Amazon Dumps Sprint for Kindle 2, Embraces AT&T

Amazon did not select T-Mobile or Verizon (the most overrated
network) when it comes to wireless data.

Amazon Dumps Sprint for Kindle 2, Embraces AT&T
By Priya Ganapati October 23, 2009 | 4:08 pm | Categories: Media
Players


In a stealthy yet significant move, Amazon has dropped Sprint as its
wireless partner for the latest versions of the Kindle 2 e-book
reader. From now on, new Kindle 2s, in the U.S. and worldwide, will be
powered exclusively by AT&T’s 3G network.

“Due to strong customer demand for the new Kindle with U.S. and
international wireless, we are consolidating our family of 6-inch
Kindles,” says Drew Herdener, spokesperson for Amazon.

The move was announced in a quiet update to Amazon’s product page for
the Kindle rather than through a press announcement.

The move is a big blow to Sprint, which was the first U.S. telecom
carrier to experiment with supporting mobile devices beyond cellphones
and netbooks. It also means AT&T has all but cornered the wireless-
connectivity market for e-readers. In addition to the Kindle 2, AT&T’s
network forms the backbone of the new Sony touchscreen reader and
Barnes & Noble’s recently introduced Nook e-reader. All that’s left
for Sprint? Providing service for Amazon’s XL-sized Kindle DX, and
supporting all the existing Sprint-connected Kindles.

When Amazon introduced the Kindle in 2007, the company highlighted
wireless downloads of books as the device’s unique feature. The move
helped the Kindle gain an edge over Sony, which had introduced its e-
reader earlier but without wireless connectivity.

Earlier this year, Amazon offered a second-generation Kindle called
Kindle 2 and a big-screen reader called the Kindle DX. Kindle 2 has a
basic browser and lets users check text-heavy sites such as Wikipedia.
But the devices were restricted to the United States.

Finally, this month, Amazon debuted an international version of the
Kindle 2. It was the first Kindle to use AT&T’s network instead of
Sprint’s. Kindle DX is still not available outside the states.

“Now that they are selling a Kindle overseas, it makes sense for them
to have just one product that they can sell in all markets,” says
Charles Golvin, an analyst with Forrester Research. “And, since, in
most of the world GSM is what is used, having a single product helps
drive down costs for Amazon.” Sprint’s network is based on the CDMA
standard.

That doesn’t mean Kindle buyers who bought their device before October
will be switching to AT&T.

“Existing Kindle users, owners of the first- and second-generation
Kindles and Kindle DX, will not notice any change to their experience.
They will continue to utilize the Sprint network in the U.S.,” says
Herdener.

And at least until Amazon introduces an international version of
Kindle DX, Sprint will continue to be in business with Amazon.

“Sprint still powers the Kindle DX,” a Sprint spokesperson told
Wired.com. “So it is not accurate to say that our relationship with
Amazon is over.”

Meanwhile, for Kindle users, the switch from Sprint to AT&T raises
questions about reliability of service. Weighed down by heavy data use
from the iPhone, AT&T’s U.S. network has become congested, leading to
slow connectivity and dropped calls.

And with about 3 million e-readers expected to be sold next year,
could AT&T’s network face additional strain? Not really, says Golvin.
“The type of connection that the Kindle needs is different from that
of a phone, since there is no voice component, only a data component,”
he says. “The actual capacity consumed by all Kindles now and those
coming on to the network is very, very small compared to the rest of
the network.”

Kindle users are also less likely to notice small delays or
disturbances in the network, says Forrester’s Golvin. Unlike a web
page, downloading a book does not require near–real-time display of
different components.

“On an e-book reader, the congestion is invisible,” says Golvin. “The
downloaded book arrives when it arrives, and a few seconds’ wait does
not change much.”

On Oct 23, 11:20*pm, Apple users seem to always get all the neat stuff
- a nice iPhone perk <vic.hea...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Amazon did not select T-Mobile or Verizon (the most overrated
> network) *when it comes to wireless data.
>
> Amazon Dumps Sprint for Kindle 2, Embraces AT&T

Yes, Amazon want a GSM model. But they aren't doing Kindle 2 uses "any
favor" since AT&T's 3G coverage is dismal.

