4G to replace cable and DSL?

4G. The next generation of wireless telecommunication. Carriers are in a mad rush to get new, faster tech radiating our airwaves, whether it means rolling out entirely new spectrum, namely LTE, or adding bolt-on tech like HSPA+ to GSM standards, which is debatable as to its branding as true 4G. Either way, in order to compete, consumers, aware of the the technology or not, want to hear "4G" next time they're due for a new phone.

However, amid the branding wars and eventual mass rollout by all carriers a version of 4G, I question it's usefulness and real impact for mobile phones, 4G's primary focus.

Let me explain.

Greater bandwidth in any case at any time is always a good thing. So, just as the competition is heating of for 4G, in the virtuous nature of capitalism, the carriers are pushing full-steam ahead here in the US for the fastest speeds they can manage. That way somebody can claim alpha-dog status and gain a bunch more customers. Hooray for all that.

The only issue I see with the whole thing is that everyone is touting 4G availablity solely as a faster network for your phone's data. I don't know about you, the amount of data I consume on my phone is but a pittance of the gigabytes upon gigabytes of data I consume on my home network.

I have an iPhone 4 and a contract with AT&T for my 3G data. But to be honest, the speeds I get with that, which can sometime get up to 3Mbps here on the outskirts in Atlanta, is entirely sufficient for any phone. That's plenty for streaming Netflix on the go, but almost everywhere else you'll use your smartphone probably has WiFi access. So, my question is, when is 4G, or later on, 5G, wireless data going to eventually replace my home broadband connection?

With WiMax, the idea is already there, except that is a data-only connection, meaning all voice calls mean VOIP, which is great, but there's no streamlined VOIP integration for cellphones quite yet. I assume because carriers make tons of money selling "minutes" and texting plans.

LTE and 4G technologies of the like should at some point be everyone's main broadband connections, both at-home and on the go, consolidating our telecom bills into one.

For the savvy tech user, maybe there are a few people that use 3G hotspots for all their data at home, but two problems exist there. For one, 3G is too slow for home use and external network devices are required, i.e. tethered cellphones, MiFi hotspots, or USB network dongles/adapters. And there lies the problem for at-home wireless access today: you have to pay for both the network modem or router for your home connection as well as the extra costs for a non-subsidized non-cellphone plan.

This may be pipe dream, but once LTE becomes widely available, I'd want a Verizon plan that allows me an iPhone 5 with 4G access along with a subsidized at-home router, effectively replacing my current setup of two bills, one for mobile 3G, the other for DSL.

Sounds good. Now let's just hope we can do all that with low latency and speeds around a consistent 5Mbps+.

Lol.

New Apple goodies aren't that goody Pt.2 -- The new Apple TV

For those that were hoping to finally cancel their cable or satellite subscriptions on the hopes that Apple's new Apple TV would revolutionize your home entertainment system, think again. Apple unveiled, along with its new iPod lineup, a tiny black box they call the new Apple TV. With many expectations and rumors about what exactly the updated Apple TV was supposed to be, I can comfortably say that what they announced this past Wednesday, Sept. 1 will be considered underwhelming at most.

The former Apple TV was already a slick device. Super slim, compared to other set top boxes with similar capability in the market, the ATV already had a gorgeous design that made anything else look cheap and dated. The new one, however, has dropped even more heft (and consequently more features), leaving something resembling a hockey puck one-fourth the size. On the back is a power jack, HDMI, digital audio out, and Ethernet, along with internal Wi-Fi for networking. Gone is the internal hard drive for storage, which eliminates the need to sync with your computer, rather being a completely streaming solution. Of course, the previous generation could receive streaming content just as well.

Besides physical design, the new Apple TV is not much different than what it replaces in terms of features. It adds only two: Netflix access for Netflix subscribers and AirPlay, which lets you stream media from other iDevices like the iPad. Other than that, the only thing Apple announced along with the new set top box is a different pricing scheme for movie and TV show rentals ($0.99 per HD TV episode, $4.99 per HD movie). The point is, nothing revolutionary here. And we've had a good three years since the first Apple TV to imagine all the great things this little box could bring to our TV sets.

I own an Apple TV -- the previous generation -- and must agree with Mr. Jobs when he says that customers love it. It’s definitely a great accessory to add to your home entertainment system, but I have always known it was underpowered and extremely limited in features. Apple knows that the only thing keeping the Apple TV selling and distinguished as a separate product than, say, a Mac Mini, is the remote-accessible front to the iTunes Store that can’t be found in any other Mac’s Front Row software. Front Row is the remote-based media navigation software included in every Mac, very similar to Windows Media Center in functionality. However, Front Row cannot access the Internet for content other than streaming iTunes Movie Previews from Apple’s website. Unfortunately there have been no reliable solutions to putting the Apple TV’s software on a Mac and also no real solutions to bringing the multi-functionality of a Mac to an Apple TV. However, with a few third-party solutions (ATV-Flash, Boxee), I've been able to squeeze a little more fun out of my set top box.

But even through these solutions, there has yet to be a Netflix app for the Apple TV. The only reason I can surmise that Netflix wasn't allowed on Boxee for the Apple TV would probably be for legal issues, but that I'm not sure about. So, with the advent of Netflix for the new Apple TV, its an enticing offer for customers that pay for it, but again, this is not revolutionary. In fact, this would be so very simple to bring to the previous gen. Apple TV with a simple software update. But I'm not sure that's going to happen.

I understand why Apple has made this new device. While admittedly a hobby to the execs at Apple, unlike the iPhone and iPad, the Apple TV wasn't meant for revolution. It was meant to get iTunes on your TV at a cheaper entry price of $99 instead of the previous $229. Granted, to accomplish that, some sacrifices had to be made. But given that the Apple TV hasn't seen anything real changes since it was released, I think most people were expecting a little bit more. I actually believed the rumors that the new Apple TV would run iOS and be able to run a lot of the different apps you find of iPhones and iPads. Amongst those: Hulu Plus, Netflix, Joost, and maybe even Facebook or Safari. I was expecting a complete revamp in the way Apple TV would be presented to the user: new UI and much more capability that could bring everything the internet had to offer to the "lean back experience" -- living room entertainment -- like how Google is trying to do with Google TV.


So what are we left with? Well, the new Apple TV is no show-stopper. It's smaller and cheaper, bringing a little more accessibility to internet content, but the emergence of a full-fledged online TV service is still far off. For now, we'll just have to sit and wait for the next guy to try their luck. Google's up next; maybe the Google TV platform can help bring this dream to fruition.