T-Mobile HotSpot users will get five years of Starbucks WiFi access after AT&T switchover

Yesterday's surprising-but-not-shocking announcement that Starbucks would be switching to AT&T for WiFi services left a lot of T-Mobile customers in the lurch -- although Starbucks said that T-Mo and AT&T had an "agreement" that would let HotSpot users stay connected, there weren't a ton of details given. Well, it looks like you've got a few more years of caffeinated surfing ahead of you, guys -- T-Mobile issued a press release today saying it was committed to ensuring "minimum customer impact" during the transition, and that it's signed a five year "roaming agreement" with AT&T that will kick in when the Starbucks WiFi transition begins later this year. Of course, the ideal roaming agreement would let you use either company's networks wherever you are, not just AT&T bandwidth in Starbucks -- we'll totally spring for the coffee if these two companies want to meet and sort something like that out.

[nerdtalker @ Feb 12th 2008 5:22PM]

I think what's really amazing here isn't that AT&T is now driving these APs, but rather the fact that people are paying for them at all.

Frankly, I think it's ridiculous to pay for WiFi on top of a coffee. I almost avoid Starbucks exclusively because I can't get work done there and can't justify paying for something that should be a service (internet access).

When I do go there, I tether my Mogul (SERO) for internet. No way I'm paying. Does anybody seriously pay?

[dennis @ Feb 12th 2008 5:27PM]

My understanding is that T-Mobile is a European company that has limited coverage in the U.S., so they have less expensive calling plans and offset their inability to offer data coverage by making the deal with Starbucks for Wi-Fi access. Whereas because Verizon has dense coverage, they can offer data plans at relatively expensive prices.

[CraigJ @ Feb 12th 2008 5:45PM]

Nope. Most of the coffee places In Phoenix/Scottsdale have free Wi-Fi and better coffee to boot. Coffee Plantation at the Biltmore, and Coffee Roastery in Scottsdale for example. I've never had a speed issue at any of them. I figure $3.50 for a cappuccino plus $2.50 for a pastry the wi-fi should be included, kinda like cream and sugar.

[rob @ Feb 12th 2008 6:27PM]

Here's the thing I think alot of people who don't subscribe to T-Mobile cellular plans don't realize. The wifi hotspots stand alone monthly subscription is $30. But if you have an unlimited data plan, which anyone with a smartphone/pda phone will probably want anyway, the wifi hotspots service is included.

Also, it's not only good for SBUX. it's good in airports and some other places.

So this news mainly sucks for people like me who (a) like going to SBUX and (b) like using the wifi there at technically no cost since i already have the unlimited data plan for my phone. Basically, these people will eventually get screwed if the unlimited data plans are reduced in price since service is effectively reduced.

I guess it depends on how seemless this whole AT&T free roaming thing works. I don't know. I'm imagining it won't be as user friendly as keeping my same tmobile hotspots account username and password. but i could be wrong.

good day all.

Robert

[Adrian Williams @ Feb 12th 2008 6:31PM]

ATT wi-fi is free if you have ATT DSL

[Matt @ Feb 12th 2008 9:42PM]

Robert,

I'm on the same plan as you are ($19.99 T-Mobile Internet with HotSpot). I personaly think 5 years to ride on at&t is a plenty of time. By that time T-Mobile will be up to the speed with the competition (3-3.5-maybe even 4G) so who will need WiFi then. I even dare to bet 100% that laptops with W-WAN cards will be standard like WiFi is these days and HotSpots will die out slowly. 5 years is a LOT of time in mobile technology so for now we really have no need to worry.

[Strife Caecus @ Feb 12th 2008 9:46PM]

Actually, AT&T DSL customers have free AT&T wifi hotspot access only if they pay for $20 or higher DSL service. The $10-$15 crowd aren't included.

[Sime @ Feb 12th 2008 5:28PM]

Nice

[Jimbo @ Feb 12th 2008 5:29PM]

Nerdtalker, the connection speed is great at Starbucks.

It's also kinda nice that there aren't nearly as many people mooching the wifi all day. Those who do are paying for it, and somehow it just makes for a more comfortable environment.

you are not paying to wifi, you are paying for the environment of the shop. If this environment doesn't appeal to you, of course this is a rip-off, but they are getting away with charging for it because a lot of people prefer things this way.

Coffee shops are everywhere, so you can always go local and enjoy the free stuff. These days, the quality of the drink is probably better too.

[Lars @ Feb 12th 2008 7:10PM]

True, and all the non-Starbucks coffee shops I've been to provide free internet access. I don't get why Starbucks is so popular. Poor selection, high prices. I guess there's something to be said for brand familiarity after all. It's just so sad that the good shops which often have better prices and real food plus other stuff like live music, close down when Starbucks moves in.

[fahnboi @ Feb 12th 2008 5:34PM]

"* Eric Member Since Feb 7th, 2008". I don't know what's sadder that your whole post history consists of "first"'s or that you made an engadget account just to annoy others?

[CraigJ @ Feb 12th 2008 5:41PM]

Mom's basement must get boring, huh?

