Video speed test: 2.5G EDGE iPhone vs. mock 3G HSDPA iPhone

[AppleInsider]

One Apple iPhone owner has posted to YouTube a video shootout that pits an iPhone running on a 2.5G EDGE network against one rigged with 3G HSDPA access in a simulated speed test.

The mock 3G iPhone was connected via WiFi to an iMac whose internet connection was supplied with a HSDPA modem and then shared, while the traditional 2.5G iPhone was run on a standard overseas EDGE wireless network.

Based on the test results, which are largely theoretical given fluctuations in mobile wireless speeds from region to region and provider to provider, the 3G iPhone loaded the same web page as the 2.5G iPhone in nearly half the time.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=4023)

[digitalclips]

One Apple iPhone owner has posted to YouTube a video shootout that pits an iPhone running on a 2.5G EDGE network against one rigged with 3G HSDPA access in a simulated speed test.

The mock 3G iPhone was connected via WiFi to an iMac whose internet connection was supplied with a HSDPA modem and then shared, while the traditional 2.5G iPhone was run on a standard overseas EDGE wireless network.

Based on the test results, which are largely theoretical given fluctuations in mobile wireless speeds from region to region and provider to provider, the 3G iPhone loaded the same web page as the 2.5G iPhone in nearly half the time.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=4023)

I was hoping for even faster ....

[mrochester]

I was hoping for even faster ....

I'll point and laugh at those who suggested the iPhone was fine without 3G.

[mydo]

I'll point and laugh at those who suggested the iPhone was fine without 3G.

Mine's fine without G3. You do know it has Wifi right?

[cameronj]

I was hoping for even faster ....

Many things will be much faster - certainly things like youtube, email sending and receiving, song purchases over 3G and the like will benefit much more than web page loading. Plus web page loading will be better than this, because the 3G iphone will not have such a complicated "modem"

[SpamSandwich]

Mine's fine without G3. You do know it has Wifi right?

You have a G3 iPhone? I thought they made the move to Intel? :D

[Abster2core]

I'll point and laugh at those who suggested the iPhone was fine without 3G.

But at what cost? For example, battery life. Will it be a problem? Is the attached article still relevant?

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3036

[chadisawesome]

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you. the real noticeable difference with edge/3g will be when you tether your phone to your computer... which you can't do

[Lafe]

One Apple iPhone owner has posted to YouTube a video shootout that pits an iPhone running on a 2.5G EDGE network against one rigged with 3G HSDPA access in a simulated speed test.

The mock 3G iPhone was connected via WiFi to an iMac whose internet connection was supplied with a HSDPA modem and then shared, while the traditional 2.5G iPhone was run on a standard overseas EDGE wireless network.

Based on the test results, which are largely theoretical given fluctuations in mobile wireless speeds from region to region and provider to provider, the 3G iPhone loaded the same web page as the 2.5G iPhone in nearly half the time.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=4023)

I'm confused about how this largely theoretical test tells us anything at all about how a real 3G iPhone would compare to today's model.

[dehgenog]

The WiFi intermediary step kills some of the latency performance gains (isn't avg initial response for EDGE ~300ms vs ~80ms for 3G ?), but the test still shows us what we kind of knew: it's much faster.

[dehgenog]

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you.

:???:

LOL?

[Amorya]

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you. the real noticeable difference with edge/3g will be when you tether your phone to your computer... which you can't do

Yes, and in this video test, they used two iphones with the same processor and memory. The speed difference was a factor of 2.

Amorya

[Foo2]

I'll point and laugh at those who suggested the iPhone was fine without 3G.

The iPhone is fine without 3G. Most web pages are properly rendered and are usable on the iPhone regardless of speed (EDGE, 3G, Wi-Fi). Of course, faster is always better--unless you're talking something other than iPhone, like Windows Mobile, where it doesn't matter how fast the hardware is, the software is cr@p.

[k2director]

I'll point and laugh at those who suggested the iPhone was fine without 3G.

It was fine enough to become the hottest smartphone on the planet, and to pave the way to Apple's utter dominance in that phone category. :)

[Solar]

Holy Crap! :wow:

I had no Idea that 3G was faster than Edge. - Really when did this happen?

:rolleyes:

Slow news day today eh?

[3goldens]

I can't believe someone would even post something as silly as this!

[TBaggins]

Holy Crap! :wow:

I had no Idea that 3G was faster than Edge. - Really when did this happen?



[testing out the broken Edit button workaround- pray for me :lol: - TB]


I think "how much faster, real-world" was the question ppl were curious about. So I'm glad whomever it was did the video, and that AI posted it.

Of course, it may not be a perfect test... as someone else noted, the WiFi intermediary step ups the latency a bit (but not too much, as WiFi is a low-latency tech usually). Real real-world (is that a new expression?), 3G is likely a bit faster than than what the test showed. 8-)

Not that it matters... once the 3G iPhone shows up in a month or two, nearly everyone is just gonna buy that, regardless of whether its 2x, 3x, 5x, whatever, faster than EDGE, real-world.

Unless the EDGE iPhone, assuming it's kept around, is priced insanely low. And even then, the 2.5G model would probably sell okay only in the US.


[Whoa. Edit workaround appears to actually work. ;) -TB]



.

[blackwind212]

Both pretty much suck.

4G or bust.

[TBaggins]

It was fine enough to become the hottest smartphone on the planet, and to pave the way to Apple's utter dominance in that phone category. :)


Dominance is a-ways ways off. Nokia shipped more than 8 times more smartphones in Q4 '07 than Apple did, RIM, about double.

On the plus side, Apple did pass Motorola for No.3, which is very impressive (even given Moto's problems) for a newcomer. 8-)



http://www.macobserver.com/article/2008/02/20080205canalys.jpg


.

[satchmo]

For me, it boils down to cost.

If:
3G iPhone = $499
2.5 iPhone = Discounted to $200

I'll take the 2.5 G iPhone.:)

[TBaggins]

Both pretty much suck.

4G or bust.


Are you willing to wait until 2011 for widespread LTE coverage? :???:

Of course, there's also WiMax, but its deployment in the US may get scaled back and slowed down, what with Sprint having a near-death experience currently. Their May 12 results are going to look like Pearl Harbor. :wow:


.

[TBaggins]

For me, it boils down to cost.

If:
3G iPhone = $499
2.5 iPhone = Discounted to $200

I'll take the 2.5 G iPhone.:)


I think there'll probably be a high-storage 3G iPhone priced at that price level, but I'd be a bit surprised if there weren't a $399 3G iPhone as well. I'm also not sure why a 2.5G iPhone would be priced under the iPod Touch ($299) if they keep it around as the low-end iPhone. :???:

Of course, if the 2.5G model gets discontinued, by all means, take advantage of any and all fire sales. 8-)

But if they keep it around, and at a $100 price delta, I think the 2.5G iPhone mostly sits on store shelves, lonely and remembering its glory days.


.

[Proximityeffect]

Both pretty much suck.

4G or bust.

4G is out of date. I'm waiting for 6G.

[satchmo]

I think there'll probably be a high-storage 3G iPhone priced at that price level, but I'd be a bit surprised if there weren't a $399 3G iPhone as well. I'm also not sure why a 2.5G iPhone would be priced under the iPod Touch ($299) if they keep it around as the low-end iPhone. :???:

Of course, if the 2.5G model gets discontinued, by all means, take advantage of any and all fire sales. 8-)

But if they keep it around, and at a $100 price delta, I think the 2.5G iPhone mostly sits on store shelves, lonely and remembering its glory days.


.

Okay, perhaps I over-reacted in hopes of a lower cost iPhone. ;)
Let's say the the 2.5 iPhone drops to $299. Perhaps refurbished ones will be at $249 (same as when AT&T had them for a few days).

Personally I'd love to see the following:

8GB iPhone 2.5 = $249
16GB iPhone 3G= $399
32GB iPhone 3G = $499

8GB iPod Touch = $199
16GB iPod Touch = $329
32GB iPod Touch = $399

[mrochester]

Mine's fine without G3. You do know it has Wifi right?

Wow you get wifi everywhere you get 3G? I sit at work - no wifi, perfect 3G, I sit on the bus to/from work, no wifi but again, perfect 3G. I visit my parents/friends/relatives. None have wifi but I get a 3G signal. So really, wifi is a bit of a bum compromise since it's so limited whereas 3G = nearly everywhere..

