the coverage where you live? Do you personally know someone using the service you're interested in, and if so, how reliable is their connection?
3. What operating system are you using? If you're running Windows you're probably okay for compatibility, but I had a fair amount of trouble using a couple of different broadband cards under Linux. I got them working, but only after significant hackery.
Just some things to consider.
Re:My experience... (Score:2, Informative)
Also, meant to say about the software trouble. I don't know what modem your provider would supply, but here in Ireland (and the UK as far as I know) all the providers use the Huawei modem. The Windows software/drivers is incredibly buggy. After a few weeks it needs to be uninstalled, reinstalled, during the reinstallation it crashes or can't find the drivers on the integrated flash memory and needs to be tried many times before success. I've tried this on a clean XP reinstall also.
I've heard that with a little manual configuration, it runs a lot better on linux. I'll be putting that to the test when my eeePC arrives. :)
Signal may be poor indoors (Score:3, Informative)
Traffic (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:5, Informative)
2. The question of DSL vs 3G has a very simple answer. The answer is a question in itself - do you have a home server and where does your traffic come from?
If your mail, media, etc is stored on a machine at home, 3G is shooting yourself in the foot. Your traffic ends up going all the way down to the GGSN at the mobile operator and than all the way back up to your kit at home (often through the narrow side of a cable or DSL). If all of your stuff is sitting in a colo somewhere or is on your laptop and you have good 3G coverage, than 3G can compete with DSL for the time being.
This is a definitely "for the time being" case because as more and more devices in the home become networked a device whose traffic has to travel across half of the country to connect to the rest of the kit becomes a white elephant.
I have ATT but... (Score:3, Informative)
If you go with ATT you probably have to buy an antennae to boost your signal. You are better off having the cheapest plan for your Cable/DSL service in addition to you mobile broadband card.
Re:Don't (Score:4, Informative)
While it is true the DSL is a switched technology and not shared like cable, that only applies to the wire from your house to the DSLAM. At that point it aggregates and the ATM uplink is most certainly oversubscribed.
DSL oversubscription is just one hop up the line, as opposed to cable, where it is oversubscribed from end to end. Not much difference, really.
Depends... (Score:5, Informative)
The relative price you mentioned of mobile broadband vs cable confuses me. You are either getting colossally ripped off for cable broadband or you are not pricing unlimited plans for your mobile broadband cards. Normally, unlimited plans are around $50/mo. Get it. Trust me. I've got a friend at Sprint who's got stories of peoples' laptops getting trojaned and winding up with a $2000 bill in the mail for bandwidth overage. And I'm assuming that you and your wife are each getting a separate plan.
Or let's say you've got an excellent signal and ridiculous speeds at your house, are not a warez monkey, and you want to share a single card between you and your wife. Well, you can get a broadband router which takes PCMCIA mobile broadband cards. I picked this Airlink 101 [airlink101.com] at Fry's for $80. It's got an Ethernet switch and is an 802.11b/g access point. Only problem is if one of you goes on a trip and takes the card the other will have to steal the neighbors' WiFi.
Nope. (Score:3, Informative)
I have been using a swiss provider's HSPA network for several months now and am not quite satisfied. The latency is bad (500~2000 ms ping rtt compared to 10-30 ms via ADSL1), availability isn't that great (often I can only get mediocre GPRS/EDGE speeds around 80-150 kbps) and the price's definately higher than a landline.
On the other hand, when HSPA works, it's great. An RTT of somewhere around 300 ms is possible and a sustained transfer rate of around 1 mbps is realistic (most of the network's 1.8 mbps HSDPA, being upgraded to 3.6; so I expect 2 mbps real bandwidth in the near future). Also, I've got this nice subscription where you pay a monthly flat fee (some 20% of an average 3 mbps landline or 2 GB WWan plan) plus a small fee per day of usage (some 7% of said landline or 2 GB WWan plan). Whenever possible I'll use public WLans and my private VPN server, limiting my WWan use to some 5-10 days per month.
Verizon's EVDO (Score:3, Informative)
Wireless cards Vs wired (Score:3, Informative)
The most important thing you need to ask yourself is what is the intended use for these cards.
If you are surfing the net, skyping, watching UTube etc, then the wireless datacards (current generation) offer enough bandwidth to give a very comfortable feeling (comparable with cable).
If you are a very heavy net user, looking to have max speeds, then maybe you should be thinking about a more dedicated solution.
As to the actual speeds you will get, this all depends on the carrier and your location. ie 7,2MBps is the current "rated" download speed for the current generation of technology, but that is reduced if you are uploading at the same time. (ie it is approx 7,2Mbps shared for upload/download - NOT really, but it is close enough to make this comparision). Also, the datarate will depend on if the carrier has deployed a network in your area. If not, you will be dialed down to highest rated speed in the area (typically EDGE). Edge is ok for surfing normal pages, but you will get some lag if you are doing large downloads, etc.
The really nice thing about 2G/3G datacards is the flexibility. No matter where you go, where you are in the world you, once you can get a standard mobile phone connection, you have access to your internet/emails etc. Personally, this is fantastic for people "on the go".
Other thing to be cautious of - check to see if your service is "per Mbit" or flat fee per month. If you are paying "per Mbit", then you can be big bills if you are not carefull. The "flat fee per month" version is excellent if you can get it.
Overall, I love these cards, but be carefull of what you sign up for.
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:5, Informative)
Just wanted to clear that up for anyone following this for bandwidth curiosities.
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:4, Informative)
That said, a friend of mine used UMTS for his home connection for about a year. He used the broadband at work for big transfers and the UMTS cap was high enough to let him browse the web (including videos of kittens on YouTube) and check his mail from home.
Re:How much do you download? (Score:5, Informative)
It's not just gaming either - web surfing is much faster over ADSL than 3G. While you can get pretty good download speeds out of 3G, the latency means it takes a while to build up to the full transfer rate (TCP slow start). Most web pages don't have content large enough that you'll get to full speed, so the browsing experience feels more like "good dialup" than it does "mobile broadband".
You could also consider getting a phone with internet access that allows "tethering" (at least, I think that's what the kids are calling it these days) so you can access the internet using your laptop via the phone's 3G data service. At home (in .au) I have ADSL2+ in my apartment and 500 mB/month via 3's "X Series" package. It costs me an extra $20/mo but means I do have internet access on the go without the expense of a separate mobile broadband plan. Using your phone for it also means you can have basic internet access even if you don't have your notebook with you, which can be handy.
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:3, Informative)
I get the purple light (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:2, Informative)
1) Home is DSL that has a consistent 4 - 4.4Mbit, and
2) Sprint EDO card for mobile that gets from 700kbit to 2 Mbit (average is 1.2Mbit).
Using the EDO cards in lieu of hotel high cost Internet saves lots of money. In fact I get better speed with the EDO card than the hotel's notoriously slow Internet...that is no doubt. At home I would rather have 4 - 5Mbit speed....it really makes a difference and speed is an addiction.
I also have to comment that it is certainly nice to go anywhere and have the EDO card instead of always fighting to find a WiFi spot that does not charge. Most airports still do not have free WiFi, and even all the coffee spots still charge although not as much as airports.
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:3, Informative)
I've not seen a non-HSPDA signal in a built up area in the UK for some time (on vodaphone as well), and have even had 3G on a remote hill in Wales. Dropping to GPRS is next to unheard of.
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:4, Informative)
While Pilkington-K and similar treated doubleglazed windows (not just any doubleglazed) drop the signal a bit, it is not the windows that are a problem. It is the tech in itself and the coverage. You need a non-congested Node-B to get anywhere near HSDPA speeds. As the number of clients on the Node-B grows the speed drops in x2 steps because even idle clients use parts of the code tree.
