Details on AT&T's 3G MicroCell: everything but the date and price
By Chris Ziegler 
posted Jan 25th 2009 10:31PM
posted Jan 25th 2009 10:31PM
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
What is an AT&T 3G MicroCell™?
AT&T 3G MicroCell acts like a mini cellular tower in your home or small business environment. It connects to AT&T's network via your existing broadband internet service (such as DSL or cable) and is designed to support up to 10 3G capable wireless phones in a home or small business setting. With AT&T 3G MicroCell, you receive improved cellular signal performance for both voice calls and cellular data applications, like picture messaging and surfing the web for up to 4 simultaneous users.
Device Features:
* Enhanced coverage indoors - supports both voice and data up to 5000 square feet.
* Available unlimited minute plans - Individual or Family Plan.
* 3G handset compatible - works with any AT&T 3G Phone.
* Up to 4 simultaneous voice or data users supported.
* Device is secure - cannot be accessed by unauthorized users, easy and secure online management of device settings
* Seamless call hand-over - start calls on your 3G MicroCell and continue uninterrupted even if you leave the building.
Device Requirements:
* 3G wireless phone/device
* Broadband service over DSL or cable
* Computer with internet access for online registration
Additional Information:
* Installing your device near a window is strongly recommended to ensure access to Global Positioning System (GPS). A GPS link is needed to verify the device location during the initial startup.
* The 3G MicroCell device is portable. The device may be moved, provided the new location is within the AT&T authorized service area and properly registered online.
I know the box has the label "Cisco" but keep in mind that Cisco has an investment in IP Access (http://www.ipaccess.com/company/investors.php), which is one of the leading femtocell companies. AT&T typically doesn't like to associate publicly with small (aka unknown etc) companies for products that will go into the homes and businesses of millions of people, so it's possible they cut Cisco into the action for the branding/service/support part. At leas this is what was reported in or about April 2008, so unless something has changed...
I would actually trust buying it more with a Cisco label on it than Samsung (which is what Sprint and Verizon use, according to the article). I know this is made by a third-party that Cisco owns (partly) but it still gives me confidence they put their name on it. Network hardware is still the bulk of their business and I can't see them wanting to tarnish their reputation by putting out junk.
Of course they bought Linksys for home/SOHO network hardware, but in my experience Linksys routers were mostly really good, so I would have bought a Linksys home router anyway. I sure wouldn't have bought a Samsung...
Alcatel-Lucent, not Cisco
So does this only give me better coverage in my home? I have an iPhone 3G now, but when I had a BB Curve on T-Mobile, I had their H@H service and w/ the $10 monthly charge, I was able to make all the calls I wanted to over WiFi and they don't count towards my minutes (and I still get the coverage enhancement since I have WiFi all over my house). Would AT&T's offering be something similar?
Similar concept in that they both allow you to make calls over your existing internet connection, but different implementation. Your T-Mo product sounds like it was using a VoIP client on your phone to route the call through your WiFi.
This product (called a femtocell) on the other hand, is a hardware appliance running a VoIP client on your LAN, and serves up a small GSM network to extend AT&T's network in your house. Your phone calls still go through your phone's GSM antenna instead of its WiFi antenna, but then get converted to VoIP at the appliance.
RG: Just to correct a possible misconception: T-Mobile's implementation is technically VoIP in the sense that your voice is being transmitted over IP packets, but that's not really a fair description of how UMA works. UMA is, essentially, GSM over IP. So, yes, unlike AT&T, it's using a Wifi radio for local access, but the phone is essentially treating "The Internet" as yet another tower, which means that the implementation is essentially transparent from an end-user standpoint.
UMA has advantages and disadvantages over femtocell implementations like the AT&T one. The major advantage is that it works anywhere. If you're in a coffee shop with Wifi in Amsterdam, you can tell your cellphone to use that connection, and then start making calls without incurring huge roaming charges (indeed, if you pay T-Mobiles H@H subscription, your calls to the US are free at that point.) It's also carrier independent, meaning that if someone has a Wifi hotspot in their building, anyone with a UMA-enabled phone and an operator that supports UMA access can use it.
The major disadvantage is that it only works with a limited range of phones right now. I'm fairly disappointed T-Mobile hasn't used its muscle to force manufacturers to ship Wifi built into all their phones, but, oh well.
What I'd like to see is a proliferation of both femtocells and UMA, but that's not going to happen at the moment as it appears most people see these as competing technologies.
Why is 2G GSM harder to do over femtocell than 3G?
Probably because GSM is a pulsing (timed) signal and the hub has to find the synchronizing frequency to communicate on whereas (W)CDMA is a continuous signal.
That's because the GSM cells uses different small ranges of frequencies (called carriers) to differentiate one cell site from another, so when the operators installs a new cell they has to reconfigure all the surrounding cell sites in order to have different frequencies, otherwise they will cause interference to each other. in 3G (WCDMA) the sites can all use the same frequency (a big carrier of 5 Mhz) but each cell site has a distinctive code that identifies them, so when they put another cell they has to make sure that the codes are different and that is much more easy to do than changing the frequencies. A new 3G cell can cause some small interference to other sites even with different codes, but the people will use this microcell on indoor environments, where the main coverage is very poor and hence ther will be no interference at all.
I just wish the U.K. networks would hurry up and get their backsides in gear on the femtocell front. Just moved into an old train station house where every wall inside and out is 3 foot thick stone. Safe to say there's no signal indoors at all (also has been a pain setting wifi up with me having to end up using powerline products to get internet around the house).
Only similar thing i've seen are mobile repeaters, but dubious on whether they work. This kind of things sounds like it would be perfect.
Hopefully this one doesn't have a location lockdown. The nicest thing about T-Mobile's @Home is the fact that it's usable anywhere in the world. And because it'd be nice to have proper 3G out here rather than that "TD-SCDMA" stuff.
Not that WiFi is 3G, but the speeds are up there.
Alas it'll HAVE to have a location lockdown. The issue with femtocells is that they need to know what frequency to operate upon. AT&T uses different frequencies in different parts of the country, and in some parts of the country has no frequencies at all. As femtocells use licensed spectrum, the FCC isn't going to approve of their use unless they're designed only to use the frequencies the operator is allowed to use.
Unhacked Femtocells will never be a solution to roaming issues. And hacked femtocells will almost certainly be illegal to use where-ever they operate. Sorry.
it is locked down by GPS
http://www.wireless.att.com/dcom//English/staticContent/html/help_ATT3GMicroCell_cms.html
I was thinking there must be a way to hack these things, like disable the GPS so you can use it wherever, or at the very least use a spectrum of your choosing.
I live in an area where AT&T only has 1900 MHz licenses, which means in building coverage is lousy. It would be nice to trick it into using 850 MHz. I don't care about blah blah blah interference, I just want to try it. If it works, it works. If not, owell. I least I know how to hack a femtocell.
Anyone heard how to do that?
I'm more curious if it does HSDPA or the future implementation of HSUPA
I'd rather have wifi calling like T-Mobile. I probably won't use this, I get good coverage at my house and I never use up all my minutes on the $40 plan, so I have a ton of rollover minutes that I will never be able to completely consume.
and like their network .....
Their website is down for maintenance.
Yeah- i think att's official line is that the link to this site was shared with people who weren't supposed to advertise it.
so, now we have a website with no deets.
and just try to buy one from att. they have no clue.
it's not official. but i can't wait until it arrives!
Talked to a ATT rep in store and confirmed they can oder online for $250.00 as of 1/31/2009
were you able to order one?