Let me clarify.
There has been a lots of perception that 3G broadband can be compared to your Streamyx at home. Well that is totally wrong. First of all, the 3G technology was never built to replace fixed broadband service. It was built to allow faster Internet speed with light surfing on your mobile phone. Fixed line services such as Stremayx was built to handle heavy traffic such as video, heavy downloads and more.
To make their 3G investment more profitable, the 3G operators has extended the 3G Internet access for use on computers.
Who should use 3G mobile broadband?- Those who use WiFi in Starbucks or Coffee Bean
- Those who require Internet access while on the move(not at home or travel frequently)
- Those who use light Internet services such as web browsing, emails, Youtube without HD, social networking, reading online..etc
- Not for heavy downloaders (such as P2P)
- Those who don't use it for than 6-8 hours a day
- Not for gamers
That is why the telcos are limiting the usage of 3G mobile broadband to control the data traffic on the network. This is expected to continue since bandwidth/backhaul/maintenance is expensive on a 3G network.
It is time that the mobile operators put in more effort to educate consumers on this matter rather than thinking of ways to sign up more broadband users and hog up the network.
You can compare Streamyx to a technology like WiMAX since WiMAX is built for Internet.
Are you the right mobile broadband user?
13 comments:
totally agree with u..
You know why people are comparing 3G mobile boardband to streamyx? because streamyx not done well in their fixed line services. so, people will try to look for better services provide from other operators.
stop selling usb modem to be use on desktop/laptop. focus on mobile browsing service only.
i the only one (among my fren) who could appreciate gprs connection, all i want is mobility connectivity. before i start to use 3g, i only use gprs and never complaint about it. i use it for email, light surfing, instant messaging.
then when 3g come to malaysia, its a bonus to me, because i expect i can have faster internet connection. but, what happen nowadays is really frustrating me, everyone want to terminate their streamyx and start migrate to 3g broadband.. resulting serious network congestion..
at the end, i switch back to gprs/edge to enjoy stable but slow connection.
We'll have to agree to disagree then. If 3G is supposed to be a niche elite market, then it's not the user dishing the dough in hope of some sort of Internet connection that ought to be blamed when they make noise about congestion. Especially when alternatives to Streamyx is plain non-existent. Blame it on the cel cos advertising it as "broadband" and charging a premium for it. IMO it ought to have been called "Mobile Phone Internet", not one word less or more, if light use is its intention. I see none of the 3G ISPs doing that, with the worst offender being a certain someone's favourite cel co which keeps touting itself the fastest widest greatest...
But here's the thing, Kugan. I don't Torrent, I don't download large files too often, I simply use 3G "broadband" to stay connected, watch online news, surf websites, upload photos. When 3G cannot even guarantee me a smooth experience doing those supposedly light online activities, when I am expected to pay a premium, you cannot rightly expect people to just put up or shut up because "it's the technology". Especially when there is no alternative. Remember that 20mil+ of the population does not live in the Klang Valley.
@Diesel Electric,
That is the reason of this post. To ensure that the telcos get their msg right to the consumers.
I agree with you that even light usage can't guarantee a good experience on 3G Broadband.
Until we have heavy downloaders on a 3G network, you won't be able to enjoy a good Internet service.
I recently did a download test on one the telco's network about 4am in the morning, the speed I achieved was between 4Mbps-6Mbps. The msg here is, if everyone use 3G broadband for the right reason, we will be able to enjoy a better internet experience.
P.s: Please don't ask me which telco..:P
I'm not totally agree to ur opinion, if 3G not use in broadband, than why need to deploy LTE 4G technology?
@ Qin : we are now talking 3G tech. not talk about 4G aka LTE ...
we said 3G not for PC to heavy online. read carefully b4 reply ...
if our fixed line service provider can provide us a speed between 4Mbps-6Mbps. i don't thing we need to use 3G technology to access for heavy data.
we are pay for better service, not limit our self to fit telco's service with their our problem.
@Kar Siong
ok, if 3G not for mobile broadband, why need to develop HSPA+ ?
HSPA+ has a highest speed of 56Mb/s downlink...
@Qin Yes u are Right. Both are "Mobile" we now TALK 3G ... 3GGGGG. we said 3G not for Laptop broadband.
and u said is 4GGGGG HSPA+ also mobile and it not NOW. and it is maybe 3 or 5 year FUTURE ...
now is 3.5G NOW NOW ... Get it ?
we talk NOW. not Future ~~~ lol tak ade mata ... tak faham faham ...
not to be bias ... only sharing
enjoy our Wireless Broadband. mind the FUP ... hey hey ~~~
There should be a seamless service between Fixed and Mobile broadband services. 80% of the time you're in fixed location, so should access via fixed infra. Only when you're on the move or mobile you should roam on 3G. That's why I would like to see more interworking between telcos. Only then, the fixed/mobile convergence can be a reality.
@Kar Siong
har?
as i known, HSPS+ is 3G...
LTE-ADVANCE and IEEE 802.16m(WiMAX Release 2.0) barulah 4G, bukankah?
Hi, Kugan,
It's true the 3G BB is not the same as fixed BB. Mobile is not meant to replace fixed BB. The bandwidth of 3G, WiMAX etc. is inherently lower than that of fixed.
2 points I don't agree at all. But thanks for the effort - intention is good but I'm sorry to say that you are mis-educating your readers in this article :)
Any broadband access (be it WiFi, 3G/4G, WiMAX or in fact any access) can and should be used by subscribers for any applications they like - as long as they paid for it. No one (especially the operator) should confine who should and shouldn't and how and what to use 3G broadband. Whether the network can cope is the operator's problem. If network can't cope, then it should not offer the BB service and profit from it in the first place.
So the operator could continue to sign up subs, and have to get their network right BUT NOT to tell the user how to use their BB.
Secondly, about WiMAX and Interent. Both WiMAX and 3G support mobile data. As a newer standard/technology, WiMAX adopted many IP-based protocols. Including VoIP. Just like 4G (LTE) will adopt even more IP protocols. But to say one is more suited for Internet access is incorrect.
No offence - I feel compelled to raises these points - for better understanding of mobile broadband.
Cheers,
Kar Ann
Post a Comment