AT&T customers seeing sudden boost in EDGE speeds?

Endgadget ^ | Jun 28th 2007 11:23PM | by Darren Murph

[Swordmaker]

Shortly after beginning the shutdown process of AMPS and TDMA networks, and just hours before the launch the EDGE-capable iPhone, a number of users are reportedly seeing dramatic increases in EDGE throughput. After questioning whether the mobile was actually using WiFi, a New Yorker began to see if fellow AT&T customers across the nation were also noticing the substantial boost in speeds; sure enough, it looks like quite a few others are seeing speeds upwards of 200Kbps. Of course, the usual banter over the legitimacy of speed tests conducted on mobiles inevitably ensued, but we're leaving it up to you. So, dear readers, hop on AT&T's 2.5G highway and give it a go, but be sure to return and let us know whether the increases are for real.

Update: We tried some speed tests on an EDGE handset ourselves, and though it's been a little inconsistent, we've been shocked to find a number of runs over 200kbps. True, these kinds of speeds are theoretically possible (actually, little known fact, the ITU technically defines EDGE as a 3G standard), but we'd never expect to see them in practice. Should make the iPhone's browsing experience a little more bearable if it holds up!

[Swordmaker]

[Swordmaker]

AT&T boost EDGE internet speed in advance of today's iPhone launch... PING!

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.

[SamAdams76]

This might explain why AT&T spent most of the past few months quietly installing new towers and equipment across the country.

Apple is not a stupid company (at least not since Jobs took back over again). I knew they were not going to hang their new "bet the company" product out to dry by sticking it with a crappy network.

It is just like Steve Jobs to let the criticism (of AT&T's slow network) build, putting their competitors at ease, and then at the last minute, pulling the rug out from under them by having AT&T roll out their enhanced network at the last minute!

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

This might explain why AT&T spent most of the past few months quietly installing new towers and equipment across the country.

You knew that? Can that be why AAPL went up by a third a couple of months ago? Seems like it would have been rumored, if it were driving the AAPL price . . .

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

It is just like Steve Jobs to let the criticism (of AT&T's slow network) build, putting their competitors at ease, and then at the last minute, pulling the rug out from under them by having AT&T roll out their enhanced network at the last minute!

. . . but would it have been in AT&T's interest to hold back the information, thereby holding down the performance of its network, until a specific date for the iPhone launch? It would seem that AT&T got seriously in bed with Apple if that's the way it came down. T agrees to spend a gigabuck or something, upgrading its capacity specifically for the iPhone, and waits for the iPhone launch to roll it out?

What's the price of T doing???

[SamAdams76]

I'm thinking that it was a "just in time" thing. It was a well-known fact that AT&T's network was greatly inferior to the Sprint network (which I use and find very fast) and upgrading this network was likely a condition of Apple going with them in the first place.

I'm thinking Apple held AT&T's feet to the fire on this and forced them to deliver (the faster network) before the iPhone launch. Maybe Apple even had a clause in the agreement giving them an "out" if AT&T failed to deliver by a certain date.

What I can tell you is that if AT&T didn't do something to increase their pokey speeds, the iPhone launch would have been a fiasco as Apple would have been crucified in the media by unhappy users.

I knew something had to give and that Steve Jobs likely had something like this up his sleeve all along.

[SamAdams76]

I'm thinking that it was a "just in time" thing. It was a well-known fact that AT&T's network was greatly inferior to the Sprint network (which I use and find very fast) and upgrading this network was likely a condition of Apple going with them in the first place.

I'm thinking Apple held AT&T's feet to the fire on this and forced them to deliver (the faster network) before the iPhone launch. Maybe Apple even had a clause in the agreement giving them an "out" if AT&T failed to deliver by a certain date.

What I can tell you is that if AT&T didn't do something to increase their pokey speeds, the iPhone launch would have been a fiasco as Apple would have been crucified in the media by unhappy users.

I knew something had to give and that Steve Jobs likely had something like this up his sleeve all along.

[SamAdams76]

I'm thinking that it was a "just in time" thing. It was a well-known fact that AT&T's network was greatly inferior to the Sprint network (which I use and find very fast) and upgrading this network was likely a condition of Apple going with them in the first place.

I'm thinking Apple held AT&T's feet to the fire on this and forced them to deliver (the faster network) before the iPhone launch. Maybe Apple even had a clause in the agreement giving them an "out" if AT&T failed to deliver by a certain date.

What I can tell you is that if AT&T didn't do something to increase their pokey speeds, the iPhone launch would have been a fiasco as Apple would have been crucified in the media by unhappy users.

I knew something had to give and that Steve Jobs likely had something like this up his sleeve all along.

[IncPen]

3rd time’s the charm...

: )

[tubebender]

Good job. Threefers are very rare...

[SamAdams76]

Must have been my fast SPRINT connection!

[af_vet_rr]

What I can tell you is that if AT&T didn't do something to increase their pokey speeds, the iPhone launch would have been a fiasco as Apple would have been crucified in the media by unhappy users.

And the last thing AT&T wanted was Steve Jobs saying "sorry, we thought AT&T could deliver". I would imagine AT&T would suffer a huge drop in their price (not to mention revenue) if Jobs came out and said something like that.

I'm not buying an iPhone, but I am unfortunately an AT&T customer, and so will benefit from it.

[politicket]

They can increase the speed of EDGE all they want to. The fact that Apple failed to put 3G into their flagship phone product makes it second tier. There is absolutely no comparison between 3G speeds and EDGE, no matter how much they tweak EDGE.

[Swordmaker]

The fact that Apple failed to put 3G into their flagship phone product makes it second tier.

The coverage that AT&T offers for 3G is miniscule compared to their EDGE coverage. In addition, the 3G chips are power hogs that would drain the batteries far too fast. Finally, there are licensing issues with the 3G chips that have currently caused the US Government to put a moratorium on importation of the chips. Could be a problem.

[politicket]

The coverage that AT&T offers for 3G is miniscule compared to their EDGE coverage.

That is true. You can't get 3G speeds out in the barn in Topeka, Kansas, but most major metropolitan cities (where business centers are located) have 3G coverage - which smokes the socks off of EDGE. When I'm not in a major city then my Cingular 8525 reverts to the old technology of EDGE. Apple sure made a big mistake in not offering 3G. It's like putting a hyundai motor in a ferrari.

[politicket]

In addition, the 3G chips are power hogs that would drain the batteries far too fast.

This could definitely be a problem for the iPhone, since Apple likes to make products where the consumer can't even change the battery.

My Cingular 8525 has an easily accessible battery and works great for long lengths of time while surfing at my blazing 3G speeds.

I hope that I meet someone with a new iPhone over the next few days. We can have a competition to see whose phone downloads a web site the fastest. And then, I'll tell them how much I paid AT&T for my 8525 versus their iPhone. What fun it will be...

[Swordmaker]

I'll tell them how much I paid AT&T for my 8525 versus their iPhone.

You paid... $350.00 The suggested retail for it is $599 with only 64MB of flash RAM. Now purchase 4GB of additional RAM cards... how much? AT&T wants $80 each for 2G cards (I know you can find them cheaper)... that's $350 plus $160 = $510. What does your unlimited internet access cost per month?

[SamAdams76]

This could definitely be a problem for the iPhone, since Apple likes to make products where the consumer can't even change the battery.

That's actually an urban myth. I've replaced iPod batteries three times over the past five years with a minimum of difficulty. I actually like having the battery where it is because the other gadgets I have, I usually end up losing or breaking the battery compartment door. With the iPod, everything is sealed in tight.

[politicket]

I don’t buy AT&T’s accessories. That would be foolish. I pay $40/month for unlimited data.

[politicket]

That's actually an urban myth.

That's great for you that you can find the battery. How many non-geeks can say the same? The fact is, Apple makes a simple thing like changing out a battery a pain for a lot of people.

[politicket]

P.S.: - Minor point, but the 8525 has 128MB of Flash ROM.

[SamAdams76]

Not a pain at all. Take the special tool provided and simply work the cover loose. A non-geek can do it in 30 seconds. The battery is then exposed.

[Swordmaker]

P.S.: - Minor point, but the 8525 has 128MB of Flash ROM.

The listing I found on the Web said 64MB... but they could have upgraded later models.

[Swordmaker]

I don’t buy AT&T’s accessories. That would be foolish. I pay $40/month for unlimited data.

The iPhone's rate is $20 a month over comparable minute calling only plans.

[politicket]

That’s OK...At least I get good value on my data plan using my 8525. I sure wouldn’t be able to maintain all of my business dealings with an iPhone, even at $20/month.

[Turbopilot]

I'm averaging about 150kb/s with the dslreports.com speed test. Not too shabby! If it's true that this is as a result of the iPhone rollout, I guess I'll see some advantage to the iPhone after all. If Apple wants to pay for a faster connection on my Windows Mobile device, I'm all in favor of it.

Having said that, I'm still wondering how people justify paying $600 for marginal improvements to technology that's been on the market for over a year now for $200. Well, I'm not really wondering; I understand the magic of Apple marketing, and I fully expect to get flamed for pointing out the exact content of the Emperor's wardrobe. I would just hate for those who haven't tasted the koolaid to think that something new or different is now on the market.

[Swordmaker]

I'm averaging about 150kb/s with the dslreports.com speed test. Not too shabby!

Sounds slow but usable. AT&T said they invested $50 million in upgrading their EDGE servers to T1 connections.

[Turbopilot]

Do you know the theoretical maximum for an EDGE connection? The Wikipedia entry says the theoretical maximum is 473kb/s for eight timeslots but doesn’t state whether all given EDGE devices would be compatible with that speed. Is there a spec for EDGE devices?

[politicket]

The iPhone's rate is $20 a month over comparable minute calling only plans.

Hi Swordmaker,

I just discovered that we're talking apples and oranges with regard to data plan pricing. The reason that I pay $40/month is because I own my business and access my corporate email from my 8525.

The $20 plan that is advertised for iPhone is available to all Cingular customers and includes unlimited web and email access, but not email access to corporate servers. They just added XPress email to the $20 option, so you can use that option if you want.

My data plan price is different because my needs are different. The iPhone offers absolutely no advantage in that area.