On Oct 24, 7:21*am, carcarx <carc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 23, 11:20*pm, Apple users seem to always get all the neat stuff
> - a nice iPhone perk <vic.hea...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Amazon did not select T-Mobile or Verizon (the most overrated
> > network) *when it comes to wireless data.
>
> > Amazon Dumps Sprint for Kindle 2, Embraces AT&T
>
> Yes, Amazon want a GSM model. But they aren't doing Kindle 2 uses "any
> favor" since AT&T's 3G coverage is dismal.

In addition to getting your posted information from TV advertising you
also rely upon the cable Cartoon Network? If you wan tto reach the
most perople in the world, you do not design a product with CDMA in it
as GSM has better global coverage.

carcarx wrote:

> Yes, Amazon want a GSM model. But they aren't doing Kindle 2 uses "any
> favor" since AT&T's 3G coverage is dismal.

AT&T 3G coverage is better than Sprint's 3G coverage, though not as wide
as Verizon's. The current AT&T 3G problems are not primarily coverage
issues, they're capacity issues. The reason Apple first approached
Verizon with the iPhone was because Apple wanted the network with the
widest 3G coverage and the consistent speeds. Verizon would not agree to
the revenue sharing model that Apple wanted. Ironically, after the
iPhone 2G, they dropped the revenue sharing model in favor of a
traditional model, for multiple reasons.

SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:4ae3101e$0$1668
$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:

> carcarx wrote:
>
>> Yes, Amazon want a GSM model. But they aren't doing Kindle 2 uses "any
>> favor" since AT&T's 3G coverage is dismal.
>
> AT&T 3G coverage is better than Sprint's 3G coverage, though not as wide
> as Verizon's.

Source?

At 24 Oct 2009 04:21:24 -0700 carcarx wrote:

> > Amazon did not select T-Mobile or Verizon (the most overrated
> > network) *when it comes to wireless data.
> >
> > Amazon Dumps Sprint for Kindle 2, Embraces AT&T
>
> Yes, Amazon want a GSM model. But they aren't doing Kindle 2 uses "any
> favor" since AT&T's 3G coverage is dismal.


AT&T's 3G coverage might be "dismal," but their DATA coverage is just fine.
EBooks are what, 150KB? 300KB tops? For this type of content, 3G
isn't necessary- EDGE and even GPRS is adequate.

In article <4ae3101e$0$1668$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> AT&T 3G coverage is better than Sprint's 3G coverage,

hah, no.

> though not as wide
> as Verizon's.

they're both effectively the same since they roam on each other.

> The current AT&T 3G problems are not primarily coverage
> issues, they're capacity issues. The reason Apple first approached
> Verizon with the iPhone was because Apple wanted the network with the
> widest 3G coverage and the consistent speeds. Verizon would not agree to
> the revenue sharing model that Apple wanted. Ironically, after the
> iPhone 2G, they dropped the revenue sharing model in favor of a
> traditional model, for multiple reasons.

bullshit. unless you were a participant in the meetings, you don't know
what the reasons were.

In article <Xns9CAE5B6148B52blutofabercom@188.40.43.213>, John
Blutarsky <bluto@faber.com> wrote:

> > AT&T 3G coverage is better than Sprint's 3G coverage, though not as wide
> > as Verizon's.
>
> Source?

he has none.

In article <BOGEm.44331$4E.44222@newsfe08.iad>, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

> AT&T's 3G coverage might be "dismal," but their DATA coverage is just fine.

not really. i've had numerous occasions where i had a strong signal and
could place a voice call but data outright failed.

On 2009-10-24, carcarx <carcarx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 23, 11:20Â*pm, Apple users seem to always get all the neat stuff
> - a nice iPhone perk <vic.hea...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Amazon did not select T-Mobile or Verizon (the most overrated
>> network) Â*when it comes to wireless data.
>>
>> Amazon Dumps Sprint for Kindle 2, Embraces AT&T
>
> Yes, Amazon want a GSM model. But they aren't doing Kindle 2 uses "any
> favor" since AT&T's 3G coverage is dismal.

AT&T's data coverage, including EDGE, isn't bad, and their 3G coverage
is a lot better than T-Mobile's even if they're a bit overloaded
these days.

The fact is, though, that any manufacturer which wants to build a
single model of a mobile data device which they can sell in as
many places in the world as possible is going to have to deal
with AT&T in the US. CDMA2000 can't match the worldwide footprint,
and T-Mobile US' 3G service is in a band used no where else
in the world so far while AT&T's is in the same bands used in
other western hemisphere countries.

Dennis Ferguson