[nicegoogly]

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you. the real noticeable difference with edge/3g will be when you tether your phone to your computer... which you can't do

I totally agree. Remember when windows and palm phones changed over to Sprint Broadband. I have had both on both versions of "High Speed" mobile internet and the difference is not so large that it would make me buy a new phone. Tethering with devices on any of the major services will not give you cable modem/FIOS type speeds, but will definitely be four to five times faster than dial up. I live in New York City so the access to the high speed networks is fairly good.

[freethinker]

Okay, perhaps I over-reacted in hopes of a lower cost iPhone. ;)
Let's say the the 2.5 iPhone drops to $299. Perhaps refurbished ones will be at $249 (same as when AT&T had them for a few days).

Personally I'd love to see the following:

8GB iPhone 2.5 = $249
16GB iPhone 3G= $399
32GB iPhone 3G = $499

8GB iPod Touch = $199
16GB iPod Touch = $329
32GB iPod Touch = $399

I like your hopefulness, but the Iphone 3g will be more like
8GB iPhone 2.5 = $299
16GB iPhone 3G= $499
32GB iPhone 3G = $599

AT&T will offer a "rebate discount" though for the new model, the 3g...

[nicegoogly]

Wow you get wifi everywhere you get 3G? I sit at work - no wifi, perfect 3G, I sit on the bus to/from work, no wifi but again, perfect 3G. I visit my parents/friends/relatives. None have wifi but I get a 3G signal. So really, wifi is a bit of a bum compromise since it's so limited whereas 3G = nearly everywhere..

This compromise is all relative. I am an attorney and have two offices, both with wi-fi, I have wi-fi at home and now all of the courthouses I am in have free wi-fi, now AT&T will be giving free wi-fi access in Barnes & Noble and Starbucks, and there are the number of unsecured servers and free wi-fi in numerous other places. My access is much greater than someone in Omaha. But will 3G be widely available in that City? 3G will never be as fast as wi-fi as it is now and the foreseeable future.

[monstrosity]

I'll point and laugh at those who suggested the iPhone was fine without 3G.

For it's target market and design goals, yes it was fine.

[murphyweb]

3G will never be as fast as wi-fi as it is now and the foreseeable future.

Sorry, but that is clearly not true. 3G is faster that wifi in many many instances.

With wifi you are only sharing whatever bandwidth is available from the access point. If you have 10 people sharing 1MB of bandwidth then your wifi connection could theoretically be only 100k or less. You go to a busy Starbucks and how many people might there be online? And how much bandwidth does Starbucks have going back to the carrier? I presume they do not give all of their bandwidth to customers and would keep a proportion of it for their own internal use too?

[Kickaha]

Sorry, but that is clearly not true. 3G is faster that wifi in many many instances.

With wifi you are only sharing whatever bandwidth is available from the access point. If you have 10 people sharing 1MB of bandwidth then your wifi connection could theoretically be only 100k or less. You go to a busy Starbucks and how many people might there be online? And how much bandwidth does Starbucks have going back to the carrier? I presume they do not give all of their bandwidth to customers and would keep a proportion of it for their own internal use too?

Well if you want to reduce the available bandwidth to a straw, then yes, you can create a scenario where 3G will be faster. It would be even *faster* if they were only using a 56k modem on the back end too, but how silly do you want to get with this?

And, which measure are you using for 3G speed in this comparison? The theoretical 2Mbit/s fixed location rate? Alright, let's assume you end up with a *perfect* connection, and can utilize all of it at 100%. Let's assume 10 folks on a WAP as well. The pipe to the ISP needs to be a measly 20Mbit, or 2.5MB/s to saturate all 10 people's connections at the same time... which you have to admit is a pretty artificial scenario for most people's use.

For the vast majority of the use cases, WiFi will beat 3G in a head to head, although yes, you can craft specific instances where a 3G unit can beat a WiFi connection... but that doesn't really give any useful information, does it?

[DESuserIGN]

So really, wifi is a bit of a bum compromise since it's so limited whereas 3G = nearly everywhere..

Yeah. Almost everywhere! . . . Almost.

3G Coverage Maps for Verizon, Cingular, and Sprint:
http://www.morethanpoints.com/articles/2006/10/23/3g-coverage-maps-for-verizon-cingular-and-sprint

[quinney]

... I am an attorney ...

For reals? What type of law do you practice? This forum could sure use
some authoritative information on the many legal questions which come up.

[solipsism]

Mine's fine without G3. You do know it has Wifi right?

Mine is too. Though I want the option for 3G, the area I am now has faster EDGE than some 3G data rates I've read about.

i think to people assume because their device and carrier HW are capable of much higher speeds that they are going to be getting it. I sure hope AT&T has up their nationwide data rates and coverage. They either have, or I've been very lucky with my 3G notebook card.

[solipsism]

I like your hopefulness, but the Iphone 3g will be more like
8GB iPhone 2.5 = $299
16GB iPhone 3G= $499
32GB iPhone 3G = $599

AT&T will offer a "rebate discount" though for the new model, the 3g...

Because so many iPhones from the US are being shipped out of the country and unlocked, thus losing revenue for Apple, I think Apple will raise the price of the device by $200 (though still officially locked because they are bastards and under contract with AT&T) and then offer a $200 discount—as you and the rumours suggest—when you sign up for a contract with AT&T.

If the AT&T happens will it be automated via the iTunes signup for the iPhone or will it have to be done via an AT&T authorized reseller? The latter is what the rumours are hinting to, but I see no reason why this can't be set up within the iTunes portal when it connects to AT&T to authorized your SIM and puts you into a 2-year contract.

if I were Apple I'd have it offer options instead of mailed rebate. Like credit toward iTS or AT&T store as well as a mailed check back.

[TBaggins]

This compromise is all relative. I am an attorney and have two offices, both with wi-fi, I have wi-fi at home and now all of the courthouses I am in have free wi-fi, now AT&T will be giving free wi-fi access in Barnes & Noble and Starbucks, and there are the number of unsecured servers and free wi-fi in numerous other places.


That's neat, but if you're on the move (on public transit, in a carpool, or heck, even walking down the street), WiFi isn't really a help. Limited range hotspots + not mobile = not good for ppl on the move. :\

But, if you're sitting on your butt enjoying a latte, then yes, it's nice.


.

[sapporobaby]

But at what cost? For example, battery life. Will it be a problem? Is the attached article still relevant?

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3036

You do not seem to get the difference between having a 3G connection and being connected for 3g applications. Here goes. If the phone is in standby and connected via 3G, it means that there is a 3G network available for a 3G application, i.e. VoIP. This drains the battery no more than a 2.5G connection. However, once the application is used, and data is passed, there is a higher drain on the battery. How do I know this? I have a 3G phone, and use it daily, so I can see how 3G does and does not affect battery life.

These blanket "kill the battery" statements such as yours and others are misleading at best and false in the worst case.'

Before you start offering expert advice via Apple talking points, get a 3G phone and do some practical tests yourself.

[solipsism]

Since WiFi was brought up, is there a site I can use that will allow me to open any other site within a frame as SSL (HTTPS)? While important sites offer this i don't necessarily want people knowing what non-encrypted data I'm looking at. For example, YouTube or MySpace pages.

What I'm picturing is going to site like http;//secure.google.com and then having a bar ner the top with place for a Google search or to input the direct link I want to go to. The top frame wouldn't change (except, perhaps, for site related ads) while the bottom one would be queried from the server unencrypted (as usual) and then sent to my unsecured access point encrypted.

[sapporobaby]

Mine is too. Though I want the option for 3G, the area I am now has faster EDGE than some 3G data rates I've read about.

i think to people assume because their device and carrier HW are capable of much higher speeds that they are going to be getting it. I sure hope AT&T has up their nationwide data rates and coverage. They either have, or I've been very lucky with my 3G notebook card.

Thank the telecom gods that I am not forced to use the somewhat crappy US networks. Maybe AT&T and the others will pull their collective heads out and take a gander across the water at the European and Japanese networks. Hell, even throw in the ME networks as well.

[solipsism]

Thank the telecom gods that I am not forced to use the somewhat crappy US networks. Maybe AT&T and the others will pull their collective heads out and take a gander across the water at the European and Japanese networks. Hell, even throw in the ME networks as well.

Are you back in Finland? if not, how fast is your 3G right now?• How fast is your cell phone? (data speed tests) (http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?p=1246948)

[TBaggins]

Mine is too. Though I want the option for 3G, the area I am now has faster EDGE than some 3G data rates I've read about.


It's unlikely that you'd get much above 200 kbps real-world with EDGE. And ATT doesn't even claim speeds that fast for EDGE on its site.

I don't know about ATT's 3G, but with Sprint's and Verizon's 3G, common speeds are 600 kbps to 1.4 Mbps real-world, last I checked.

