Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sprint's $199 HTC EVO 4G Gets Release Date of June 4

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the blanket-the-earth-with-signal dept.

Cellphones 182

Chameleon Man writes "The first 4G phone ever to be released, the HTC EVO 4G, announced back in March, has finally been given a release date of June 4. Along with the release date, Sprint has provided information on phone plans and pricing. From Engadget: 'Unfortunately, there's a downside to all this: customers will be paying a mandatory (as confirmed to us by Sprint reps) $10 per month "Premium Data add-on" on top of their plan — ostensibly for the privilege of enjoying WiMAX when they're in a Sprint 4G market — and the 8-device Wi-Fi hotspot feature runs an extra $29.99 a month, which Sprint is quick to point out is half what you'd pay for a dedicated mobile broadband account.' In 4G areas, it might be a formidable option for anyone who hates their ISP *ehem* Comcast *ehem.*"

cancel ×

182 comments

For this item... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200532)

I would totally fuck your dead great grandmother in the ass!

Re:For this item... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200544)

Too late. I already did! Hope you enjoy sloppy seconds!

Re:For this item... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201958)

For this item, I would gladly enjoy sloppy seconds with your dead grandma.

In fact, I would gladly enjoy them even without the device. Spunk makes good lube, and I've got a thing for cum dumpsters.

The latter is why I fucked your dad.

lawl (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200534)

first

No... (4, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200598)

In 4G areas, it might be a formidable option for anyone who hates their ISP *ehem* Comcast *ehem.*"

While paying for 4G might allow you to get rid of Comcast for "ordinary" browsing, mobile phone providers are going to be a lot more strict about caps and such than Comcast most likely because bandwidth is more limited.

Re:No... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200648)

Sprint has specificaly stated that paying your $10 surcharge for 4G gets you truly unlimited data (as in no cap).

Re:No... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200718)

So when I start pulling 1Tb down a month they'll still be cool with it? Fat chance.

Re:No... (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201272)

I don't think you would be able to do 1 TB (or did you really mean Tb?) in one month even if you were downloading at max speed 24/7. I think that's why they can say "unlimited" because you are being throttled by the basic parameters of the service.

Re:No... (2, Informative)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201412)

Max speed = 6Mbps according to their website, so 24 * 31 * 3600 * 6 = 16070400 Mb, which is well beyond 1Tb and even more than 1TB.

Re:No... (1)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201838)

They're not sprint, but ClearWire Chicago is a 4G WiMax provider and they never imposed any caps on me. I finally switched to comcast, er...I mean xfinity, because I need more than just 6Mb of bandwidth. If they had a better ping time and slightly more bandwidth, I would have stuck with them.

Re:No... (1)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203196)

They're not sprint, but ClearWire Chicago is a 4G WiMax provider

Clearwire is 51% owned by Sprint.

I have Sprint's 4G "Desktop Modem" plan in Baltimore -- which apparently runs on a network run by Clearwire...it's weird, and most people at Sprint seem to have no idea that this plan, or the device I'm using (which I bought from them, and has a bign Sprint logo on it), exists. But there's no cap.

Re:No... (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202684)

Right but outside of cell provider fantasy land, it's more like 60k on average with 3000ms latency.

Re:No... (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203302)

Dude, even my t-mobile 3G is only ~150-200ms latency and 300/300Kbps with a marginal signal.

Re:No... (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203334)

You must be using a different t-mobile than I am.

Re:No... (4, Informative)

hahiss (696716) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200742)

Except that the extra $10 gets you no cap, at least according to PhoneScoop:

http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?n=5973 [phonescoop.com]

I know, I know, mobile provider promises and $2.50 will get you a ride on the subway. I'm skeptical too.

Re:No... (2, Interesting)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201004)

Seriously though. If you have to extra on top of the data plan to get a "Truly Unlimited" data plan. Sprint would find it very difficult in court to justify any cap.

Re:No... (3, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201540)

Seriously though. If you have to extra on top of the data plan to get a "Truly Unlimited" data plan. Sprint would find it very difficult in court to justify any cap.

It should be difficult in court to justify unlimited not really meaning unlimited, but alas, they have shaken our faith.

This is well earned distrust.