So as the tech is becoming more and more popular the network becomes worse and worse. As a result you can probably still get HSDPA speeds out there in residential suburbia. Getting HSDPA speeds in downtown lodnon, at railway stations or any other place where there are loads of clients (even non-active ones) is practically impossible.
Re:How much do you download? (Score:2, Informative)
That said, AU is definitely ahead with mobile billing. In the US, they charge you for everything on the phone - IN AND OUT. Which means you receive (or make) a phone call? you pay for it. You receive (or send) a text message? you pay for it. They have plans with X text messages free, but since a lot of phone companies offer an email -> text message interface, it is quite possible to run up someone's bill by making a program that will send emails to a subscriber's email -> text message address, and give them like 5000 text messages in the month. And the subscriber has no choice but to pay for it. I've always been against being forced to pay for what you receive on a cell (mobile) phone as far as voice calls and text messages. Mobile internet is a different story of course.
Also, in the US, you can get residential internet speeds MUCH faster than what you can get on mobile broadband. Mobile broadband tends to be on the low end of 'high speed'. For example Verizon BroadbandAccess (which I have) advertises 700kbit, with bursts up to 2mbit. And this is approximately accurate. However you can get the Verizon FiOS (fiber to the home) service, and get up to a 50mbit connection (I have 20mbit, and have verified the speeds are accurate). This in itself is also forcing cable companies and other DSL providers to up their offering, which is why cable is all about saying 'You can get 10mbit!' or advertising their 'boosting' options to go up to 20/50/etc (though the big problem with cable is its a shared pipe, if your neighbours are flooding the line, your connection suffers - not so with DSL or FiOS).
In the US at least, the speed gap between 3G and residential broadband is huge, and getting bigger.
And to the original post, I'd recommend Verizon's BroadbandAccess. You will note that in the Sprint/AT&T ads, they NEVER mention Verizon, because Verizon's coverage is better, and their speeds are better. And their AUP is less draconian (though it still 'forbids' use for P2P applications and running a server though it, but Verizon also tends not to filter anything so doesn't enforce said AUP much unless it puts a strain on their network).
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:3, Informative)
Indeed. I work in a metal framed two story building with reinforced concrete walls and floor to ceiling windows with
low-e [wikipedia.org] coatings. Signal quality was zero bars before they installed wireless repeaters.
The answer to the original question is simple - if you aren't home often, go with the 3G card. But beware that your speeds will be fastest now and drop as more and more people sign up for data services.
Re:Convenience vs Performance (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Don't (Score:3, Informative)
Actually there is one very important difference: with cable, each customer is connected _directly_ to the shared medium, so it is possible for a single user to saturate it (this is GOOD as long as the protocols allows the link to be shared fairly). With DSL this is not possible because the uplink from the DSLAM (100+Mbps) is much faster than an individual line to a subscriber (2-6Mbps). It would take many subscribers all downloading at the same time to saturate that link, and it might never happen if the link is faster than the peak actual usage of the sum of all subscribers.
I'd still take cable over DSL because even though I am contending directly for bandwidth with other users, my speed would still much faster 99% of the time. Less deterministic maybe, but who cares as long as it's faster? Unfortunately neither is available to me, but I have a long-range 802.11 link which works OK.
As a side note, people seem to be really confused about what it means to be "oversubscribed". It doesn't mean "there isnt enough bandwidth for everybody". It means that there is some ratio > 1 of total last-mile bandwidth to total uplink bandwidth. Just as the main breaker in your house might have a 100A main breaker, but if you add up all the individual breakers you might have 300A or more. There's nothing wrong with it and you will always have enough power provided that the main breaker is larger than the _peak_ load. Really it's meaningless to complain about oversubscription per se - that is the right thing to do and will happen no matter what. The issue is just how much bandwidth is available to a given user at a given time and there is no "right" answer for what an oversubscription ratio should be. Depends on the type of network, the needs of the users, budget etc. It's not a right/wrong question.