If EDGE is outpacing 3G for you, something's not as it should be. :???:


.

[solipsism]

If EDGE is outpacing 3G for you, something's not as it should be.

I have measured the speed of AT&T EDGE in one area to be faster than AT&T HSDPA offered in another area. That is based on map coverage of AT&T's 3G coverage. There could have been technical issues preventing it from being faster.

Right now, when I plug in the AT&T Sierra Wireless 3G USB card I get a rough average of about 1500Kb/s and saw it as high as 1900Mb/s after doing several tests from several sources. I hope this coverage is the norm, not the exception.

[sapporobaby]

Are you back in Finland? if not, how fast is your 3G right now?• How fast is your cell phone? (data speed tests) (http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?p=1246948)

On my iPhone I got SPEED: 112kbps

All time: average 130 kbit
24 hr: average 112

[k2director]

Dominance is a-ways ways off. Nokia shipped more than 8 times more smartphones in Q4 '07 than Apple did, RIM, about double.


Nokia has had years to build market momentum and a worldwide sales channel, while Apple has had about 10 months. But I'm certain Apple will indeed dominate the segment within a few years; it has too many weapons that Nokia nor RIM can effectively counter--ie, a world-class software development culture, a world-class media store (how easy is it to rent a movie and watch it on your Nokia or Blackberry??), the potential for deep integration with desktop computers and home networks. etc.

The iPhone has indeed paved the way to world domination, and it sure didn't need 3G to get the ball rolling.

[solipsism]

But I'm certain Apple will indeed dominate the segment within a few years

I think so too. The iPhone has pulled a good deal of its customers from the cheap to free, low function phone to the high-end smartphone sector. That is pretty impressive and I think that will be the achilles heal of Nokia's dominance in smartphone sales; pulling replacing a basic cellphone and iPod for an iPhone.

[sapporobaby]

Nokia has had years to build market momentum and a worldwide sales channel, while Apple has had about 10 months. But I'm certain Apple will indeed dominate the segment within a few years; it has too many weapons that Nokia nor RIM can effectively counter--ie, a world-class software development culture, a world-class media store (how easy is it to rent a movie and watch it on your Nokia or Blackberry??), the potential for deep integration with desktop computers and home networks. etc.

The iPhone has indeed paved the way to world domination, and it sure didn't need 3G to get the ball rolling.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......

Please wake me when something interesting is said. Do you really, really think that Nokia is incapable of duplicating what Apple has done?

Let's recap:

1. The iPhone is a 3 year old phone (technologically), with a very nice UI. Drop the UI, you have a Motorola, i.e. POS.
2. The iPhone is more iPod than phone. Try making a VoIP call or exchange vCards, or any biz function.
3. iTunes is what is the driver here. A comparable store offered and supported by Nokia would be hard to dismiss and Nokia already has about a gazillion more customers and deeper pockets than Apple, and well, Nokia is a company of mobile telephony experts. There is nothing from a technological standpoint that Apple can do that Nokia can't.
4. Nokia is pretty good at adapting and selling products that people want, hence their market domination.

These are just a few points. I have been traveling all day and could not be bothered to list more. I am quite sure you get meaning.

[sapporobaby]

I think so too. The iPhone has pulled a good deal of its customers from the cheap to free, low function phone to the high-end smartphone sector. That is pretty impressive and I think that will be the achilles heal of Nokia's dominance in smartphone sales; pulling replacing a basic cellphone and iPod for an iPhone.

This is where you and the other gentleman are mistaken (my opinion). It is my assumption that you and he have never used or even held a high end Nokia phone. Right now, the N82 simply blows the iPhone away in terms of technology. This is why the iPhone sales in Europe are flat. Europeans think the iPhone is nice but for the money, they get more bang for the buck (or Euro). Many see the iPhone as a nice iPod that has some basic telephony functions.

[sapporobaby]

Tried to edit my prior post but for some reason it would not let me so sorry for creating an additional post.

Go to: http://europe.nokia.com/products and have a quick look at any E or N series phone and compare them to the iPhone in terms of specifications and functionality.

While in Germany for the past week, I was using my iPhone and my N82. Many to most thought the iPhone was nice but most felt the N82 offered more value for the money. The ability to add software at will, or to swap a battery, 3G (oh no, not that), a real GPS, expandable memory, etc... While they all loved the TS UI of the iPhone, they were content with the navigation of the N82.

[solipsism]

Please wake me when something interesting is said. Do you really, really think that Nokia is incapable of duplicating what Apple has done?
[...]
These are just a few points. I have been traveling all day and could not be bothered to list more. I am quite sure you get meaning.

There are capacitance multi-touch phones on the market with more on the horizon, but Apple is in a unique position of having a UI and underlying OS that dominates the mobile market. While the iPhone is oddly missing some basic functionality in the HW and SW, the OS is such a powerful factor that no one has come close to duplicating, only mimicking the UI on a few screens.

[sapporobaby]

There are capacitance multi-touch phones on the market with more on the horizon, but Apple is in a unique position of having a UI and underlying OS that dominates the mobile market. While the iPhone is oddly missing some basic functionality in the HW and SW, the OS is such a powerful factor that no one has come close to duplicating, only mimicking the UI on a few screens.

Don't get me wrong here. I like my iPhone and chances are I will get a 3G version as well. As you pointed out the underlying OS is the real deal maker here. It is fast, stable, and if Apple really wants to be open as they say, provides a great platform to build upon. After being in the telecom game on both sides, software development sector and operator side, I have seen all the hottest, latest and greatest. The so-called "Brand-X" killers come and go, and they never pan out or deliver the knock out blow. Nokia will lose some market share initially to Apple but Nokia is smart and innovative. I have seen their new phone (NDA so no details) but it will be nice and compete with the iPhone. Many of the same iPhone users in Europe carry two phones. This alone should speak volumes that the iPhone is lacking. Apple had better bring its A game.

[solipsism]

Nokia will lose some market share initially to Apple but Nokia is smart and innovative.

I think the iPhone is pulling in mainly new blood into the smartphone market, so I suspect that Nokia's year-over-year unit sale percentage will grow at about the same rate, if not more, than it is now.

It's the by percentage comparison of smartphone unit sales among the industry that Nokia will lose share that will not be recovered. But that is to be expected. It's like Apple's increasing Mac marketshare, though PC unit sales are still gaining momentum yer-over-year.



I think I'm coming down with something as I don't feel I am communicating well today. Can you get SARS from Americanized Chinese food? :(

[sapporobaby]

Cna you get SARS from Americanized Chinese food?:([/I]

Not sure but I know I need to get my butt in bed. The sun is coming up here in Helsinki and it is only 0437. Shit.

Get well, till laters.

[TBaggins]

Nokia has had years to build market momentum and a worldwide sales channel, while Apple has had about 10 months. But I'm certain Apple will indeed dominate the segment within a few years; it has too many weapons that Nokia nor RIM can effectively counter--ie, a world-class software development culture, a world-class media store (how easy is it to rent a movie and watch it on your Nokia or Blackberry??), the potential for deep integration with desktop computers and home networks. etc.

I dunno... both sides have their advantages. Apple's software is great, but Nokia has 40 percent of the worldwide cellphone market, which is close to half a BILLION cellphones sold every year. :wow:

I think at some point Nokia and Apple will be like Coke and Pepsi in the cellphone market, but I'd never predict that one will 'dominate' the other. And I'm a pretty huge Apple fan.


The iPhone has indeed paved the way to world domination, and it sure didn't need 3G to get the ball rolling.

No, but it'll need 3G to roll the ball over the next major hills, which would be the Asian launch, and finally doing well in Europe.


.

[one9deuce]

sapporobaby, you're judging the iPhone on version 1, a product that has been out a whole ten months. Nokia has been in the mobile phone business for how long?

No offense, but you really come off like a very clever Nokia troll. I'm thinking you work for Nokia but still talk about an iPhone in your posts so you don't seem biased. But you still come off that way. :embarrass

Of course, this debate will be rendered moot very soon. When iPhone version 2 is released it is going to dominate everyone, including Nokia. Maybe Nokia can make a half-way decent iPhone knock-off so they don't lose TOO much business. You know, so you still have a job and all. :D

[solipsism]

No offense, but you really come off like a very clever Nokia troll. I'm thinking you work for Nokia but still talk about an iPhone in your posts so you don't seem biased. But you still come off that way :embarrass:

I don't agree with his conservative assessment of the worldwide adoption of a 3G iPhone with v2.0 firmware, but there is nothing trollish about his posts. He is clearly not trying to incite an aggravated response in anyone.