Re:No... (1)

erica_ann (910043) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202212)

When has unlimited EVER meant truly unlimited? There is always fine print. As with all providers in the past.. there has to be a catch in the fine print somewhere.

Re:No... (1)

laughingcoyote (762272) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202740)

I generally figure, that when there is a conflict between two things any provider of anything says, whatever was said in a larger, more colorful, more intended to be publicly distributed, and/or glossier font or medium will prevail.

Advertising something, and saying in the fine print that you don't really mean what you say, should be considered false advertising. If you're limiting your service in any way (port blocking, protocol throttling, bandwidth cap...), you're not selling UNLIMITED!!!!!!!!!!! service, you're selling limited service. Either sell it as that or provide genuinely unlimited service. You can do either one, but you can't advertise one thing and deliver something less.

Re:No... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32202932)

So it comes down to overselling. Satisfy 99%, and make 1% angry with unreliable service. Or annoy 99% with subpar service and lower bandwidth, and make the 1% happy with reliable service.

Of course, Comcast has a whole other routine: Increasingly raise prices, with no noticeable change in service quality.

Re:No... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32203356)

I am not even sure about the "Unlimited" or the "Really Unlimited" plan being unlimited. I think Sprint will probably have a "Really Truly Unlimited" plan and quite possibly a "Yes.. Really, Truly, Unlimited Plan" but even those will not be unlimited.

Re:No... (1)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201524)

Yea, just like comcast sells you unlimited service.

Unlimited means they just don't tell you the limit, not that its actually unlimited.

Re:No... (1)

xclay (924789) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202328)

WiMax is supposedly much faster than what Sprint's infrastructure is capable of right now, so I think some decision makers at Sprint are being dimwits for thinking that masses of people are going to pay that much for a rather dim service that is only available in limited areas.

Re:No... (1)

jasonwc (939262) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200798)

I'm interested to know if anyone has actually had their Comcast connection terminated (on the East Coast) due to exceeding the 250 GB cap. I have exceeded the cap numerous times and never heard as much as a word from Comcast. In fact, a Comcast tech mentioned that they don't enforce the cap at all in my area.

I wonder if enforcement is regional in nature. It seems stupid to have a rule that generates such bad PR if they're not even going to enforce it.

Re:No... (1)

edittard (805475) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201030)

Should apply cap "yes" or apply cap "no". Comcast apply cap "guess so".

Re:No... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201332)

I work with the team that handles usage. They want to enforce the caps everywhere, but they are so discombobulated that it's taking forever. Comcast sucks outside and in, basically. Be happy you have what you have now, they are working diligently if somewhat retardedly to restrict you as soon as possible.

Re:No... (1)

jasonwc (939262) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201402)

I am switching to 25/20 FiOS in a few weeks for the indefinite future, so they're too late.

Re:No... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32203070)

I am stunned with how anyone can possibly exceed 250GB/month. How is that possible? I stream maybe two (high-def) Netflix movies a week, and 1-2 TV episodes. And I browse pretty much 24/7. I download, maybe, one ISO a month, sometimes two or three.

My average bandwidth/day averages somewhere between 1 and 2.5 GB. And that's with two people, who are surfing constantly. Last week, we (exceptionally) watched 6 Netflix movies in one day, and the total bandwidth for that day was 7.5GB.

Last month: 34,366MB in; 1,538MB out. March: 26,809MB in; out: 1,238MB.

I should mention, my download speed sits at about 1.5MB-2MB/s, even while torrenting. So how is it, that people incur these fucking massive bandwidth usages, when my way-beyond-normal usage is way below 250GB?! It makes no sense.

Re:No... (2, Insightful)

jasonwc (939262) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203130)

Easy. Start downloading high-quality 1080p movie encodes (12-15 GB avg) and high-quality 720p encodes of TV series from Blu-Ray (50-75 GB a season). Adds up quickly.

But, the last month was just a freeleech on one of my private trackers. It was upload - not download.

On most private trackers, you have to multiply everything you upload by 2 just to hit a 1.0 ratio, and I tend to seed to significantly higher than that. 250 GB is easy to hit. Hell, 2.5 TB isn't that difficult. :P

Re:No... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32203434)

Let me get this straight. You're complaining about a 250GB cap, because it theoretically prevents you from illegally downloading movies?

