foxfi for the GS3

[jonathanm1978]

I'd like to find a user (out of Members: 901,701, Active Members: 243,505 here on Android Central) that uses tethering as their primary means of internet in their entire home...I personally have never seen anyone say they do this, and I find it hard to believe this could be feasible, or viable.

The main problem with insinuating/assuming this is that the ping time is nearly 1 second, which is nearly as bad as satellite internet.
More devices using a tethered connection, slower it gets..and less data gets through without errors...someone might try using it on one computer -- tablet -- laptop..but for a long-term solution to internet needs...no, I doubt it. Seems more likely that you're just saying that to make your argument sound better against people who tether.

You really should be arguing against developers who do the rooting, not the people who use the functionality that comes AFTER rooting. Your entire argument is against people using open-source OS..fully open-sourced. Tethering is part of ANDROID, not something Sprint, VZW, AT&T and T-mo invented...tethering was around for AGES before the providers decided they could use that to charge people a second time around for something they've paid for already.

I can show C&P from my AT&T DSL bill from months that I don't do PS3 gaming and only do surfing the net where I don't use but 4 to 5 gigs per month. That is inclusive of my cell phone being connected to Wifi, and the Airvana that gives me Sprint service.

I pay for the internet that provides the data that's broadcasted via my Airave (3G data speeds)..does that mean that since I already pay for it through AT&T that I shouldn't be charged for data on Sprint???
I'd really like for this guy to answer this one for me...I'd like to know his answer.
If I turn off WIFI and use ONLY 3G in my home, in range of the AIRAVE...that AIRAVE is plugged into my DSL (or actually, it's plugged into my Buffalo High-Power router)...so the internet connected is provided..and the Airave just broadcasts the data that it's provided via my DSL connection.
How can Sprint charge me a data fee if I never leave home and only use the Airave for my phone to connect to??? I'm not even on Sprint's tower...I'm on a femtocell tower..and that particular data is already paid for via my AT&T bill...
So please, enlighten me on that...how can Sprint do that when I never hit their tower (assuming I stay home from the 6th of this month until the 5th of next month)...??

Again, it's a bandwidth issue, and bandwidth doesn't cost the carriers (or AT&T, or Comcast, or any other ISP) hardly ANYTHING. Bandwidth is almost GIVEN away...

 

[boomerbubba]

I'd like to find a user (out of Members: 901,701, Active Members: 243,505 here on Android Central) that uses tethering as their primary means of internet in their entire home...I personally have never seen anyone say they do this, and I find it hard to believe this could be feasible, or viable.

The main problem with insinuating/assuming this is that the ping time is nearly 1 second, which is nearly as bad as satellite internet

I have known of college kids in group houses who try this. Not a very satisfactory solution, but they think of it as "free." I have known adults who tether rooted while traveling. And I have seen several user comments in other forums and threads focusing on Sprint's new network under construction -- with ping times closer to 100 ms -- who think this will be viable for them for home Internet. I think they will be disappointed, mainly because I predict that Sprint will crack down more.

You really should be arguing against developers who do the rooting, not the people who use the functionality that comes AFTER rooting. Your entire argument is against people using open-source OS..fully open-sourced. Tethering is part of ANDROID, not something Sprint, VZW, AT&T and T-mo invented...tethering was around for AGES before the providers decided they could use that to charge people a second time around for something they've paid for already.

Well, Android is not that much good on an unconnected phone, and Google does not run the carriers. They have their own business models whether we like it or not. I'm not at all crazy about the structure of the U.S. telecom industry myself, but I am bound by the contracts I agree to.

No, I have no argument against rooting. I don't do it now, but someday I might. I do have a big problem with people who root their expensive smartphones and brick them, then commit insurance fraud to get free or subsidized replacements. That inflates the premiums for everyone else.

I can show C&P from my AT&T DSL bill from months that I don't do PS3 gaming and only do surfing the net where I don't use but 4 to 5 gigs per month. That is inclusive of my cell phone being connected to Wifi, and the Airvana that gives me Sprint service.