I don't doubt that the iPhone will have a much, much faster year-over-year growth than either RiM, Nokia or WinMobile devices, but that isn't saying much considering what we know will be coming to the iPhone with 3G, 3rd-party apps and Exchange support. Apple will break records in growth in this area, but Nokia's smartphones will still outsell the iPhone in unit sales for some time.

I'm not even convinced that Apple will outsell RiM's smartphones for at first two quarters. One thing that is certain is that even if Apple becomes the number one selling smartphone Nokia will still be there making money hand-over-fist.

[sapporobaby]

sapporobaby, you're judging the iPhone on version 1, a product that has been out a whole ten months. Nokia has been in the mobile phone business for how long?

No offense, but you really come off like a very clever Nokia troll. I'm thinking you work for Nokia but still talk about an iPhone in your posts so you don't seem biased. But you still come off that way. :embarrass

Of course, this debate will be rendered moot very soon. When iPhone version 2 is released it is going to dominate everyone, including Nokia. Maybe Nokia can make a half-way decent iPhone knock-off so they don't lose TOO much business. You know, so you still have a job and all. :D

I am here to educate you.

Class in session. As I have stated several times throughout this thread and forum, I work for the US State Department but am currently living in Europe on assignment. Get a passport and travel before making a blanket assessment about someone. Anyway, I have had the advantage of working in the telecoms industry on the operator and software developer side (this was mentioned in this very thread). I will include pictures next time. I have also had the pleasure of using almost every smartphone/mobile phone device type since the middle 90's when Nokia came out with the original Communicator, Ericsson with the R380, various Psion devices, and so on. I would say this makes me more than "clever" but knowledgeable and able to speak with some confidence about a subject I am quite familiar with. What's your excuse?

It seems that anytime, anyone does not tow the "Apple, Apple uber alles", party line this person is either biased, Apple haters, stupid in some cases, etc.....


@solipsism,

You are correct. Hope you are feeling better.

[mrochester]

Yeah. Almost everywhere! . . . Almost.

3G Coverage Maps for Verizon, Cingular, and Sprint:
http://www.morethanpoints.com/articles/2006/10/23/3g-coverage-maps-for-verizon-cingular-and-sprint

That's a US map, not the UK ;)

[JeffDM]

Sorry, but that is clearly not true. 3G is faster that wifi in many many instances.

With wifi you are only sharing whatever bandwidth is available from the access point. If you have 10 people sharing 1MB of bandwidth then your wifi connection could theoretically be only 100k or less. You go to a busy Starbucks and how many people might there be online? And how much bandwidth does Starbucks have going back to the carrier? I presume they do not give all of their bandwidth to customers and would keep a proportion of it for their own internal use too?

The internet is almost always shared bandwidth. It's shared with DSL at the CO & its uplink, it's shared on cable because of the cable, it's shared on cellular because you're sharing the antenna as well as its upstream link. You don't get dedicated bandwidth unless you really pay dearly for it.

I don't know what bandwidth Starbuck's would use, but I don't think it's a whole lot.

[TBaggins]

It seems that anytime, anyone does not tow the "Apple, Apple uber alles", party line this person is either biased, Apple haters, stupid in some cases, etc.....


You forgot "troll". That one often gets tossed in one's face by someone if you don't automatically agree that Apple is always right and is on the glide path to total, undisputed rule over whatever product segment they're currently entering. It's the AI forums way. :lol:

I'm a pretty huge Apple fan, having owned Macs all the way back to the SE/30, I'm currently typing this message on my gfriend's MacBook (my ancient iBook is a bit slow, but I still use it) while waiting to go the gym where I'll be using my iPod during my workout. But, if I disagree with Apple on anything, somehow I'm suspect, at least in certain ppl's minds.

It's kinda funny, when you think about it: ;)



http://www.sott.net/image/image/7281/inquisition_monty_python.jpg
NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!


.

[sapporobaby]

The internet is almost always shared bandwidth. It's shared with DSL at the CO & its uplink, it's shared on cable because of the cable, it's shared on cellular because you're sharing the antenna as well as its upstream link. You don't get dedicated bandwidth unless you really pay dearly for it.

I don't know what bandwidth Starbuck's would use, but I don't think it's a whole lot.


Pretty much spot on. Mobile data uses timeslots and such but for the most part it is all shared. I get a dedicated speed based on the amount that I am willing to pay, but this is solely based on the network coverage. Even with HSDPA, wifi smokes most mobile data connections. Even in downtown Helsinki with is blanketed it with wifi, and connected users, wifi is still faster in most cases.

[sapporobaby]

You forgot "troll". That one often gets tossed in one's face by someone if you don't automatically agree that Apple is always right and is on the glide path to total, undisputed rule over whatever product segment they're currently entering. It's the AI forums way. :lol:

I'm a pretty huge Apple fan, having owned Macs all the way back to the SE/30, I'm currently typing this message on my gfriend's MacBook (my ancient iBook is a bit slow, but I still use it) while waiting to go the gym where I'll be using my iPod during my workout. But, if I disagree with Apple on anything, somehow I'm suspect, at least in certain ppl's minds.

It's kinda funny, when you think about it. ;)


.

Yes, I did forget troll. Thanks for the update TBaggins. I will add this to the list.

Funny thing, as I head into my livingroom to watch some shows on my ATV, that I downloaded from iTunes, that reside on my MBP 17 inch, which happen to be on my iPod Touch and iPhone, which have access to songs on my other Macbook G4, I wonder if I am doing the right thing by trying to think different. Maybe I should become one of the "sheeple" and let "He who must not be named" do all of my thinking for me. It seems that more than most here are happy to not have a single isolated thought outside of the Third Apple Reich.

Oh well, back to the AI super hug-fest.

[solipsism]

Oh well, back to the AI super hug-fest.

Excuse me, that is the AI super fanboy hugfest.

You're either a troll or a fanboy, there is no in between. I suppose it follows the "you're either with us or you're against us" mantra of the short-sided.

[sapporobaby]

Excuse me, that is the AI super fanboy hugfest.

You're either a troll or a fanboy there is no in between. I suppose it follows the "you're either with us or you're against us" mantra. of the short-sided.

ROFLMA. You feeling better?

[TBaggins]

Excuse me, that is the AI super fanboy hugfest.

You're either a troll or a fanboy there is no in between. I suppose it follows the "you're either with us or you're against us" mantra of the short-sided.


Yep, and it's irritating.

I mean, back in the '90s, when Apple was undergoing it's near-death phase, it made sense to think that way. LEGIONS of PC trolls would descend on Apple forums, spreading FUD and in general being a-holes. If you were a Mac fan, it was like being in a castle under siege... not that it wasn't fun pouring flaming oil on the PC barbarians at the gate, as I did many times. ;)

But that was then, this is now. FUD means little, it's mostly good for a laugh. Any idiot can see that Apple is doing well and is a major contender again. So why are some still so scared? Why are the wagons still circled? Or maybe the zealots are largely new people? Who knows.

All I can say is, the Apple Purity Police™ can suck it. I think for myself, and I have no wish to join their clique. There's a third group beyond fanbois or trolls, its Apple fans who are behind Apple but try to view their products and strategies reasonably objectively, and buy in up to the point where it makes sense, but aren't slavish followers of the party line.

If thats upsetting to some, oh well.


.

[solipsism]

ROFLMA. You feeling better?
Yes. Thank you for asking.

If you were a Mac fan, it was like being in a castle under siege... not that it wasn't fun pouring flaming oil on the PC barbarians at the gate, as I did many times.
It was like that here around the last MacWorld event. So many new posters just trolling away. I suspect it will continue to get worse as Apple increases it marketshare in the PC and cell phone arenas, but I hope the WWDC is spared. A once a year spike is more than enough.

All I can say is, the Apple Purity Police™ can suck it.
Which is why I prefer AI to any other Apple related site and over most tech sites.

[TBaggins]

It was like that here around the last MacWorld event. So many new posters just trolling away. I suspect it will continue to get worse as Apple increases it marketshare in the PC and cell phone arenas, but I hope the WWDC is spared. A once a year spike is more than enough.

Yeah, but it'll never be as bad as the '90s were. Because the '90s forum wars were done against the backdrop of Apple possibly dying.


Which is why I prefer AI to any other Apple related site and over most tech sites.

I dunno... the level of zealotry here is pretty durn high. But I agree that AI is not alone in that respect.


.

[one9deuce]

Uhhhhh, sapporobaby, as far as I know you're a janitor, but your posts make you sound like you work for Nokia. Or you're a Nokia shareholder. Or a Nokia fanboy if there is such a thing.

Or am I misinterpreting these?

"There is nothing from a technological standpoint that Apple can do that Nokia can't"

"Do you really, really think that Nokia is incapable of duplicating what Apple has done?"

"A comparable store offered and supported by Nokia would be hard to dismiss and Nokia already has about a gazillion more customers and deeper pockets than Apple"

I could go into a long post telling you why these statements are inaccurate, but why bother?. You'll be seeing for yourself soon enough.

And I'm hardly an Apple fanboy, TBaggins. I've never had an iPhone or an iPod, and I'm typing this on my Dell. But the writing is on the wall for the iPhone. It couldn't be more obvious how things are going to play out. Get some AAPL ;)

[k2director]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......

Please wake me when something interesting is said. Do you really, really think that Nokia is incapable of duplicating what Apple has done?

Let's recap:

1. The iPhone is a 3 year old phone (technologically), with a very nice UI. Drop the UI, you have a Motorola, i.e. POS.
2. The iPhone is more iPod than phone. Try making a VoIP call or exchange vCards, or any biz function.
3. iTunes is what is the driver here. A comparable store offered and supported by Nokia would be hard to dismiss and Nokia already has about a gazillion more customers and deeper pockets than Apple, and well, Nokia is a company of mobile telephony experts. There is nothing from a technological standpoint that Apple can do that Nokia can't.
4. Nokia is pretty good at adapting and selling products that people want, hence their market domination.

These are just a few points. I have been traveling all day and could not be bothered to list more. I am quite sure you get meaning.

LOL. It's the old "the iPhone offers nothing new but a UI" defense! I thought that was retired long ago....

Really, Sapporobaby, if you want to be taken seriously, you can't peddle this sort of drivel. There are tons of technological innovations in the iPhone. I don't recall seeing many Motorola phones with 3.5" screens, WiFI, directional and light sensors, precise touch-screens, and gigs of RAM all in a tiny form factor with pretty damn good battery life. But still, who cares how the iPhone delivers a superior smartphone experience--ie, whether it's hardware or software? The fact is, it DOES deliver a superior experience.

By the way, it's laughable that you think Nokia could build a Media Store eco-system that's anything close to iTunes. Nokia is in no better position to offer a "comparable" alternative to the iTunes Store than Microsoft, or any number of other competitors that have tried over the years, and failed. Even if Nokia could catch up with all of the store technology that Apple has developed (which is a BIG 'if'...you clearly underestimate what it takes), they'd still have to convince millions of customers to switch from what they already know. How will Nokia do that? By asking nicely? Good luck to them, it's not going to happen!

Also, I highly doubt the mainstream smartphone market (ie, consumers) cares about VoIP calls or exchanging vCards very much. And in less than 2 months, business users will have a lot less to complain about...

You're way to enamored of Nokia. For starters, Apple is a bigger and richer company. It has a significantly bigger market valuation (look it up!) and almost twice as much cash in the bank! And if Nokia can do anything Apple can do, why did it take Apple to effectively re-invent the smartphone category, and suddenly aim smartphones at everybody, and not just a small business niche? Why is Nokia now playing catch-up, trying to copy the iPhone's magic? (see: http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/30/the-nokia-iphone-commercial/)

Nokia's market domination is owed to much cheaper phones, not smartphones. There's not much future in making cheap, primitive phones, but there's a HUGE future in making phones like the iPhone (and integrating them with other digital devices like your computer and TV). We'll see how dominating Nokia looks in a few years....

[TBaggins]

Uhhhhh, sapporobaby, as far as I know you're a janitor, but your posts make you sound like you work for Nokia. Or you're a Nokia shareholder. Or a Nokia fanboy if there is such a thing.

Or am I misinterpreting these?

"There is nothing from a technological standpoint that Apple can do that Nokia can't"

"Do you really, really think that Nokia is incapable of duplicating what Apple has done?"

"A comparable store offered and supported by Nokia would be hard to dismiss and Nokia already has about a gazillion more customers and deeper pockets than Apple"

I could go into a long post telling you why these statements are inaccurate, but why bother?. You'll be seeing for yourself soon enough.


Meh. I think what Sapporo is saying is that no matter what Apple does in cellphones, Nokia can always play Microsoft to Apple's, well, Apple... i.e. imitate whatever Apple does a couple of year later with a 'good enough' copy, and use their sheer size and market position to ram it on through. Nokia will be a $100 billion/year revenue company soon, after all, and phones are their core business, while they're just one of Apple's three core businesses.

It's hard to predict with any certainty how successful that strategy will be, but it's fair to say that Nokia is going to be a major challenge for Apple. They are an extremely large and well-entrenched company with a lot of resources. Just because they're behind on software right now doesn't mean they're roadkill, as much as I, an Apple fan, would love to believe it.



And I'm hardly an Apple fanboy, TBaggins. I've never had an iPhone or an iPod, and I'm typing this on my Dell. But the writing is on the wall for the iPhone. It couldn't be more obvious how things are going to play out.

I'm not saying you're an Apple fanboi... heck, I'm actually the Apple fanboi, but I'm one who tries to see things in a balanced way, which gets me in trouble from time to time. 8-)


Get some AAPL ;)

Way ahead of you, ace. I've owned APPL for years now. :smokey:


.

[TBaggins]

Crap, so much stuff to do. This forum is such a time sink. :D

Okay ppl, argue, but play nice. I'll try to get back here sometime next week. :lol:



.

[k2director]

Meh. I think what Sapporo is saying is that no matter what Apple does in cellphones, Nokia can always play Microsoft to Apple's, well, Apple... i.e. imitate whatever Apple does a couple of year later with a 'good enough' copy, and use their sheer size and market position to ram it on through. Nokia will be a $100 billion/year revenue company soon, after all, and phones are their core business, while they're just one of Apple's three core businesses..

It's interesting that you draw a parallel between Microsoft and Nokia. Nokia may indeed follow Microsoft's playbook (ie, be the imitator and rely on sheer size to create a market) but Microsoft's strategy isn't looking so foolproof these days. I shudder to think how much $$$ Microsoft has thrown away trying to make the Zune and its media store into an iPod competitor, and it hasn't even made a dent. Also, the iPhone is easily outselling Windows Mobile phones, despite the fact that Windows Mobile has been in the market for years. And clearly, more and more people are switching away from Windows to Macs because of the Mac's innovative features and design.

The point is: the Microsoft strategy is by no means effective in all cases, and if that's Nokia's path, then the company is taking a terrible risk.

P.S. Microsoft *has* found success when it does innovate, and not simply follow someone else's lead. Case in point: the Xbox 360. By being early to market with a genre-defining product (the first next-gen console from the big 3), and by developing a kick-ass online service that's years ahead of the competition.

In other words, being an early innovator is a great thing, and I'm betting Apple can out-innovate Nokia, RIM or anyone else in the smartphone space....

[addabox]

So it seems to me that the challenge Nokia faces going forward is the changing definition of "cell phone."

It looks like the market is going to segment into free, disposable "just a phone" items, and mobile computing devices such as the iPhone. Not "smart phones", a category that appears to have been a way-station on this road, but "mobile computers that have telephony among their applications."

These devices are going to sink or swim on their integration with the larger computing and media environment and, as more and more functionality gets shoe-horned into a constricted display and control space, their UI.

Apple is in an incredibly good position in regards to media and desktop integration. What would it take for Nokia to match Apple's ecosystem? Doesn't it seem obvious that the mobile computing device as extension of your larger digital world becomes increasingly important from now on? Doesn't being the guys with the well regarded desktop OS, of which your phone OS is a subset, and the vast iTunes ecosystem seem like a huge advantage, in that case?

The latter point, shoe-horning more and more "real computer" experience into such a small form factor, is why it seems to me to be wrong-headed to dismiss the iPhone as "old tech with a pretty face." The UI is, for most users, the device. Clunky navigation and confusing menu structures are one thing if I just want to do a few things, or if the phone is primarily intended for enthusiasts. It's quite another if the idea is to offer a lot of different functionality to the "just a phone" crowd.

I look at it this way: Nokia has done a good job growing simple phone functionality into more sophisticated devices. Apple has done a good job shrinking a desktop OS to fit on a handheld device.

As hand held devices get more and more powerful, which is the better starting point?

[sapporobaby]

I look at it this way: Nokia has done a good job growing simple phone functionality into more sophisticated devices. Apple has done a good job shrinking a desktop OS to fit on a handheld device.

As hand held devices get more and more powerful, which is the better starting point?

This is probably the best summation of this entire thread.