How about coming up with a scenario that reaches 250GB without breaking the law? I could watch Netflix movies all day and still not go over the cap.

Incredible.

Re:No... (1)

Iberian (533067) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200844)

My in-laws live in a location where they cannot get DSL/Cable/Wifi from any internet provider. It will be interesting to see what happens when they start using this and they run up the bandwidth past the typical 5 gig limit which supposedly won't exist. Realistically for most households why would you need internet unless you are playing online games if you can just spend an extra 10-30 dollars on your cell phone bill.

Re:No... (1)

MistrBlank (1183469) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201176)

If they don't get those services, they're likely not getting 4G. Go read the fine print, it's only unlimited for 4G connections which are a limited market.

Re:No... (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200864)

Sprint's 4G is really clear.com's service and they have made strong implications of unlimited service. Clear's site goes so far as to bash the concept of the 5 gig limit of most 3G providers. They market the service as a broadband replacement for home use.

If this turns out to be true, my Verizon 3G data package is going to be in serious jeopardy next fall. (Assuming clear/sprint roll out coverage in my area by then.)

Re:No... (5, Interesting)

orcateers (883419) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200948)

I used to have Clearwire in Seattle, (which I believe was the same network this phone will use), the speed was good for streaming video, and they didn't have any cap on monthly usage, but they throttled me for bittorrent, ostensibly because of the upload quantity, but ftp uploading to my web host never caused any alarm. (I noticed that the sprint service for evo will cap uploads at 1 mbps). On an unrelated note, the wimax service varied greatly based on what window I put the antenna in, or what corner of the house I was in etc, so you'd have to test it out on-site before getting an idea of what it can really do for you.

Re:No... (2, Interesting)

Beardydog (716221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201892)

They throttled me too : ( And then their local storefronts disappeared, and then they changed their name from something recognizable and google-linked to several vitriolic websites to something that is difficult to search for effectively.
On the bright side, my modem reached Texas before they forcefully renewed my two year "Please Throttle Me" plan.

Re:No... (1)

caladine (1290184) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200932)

Until 4G actually meets the speeds I can get currently (20 Mbps down, 5 Mbps up), I'm not sure I see the point in trading providers. I do hope this leads to improved service due to improved competition and the like, though.

Re:No... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201616)

In 4G areas, it might be a formidable option for anyone who hates their ISP *ehem* Comcast *ehem.*"

While paying for 4G might allow you to get rid of Comcast for "ordinary" browsing, mobile phone providers are going to be a lot more strict about caps and such than Comcast most likely because bandwidth is more limited.

Many people with HTC phones have cooked ROMS that circumvent the extra cost for 'additional devices' using the wifi routing... they spoof the connections to appear to be accessed from the phone itself.

HTC Touch Pro 2, HTC Touch Pro, HTC Mogul --- all have done it, among others.

Re:No... (1)

ZosX (517789) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203328)

T-1 doesn't charge me anything to tether. Since my phone is rooted, I can do it wirelessly. As far as I'm concerned, if you are paying $30-40 a month for a data plan, you might as well use it for something other than checking facebook.

Not the first (1)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200668)

HTC has released the Max 4G more than a year ago.

Re:Not the first (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201056)

How much "4G" is it anyway? This table [wikipedia.org] (yeah, I know, just what was agreed there) seems to place mobile WiMax in "3G transitional", together with other tech of comparable speeds which is generally regarded as "3G"

Re:Not the first (2, Interesting)

mlts (1038732) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202048)

I wonder how "3.5G" networks such as T-Mobile's HSPA+ will compare to this. T-Mobile is supposed to have this rolled out at the end of this year, and because it isn't as big a hardware change, towers can be converted faster as compared to a completely new wireless technology.

I've heard people in Philadelphia say that T-Mobile has the edge compared to Clear WiMax, but it has been stated that T-Mobile has a 5 GB limit per month, so that makes it useless for a primary Internet connection.

