Engadget Mobile scoops T-Mobile's UMA beta

Engadget fans make excellent beta testers, and we have a handful of 'em to thank for Engadget Mobile's in-depth coverage of T-Mobile's upcoming UMA service. Yeah, they've got specs. Yeah, they've got pics. What else could ya ask for? Hop on over to Mobile for the full deets.

[Gio @ Aug 1st 2006 4:47PM]

WI-Fi Calling Why??? Arent the towers enough. The only purpose I see is for Internet browsing. But wooptie-doo!

[Bman @ Jul 16th 2007 12:04PM]

Why??, Because some people don't have service at there house, like me.

[D Tas @ Aug 1st 2006 5:01PM]

Exactly. How does this UMA benefit the consumer, unless by using wifi does not consume your plan's minutes?? I'm sure the handoff is a hip-trick but I won't use my bandwidth or seek out free wi-fi unless I have incentive to do so.

[Will @ Aug 1st 2006 5:02PM]

Don't mock this too much. I work in a small office that has mediocre reception for T-mobile. But we do have wi-fi, so this would be a perfect solution for us in order to have one phone per employee, and eliminate the desk phone. Couple that with a laptop, and you can work efficiantly from anywhere.

It is definatley bleeding edge to set up a system like this, but something like this would enable me to work from my home or office seamlessly, which as gas prices continue to rise, will make more sense.

I know not everyone will do this, but our office is a great example of an ideal customer.

[Jacob Varghese @ Aug 1st 2006 5:23PM]

Gio, there are tons of people that don't have good reception in their offices or homes.

[John @ Aug 1st 2006 6:02PM]

T-Mobile has the worse of coverage...wouldnt it be wiser to invest in better tower coverage rather than ramp up some wifi service that will be just as bad.

Wake up T-Mobile that why i Left ya long time ago...poor coverage.

[Chance @ Aug 1st 2006 6:19PM]

John,

What are you basing your opinion on?

I think this issue needs to be treated on a coverage area by coverage area basis. I for one can say that in Houston the reception I get with T-Mobile is not only more consistent but also of a higher quality than Verizon.

I agree this is not a long term solution, but for current Tmo customers in need of better service at their home or office who happen to be under a 1 or 2 year contract, this seems to be an answer to their problem.

[AJ @ Aug 1st 2006 6:19PM]

This could be useful, but ultimately will probably not work out for the Pink T. The "work from anywhere" mentality is one that needs to go. While it's nice that yes, I can in fact work from whereever, it also means that no matter where I am, I can work. More and more work is tagging along on vacations, much to the detriment of the vacation itself. What is the point of going on vacation if you're going to work while you're there?

This won't cut down on the cell phone bills, as T-Mobile will probably want to bundle time on their HotSpot network (found in a Starbucks near you). This will end up being a novelty and perhaps useful for a few people, but not a giant overhaul of cellular service.

[dapharmer @ Aug 1st 2006 6:22PM]

i work in jersey close by nyc and my tmobile reception is pretty damn good.

[Ben18 @ Aug 1st 2006 6:46PM]

Here in Phoenix, Az I get much better than coverage than all of my friends, and guess what network I use...t-mobile. I would really say many networks just have better situations in different locations. I wouldn't slam one network for poor coverage in my area, I would just hope that other consumers understand that issue.

[Vince @ Aug 1st 2006 7:27PM]

I think Tmobile sees this as a stop-gap for their nonexistant 3G network. It'll allow them to roll out some more advanced data services, and at least not fall too far behind the competition. From my point of view, it's a good move on their part.

[Eric @ Aug 1st 2006 8:41PM]

T-Mobile works great everywhere for me, except my house. I get 1 bar upstairs and "searching" when I'm downstairs. This could solve my issues if for some reason they can't put up a new tower or fix the current situation. The only phone company that works in my house is Sprint and I don't want them again.

[Vince @ Aug 1st 2006 9:00PM]

Eric, aren't there relatively inexpensive antennas or dedicated signal boosters that can help improve your reception at home?

[Whizack @ Aug 1st 2006 9:16PM]

I think the author might as well just send this directly to T-Mobile.

I am currently a member of this beta, and I don't think T-Mobile nor their external vendor appreciate users in the program divulging spec data and other information about the device when it's strictly prohibited by the NDA we all signed when we joined the test.

The hardware can't browse the internet over WiFi anyways, so I fail to see the point of blogging about a half-implemented network service being utilized by a handset that doesn't have any new features worth talking about.

[Droo @ Aug 1st 2006 9:22PM]

Whizack - I don't think the beta coordinator appreciates you disclosing your involvement with the beta. Perhaps you should re-read your NDA. I'm sure it reads a bit like the rules of Fight Club (whatever that is :)).

[superstar @ Aug 3rd 2006 10:26AM]

The problem is that in order to give people good coverage inside their house, a cell co. has to put a tower in the neighborhood--not an easy thing to do in many communities due to zoning laws and anti-tower residents who complain about bad coverage and then complain when a company wants to build a tower nearby. If your T-Mobile phone does not work in your house, chances are no carrier will work in your house, because nobody can build a tower close enough to get a signal into your home/neighborhood. This seems like a great way for people with great coverage everywhere except their home or office to get what they need easy and cheap.

[geminiman @ Aug 5th 2006 10:33AM]

Superstar hit it on the head!!
There is a good saying that encapsulates the poor coverage dilemma.
"Everyone wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die"
Everyone says they want good coverage at home but are the same people vehemently oppose to the erection of a cell tower in their neighborhood. Carriers are not opposed to building towers to service their customers; they'll welcome your support! Don't complain to the carriers they assuredly know their deficiencies, complain to the locally elected politician to amend local zoning codes to facilitate the deployment of cell sites and you'll see how quickly your coverage will improve. As someone innately familiar with the process, we need communities to begin demanding better wireless coverage from their elected officials.

[Diamond Dave @ Aug 8th 2006 11:31AM]

Think of using this while traveling internationally. This could be big. Rather than paying roaming charges you just jump on a wifi network at an italian cafe.

[boozehound @ Sep 9th 2006 6:52PM]

This is the wave of the future and all you verizon yahoos and cingular bafoons will soon be seeing the rise of the real communications company. This is just one piece of their new strategy that will overtake the industry. Combine this new tech focus with 4 time award winning customer service 4 time award winning coverage awards- and it doesnt matter how much cingular lies about their coverage the world will know who the real leader is.

[Lee @ Sep 26th 2007 3:38PM]

I can't believe you can all be this ignorant! The reason this is a good thing is because it allows you to surf without using your plan minutes! Duh! I means potential huge savings for people such as myself who live and die by their cell phones.