Point: Nokia has the stones to do pretty much whatever it wants in any given market. The non-passport holding crowd simply see Nokia as a phone manufacture. They make all components required in a cell network. Phones are just one part, just as Mac OS on the iPhone is another part.
Point: Nokia simply has more numbers than Apple in terms of phones.
Point: The US market is the only market that remotely considers the iPhone a "smartphone". Other than playing videos, music, various other media, its telephone functions are crap. Pure and simple. Crap.
Point: Nokia has a long way to go to be remotely close to iTunes but they, just like Apple, have started slowly and are gauging the way the consumer winds are blowing and they will go in that direction.
Point: IN a side by side comparison in terms of features, the iPhone loses when compared to a real smartphone. Stack an iPhone up against a N95, N82, E90, E61i and see where the iPhone comes in. If terms of media functionality, the iPhone will probably get 8 out of 10 votes. However if you only want a device that has the barebones in telephony, the iPhone is your device.

At the end of the day, it is unfair to compare the iPhone to smartphone as it is not in the same class of devices. Nokia can use the same argument presented here: just wait and see what we will do next. This is the number one battle cry from the Apple-teenie crews here when biz features or the lack of biz features are mentioned. Apple is playing catch up just as Nokia. The only difference is, Nokia has a proven record and hundreds of millions of customers to back up their claims. Apple is the new kid on the block. As I have said several times before, Apple would be smart to hire some European phone designers from SE, or Nokia to help them understand the Enterprise market.

[sapporobaby]

Uhhhhh, sapporobaby, as far as I know you're a janitor, but your posts make you sound like you work for Nokia. Or you're a Nokia shareholder. Or a Nokia fanboy if there is such a thing.

Or am I misinterpreting these?

"There is nothing from a technological standpoint that Apple can do that Nokia can't"

"Do you really, really think that Nokia is incapable of duplicating what Apple has done?"

"A comparable store offered and supported by Nokia would be hard to dismiss and Nokia already has about a gazillion more customers and deeper pockets than Apple"

I could go into a long post telling you why these statements are inaccurate, but why bother?. You'll be seeing for yourself soon enough.

And I'm hardly an Apple fanboy, TBaggins. I've never had an iPhone or an iPod, and I'm typing this on my Dell. But the writing is on the wall for the iPhone. It couldn't be more obvious how things are going to play out. Get some AAPL ;)


These are called facts. Next time I will try to include some pics for you. So are you saying:

1. Nokia can not match Apple technology wise?
2. Are you saying that Apple has cornered the market on innovation and all other companies should just pack it in?

Your dismissal of anything that does not come from Apple and falling back to the Apple, "wait and see" party line is pretty much par for the course for a Apple-zealot, or did I misrepresent you here?

[sapporobaby]

LOL. It's the old "the iPhone offers nothing new but a UI" defense! I thought that was retired long ago....

I guess it was valid then and still now considering that European sales make it clear the iPhone is not the revolutionary product that some think nor is it ready for a much more sophisticated market.

Really, Sapporobaby, if you want to be taken seriously, you can't peddle this sort of drivel. There are tons of technological innovations in the iPhone. I don't recall seeing many Motorola phones with 3.5" screens, WiFI, directional and light sensors, precise touch-screens, and gigs of RAM all in a tiny form factor with pretty damn good battery life. But still, who cares how the iPhone delivers a superior smartphone experience--ie, whether it's hardware or software? The fact is, it DOES deliver a superior experience.

We are talking about Nokia phones. Nokia. Minus the touch screens (for the moment) I have pretty much all of that in my Nokia N82. Google. It works.

By the way, it's laughable that you think Nokia could build a Media Store eco-system that's anything close to iTunes. Nokia is in no better position to offer a "comparable" alternative to the iTunes Store than Microsoft, or any number of other competitors that have tried over the years, and failed. Even if Nokia could catch up with all of the store technology that Apple has developed (which is a BIG 'if'...you clearly underestimate what it takes), they'd still have to convince millions of customers to switch from what they already know. How will Nokia do that? By asking nicely? Good luck to them, it's not going to happen!

That's right. iTunes sprung up overnight. Soooo glad you pointed this out. Yes. Apple didn't take a few years, and mucho dollars to invest into making iTunes what it is today. Right. Thanks for the info. By the way, you might have heard of this other little company that is offering better quality music (bit rates). What's the name? Uhhhh..... Hmmmm.... Ah, yes. Amazon. That's right. Amazon is offering DRM free music at higher bit rates and lower prices. Let's all ignore this because it is not an Apple offering.

Also, I highly doubt the mainstream smartphone market (ie, consumers) cares about VoIP calls or exchanging vCards very much. And in less than 2 months, business users will have a lot less to complain about...

Get passport. Travel. See the world. Do know that Mexico and Canada do not count as abroad. If a biz dude can sit in Jakarta with SE (just to shake things up) and make a VoIP call to his family, or office, he did what? Say it with me now. He saved money. Isn't this what VoIP is all about? It is quite clear you have zero point zero understanding how this works. Should you be taken serious regarding this?

You're way to enamored of Nokia. For starters, Apple is a bigger and richer company. It has a significantly bigger market valuation (look it up!) and almost twice as much cash in the bank! And if Nokia can do anything Apple can do, why did it take Apple to effectively re-invent the smartphone category, and suddenly aim smartphones at everybody, and not just a small business niche? Why is Nokia now playing catch-up, trying to copy the iPhone's magic? (see: http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/30/the-nokia-iphone-commercial/)

I am enamored with what works. For music/media, the iPhone is king. As a "REAL" smartphone, the iPhone falls short. Would you like to know why? Go look it up. By the way, your link is a bit dated. Do you really think Nokia hasn't done anything since then? Really?

Nokia's market domination is owed to much cheaper phones, not smartphones. There's not much future in making cheap, primitive phones, but there's a HUGE future in making phones like the iPhone (and integrating them with other digital devices like your computer and TV). We'll see how dominating Nokia looks in a few years....

This is almost too easy. Go to (I will help you here): www.nokia.co.uk and look up their phones. Europe, Asia, the Mid East get the good phones. The more mature or as someone put it, sophisticated models. Nokia could not sell another phone in the US and still be profitable with their E and N series phones.

Honestly, get that passport and look around a bit.

[Kickaha]

This is probably the best summation of this entire thread.

Indeed. Well said, addabox.

Point: Nokia has the stones to do pretty much whatever it wants in any given market. The non-passport holding crowd simply see Nokia as a phone manufacture. They make all components required in a cell network. Phones are just one part, just as Mac OS on the iPhone is another part.
Point: Nokia simply has more numbers than Apple in terms of phones.
Point: The US market is the only market that remotely considers the iPhone a "smartphone". Other than playing videos, music, various other media, its telephone functions are crap. Pure and simple. Crap.
Point: Nokia has a long way to go to be remotely close to iTunes but they, just like Apple, have started slowly and are gauging the way the consumer winds are blowing and they will go in that direction.
Point: IN a side by side comparison in terms of features, the iPhone loses when compared to a real smartphone. Stack an iPhone up against a N95, N82, E90, E61i and see where the iPhone comes in. If terms of media functionality, the iPhone will probably get 8 out of 10 votes. However if you only want a device that has the barebones in telephony, the iPhone is your device.

What telephony features do you see it needing?

At the end of the day, it is unfair to compare the iPhone to smartphone as it is not in the same class of devices. Nokia can use the same argument presented here: just wait and see what we will do next. This is the number one battle cry from the Apple-teenie crews here when biz features or the lack of biz features are mentioned. Apple is playing catch up just as Nokia. The only difference is, Nokia has a proven record and hundreds of millions of customers to back up their claims. Apple is the new kid on the block. As I have said several times before, Apple would be smart to hire some European phone designers from SE, or Nokia to help them understand the Enterprise market.

I assume this is what you mean by missing telephony features... and yeah, they'd do well to incorporate them, and do it intelligently.

However, I think you missed addabox's main point, even as you called it out as a good synopsis: which company has a better platform for quickly adding every more powerful features? The phone OS++, or the stripped down desktop OS? My money is on the latter. It's simply a better starting point as handhelds rise to meet the capabilities of desktops of just a few years ago.

*Can* Nokia meet Apple technology-wise? Sure. So *can* MS. Still waiting for proof on that last one though...

I think the Nokia/MS analogy is a decent one, but not perfect. We'll see how it goes.

[sapporobaby]

Indeed. Well said, addabox.



What telephony features do you see it needing?



I assume this is what you mean by missing telephony features... and yeah, they'd do well to incorporate them, and do it intelligently.