Re:Not the first (1)

ZosX (517789) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203370)

I've been told that the android data plan is unlimited. When I signed up, I asked the rep specifically about caps, and he said there were no caps. I don't know if this is true or not, but I do know that if you exceed your cap it generally kicks you down to edge, or at least that is how it used to. I've heard quotes of 10gb caps for t-mobile, so I'm guessing that their different data plans are all not the same. Do you know if hspa+ will be supported on all the htc android phones, or will it require all new hardware? Currently, in Pittsburgh, I get average speeds of 300-750kbps. Every once in a while I'll see it burst up to 1meg, so I'm at least getting average 3g speeds, but not super great or anything. (video can be problematic)

40 / 30 = 2? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200690)

Last I checked (30 seconds ago), Clearwire sells dedicated mobile broadband accounts for $40 a month. To hit half of that, you would need to knock another $10 off the WiFi hotspot feature...and drop the premium data add-on, and drop the high-cost voice and data plan that it starts with. Nice phone. Too bad the service they want you to buy with it isn't competitively priced.

They aren't charging. (2, Interesting)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200712)

They only think they're charging for the wifi hotspot functionality. You can already do this with current Android phones with a little work, and someone will hack the Evo to do it natively for free within a reasonably short period.

Still Cheaper Than Ridiculously Expensive AT&T (5, Interesting)

meehawl (73285) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200750)

A Sprint "Everything [google.com] " data plan, even with a $10 tariff for 4G, is still ridiculously cheaper than the crazy high prices that AT&T gouges from its Apple-dazed captive masses.

If you decide to swing an employee referral plan [fatwallet.com] for the Evo then you are really coming out ahead.

Re:Still Cheaper Than Ridiculously Expensive AT&am (2, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201062)

SERO usually doesn't get any of the good phones.

Re:Still Cheaper Than Ridiculously Expensive AT&am (2, Informative)

agent_vee (1801664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201208)

SERO is old employee referral plan which is no longer available for new sign ups and restricted from using any Android or WebOS phones. The new employee referral plan called EPRP which is about 2x the cost of SERO (still cheaper than any other plan out there) has no phone restrictions.

Re:Still Cheaper Than Ridiculously Expensive AT&am (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201266)

That link isn't for SERO, it is Everything Plus. SERO has been closed down for new signups and is only for those who had it while it was around and have been grandfathered in.

SERO users are stuck with WinMo phones, but for $30 a month ($34.14 after taxes for me) it is hard to think any phone is worth the nearly $400 additional annual cost of service.

But then you have to use an andriod phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201194)

I'd rather pay more for AT&T's service just so I can use an iPhone. Android sucks balls in speed, usability, and stability. As for the EVO, putting a bigger screen on a turd doesn't make it smell any better.

Think Different.
Think Better.
Think Apple.

Re:But then you have to use an andriod phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201836)

Does it feel good "thinking different" like every other assclown with an iPhone?

Re:But then you have to use an andriod phone (1)

xclay (924789) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202608)

I'm afraid you're comparing apples and oranges here. Educate yourself on hard facts such as specs on these phones and you will come away little more enlightened than you already are using Jobs' money machine.

Re:Still Cheaper Than Ridiculously Expensive AT&am (1)

MistrBlank (1183469) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201238)

What high prices? It's $10 more for AT&T service that is at least top two in the country. SERO "used to be" good when it was $30, now it's no better than anywhere else.

Sprint on the other hand has tons of trouble and I can't find anyone happy with it where I am.

Re:Still Cheaper Than Ridiculously Expensive AT&am (1)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201552)

Apple charges $30 for data ... since when did sprint start charging $20 for unlimited data?

Re:Still Cheaper Than Ridiculously Expensive AT&am (4, Informative)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201636)

A Sprint "Everything" data plan, even with a $10 tariff for 4G, is still ridiculously cheaper than the crazy high prices that AT&T gouges from its Apple-dazed captive masses.

Hardly. I just just checked prices (because I'm out of contract with AT&T and thinking of upgrading to a smart phone), and AT&T will charge me $130/mo for two iPhones while Sprint will charge me $128/mo for two Droid phones - and that's without the 4G tariff.

The $50 question... (3, Interesting)

mlts (1038732) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200768)

When will someone get the Evo rooted and able to have custom ROMs. This is my biggest decision maker on what phone I select. If the phone has hidden obstacles (partitions that can't be mounted rw even with root, fastboot issues, etc.), or have other gotchas (such as the radio ROM upgrade on the Cliq), then I'll pass, even if it has a fast Internet connection.

