1. Daniel.Black's Avatar


    Do you have crappy 3G wireless coverage in your home or office and your carrier is AT&T? Well you are in luck! AT&T announced today [AT&T 3G MicroCell] that they have the answer. All you need is to do is buy the AT&T 3G MicroCell ($150) and then connect it to a broadband internet connection that you provide. WHAM now you have good AT&T 3G wireless service in your home.

    Seriously folks Iím not making this up!

    3G MicroCell Features:

    Read the full story on our site and comment here on CB:
    AT&T Wants You to Spend $150 to Make Their Network Better | MobiMadness
    09-21-09 06:38 PM
  2. codito's Avatar
    That article's stupid. It's like UMA but easier for at&t. $150 isn't bad for guaranteed solid 3g coverage at your house all the time.
    09-21-09 07:04 PM
  3. theanswer3's Avatar
    Yeah plus 20 per month if you want unlimited calling as well. I love that.
    Last edited by theanswer3; 09-21-09 at 09:45 PM.
    09-21-09 07:13 PM
  4. moosc's Avatar
    Verizon and sprint already offe something similar. Att late to the party.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-21-09 09:29 PM
  5. theanswer3's Avatar
    TMO does too
    09-21-09 09:45 PM
  6. Artemis68's Avatar
    That's hilarious...really.

    What about saving yourself some $$ and getting a wifi router to use with your 3G device if it supports Wi-Fi? Granted, you can't make calls over Wi-Fi with AT&T but you're probably getting EDGE coverage at the least so that's set.

    @theanswer3

    Yeah, tmo does have something similar...only it's just a Wi-Fi router. They try to make it look all special but really, it's just a router. You can make calls over any wifi router with the right phone. 9.99/month for unlimited Wi-Fi minutes but that's not required....if you don't have it, wifi minutes deduct just like normal minutes.
    Last edited by Artemis68; 09-21-09 at 09:50 PM.
    09-21-09 09:46 PM
  7. gschaefer612's Avatar
    VZW's is 249.99 (199.99 for VIPs) and it adds 5k square foot of service for voice. But really most people dont need it for VZW since they are superior. WHen I had my kid Iphone I needed wifi to get decent data in my house now I get 3g from VZW 5 bars, to each their own, but its a good idea for those who like thier provider yet want reliable full service connection
    09-22-09 03:43 AM
  8. TvTechGuru's Avatar
    I refuse to accept this kind of technology. If the service isn't good where I need it, I'm finding another carrier. I may sound like a greedy tech brat but were getting to the point in capacity and cell industry where the providers need to fill in those dead zones that lie in the suburbs. It's no longer acceptable to only have great coverage in major cities or metropolitan areas. Is this asking to much? It's ashame but were getting spoiled with great coverage in certain areas so when we don't get it in others we pout. I know I do.

    I'm guessing the 3 providers doing this for a cheap solution for those complaining about coverage problems in their home.

    P.S. I am leaving Sprint soon because of this. Coverage is great in the main city/metro areas but terrible in the suburbs where I live.
    Last edited by TvTechGuru; 09-22-09 at 05:50 AM.
    09-22-09 05:46 AM
  9. Fibofan's Avatar
    Seems funny to me. All the carriers need to do is put a small VOIP software on the phone and everyone can instantly use their own Wi-Fi to improve their in home coverage. Although this would not make money for them so instead they sell femtocell devices for lots of money. Hello Google voice on my BB!! Another reason Wi-fi is better than just 3g.
    09-22-09 06:27 AM
  10. jd6102's Avatar
    VZW's is 249.99 (199.99 for VIPs) and it adds 5k square foot of service for voice. But really most people dont need it for VZW since they are superior. WHen I had my kid Iphone I needed wifi to get decent data in my house now I get 3g from VZW 5 bars, to each their own, but its a good idea for those who like thier provider yet want reliable full service connection
    VZW is only better for some people. In my are and more importantly my house. Verizon is completely SOS. No service what's so ever. Sprint works sometimes and Tmo only works on wifi. AT&T is the only carrier that works well in my city. And it works at my house. So for you to say that VZW is far better that's all amatter of your opinion, and your location.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-22-09 06:47 AM
  11. Timelessblur's Avatar
    I refuse to accept this kind of technology. If the service isn't good where I need it, I'm finding another carrier. I may sound like a greedy tech brat but were getting to the point in capacity and cell industry where the providers need to fill in those dead zones that lie in the suburbs. It's no longer acceptable to only have great coverage in major cities or metropolitan areas. Is this asking to much? It's ashame but were getting spoiled with great coverage in certain areas so when we don't get it in others we pout. I know I do.