However, I think you missed addabox's main point, even as you called it out as a good synopsis: which company has a better platform for quickly adding every more powerful features? The phone OS++, or the stripped down desktop OS? My money is on the latter. It's simply a better starting point as handhelds rise to meet the capabilities of desktops of just a few years ago.

*Can* Nokia meet Apple technology-wise? Sure. So *can* MS. Still waiting for proof on that last one though...

I think the Nokia/MS analogy is a decent one, but not perfect. We'll see how it goes.

Hi kickaha,

Your post was equally as well stated. The thing is, I never said the iPhone was crap. It is far from it. It is however not the revolutionary device (my opinion) that many here (some of them blind followers) think. It is an evolutionary device. It was the logical next step. It builds a stable bridge from the desktop to a mobile device, and it does it well. Nokia products, are designed to be an extension of your office in your pocket. They perform this function quite well also. The iPhone and the Nokia devices are simply not comparable in my view as they serve different functions. I would not like to listen to music or watch a movie on my N82 even though I can, but I do like the VoIP, Skype, Fring, plethora of applications that I can use to make my working experience pretty decent. The same can be said of the iPhone. Movies, music, audio books, browsing, the iPhone wins clearly. But can I send biz cards, do vCard, vCal (not sure if they added this to be honest in 1.1.4), VoIP calls, decent quality pics, MMS (do not use often but when I need it, I really need it). How about saving docs for later emailing? These are the basics features in a so-called smartphone and the iPhone lacks them. Without even going down the 3G road again, this is also missing. To ignore this and continue the "iPhone = smartphone) is a lack of understanding. This shows in the European sales. Clearly they have a better understanding of what biz needs (well European needs) are as opposed to the US biz market.

[TBaggins]

Aww, crap... sucked in for one more post. :lol:

It's interesting that you draw a parallel between Microsoft and Nokia. Nokia may indeed follow Microsoft's playbook (ie, be the imitator and rely on sheer size to create a market) but Microsoft's strategy isn't looking so foolproof these days. I shudder to think how much $$$ Microsoft has thrown away trying to make the Zune and its media store into an iPod competitor, and it hasn't even made a dent.

Very true, the Zune has largely been a failure. But, who was the well-entrenched incumbent in the mp3 player market at the time the Zune was introduced? Apple.

Does Apple have that same position in the cellphone market? No. Nokia does.

Therefore, I'm not sure one can say that the 'MS-strategy' works equally well/badly in cellphones as it does in mp3 players, as Apple's starting position in each market is dramatically different... mighty incumbent in players, 'new-kid-on-the-block' trying to be taken seriously in phones and smartphones.

Thus, a Nokia 'good enough' imitative strategy may work. Not saying it will, not saying it won't.


In other words, being an early innovator is a great thing, and I'm betting Apple can out-innovate Nokia, RIM or anyone else in the smartphone space....

I agree, being the pacesetter is extremely helpful, and Apple has a software and design culture that the other cellphone makers do not.

But again, Microsoft didn't have those advantages, and still won the desktop wars. I realize that the Apple of the 2000s isn't the Apple of the 80s and early-mid 90s, but still, I do worry.

What I imagine happening is Apple and Nokia, over time, becoming more like one another. Apple will get bigger, offer more features, and offer more models serving a wider variety of audiences, maybe even models tailored specifically to Euro and Asian markets, while Nokia will place a higher priority on, and improve in, software and UI (though not to Apple's level).

In the end, they'll be the co-juggernauts of the mobile space, beating each others' brains in every quarter like it was World War 3. 8-)

I don't really see either killing the other off in cellphones, but this is just an educated guess... no one can predict with absolute certainty what's going to unfold, unless they're a fool.


.

[nicegoogly]

For reals? What type of law do you practice? This forum could sure use
some authoritative information on the many legal questions which come up.

I do a whole bunch of stuff from criminal to civil. I am more than happy to lend a hand if I can be helpful.8-)

[solipsism]

I do a whole bunch of stuff from criminal to civil. I am more than happy to lend a hand if I can be helpful.8-)

We really could use some insight on patent law around here whenever a new patent from Apple or lawsuit pertaining to an Apple product comes out.

[nicegoogly]

We really could use some insight on patent law around here whenever a new patent from Apple or lawsuit pertaining to an Apple product comes out.

Sounds like you are questioning those home made macs for sale. This one will be interesting to watch. I look at it this way: Apple is going to be much better equipped legally (obviously) due to their deep pockets. At the end of the day, it is not so much about the money, but about the case (as my two small offices would like to believe). Apple has a lot of support from the courts lately with the current decisions regarding EULA's and the scores of cases won by the RRIA against websites and individuals to move forward with a case. Where they may get hit is the comparison to the anti-trust cases filed against Microsoft a while back. One obvious connection is the courts requiring Microsoft to permit other applications other than their proprietary lot on to the system on prefabricated/preinstalled windows computers. Apple does this too, but people who buy Apple, love Apple. Plus, Apple tends to put more useful default applications on their computers. The court needs to see the Mac environment as its own environment that Apple has exclusive control over, thus creating a monopoly over that environment. If the universe includes desktop/laptop computers in general, then you are never forced to use an Apple computer in order to use a computer since there is competition between Apple, Microsoft and other computer manufacturers. I think is it somewhat BS to force someone to use and Apple computer to run a Mac OS, however, Jobs' tight grip over what can be put on the iPhone makes perfect sense. How many of us that had a Palm Treo would put untested third party apps on the damn thing to watch it go in an endless reset loop? What was looked at as overbearing and controlling by some, was smart to keep a product reliable and functioning well. Same with Apple computers. We designed the Mac OS to run on our products. Don't bring some other junk in to make our hard work look like it doesn't work at all. Additionally, Microsoft does not prevent anyone from using bootcamp and VMware and other sorts of dual boot software. I would think that this type freedom to add the Mac OS to another machine might appeal to Apple's freeform/ease of use interface style.

Sorry for the longwinded off topic post.

[solipsism]

Sounds like you are questioning those home made macs for sale.
That was the last one from my mind. I'm talking amore about the AI articles where Apple is accused of using technology that someone else patented and the articles where a new Apple patent comes up that has been used by others for some time.• AU articles regarding patents (http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=appleinsider+patent&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8)

If Apple sues "Pshystar" or cease and desist letters they will look like the bad guy, but I don't think Apple is worried about it right now. Despite Psystar's sketchy start their machines are still questionable.

They send you the $129 copy of Leopard unopened—because you need an OSx86 version—which I think they sell you for $150. So if you need to reinstall Leopard you have to pull out the HDD and ship it to them. They then have access to al your files so you could save a few bucks on a garage-built machine that doesn't have the more optimized drivers and where getting the device fixed under warranty will be a crap shoot.

Plus, you can't setup BootCamp, use the Leopard Install DIsc, or update the OS and a good deal of the Apps. It also doesn't come with any iLife apps. My point is, I don't think Apple is worried about them; The vast other home built OSx86 projects will certainly trump what Psystar can sell. SWIM has been using a Dell as home server running OS X for a couple years now.It works great!

I think they realized that litigation may stall them but not solve the larger problem. I suspect that they may be working with Intel, or perhaps with P.A. Semi now, to use HW authentication to make the clones harder to crack.


Additionally, Microsoft does not prevent anyone from using bootcamp and VMware and other sorts of dual boot software. I would think that this type freedom to add the Mac OS to another machine might appeal to Apple's freeform/ease of use interface style.
But MS makes money from their OS. They don't produce desktop hardware (save for their mice). Apple bread and butter is the HW so virtual OS X isn't an attractive option to Apple, especially if they were to be required to supply support for all the drivers of the various HW that MS has to deal with.

When Vista first came out MS did try to enforce via the EULA that only the more expensive copies could be used virtually. This was recently changed, probably as a result of poor Vista sales

Though, Leopard Server now allows virtualization, so some things have changed.

Sorry for the longwinded off topic post.
Longwinded is fine, it's the lack of paragraphs that we get upset with. :D

[addabox]

Hi kickaha,

Your post was equally as well stated. The thing is, I never said the iPhone was crap. It is far from it. It is however not the revolutionary device (my opinion) that many here (some of them blind followers) think. It is an evolutionary device. It was the logical next step. It builds a stable bridge from the desktop to a mobile device, and it does it well. Nokia products, are designed to be an extension of your office in your pocket. They perform this function quite well also. The iPhone and the Nokia devices are simply not comparable in my view as they serve different functions. I would not like to listen to music or watch a movie on my N82 even though I can, but I do like the VoIP, Skype, Fring, plethora of applications that I can use to make my working experience pretty decent. The same can be said of the iPhone. Movies, music, audio books, browsing, the iPhone wins clearly. But can I send biz cards, do vCard, vCal (not sure if they added this to be honest in 1.1.4), VoIP calls, decent quality pics, MMS (do not use often but when I need it, I really need it). How about saving docs for later emailing? These are the basics features in a so-called smartphone and the iPhone lacks them. Without even going down the 3G road again, this is also missing. To ignore this and continue the "iPhone = smartphone) is a lack of understanding. This shows in the European sales. Clearly they have a better understanding of what biz needs (well European needs) are as opposed to the US biz market.