I can think of a lot of very useful things that could be useful with a device offering a fast connection and with a custom ROM. A quick and dirty failover connection on a LAN, to plugging into a server and running some firewall/VPN software on the Android level for a fast remote access ability, to load balancing (if someone has a slow, but low latency DSL connection, the packets for games go through that, while the video streaming and such will go through the high bandwidth, high latency 4g connection).

Of course, I wonder how well this will perform if not on a Clear/4G network. How well will it failover to 3G gracefully if I'm in the sticks and able to get a "generic" CDMA signal?

Any word on Multi-tasking yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200790)

Frankly, I talk and browse the web on my iPhone simultaneously all the time. Several times a day. The inability to do both would be a deal-breaker. And I AM itching to dump the Apple regime.

Last I heard, Sprint (not HTC) has delimited only CDMA or Data traffic at once, never both at the same time.

Have they fixed this yet?

Re:Any word on Multi-tasking yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200874)

If you have WiMax in your area then this phone fixes that talking and browsing issue by using WiMax for the data and the PCS network for talk. Most of the I5 corridor here in Oregon is set for WiMax thanks to Clear.

Re:Any word on Multi-tasking yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200966)

Welp, time to leave MN, packing up the kids.

Seriously though. Let's see some 4G in the state capitol for cryin' out loud.

Not quite.. (3, Informative)

SirFozzie (442268) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200818)

The summary states it's $199. Not really true.

Not just the $10/mo fee for data.. but..

A) $100 Mail-In Rebate (so $299). And remember how much fun trying to claim a Mail-In Rebate is (and the lengths that they'll go to deny such claims?)
B) You have to be able to switch phones.. for those of you who still have an agreement length date.. if you really want it.. throw in an early termination fee.. ($449)
C) Plus you're locked in for two years.

Re:Not quite.. (4, Insightful)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200954)

A) $100 Mail-In Rebate (so $299). And remember how much fun trying to claim a Mail-In Rebate is (and the lengths that they'll go to deny such claims?)
B) You have to be able to switch phones.. for those of you who still have an agreement length date.. if you really want it.. throw in an early termination fee.. ($449)
C) Plus you're locked in for two years.

So, in other words, all the normal things that happen when you get a new phone/upgrade an existing phone.

You may be able to avoid the MIR if you get the phone at Best Buy, though I can't recommend 'experiencing' Best Buy just to avoid an MIR. *shudder*

Re:Not quite.. (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201102)

though I can't recommend 'experiencing' Best Buy just to avoid an MIR. *shudder*

I can. I would rather go to Best Buy for 15 min than do a $100.00 MIR. I wouldn't want to buy anything else there, or listen to a salesman throw out some tech words hoping I am stupid and just say ok. But I will be purchasing my EVO from Best Buy,

Re:Not quite.. (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201156)

I would rather go to Best Buy for 15 min than do a $100.00 MIR. I wouldn't want to buy anything else there, or listen to a salesman throw out some tech words hoping I am stupid and just say ok. But I will be purchasing my EVO from Best Buy,

I heard they might be doing the pre orders already, if you want your EVO on day one. FYI.

Re:Not quite.. (1)

hAckz0r (989977) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201334)

With the amount of fighting I have had to do with SprintPCS directly I would say going to Best Buy would be well worth it! To get a rebate you need a sales slip, which is never in the package delivered to your door (at least not mine). They don't accept other documentation other than what they list on the MIR forms. The MIR processing itself is handled by an outsourced company that can't or won't look up your Sprint records and absolutely refuses to honour anything as far as I can tell. Ok, once. I have been through this with five phones over the years and so far I have collected on a single phone MIR so far. Next time I'm documenting everything and sending a cc copy of everything to my lawyer. I bet there is a class action suit brewing here somewhere, as I can't be the only one screwed by this again and again. They will have to pull my current phone/contract from my dead or dying hand, or at least they will never get a contract renewal from me until I have the MIR payment in hand *first*. I'm happy with their service over all, but this MIR rejection stuff has got to stop. Don't promise what you won't deliver, please. Sprint, you listening? Hello?