I pay for the internet that provides the data that's broadcasted via my Airave (3G data speeds)..does that mean that since I already pay for it through AT&T that I shouldn't be charged for data on Sprint???
I'd really like for this guy to answer this one for me...I'd like to know his answer.
If I turn off WIFI and use ONLY 3G in my home, in range of the AIRAVE...that AIRAVE is plugged into my DSL (or actually, it's plugged into my Buffalo High-Power router)...so the internet connected is provided..and the Airave just broadcasts the data that it's provided via my DSL connection.
How can Sprint charge me a data fee if I never leave home and only use the Airave for my phone to connect to??? I'm not even on Sprint's tower...I'm on a femtocell tower..and that particular data is already paid for via my AT&T bill...
So please, enlighten me on that...how can Sprint do that when I never hit their tower (assuming I stay home from the 6th of this month until the 5th of next month)...??

Wow. I don;t know quite what to make of that ramble, or how to respond. I am not Sprint. But I can't think of why anyone with an Airave at home would ever want to tether there at all. They would be much better off just using WiFi. And when you say "I don't use but 4 to 5 gigs per month" surfing on your DSL service, you should understand that would have a market value with a Sprint data plan of about $50-$60/month depending on the plan. So if you did use your "unlimited" phone to pirate-tether that amount of data, you would be cheating by about that amount in dollar terms.

Again, it's a bandwidth issue, and bandwidth doesn't cost the carriers (or AT&T, or Comcast, or any other ISP) hardly ANYTHING. Bandwidth is almost GIVEN away..

It is absolutely a bandwidth issue. But bandwidth is anything but free. In fact, bandwidth right now is very scarce. That is why our 3G speeds are so slow. Demand overwhelmingly exceeds Sprint network capacity, and it is no secret that speeds have been getting worse.

That will improve with the Network Vision rebuild. But the new bandwidth will not be free by a longshot. In fact Sprint, a company that now loses money, is deeply in debt to finance the new network. Whatever the new capacity is, I want it to be 100 percent available to support honest paying customers like myself, not pirates.

 

[jonathanm1978]

So you're saying the chart I just posted was designed by my 5 year old? Damn, can't you look at a graph and read it? Wait, let me guess, bandwidth for cellular costs more than bandwidth for home broadband, right? Because it's a different internet or something? Funny. Like I just showed, bandwidth is cheap and barely costs anything for them. Believe it or don't, don't care. And not understanding about the airave just shows that you don't get I what's being said. I just gave proof that broadband bandwidth is dirt cheap and accounts for VERY LITTLE of the bill we pay, but I guess that is not relevant here as well.
And again, I don't tether, or "pirate" as you have so named it.

If you did understand, you would know that bandwidth and capacity are TOTALLY SEPARATE AND HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER. Capacity is what causes network lag, not lack of bandwidth. The speed would be great if Sprint had the equipment in place to access it.

Swype'd with my Sammy Galaxy S3

 

[boomerbubba]

So you're saying the chart I just posted was designed by my 5 year old? Damn, can't you look at a graph and read it?

I didn't comment on that chart because I have no idea where it came from, who created it or what its context is. All I can tell from the labels is that is seems to describe some metric about cable-based internet, which has nothing to do with wireless.

The capacity metric that we care most about at any instant because it affects speed is some metric of bits per second downloaded or uploaded. When carriers charge for data, they typically charge by cumulative bytes transmitted over some longer period of time, such as a month. As multiple users share the name network channel at any given moment, that data movement will be fast or slow as a function of the bits queued to transmit through the bps capacity of the network. So that is how the two are related. That instantaneous capacity is a function of bandwidth. And bandwidth is usually quoted as some variant of bits per second. The capacity for wireless can only be as fast as its slowest bottleneck. In wireless data, that bottleneck might be in the RF channels, in the backhaul (historically copper landlines, now being replaced by fiber and microwave), in the carrier's core system or switching network, or in the Internet backbone. None of that infrastructure is free. Sprint is spending billions right now to rebuild its entire network.