    I'm guessing the 3 providers doing this for a cheap solution for those complaining about coverage problems in their home.

    P.S. I am leaving Sprint soon because of this. Coverage is great in the main city/metro areas but terrible in the suburbs where I live.
    You have to remeber that it will not be possible for the carrier to cover every dead zone in the suburbs. You cities that will not let the companies put up new towers so thar limits things. Also you have deal with hills and building that block signal.
    That or your home just eats cell signals for breakfast like my friend's house does. Out side the house 5 bars all carriers step in side and you drop to 1 bar and limited to slow text messages only. There is nothing short of one of this home network extenders that will solve this problem. the reason cell signal die in the house is because of all the metal heatshield in the roof blocks most wireless signals.

    Just some reasons why they can not cover everywhere subs are a pain dealimg with cities be much more difficult to allow ugly towers going up.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-22-09 08:56 AM
  12. fabuloso's Avatar
    Id rather have a portable mini-femtocell (Like what vzw and Sprint) to carry around to give me wi-fi in spots i might need it if i am traveling in crappy coverage areas.
    09-22-09 09:20 AM
  13. theanswer3's Avatar
    I refuse to accept this kind of technology. If the service isn't good where I need it, I'm finding another carrier. I may sound like a greedy tech brat but were getting to the point in capacity and cell industry where the providers need to fill in those dead zones that lie in the suburbs. It's no longer acceptable to only have great coverage in major cities or metropolitan areas. Is this asking to much? It's ashame but were getting spoiled with great coverage in certain areas so when we don't get it in others we pout. I know I do.

    I'm guessing the 3 providers doing this for a cheap solution for those complaining about coverage problems in their home.

    P.S. I am leaving Sprint soon because of this. Coverage is great in the main city/metro areas but terrible in the suburbs where I live.
    Whats funny is everyone wants the deadzones in the suburbs to be covered by the carriers, but no one wants a cell tower in their neighborhood making it look ugly. Its one or the other, there has been many examples of a carrier trying to build a tower close to or in a residential area, and the neighborhood freaks out and votes it down. You can't get the coverage you seek without towers.
    09-22-09 10:07 AM
  14. papped's Avatar
    Verizon and sprint already offe something similar. Att late to the party.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Except that the Verizon version still uses your minutes, offers no unlimited calling option and both the Verizon and Sprint versions don't support EVDO...

    So yeah, while these services are kind of a ripoff due to paying to use your own bandwidth, this isn't really worse than the other versions.

    I got a Sprint Airave sitting in the closet btw if anyone wants it cheap...
    09-22-09 02:14 PM
  15. FYDave's Avatar
    AT&T is just late to the party of, "Let's have our customers pay for the fact that we can't can't extend service to lots of places."

    I think it's kind of bull that this is being offered by any carrier for lack of better cell phone service on their part.
    09-22-09 04:47 PM
  16. papped's Avatar
    I think it's kind of bull that this is being offered by any carrier for lack of better cell phone service on their part.
    I'd even be ok with the hardware cost. But subscription to use your own bandwidth to carry the calls? That's some crap.
    09-22-09 07:05 PM
  17. chrischoi's Avatar
    Sprint so has them beat. Free and $0/month. Haha. I guess it is required. I'll stop talking.
    09-22-09 08:06 PM
  18. TvTechGuru's Avatar
    Whats funny is everyone wants the deadzones in the suburbs to be covered by the carriers, but no one wants a cell tower in their neighborhood making it look ugly. Its one or the other, there has been many examples of a carrier trying to build a tower close to or in a residential area, and the neighborhood freaks out and votes it down. You can't get the coverage you seek without towers.
    Hey I don't care, put one in my backyard, better service for me at home, lol. There are ways to compromise, you don't have to put the tower right next to homes. Usually there are neutral zones that are close to residential areas where towers could be put. It's just the local municipalities and townships that give the providers a hard time and lots of red tape.
    10-02-09 05:34 AM
  19. amofiav's Avatar
    FYDave.... did you read the post above explaining why cell phone complanies aren't able to cover all dead zones?
    10-02-09 06:16 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD