Well it makes sense, really. AT&T have to deploy UMTS in the same frequencies they have GSM/EDGE (unlike european operators who got brand new empty spectrum for the job). So now that they've sold a couple million UMTS iPhones and people are sucking up data there, you need more capacity in your network.
EDGE is much less spectrum-efficient than UMTS. So they have their 5 MHz slot of spectrum - should they keep using it to provide 20 kbit/s or EDGE, or replace it with 500 kbit of UMTS?
EDGE uses otherwise *unused* 2GSM capacity, as long as people are using GSM, EDGE will be efficient to deploy.
This article is, frankly, completely ridiculous. There is no benefit to AT&T at all to force people off of EDGE. UMTS phones are more expensive, requiring higher subsidies, and UMTS has horrible spectrum requirements. In many areas, if AT&T tried to increase the amount of spectrum it is using for UMTS, it would to shut down the 2GSM network in that area altogether.
The most likely reason for slower EDGE, if, indeed, that's happening, is more people using the network, both for voice and data. That seems fairly probable: people are finally getting used to mobile data, and they're starting to use it seriously. I wouldn't doubt at all that AT&T is getting more data traffic than ever before.
“We're grateful that RIM has finally decided to pay some attention to the sizable number of non-PC users that have been stuck with poor alternatives for way too long.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Well it makes sense, really. AT&T have to deploy UMTS in the same frequencies they have GSM/EDGE (unlike european operators who got brand new empty spectrum for the job). So now that they've sold a couple million UMTS iPhones and people are sucking up data there, you need more capacity in your network.
EDGE is much less spectrum-efficient than UMTS. So they have their 5 MHz slot of spectrum - should they keep using it to provide 20 kbit/s or EDGE, or replace it with 500 kbit of UMTS?
EDGE uses otherwise *unused* 2GSM capacity, as long as people are using GSM, EDGE will be efficient to deploy.
This article is, frankly, completely ridiculous. There is no benefit to AT&T at all to force people off of EDGE. UMTS phones are more expensive, requiring higher subsidies, and UMTS has horrible spectrum requirements. In many areas, if AT&T tried to increase the amount of spectrum it is using for UMTS, it would to shut down the 2GSM network in that area altogether.
The most likely reason for slower EDGE, if, indeed, that's happening, is more people using the network, both for voice and data. That seems fairly probable: people are finally getting used to mobile data, and they're starting to use it seriously. I wouldn't doubt at all that AT&T is getting more data traffic than ever before.