I have no idea how the metric behind your cable Internet chart was calculated, nor how it is relevant here. The dollar prices for GB per month I am quoting are those charged by Sprint, a wireless carrier, to its retail customers. Data rates in terms of dollars per gigabyte per month are comparable for other wireless carriers.

(Your chart does not even make sense to me as far as describing cable Internet or DSL goes. It is captioned "Consumer pricing of Internet bandwidth per gigabyte" -- even though bandwidth is not usually quoted as cumulative data bytes transmitted, but as the bps rate of transmission. For example, the charted figure for AT&T's DSL service is $0.13. You say you used 4-5 GB per month with AT&T as your ISP. So your monthly Internet bill for that period from AT&T was only about $0.52 to $0.65? I don't think so.)

 

[jonathanm1978]

dude, you just don't fking get it.

I live next door to the DSLAM that provides me AT&T DSL.
NEXT DOOR.

The AT&T cell tower that's a mile away from my house, has a fiber line that runs FROM THIS DSLAM

That means that the internet/data is provided by the SAME DSLAM AND HUT THAT GIVES ME DSL.
DO YOU COMPREHEND? AT&T GIVES ME DSL...AT&T POWERS THE CELL TOWER 1 MILE AWAY WITH THE SAME FKING FIBER THAT FEEDS THIS HUT/DSLAM. COMPRENDE?
JESUS.

Let me guess..the internet that goes up to the tower is a different internet than what is sent to me, FROM THE SAME HUT AND SAME DSLAM?
And thanks for clearing it up that AT&T is cable..(ie, the chart).
At least try to understand...

 

[boomerbubba]

dude, you just don't fking get it.

I live next door to the DSLAM that provides me AT&T DSL.
NEXT DOOR.

The AT&T cell tower that's a mile away from my house, has a fiber line that runs FROM THIS DSLAM

That means that the internet/data is provided by the SAME DSLAM AND HUT THAT GIVES ME DSL.
DO YOU COMPREHEND? AT&T GIVES ME DSL...AT&T POWERS THE CELL TOWER 1 MILE AWAY WITH THE SAME FKING FIBER THAT FEEDS THIS HUT/DSLAM. COMPRENDE?
JESUS.

Let me guess..the internet that goes up to the tower is a different internet than what is sent to me, FROM THE SAME HUT AND SAME DSLAM?
And thanks for clearing it up that AT&T is cable..(ie, the chart).
At least try to understand...

What does any that have to do with the chart you posted, or with your attempt to make it prove that end-to-end wireless bandwidth is almost free? Is your AT&T ISP bill really $0.52-$0.65 per month as your chart would indicate? Are you an AT&T phone customer, too? Do they charge $0.13 per GB for wireless data because they get it from the Free Data Fairy? I would jump on that deal if I were you, if AT&T really does run its wireless service on its DSL multiplexers as you assume.

I don't believe such a deal is really available, though. And I don't think your incoherent ramblings have anything to do with the subject of tethering piracy on Sprint wireless. Your argument now is: AT&T has fiber backhaul available, therefore it is acceptable for Sprint subscribers to pirate tethered wireless service. That is called a non sequitur. You are just wrong at the top of your voice. The all-caps certainly make it all true, though.

 

[boomerbubba]

Duplicate post.

 

[jonathanm1978]

Don't care what you believe or don't believe. If I were so inclined, I could give you the phone number of the guy who helped dig the line under my driveway (yeah, that fiber optic 24-pair line that feeds the cell phone tower) and you could discuss your disbelief with him..
You can't believe that someone who actually KNOWS how this works has chimed in and you call the facts "incoherent" and "ramblings"...
truly shows the ignorance involved here...believe what you want..believe that the carriers are facing a shortage of bandwidth, and they build factories that produce 1-gallon buckets of bandwidth.....I really don't give two sh*ts what you think about where they get their bandwidth. I know for a fact that AT&T's cell tower is fed by AT&T's fiber line, which means they provide their own bandwidth.

Your ignorance really shines when you ask about me paying the same amount in the chart for my DSL...did you really just ask me if I paid the same price for bandwidth as what it COSTS the carrier/ISP?? Oh. My. God.