[Itchyass @ Feb 12th 2008 5:50PM]

what about the HotSpot phone service (UMA) from TMobile? That was the major reason I bought my Curve and now it sounds like my phone's going to grow less useful less than 4 months into its life.

[Droo @ Feb 12th 2008 5:58PM]

Your Curve works on home WiFi, work WiFi, *AND* T-mobile Hotspots to make unlimited calls (with the 9.99 plan) or using your plan minutes (without the 9.99 plan). This isn't going to change and has nothing directly to do with the Hotspots service run by T-mobile to sell WiFi.

The UMA service works with ANY WiFi network, not JUST the Hotspots that T-mobile operates.

[Itchyass @ Feb 12th 2008 6:05PM]

True, but the TM HotSpot ubiquity was the reason I bought into the UMA concept. Plus it just picks up the HS location and switches right over without issue or fuss. You have to admit this is a significant dent in the case for using their UMA service--especially for a fee.

[Droo @ Feb 12th 2008 6:13PM]

The 'hotspot ubiquity' is here for another 5 years, not really a big deal. Your Curve will probably be in the landfill by then.

Also, it switches over with no issue or fuss on my WiFi IN MY HOUSE too once I've added my network and password to the network list in the Curve.

Their UMA service is 9.99 for unlimited calling on ANY WiFi network and it can be used for FREE using your plan minutes. I don't see this 'dent' you speak of. It sounds more like you're being melodramatic.

You act like the only WiFi out there is in a Starbucks or a Borders. The Curve even seamlessly hands back to T-mobile's network once I drive out of my driveway (because my WiFi signal reaches all along my property line).

This is not a big deal. In 5 years they may renew or it may go away from Starbucks, but in the meantime nothings changing and most of us are using H@H in our work, home, campus or places other than a Starbucks, Borders, or Kinkos.

[Romax @ Feb 12th 2008 6:07PM]

This means. T-mobile pays AT&T for a piece of the pie. Which means T-mobile users will eventually get the stiff with higher fees down the road.

[Droo @ Feb 12th 2008 6:22PM]

The way that it sounds, Starbucks already dealt with AT&T for other things and wanted to use them for this too. I don't know what the previous deal with T-mobile was (length, costs, etc.). It's possible that Starbucks pulled the trigger early and this was the compromise.

T-mobile figured out a while ago that most people don't care/want to pay for their Hotspots service. They should consider buying Boingo Wireless or partnering with them instead of this nonsense.

[Sander de Regt @ Feb 12th 2008 6:09PM]

[I]we'll totally spring for the coffee if these two companies want to meet and sort something like that out.[/I]
I am not sure if that's such a good idea. I think something like that will involve hundreds of lawyers. Not a cheap coffee bill. And I can't even begin to imagine what that will look like. Especially when all those lawyers will start prying open the coffeecup lids when noone is looking and start spilling their hot java onto their laps just to be able to be the next one to sue Starbucks.

[fuma @ Feb 12th 2008 6:12PM]

really? is this a big deal? Why not save the $$$ and use your own connection at home rather than looking like a choad sitting at SB? For the price of their crap coffee every other day, you could afford FIOS.

[Reader @ Feb 12th 2008 6:36PM]

I can think of a lot of words to describe a "First comment", awesome doesn't happen to be one of them.

[Steffen Jobbs @ Feb 12th 2008 8:12PM]

What about free coffee for T-Mo losers just to stop them from whining?

[Jkswiss @ Feb 12th 2008 8:27PM]

Jeez, don't bring a man down. Simple minds..
He's probably one easily pleased dude.

[Strife Caecus @ Feb 12th 2008 9:54PM]

Matt does have a point. Once high-speed cellular broadband is deployed widespread and it's fairly affordable and reliable, it could possibly spell doom for the many hotspots around the country. But we'll see over the next few years...

[sfvisionary @ Feb 12th 2008 11:11PM]

Maybe Starbucks and AT&T are factoring in the iPhone, MAC, iTunes equation to make things a seamless experience for these folks, especially when you consider Starbucks is becoming more and more an "entertainment" experience. They also have to contend with McDonald's taking a whack at their Barristaland.

[Jacqueline @ Feb 12th 2008 11:48PM]

From what I've read from many tech sites, when the AT&T/Starbucks union happens, folks who have a Starbucks card (Duetto Card?) will receive 2 free hours/day of surfing if they buy 1 thing a month at SB. I guess that's correct...

Anyhoo, if that's so, then it's not a bad deal. Yea, SB is synonymous with pretentious, overpriced java but to drop like $2.50 on a cookie a month to surf aprox. 60 or so hrs a month isn't something to cry about. Personally, I wouldn't want to spend more than an hr or so at a coffee shop trying to check email; have internet at home and on my smartphone. Yes, there's a couple of Panera Bread shops nearby me, but for some folks, SB might be the only game in town.

[Alex @ Feb 19th 2008 1:06AM]

I think the reason Starbucks charge for WiFi is just because they don't care to be competitive with other local coffee shops. WiFi fees are not their primary source of profits anyways. In my town, some local coffee shops used to charge for WiFi, but they later all switched to free WiFi, because it's just very easy to find another place with free access.

There should be a comprehensive list of free WiFi hotspots across the country/world. That would be sweet.