Re:Not quite.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201442)

And: D) Purchasing this phone supports Microsoft and their extortion attempts.

Re:Not quite.. (1)

Lord_Byron (13168) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202422)

Wait, what? You do know this phone is running Android, Google's mobile Linux-based OS for phones, right? How is it supporting Microsoft?

Re:Not quite.. (0, Troll)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201586)

Really, people need to stop trying the 'locked into a contract' bullshit.

Yes, you have a contract, you were going to have service anyway so having a contract doesn't make you pay more, the whole thought is retarded and does nothing but make logical, intelligent people think less of your points.

Re:Not quite.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32202356)

You do realize T-Mobile gives a 10 dollar monthly discount if you bring your own phone instead of taking the 2 year and their phone deal. That comes out to 240 dollars, more like 285 if you count interest.

Re:Not quite.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201954)

Huh? You don't get charged an early termination fee for upgrading your phone. You just have to pay full price for the phone. That's the case with every phone on every provider....

Re:Not quite.. (1)

hhawk (26580) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202574)

You maybe be locked into a contract to have the service with Sprint but you are able to change your plan during the contract period or so I've been led to believe by talking to the Sprint support staff.

WiFi hotspot for 30 dollars a month (3, Insightful)

owlstead (636356) | more than 4 years ago | (#32200820)

30 dollars just to turn on a feature of the mobile phone? Who are they kidding? Will anybody pay that price? And how long until somebody hacks the device to turn it on? Or maybe they are just relying on some businesses and rich people that don't care about 30 dollars a month?

Personally I think it's a ridiculous amount - and I do think they simply disable it because they are afraid of large downloads. Ultimately, I do think that is ungrounded, it will be some time before wireless beats wired internet for continuous downloads.

That said, at least there is the option. I am happily using my android phone as 3G modem while on the road. I've got only 128kbit, but for browsing while I'm in a train, it's just perfect. But there's no way I'm going to pay 30 dollars for that kind of infrequent use.

(in June there will be Android 2.1 for the Hero, I'm looking forward to using bluetooth instead of the USB cable, although that will drain the phones battery instead of charging it)

Re:WiFi hotspot for 30 dollars a month (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201020)

Personally I think it's a ridiculous amount - and I do think they simply disable it because they are afraid of large downloads. Ultimately, I do think that is ungrounded, it will be some time before wireless beats wired internet for continuous downloads.

While I'm disappointed at the extra fee, I think a phone like the EVO 4G on a WiMax network will encourage people to do a lot more downloading of video, which will impact their network. As they say, this IS half the price of their tethering plan, so while it's not free, it's still a better deal.

I'm much more disappointed in the required $10/mo add-on for people who aren't in a 4G area. That's just lame.

I need to find an HDMI-to-DVI cable for this thing...

Re:WiFi hotspot for 30 dollars a month (1)

owlstead (636356) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201512)

I'm paying less than 25 euro per month for my Android experience right now. That includes I think 100 minutes a month (or SMS) and an unlimited 128 Kbit data plan, although that is only valid within the Netherlands (we tend to travel outside a lot, NL is not that large). In addition, I payed just 30 euro for the phone itself. 30 dollars per month seems quite a lot for just a WiFi hotspot feature to me, it's as much as my total costs (if I don't phone over 100 minutes of course - no problem I use email for most of my communications).

Re:WiFi hotspot for 30 dollars a month (1)

Iberian (533067) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201254)

You can already root the hero and load 2.1 on it.

Re:WiFi hotspot for 30 dollars a month (1)

owlstead (636356) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202226)

It's my main phone, I'm not in a big hurry to mess too much with it, especially if an official version is coming out in a month or so. It's working rather fine, the faster JVM and bluetooth internet sharing are nice-to-haves for my purposes.

Re:WiFi hotspot for 30 dollars a month (1)

barzok (26681) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202696)

30 dollars just to turn on a feature of the mobile phone? Who are they kidding? Will anybody pay that price? And how long until somebody hacks the device to turn it on? Or maybe they are just relying on some businesses and rich people that don't care about 30 dollars a month?

Except it may actually be worth it to some people.