Really...please stop making yourself look more foolish.
You just can't deal with being faced with the facts and would rather believe that cell phone carriers pay out the ass for data that we use, when they do NOT...

This reminds me of people who used to argue that text messages cost something for the carriers, when it finally came out that actually text messages were free for them, and they were making a KILLING on texts by charging people on a per-use basis for them.

 

[boomerbubba]

Don't care what you believe or don't believe. If I were so inclined, I could give you the phone number of the guy who helped dig the line under my driveway (yeah, that fiber optic 24-pair line that feeds the cell phone tower) and you could discuss your disbelief with him..
You can't believe that someone who actually KNOWS how this works has chimed in and you call the facts "incoherent" and "ramblings"...
truly shows the ignorance involved here...believe what you want..believe that the carriers are facing a shortage of bandwidth, and they build factories that produce 1-gallon buckets of bandwidth.....I really don't give two sh*ts what you think about where they get their bandwidth. I know for a fact that AT&T's cell tower is fed by AT&T's fiber line, which means they provide their own bandwidth.

Your ignorance really shines when you ask about me paying the same amount in the chart for my DSL...did you really just ask me if I paid the same price for bandwidth as what it COSTS the carrier/ISP?? Oh. My. God.

Really...please stop making yourself look more foolish.
You just can't deal with being faced with the facts and would rather believe that cell phone carriers pay out the ass for data that we use, when they do NOT...

This reminds me of people who used to argue that text messages cost something for the carriers, when it finally came out that actually text messages were free for them, and they were making a KILLING on texts by charging people on a per-use basis for them.

Okay, lets agree to disagree. You keep right on believing your cut-and-paste chart from the unknown source -- which did not say "carrier cost" BTW, but "Consumer pricing". And of course, the best high-level technical and financial analysis always comes from the guy who digs the ditch at your house. All-caps makes anything true on the Internet.

 

[jonathanm1978]

Hah..the guy who digs the ditch? So, from "helped dig the line" you gathered he was a ditch-digger?
Obviously, I didn't mean the guy who ran the ditch witch...fking Christ guy.
I have connections with deployment engineers and project leads for AT&T who I get my info from...
where does YOUR info come from? Google?
You're funny, assuming that I would ask the guy to cut off his tractor to answer questions about fiber optic lines...


I've never seen anyone get so hostile when someone shows them they are wrong, it's amusingly funny when presented with factual statements that you have nothing else to rely on by saying it's "ramblings and incoherent"...

You get an "A" for effort though..at least you're trying by pretending to know something.

 

[jonathanm1978]

and too, I'm out...there's no point in this...
You ran into this thread like the data police telling everyone here how data costs the providers oodles of money, and how people who tether (after rooting which just gives the full functionality of the phone to begin with) are "pirates" and trying to convince them they are stealing something when they are NOT...they are merely using something they've already paid for in a way which the provider has found to make a profit...

Then you tried saying that the 1080P netflix movie on a laptop is a different size in data than the same movie on a handheld device...when it's not. Netflix downloads the same amount of data whether it's a TV, laptop, or phone...or tablet. So the same amount of data gets used for streaming a movie, listening to radio, whatever...
You've called people names, made statements you can't back up with facts, nor do you even know much about how cellular technology works to begin with, and it's really not worth continuing on on the back and forth when you refuse to educated yourself before trying to have a discussion on the matter...
You want to believe that providers pay some humongous premium for data, and that people who use the full function of their phone to tether it are some sort of vandals or thugs, then so be it..
I would think if someone showed you that the FCC has already ruled that just because a provider's data get's heavy use, it doesn't constitute damage to them. If someone was hacking the cellular network and using data, that's theft..people who have already paid for data aren't thieves...

Then when I showed the costs of bandwidth (so what WHO the cost is for), you made smart remarks about that too...and act like the data that comes from ISPs is different from mobile data..

OBVIOUSLY you don't know what runs underground to the cell phone towers to give them access to data...if you did, then you wouldn't make those statements you made..
I guess you think they can just throw up a cell tower in the middle of an island, and it's magically connected to the internet by...lemmee guess, wifi? Do they use a tethering app for that???
Funny stuff, but I quit..
Can't debate with someone who refuses to acknowledge facts, and won't do their own research before throwing out blanket statements.

Keep on preaching your "piracy" beliefs...maybe someday you'll find someone gullible enough to actually believe you and pay for something they've already paid for..

(it would be amusing to see what you think about me using a DD-WRT router as a repeater to give my neighbor my internet access so they can surf the web...since it's essentially the same thing...I pay for DSL, then I broadcast it to my neighbors house, use a router with DD-WRT installed to repeat my wifi signals inside his house, and he connects to that and surfs the web. I bet I'm somehow a pirate ..or maybe he's the pirate...but I've never used even half the data cap I get (150gb/month))

 

[boomerbubba]

and too, I'm out...there's no point in this...

Funny stuff, but I quit..

Keep on preaching your "piracy" beliefs..

1) Okay.

2) Okay.

3) Okay, I will. When Sprint and I agreed to "unlimited" data on my smartphone, I know I did not pay for unauthorized tethering, and neither did you. That is what the contract says. When I need to tether, I pay extra for that. The tetherers who don't are pirating. And if that includes you, I sincerely hope that Sprint discovers the violation and terminates your service.

Have a nice day.

 

[jmercadonyc]

Somehow it worked for me through Bluetooth. I restarted my phone tried wifi to no avail and then turned on Bluetooth DUN through Foxfi. I went into settings and connected my phone in the Bluetooth iPad menu. Then I turned on tethering in the g3 menu under settings/more/tethering/Bluetooth it then said I was sharing one device and I am using it now. I also turned off sprints automatic network setting. I just did it so I have not repeated. Hope it works for you

 

[stl_joe]

For someone who started this argument on ToS it sure seems you are very defensive about what other people are or are not paying for. Do you work for sprint? Maybe one of the customer support techs who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Turn to tab Q.... Quit whining!

IDC who the company is...anyone who sells me a service and then tries to dictate what device I use it with is out of their mind...or well in this case getting ousted from the business. Didn't they just well 70% stake to a Japanese firm...yes they did. Know why? They don't have the money to increase their network capacity... not a bandwidth issue. Too many subscribers not enough backbone.

As far as the tethering plan goes..shouldn't be long till that gets squashed like with the ma' bells. Remember when LD calls were ridiculous? Yeah.

Its real simple.. if tethering is hurting their 'unlimited data' then they would ban the user. They NEED the recurring monthlies.

And as someone who works in the industry. A cellular call whether voice or data is terminated the same way. It does not bounce from tower to tower. It hits the nearest tower, drops to land lines fiber or copper, is assessed a carrier fee if it isn't owned by the originating service provider and forwarded to its destination. The b2b transactions are enormous, but when you look at the markup tagged by your providers you will probably be ticked off.

That's why the FCC has so many regulations on the different land based carriers. The HAVE to provide colo's for the smaller providers and sell them 'bandwidth' @ wholesale/ bulk rates.

I rarely ever tether my phone, but when I do because flaws is crap on android or I just want to type a long message faster than I typed this on my GS3 I would rather jump on my laptop and knock it out in 2 minutes rather than the 8-10 it took me to type this.

Bottom line is I pay for a service. Access to voice and data ... unlimited voice and data. I carry 5 lines and shell out a couple hundred a month, so when a provided tries to nickel and dime me to death...I get a bit irritated. Oh and BTW.. I also have business class internet at home and pay a premium for that too. Its blazing fast, but I would much rather use my tether to connect.

As long as there are suckers in this world willing to allow a company to double charge for the same service then I say more power to the business who will take money they shouldn't be entitles to. A fool and his money...

 

[seoulbrova]

So if I tether I'm a pirate stealing from Sprint?

Okay, how about the fact that I was sold my EVO4G with the promise that WiMax was rolling out and that I would get service eventually? In two years, I've never been able to use WiMax. I live 20 miles outside Los Angeles and it's never worked. Tell me why I paid an extra $10 a month for two years for a service I never received?

