LTE Is Fast, But I Don't Care

The hottest thing in mobile data networking is most certainly “4G.”  The term itself has been quite nebulous with various carriers claiming to have “4G,” whether it be WiMax, HSPA+, or LTE.  Technically speaking, none of these technologies are true 4G - that moniker is reserved for technologies like LTE Advanced.  What gets lost in all of this marketing however are the technical differences between all of these and how the consumer can best take advantage of these faster speeds.


In speaking with many new phone buyers, it is clear that “4G” means nothing more to them than faster data.  AT&T confuses the issue further by advocating its “two layers of 4G network technology: HSPA+ and LTE.”  What is the consumer supposed to make of this?  I find it hard to believe that the average consumer understands that one of the 4G’s is slower than the other and that if your phone supports a certain 4G, it may not support the other.

My point here is not to attack 4G marketing in the United States.  Instead, I want to address this LTE fever pitch, especially from the perspective of the consumer.  I have used LTE on Verizon and while the speeds are fantastically fast, my feelings are tempered by the complete lack of network interoperability.  LTE is a derivative of GSM technologies and it uses SIMs to activate service on the network.  Despite this, an American consumer cannot use an AT&T LTE SIM in a Verizon LTE phone nor vice versa.  Even worse, Sprint’s LTE phones have an integrated non-removable LTE SIM further preventing any network migration.  This is all to say nothing about international LTE compatibility once other nations roll out their networks on various frequencies.

In many cases, HSPA+ is plenty fast and sometimes even slightly faster than LTE.  Beyond that though, it is completely interoperable across networks.  Until we see the equivalent of pentaband HSPA+ phones on LTE, I just cannot get excited about LTE.  In a way, I am glad that networks across the globe have been slow to build out LTE networks because it means that for the foreseeable future there will be high end, highly interoperable international hardware running on HSPA+.

I sincerely hope that American GSM carriers continue to build out and strengthen their HSPA+ networks in tandem with LTE.  It might be a pipe dream, but I am hoping for a day not too far in the future where the US carriers all use and allow interoperable LTE hardware as well as offer sensible, compelling prepaid LTE plans.  Until then however, I will be sitting pretty using my pentaband HSPA+ phones bouncing month to month between different carriers and MVNOs.

Untethered

A few weeks back, something amazing happened to me -- I finally freed myself from the clutches of the carriers.

For one reason or another, I had previously been locked into Verizon, and Sprint before that.  I had no gripes with either of these carriers per se, coverage was great, speeds were great, pricing was manageable, but there was a persistent feeling of constriction.  Even if I paid outright for my phone to avoid a contract, it's not as if I could take my phone to another carrier. After all, even if I had an unlocked world phone from Sprint or Verizon, any ability to achieve speeds beyond EDGE were artificially disabled to further confine users to one network.  Thus began my need to ditch proprietary CDMA technologies and run into the open arms of open GSM standard!

Surface for RT or Pro?

I was going to write a "my first post" post, but then thought, nah let's just jump right in!

I don’t think I have been this excited about Microsoft since the initial introduction of Windows Phone a little of two years ago.  This past week however blows that excitement out of the water.  Between the announcements of the Surface and Windows Phone 8, I couldn’t avoid the flood of Microsoft news even if I wanted to.

In particular, I am most excited to get my hands on a Surface tablet later this year. As someone who has owned all three iPads and having seen the slew of nondescript Android tablets hit the market over the last couple of years, I have to admit the tablet category was starting to feel a bit tired.  Sure there have been plenty of software enhancements and improvements, but form factors just have not changed.  All due credit to Asus for the Transformer(s), but the idea of trucking around a heavy keyboard dock along with the tablet does not offer any compelling reason to use it over a higher powered, feature rich Ultrabook.

The Surface asserts not only Microsoft as a serious competitor and innovator in the tablet space, it also satisfies my desire for a pure software experience running on first party hardware where the software and hardware are married in a way that OEMs simply have not been able to achieve with previous versions of Windows.  Of course all of us who are excited about the Surface are now posed with the ultimate question: RT or Pro?