Doing this gets you up to 8 WiFi connections to "hang" other devices off. I'm paying Time Warner $50/month for RoadRunner at 10Mbps. If I were already going to buy this phone, I could pay $30/month to hook up every device in my house at "fast enough" speeds, and save $20/month. While taking my connection anywhere that has 4G, not just sitting at home.

Re:WiFi hotspot for 30 dollars a month (1)

owlstead (636356) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203080)

I presume then that they have already turned off all tethering. Other it would not be hard to have another device act as the router, using the droid as a USB modem (it can charge at the same time). Maybe that's a bit of a kludge, but at 30 dollars per month it might be worth it - until somebody hacks the phone of course.

Re:WiFi hotspot for 30 dollars a month (1)

barzok (26681) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203256)

I've been wondering the same thing. My wife has thought about getting a USB dongle for 3G access on her laptop; if tethering is allowed with the EVO 4G without paying the extra $30, that would take care of just about everything.

Buzzkill (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32200884)

customers will be paying a mandatory (as confirmed to us by Sprint reps) $10 per month "Premium Data add-on" on top of their plan

and the 8-device WiFi hotspot feature runs an extra $29.99 a month

Why is it every time I'm really excited about a telecom device, companies find a way to make me completely lose interest? Why is it that telecom companies in particular try so hard to make sure you can't get excited about anything they do?

Re:Buzzkill (3, Insightful)

ZorinLynx (31751) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201248)

Let me fix this for you...

"Why is it every time I'm really excited about a telecom device, companies IN THE UNITED STATES find a way to make me completely lose interest? Why is it that telecom companies IN THE UNITED STATES in particular try so hard to make sure you can't get excited about anything they do HERE?"

My friends in the UK and other countries have told me they don't pull any of this shit over there. Buying the handset and the service are completely separate, and once you have them you can use any feature you wish on the handset. The only restriction is staying under a monthly data limit (which tends to be higher than what they offer here).

We here in the US get a raw deal when it comes to communications. Regional monopolies and poor choice in providers make that a fact.

Re:Buzzkill (4, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201606)

Your friends would be liars, as we've noticed with all the iPhone buzz more of the time it turns out that you get the same contract style offers there OR the option to buy the phone outright for a lot more money.

Ok, so they aren't really lying, but you certainly aren't presenting the full story.

Go ask them how many buy $600 smart phones without a contract rather than $100 phones with a contract.

Re:Buzzkill (3, Informative)

Santzes (756183) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203294)

Go ask them how many buy $600 smart phones without a contract rather than $100 phones with a contract.

At least in Finland, most of the people. Why would you want to buy a more expensive (in the end) locked down phone than cheaper phone and freedom to go with any operator? (or change operator after 6 months or change phone whenever you want). I've seen a few friends buy a phone with contract but that's usually a combination of poorness and lower education.

not worth it yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201052)

I dont think its worth it over other phones considering sprints website states 4g is only available in 8 cities. So people should not depend on the 4g as a feature.

Lets hope that.. (1)

pyrosine (1787666) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201200)

The new UK government doesnt screw over the mobile companies like they did for 3G, mabye we can finally get a decent deal.

Re:Lets hope that.. (1)

Pop69 (700500) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202322)

The government put 3g up for auction, the fact that telecos massively overpaid for it would be their own stupid fault rather than any government failing I would have thought ?

Not for Europe and the UK (1)

Chelmet (1273754) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201350)

This may seem obvious to some, but I spent an hour or so looking into this phone as my next upgrade last week. It uses CDMA, which is new to me (as a UK consumer), which means that it has no sim card, and instead the phone itself logs onto your network provider - as such, you have no way of importing and using it. There are no stated plans to bring it across the pond :O(

Which is a shame, as it blows the current android crop available in the UK out of the water.

$30 (2, Informative)

Beardydog (716221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201596)

ClearWire is $40 per month here, with a USB stick for your laptop... Or $30 per month with a netbook-sized modem and a lantern battery in a fanny pack.

Comcast is a very secure ISP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32201688)

Irrefutable proof! [anotherrandomday.com]

Verizon/Palm offer the Wi-Fi hotspot for free... (1)

spmkk (528421) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201788)

While it's a fact that nothing exists until Google invents it, Palm has the Wi-Fi hotspot feature integrated into their Pre and Pixi handsets today. Not only that, Verizon is offering that feature at no additional cost [mobilecrunch.com] for as long as you have the phone activated on your plan. I have one. It works great.