I have no problems tethering because I don't use it as my primary internet provider. I do use it when I need to (2-4 GB) a month, and I'm not paying Sprint for that.

 

[Gator352]

Look. I could careless what any of you do, but the fact is.....

If YOU have to do something...anything...to circumvent the way something works to obtain a "service" for free.....especially if it's in a ToS...is stealing. No if's, ands, or but's about it. Period.

@jonathanm1978....yeah...if you "give" your service to your neighbors. It's stealing dude. When you sign up for cable, internet, or phone service, you sign up for service for a "single family" dwelling that only consists of YOUR adress. If it's an apartment, the service goes to that "single family" unit number.

Here's some info on this topic: arrested for stealing internet? - Bing

"I would think if someone showed you that the FCC has already ruled that just because a provider's data get's heavy use, it doesn't constitute damage to them. If someone was hacking the cellular network and using data, that's theft..people who have already paid for data aren't thieves.."

Yes, but they also said that that data belongs ONLY to the device in question unless your ToS states otherwise. Sprints ToS says...."no". Here's some more reading infofor ya....http://www.tgdaily.com/mobility-features/55206-is-unauthorized-tethering-illegal

Before you digress, only AT&T and VZW were made to add tethering to thier "tiered" data plans because they have a data cap in which the owner pays a certain amount of money for a certain amount of data. Sprint doesn't have to comply with the ruling because Sprint offers unlimited data with no data caps and therefore charge extra to add devices to that unlimited plan.


Just because you can do something doesn't make it right or legal. In the case, Sprint charges for tethering use and altering the "lock" by obtaining root to obtain that service for free for which they charge otherwise, constitutes theft. Breaking a lock on a house to obtain its contents inside is the same analogy...in fact, they are exactly the same. In the ToS, it says tethering without paying is prohibited but you would have us believe that just because you obtained root to take advantage of a service is OK. Gotcha.

I'm not calling anyone a pirate, thief, or anything thereof but when someone tries to tell me (or anyone) that just because you can do it (even illegally) is perfectly OK just because he/she says so is ludicrous in my book.

Chow.

 

[GrooveRite]

Its only illegal if you get caught.... lol!!!!

 

[Gator352]

"As long as there are suckers in this world willing to allow a company to double charge for the same service then I say more power to the business who will take money they shouldn't be entitles to. A fool and his money..."

@stl_joe......

I agree with you to a point. But not so much after that. See, Sprint isn't double charging for anything. They are charging you to use your unlimited data on those specific devices you agreed to. Adding extra devices to "use" that data requires a tethering plan that costs extra. I agree it should be free but it's not. That's the way it is.

And saying taking money they shouldn't be entitled to has got to be the liberal statement of the year. Why? Cause if that's the case, GM shouldn't charge extra for leather seats! Damn them! Dell shouldn't charge extra for a faster proc,more ram, and an 512GB SSD! Damn them too! McDonalds shouldn't charge for extra cheese! GTFO!!!!!

And this is no different. You want tethering, you have to pay for it...it's an extra.

Like I said before, I could care less what you do and I'm not calling anyone a thief or pirate...but I am calling it for what it is and admitting it is the first step to healing.....

 

[Gator352]

Its only illegal if you get caught.... lol!!!!

So true!! LOL

 

[four2x4]

Technically it is a violation of the users contract which is a violation of civil (not criminal) law. And yes, with deep packet inspection they can tell that the ultimate destination of a data packet is not the phone (unless your doing some sort of VPN tunneling). However Sprint really wants to retain customers so they are likely only going to ban someone if there is obvious/egregious abuse. Personally I've had no problem setting up a mobile hotspot on my old Palm Pre so my daughter could download an e-book before a flight and send a few messages to friends, but I wouldn't keep a torrent running on a laptop. Somewhere between those extremes is a not publicly defined line that you shouldn't cross.

So, basically you've found a place of compromise (in breaking the terms of your agreement) that suit(s) your individual needs, (and you've justified it) but for those who have different needs, should be reprimanded. Whether you talk only a few Kb vs several GB , it's still breaking the terms of the agreement.