Posted 11/20/09 at 08:10:29 PM by Ryan Whitwam

You may not be aware, but Qualcomm holds a number of patents on modern 3G cellular technology. Any company making a 3G cell phone has to pay patent royalties to Qualcomm. Analyst Sanford Bernstein pointed out in a report this week that Apple appears to be taking advantage of a licensing loophole to avoid paying all those fees for the iPhone. The loophole is estimated to save Apple $290 million in fiscal 2009 alone.

Licensees must pay 5% of the wholesale price of a 3G device to the patent owner. Qualcomm’s website lists over 145 companies that have licensed their 3G technology. The list includes all major makers of 3G handsets. The one notable exception? Apple. One surprise on the list is Foxconn, the Taiwanese manufacturer of the iPhone.

The Bernstein report says that Qualcomm is being paid royalties not on the price Apple charges (average $590), but on the unit price Apple pays Foxconn, a mere $244. So instead of making $23.60 per iPhone, Qualcomm is only seeing $9.70. Apple is able to get away with this because the entire manufacturing process is done externally. Qualcomm seems fine with the arrangement. After all, $9.70 per iPhone is pretty good considering how they fly off the shelves.

Read More

Posted 11/20/09 at 06:36:43 PM by Ryan Whitwam

In the wake of a major service outage a few weeks ago, fourth place US carrier T-Mobile may be shopping around for investment money from another US cell provider. Compared to the other US carriers, T-Mobile has a very small 3G footprint. Recognizing a need to expand, rumors indicate that parent company Deutsche Telekom is courting the likes of MetroPCS, Clearwire, and even AT&T.

Any of these investors would receive a small stake in T-Mobile in exchange for investment to expand their network. MetroPCS is of particular interest as the smaller carrier uses the same odd 1700Mhz 3G frequency that T-Mobile does. Collaboration with AT&T would be risky due to possible anti-trust allegations. AT&T is the only other GSM carrier in the US.

Deutsche Telekom’s T-Mobile UK was recently forced to merge with Orange UK. Could their US arm be headed in the same direction?

Read More

Posted 11/17/09 at 09:00:34 AM by Paul Lilly

Did you think Verizon would back down from its 3G map ads after AT&T hit the wireless carrier with a lawsuit? Not gonna happen. Instead, the ads keep rolling, and so do the jabs, including one that was filed in response to the suit.

"AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon's 'There's A Map For That' advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon's ads are true and the truth hurts," Verizon's lawyers wrote in a 53-page Memorandum of Law.

The document went on to defend Verizon's position that there's no way the wireless carrier is confusing or misleading customers about AT&T's coverage because "each ad speaks of 3G coverage repeatedly, [and] the maps used in each are clearly labeled 3G."

For a 53-page court document, it's actually a fun little read, and Engadget believes that's entirely by design, pointing out that this was probably drafted with publication in mind. After giving it a once-over ourselves, we'd have to agree.

Give the PDF a read here, then hit the jump and tell us what you think.

Read More

Posted 11/16/09 at 07:35:58 PM by Ryan Whitwam

AT&T has just started selling a handsome pair of 3G equipped netbooks running Windows 7 Starter. While there’s certainly nothing wrong with the Acer Aspire One, or the Samsung Go, the value proposition here isn’t the best.

Each unit will set you back $199 after a mail-in rebate and new two-year agreement. Factor in the cost of data, and things start looking bleak. AT&T offers a $35 per month plan with a laughable 200MB monthly data cap. The more expensive $60 per month plan has a more reasonable 5GB monthly limit. It works out to a total cost of $1,639 over the two years. Now consider that it’s only running Windows 7 Starter, meaning you’re missing some of the neat Windows 7 features like Media Center and well… changing the wallpaper.

The value may not be great, but if you need a netbook with built in 3G, these are fine machines. Alternatively, you could just opt for a USB data card and cheap netbook from elsewhere. Better yet, wait for Pine Trail based netbooks to make the scene. Is anyone planning on swinging by the local AT&T store to investigate further? Maybe take that Windows Anytime Upgrade for a spin?

Read More

Posted 11/12/09 at 06:37:28 PM by Ryan Whitwam

Verizon sure isn’t letting up with their new anti-AT&T ad campaign. Likewise, AT&T isn’t letting up with their legal threats. AT&T’s latest strategy swung into action on Wednesday night when they asked the federal court in Atlanta to order the ads pulled from the airwaves.

The ads (which we’ve discussed before) compare AT&T 3G coverage with that of Verizon. AT&T claims that the maps used in the ads are misleading because they do not show AT&T’s 2.5G EDGE network, instead displaying empty spaces. In a statement AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel said, “If customers think they can't make calls in the vast majority of the country ... that could do us irreparable harm."

The newest ad is holiday themed, borrowing from the story of the “Island of Misfit Toys”. Poor iPhone is a misfit because it is cursed with an inferior network… how sad. Big Red hopes the holiday season will be a good one for their new line of smartphones. Is that wishful thinking?

Read More

Posted 11/11/09 at 07:34:07 AM by Paul Lilly

By now you've probably seen one of Verizon's ads taking shots at AT&T's comparatively dismal 3G network coverage. Even if you didn't, AT&T has, and the wireless carrier has accused Verizon of not telling the whole story and misleading the public.

AT&T contends it's unfair to show 3G coverage maps from the two carriers side by side because it makes it look like AT&T doesn't have service in most areas. The maps only depict 3G zones, ignoring AT&T's existing 2.5G network, which is sufficient for email and other tasks portrayed in the commercials. The bottom line is, the ads are accurate in terms of 3G, but neglect to tell the whole story. Is that misleading?

AT&T thinks so, and as we previously reported, the wireless carrier has dropped a lawsuit on Verizon's lap. How that plays out will be for the courts to decide. In the meantime, expect the ads to keep rolling, especially with Verizon's Droid attracting so much attention.

Read More

Posted 11/09/09 at 04:55:50 PM by Pulkit Chandna

AT&T plans to deploy HSPA 7.2 in six US cities by the end of the year. Today, it took a small step towards that launch by announcing a new 3G LaptopConnect device from Sierra Wireless. Compatible with HSPA 7.2 and called the AT&T USBConnect Lightning, the USB stick will become available on November 22. It will be available for free with a data plan of at least $35 a month. AT&T will be upgrading its existing 3G network to HSPA 7.2 in Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles and Miami before the end of this year, with further plans "to reach about 90 percent of its existing 3G network footprint with HSPA 7.2 by the end of 2011."

Read More

Posted 11/03/09 at 07:33:11 PM by Ryan Whitwam

Verizon thought they were so clever. Big Red’s recent “There’s a map for that” adverts seem to have ruffled some feathers over at AT&T. Now AT&T has filed a federal lawsuit against Verizon for false advertising. The issue comes down to the maps shown in the commercial.

The ad compares 3G coverage areas for the two wireless providers side by side. The red Verizon map, of course, looks much more filled in. AT&T’s map looks sparse by comparison. What many less savvy consumers might not follow is that this is only showing AT&T’s 3G, not EDGE. While Verizon’s entire network is 3G, AT&T still has significant areas covered only by slower EDGE service. AT&T claims that the ad leads people to believe that AT&T does not have coverage at all in the un-highlighted areas.

Indeed, the original version of the ad said that AT&T users outside the highlighted area were “out of touch”. Verizon removed that line and noted that non-3G voice and data were available, but AT&T still wasn’t happy. It’s not really an enviable position for AT&T to be in. They have to argue that Verizon should be making it clear that the AT&T network is available in more places – it’s just very, very slow. Everyone settle in, this might be entertaining.

Read More