AT&T 3G MicroCell: A Comprehensive Exploration
by Brian Klug on April 1, 2010 1:55 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- AT&T
- Microcell Review
- Mobile
Conclusions
If you're stuck in a location with absolutely no coverage, the 3G MicroCell is undoubtedly going to improve coverage, and to that extent, it does what it's supposed to do. On the flip side, if you're somewhere with relatively consistent coverage, the MicroCell is only going to frustrate you with its inconsistent at best call handover performance. As far as data is concerned, unless you have a compelling reason to, it makes more sense to use WiFi instead of 3G for both performance and battery reasons. It's definitely a feature to build a real 3G stack on the femtocell, especially when the competitor offerings are essentially voice-only 2.5G offerings, but performance is still much greater over WiFi than HSPA is, yet.
It's obvious that there are still a number of lingering problems with the MicroCell. The MicroCell's relatively abysmal handover performance is something which absolutely must be addressed before nationwide rollouts start in mid April, hopefully even before then. It's a challenging engineering problem, but customers are going to expect that installing what amounts to a cell tower in their home improves performance and coverage no matter what the case - handovers need to be just as transparent as they are elsewhere. There's no excuse for anything less. While we haven't tested Samsung's CDMA solution for Sprint and Verizon or T-Mobile's UMA, it's a fair bet that unreliable handovers are just as frustrating of an occurrence.
In the broader scope of things, there's the very real expectation that femtocells are the solution to our looming spectrum crisis. Unfortunately, this current iteration of devices doesn't let you transparently build out the public cellular network in a manner that benefits everyone - in fact, a lot of people think femtocells do just that. In the case of the AT&T MicroCell, you benefit a maximum of 10 possible people, four at a time. Verizon and Sprint offer 100 and 50 respectively, and a maximum of three at a time. Numbers like these aren't going to come close to mitigating load in even dense urban environments, because you can't share your femtocell. In a lot of ways, T-Mobile's decision to go with UMA - which is constrained solely by WiFi capacity - makes a lot of sense. In fact, it's probably a better power savings to just run one radio on the handset instead of two, and WiFi handovers from AP to AP are largely a solved problem with enterprise gear.
Subscribers that simply want to improve coverage for everyone, perhaps in return for being able to roam on other femtocells while moving around, this current generation of devices isn't going to satisfy. Femtocells are still in their infancy, hopefully in time we'll see apprehension about letting other phones use your bandwidth (in turn improving the network for everyone) gradually erode away. Until then, if signal is absolutely abysmal in your home or office, they're a very practical solution.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
63 Comments
View All Comments
dkapke - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link
I can't speak for what AT&Ts plans are, but I think what a lot of you aren't seeing, at least in terms of Sprint, is I LOVE their femtocell. Not because I can't get service or have crappy coverage, but because it allows UNLIMITED calls. I can get their cheapest plan, eliminate the home phone, and so long as I'm not driving between 6a-6p all of my calls are free. I work from home so this is great.So, all of you saying this is AT&Ts method of uncongesting their network - yes, that's true. But you're missing a very valid argument FOR these - unlimited calling. I guess you have to determine how often you're at home and how many minutes you use at home before night/weekend calling kicks in, but for those of us who work from home, these are awesome and well worth the $20. Oh, and when my kids come down for the summer and spend all day on the phone while they're sitting around at the house...yeah...it pays for itself very quickly.
echtogammut - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link
They even collaborated with AT&T on this one : http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/why/3gmicrocell/...Seriously, what really gets me about this, is I installed a booster for the last company I worked with because they were not able get calls when more than 5 data phones were in the building. I called AT&T to see if I could work with them about setting up a device similar to the microcell and they transferred me to an engineer that warned me off boosting the signal. Not that long ago they called me and offered this device to fix my reception issues and charge me for another service plan... no thank you, the booster is working fine.
kamikaze56 - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link
I agree with all you guys saying that you wont pay for a monthly cellular bill, buy your own "cell" wich uses YOUR own internet connection.. But just remember a few facts:- First of all, this device is aimed to people who have very low to zero coverage on their house/workplace and DONT want to change carrier (Or cant due to contracts), it is not aimed to people who can change their carrier at anytime..
- Second, most of the "negative" review on this article was found on location 1 (Location in urban area, with a really good coonection, crowded spectrum etc) remember, this device is aimed to locations with Zero to Really bad coverage
- 3rd and most important: Yes, you are paying your bill, you are paying by your own cell and using your own internet connection but remember, you are just using like 1/50 part of your connection in order to REACH THE CORE NETWORK, what happens in the core network and forward its still being done by the carrier (And this part of the communication process is the one that costs more), so your basically paying for using this core network. If you dont agree with this.. DONT BUY IT
kidboodah - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link
There seems to be a misunderstanding on the pricing of this.You pay $20 a month for unlimited minutes while connected to it. This includes up to 4 simultaneous connections.
So let's say you have a 1400 FamilyTalk plan, with 4 lines. That's $109.99 per month normally. Add the Microcell and you have Unlimited talking from home for $129.99 for all lines.
Compare this to an Unlimited Family Talk plan for $70+50+50+50....and you're saving $100 a month.
It's definitely worth the initial cost for alot of customers who are on Family plans and want unlimited service from home -- while ALSO giving them full signal strength.
taltamir - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link
there is no such thing as a radius in square feet.Square feet is used to describe the area.
Since the area of a circle is Pie*r^2 then ((5000 ft^2)/pie)^0.5 = r
or a radius of 39.89 feet
Brian Klug - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link
Oops, that's a typo! Fixed!-Brian Klug
Ardric - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link
The TCP and UDP ports you've listed are only used for provisioning, when the device boots. They don't carry the voice traffic. There's no use in bothering with them. Especially HTTPS -- do you really want to elevate that for your banking site too!?The voice traffic is on the IPsec tunnel, and that's carried by the ESP protocol. ESP is IP protocol 50. There's no port number.
So ignore the TCP and UDP ports and prioritize on ESP, preferably in combination with the particular AT&T IP addresses. That's how you should set up your QoS matching.
Brian Klug - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link
You're totally right about the provisioning ports being used only for initial setup, but the device is using IPsec NAT-T, which is definitely 4500/UDP.To be honest, all my QoS rules prioritized the device in general - I'd say doing it with a static DHCP lease IP address or MAC addy makes the most sense.
Cheers,
Brian Klug
SmCaudata - Friday, April 2, 2010 - link
With T-mobile I have UMA on my phones so I can make calls anywhere I have a wireless signal. I don't need an extra box in my home AND I can use it in the deepest basement of my work.AT&T sucks. The iPhone is the ONLY thing they have going for them.
leexgx - Friday, April 2, 2010 - link
at any time did you use 2g only (set the Phone to 3g off) as i find 3g/HSDPA mostly unreliable (more so on the Iphones not so much on windows phones with HSDPA off) problem is most phone makers set the Hand over to GSM or 2g for there phones to low and i find 3g has more problems with weaker signal (if should move to 2g when signal is below 20% back to 3g when above 35%, as when 3g gets to less then 10-20% it seems to be unreliable)