Re:Verizon/Palm offer the Wi-Fi hotspot for free.. (1)

mgblst (80109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202930)

So where the fuck does it say that Google invented this? Palm wasn't the first to do this either, but they did a great job, and a very useful function it is.

Maybe you should stop being so sensitive, and stop applying that red lipstick, it is making you angry.

$29.99 / month (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201818)

$29.99 per month to flip a bit? I'm in the wrong business.

Re:$29.99 / month (1)

mystikkman (1487801) | more than 4 years ago | (#32201868)

You mean you aren't in the software business? All programmers do is flip bits, until they are laid off and start flipping burgers.

Re:$29.99 / month (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202478)

Either you're not funny or you don't understand.

Sprint flips one bit one time and charges the customer $30 per month indefinitely. That's redonculous. They're allowing their customers to pay them to use the hardware the customer already owns, and provide the customer no additional service. It's not like you get wifi access point AND more bandwidth. You just get to connect to the phone from another device via wifi. I bet the wifi devices get private IPs too, so you're not even getting more public IP addresses.

Re:$29.99 / month (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32202586)

Sounds like the cable TV & satellite TV ripoff, eh? “The signals are in the air, WTF are they charging me to receive them???”

Re:$29.99 / month (1)

kevinmenzel (1403457) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202880)

Well, to be fair, at least here in Ontario, even living in Toronto with a good line of site to places like the CN tower, basic analog cable still gets me somewhere just over 25 channels vs. the 8 or 9 I could pull OTA... so though it's perhaps overpriced, it's not like I can just receive all that content live without cable.

Re:$29.99 / month (1)

hhawk (26580) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202600)

Clearly in that it supports 8 Wifi connections it could run them a lot of data. I see this as an option for small offices and remote productions (TV, sports, catering, etc.) where a team is in a remote location and everyone has wifi devices.. the boss brings an Evo (has to plug it in or go through a few batteries) but everyone gets' internet... worth the 30.00

Not really a competitor to land-based data access (3, Informative)

EmagGeek (574360) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202556)

"In 4G areas, it might be a formidable option for anyone who hates their ISP *ehem* Comcast *ehem.*"

Not really... I tried a 4G service out last week and the latency was so horrible that it wouldn't matter if it had a 100Mbit transport, it'd still be slow as all hell and basically useless.

Latency to the gateway was between 75 and 125ms. That's horrible every day of the week.

Alternatives (1)

JamesFosterUK (1803490) | more than 4 years ago | (#32202858)

I tried the HTC desire a few hours ago running android 2.1. BTH its is no where near as polished and intutitive as the iPhone. I've never tried the Palm Pre. Palm has no traction in England. But I think that Windows Phone 7 will be the true challenger to iPhone. And I can't wait for it to be paired with the craftmanship of Toshiba, Sony or Panasonic.

Actual cost (1)

evil_aar0n (1001515) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203224)

I'm waiting for the actual cost data. I really want this phone, but I saw the "fine print" in the e-mail announcement, and now I'm not so sure.

$199 - after rebate, Ok. It's tolerable.
$69 for "Anything" basic service - which does or does not include SMS? I tend to text more than call, lately.
$30 for "wireless hub" service - ouch.
$? for a data plan -- ? ... and whatever else they want to throw in.

Mandatory data plan requirements... (1)

merc (115854) | more than 4 years ago | (#32203318)

should be investigated by Congress -- just my opinion, but to force customers to pay an extra surcharge per month to buy the product should be illegal but only if it can be proved that all of the wireless providers colluded to force the customer into this racket. I think the odds of this being the case are high since every provider is perpetuating this scam.

Case in point: I already have a work provided wireless device that provides a data plan, I don't need to pay an extra monthly fee on my personal mobile phone for another data plan.

All of the wireless providers are requiring compulsary data plans in order to activate a smartphone or PDA now. It's my opinion that this should be illegal, but then I guess if it was a real lawyer would've started a class action lawsuit by now. I definately believe it enriches a small few and is not in the interest of consumers.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...