OK, but as Kickaha was saying, my point is that Apple is in a pretty good position to add functionality as they feel it is needed, or let third party developers do so.

And the important thing is this: they can add functionality within the context of a carefully thought out, desktop derived OS and UI, so that that functionality is easy to access, use and integrate-- not just with the rest of the iPhone apps but with the larger world of OS X and its desktop apps, iTunes, and things like movie rentals that can move between devices.

So, again everything you say about the current iteration of the iPhone may somewhat true, but the real story is what Apple can do going forward.

It still seems to me that what Apple has is a small form factor computer, with all that implies in terms of rapid rollouts of OS updates, flexibility, depth of interoperability, consistency of UI and interactions across apps, etc. That underlying power is only going to become more evident as the horsepower of these things keeps increasing. The distinction between desktop and palmtop devices is going to be mostly a matter of UI, and Apple has arguably the best thought out UI of the breed, atop a mature, well supported and very powerful OS.

Nokia has an extended phone OS, originally designed to run on far more constrained hardware. At some point, that becomes a problem if what the market is demanding is tiny general purpose computers, where telephony is a feature.

The situation is analogous to if Adobe had been a maker of really good stand alone graphics appliances, running their very good application suite, in a world where stand alone graphics appliances are the only game in town, due to historical hardware constraints. Over time they've managed to allow third party apps on these appliances, to extend their usefulness, but basically these are single purpose machines which have been modified and extended to meet a gradually growing demand for more general purpose devices.

Then someone comes along and makes a personal computer. It doesn't do graphics as well as the Adobe kit, but it does a lot of other stuff, and is far more flexible and open ended in its underlying design philosophy. Still, a lot of people dismiss the newcomer, because they persist in thinking of all computing machines as being intrinsically graphics appliances, and Adobe has demonstrated mastery at that game.

So Adobe has core expertise in their field, and in this scenario let's figure they've been building pretty good hardware to run their stuff. But do you really want to bet on them carrying the day, when it comes time to compete with a actual computers that were designed as such from the beginning? Will they be able to work their way out of the collection of apps and UI bits that they've been calling an "operating system", and do it without breaking compatibility with all that came before? Do it fast enough to compete with a real OS?

Apple is a computer company. Nokia is a phone company. If the future belongs to computers that can make calls, is it easier for the computer company to figure out how to make telephony apps, or the phone company to figure out how to make computers?

[sapporobaby]

Nokia has an extended phone OS, originally designed to run on far more constrained hardware. At some point, that becomes a problem if what the market is demanding is tiny general purpose computers, where telephony is a feature.



Apple is a computer company. Nokia is a phone company. If the future belongs to computers that can make calls, is it easier for the computer company to figure out how to make telephony apps, or the phone company to figure out how to make computers?


Great post. I agree with 99.99% of it except the final "figuring out". Both Nokia and Apple will simply buy the expertise that they need to get a jump start on the market. I would have assumed (I could be wrong), that Apple had done this. Surely they, would have gone to the #1 phone maker on the market and pouched some of their talent.

The next few months, will be interesting. Nokia will be putting forward a TS UI device with music store, while Apple will hopefully launch a true smartphone. Either way, get you pennies ready. All this fun will probably be expensive. :)

[sapporobaby]

Are you some sort of ignoramus?

Originally Posted by Abster2core
But at what cost? For example, battery life. Will it be a problem? Is the attached article still relevant?

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3036

I asked a question based on supposedly expert knowledge. It wasn't my opinion. I don't know and didn't know the answer, that is why I threw it out there. Obviously you have a problem reading and understanding English.

The difference between your "article" and my facts are quite simple. I went to the source. In my capacity working for the DS, I can get the opportunities to meet with GSM operators, phone manufacturers and ask them questions on and off the record. I also have resources from my prior life in the GSM/software development arena. I showed them your article. It is probably in one of the stalls being used for toilet paper. They all came back with one baseline fact. The article is based on US phones, US networks with most likely US components derived by Motorola. 3G has been around in Europe for a bit longer and the networks are pretty well optimized for max performance.

How is my english now? Maybe comprehension is your problem.

[Abster2core]

I am here to educate you.

Class in session. As I have stated several times throughout this thread and forum, I work for the US State Department but am currently living in Europe on assignment. Get a passport and travel before making a blanket assessment about someone. Anyway, I have had the advantage of working in the telecoms industry on the operator and software developer side (this was mentioned in this very thread). I will include pictures next time. I have also had the pleasure of using almost every smartphone/mobile phone device type since the middle 90's when Nokia came out with the original Communicator, Ericsson with the R380, various Psion devices, and so on. I would say this makes me more than "clever" but knowledgeable and able to speak with some confidence about a subject I am quite familiar with. What's your excuse?

It seems that anytime, anyone does not tow the "Apple, Apple uber alles", party line this person is either biased, Apple haters, stupid in some cases, etc.....

You work for the US State Department. As such, you feel that it entitles you to educate belittle and berate anybody that says even anything positive about Apples?

I would suggest that, like hell you do.

If you did work for the U.S. Department of State, not the US State Department as you erroneously called it, you wouldn't have made the last comment, or one of your previous diplomatic proclamations, "Apple produces it, Stevie Boy sells it, and the lemmings buy it."

[Abster2core]

The difference between your "article" and my facts are quite simple. I went to the source. In my capacity working for the DS, I can get the opportunities to meet with GSM operators, phone manufacturers and ask them questions on and off the record. I also have resources from my prior life in the GSM/software development arena. I showed them your article. It is probably in one of the stalls being used for toilet paper. They all came back with one baseline fact. The article is based on US phones, US networks with most likely US components derived by Motorola. 3G has been around in Europe for a bit longer and the networks are pretty well optimized for max performance.

How is my english now? Maybe comprehension is your problem.

I asked for an opinion on what seemed to be a highly intelligent review. I didn't expect anybody to lambaste me for making a query.

And to your explanation, I would suggest that it is an outright falsehood. You never showed it to anybody, like most things you pretend to do.

[sapporobaby]

I asked for an opinion on what seemed to be a highly intelligent review. I didn't expect anybody to lambaste me for making a query.

And to your explanation, I would suggest that it is an outright falsehood. You never showed it to anybody, like most things you pretend to do.

There is this new thing as Prez Bush called it. The Internets... They have this other thing called email. Forward the link. Ever hear of that?

[JeffDM]

Ah the sign of a losing argument, fall back to semantics. News flash, those of us that do work at State (one name for it that we insiders call it), or State Department, or Department of State, or DS (not to be confused with Diplomatic Security).

I think your hair is in a tizzy. it is the Apple Thought Police (yourself included) that scour these threads looking for anything not Apple friendly. Anything that does not proclaim allegiance to ze fazer-land will be meet by ze storm troopers in their Jack boots. As I have said on several occasions, but I will go slow for you, "I own several Apple products and am pleased with them", however I have the right no THINK DIFFERENT about them and can say so. If you do not like my posts, by all means hit the "Report Post" button and take it up with someone that cares.

With that being the case, I would suggest that you "foxtrot oscar" and stop wasting my time.

Another sign of losing an argument is to insult, impugn and demean those that disagree with you, which you have done repeatedly in this thread.

You say you cite facts, but I don't remember you providing any information to corroborate your facts. If the things you say are true, then it should be easy to provide source references. It's unreasonable for you to expect us to accept what you say if you're unwilling to cite specific references. Doubly so if you repeatedly insult people that don't readily accept what you say just because you say so.

[sapporobaby]

Another sign of losing an argument is to insult, impugn and demean those that disagree with you, which you have done repeatedly in this thread.

You say you cite facts, but I don't remember you providing any information to corroborate your facts. If the things you say are true, then it should be easy to provide source references. It's unreasonable for you to expect us to accept what you say if you're unwilling to cite specific references. Doubly so if you repeatedly insult people that don't readily accept what you say just because you say so.

You seem to think that anything I say or you actually matters. If you do not like what I say or do not want to believe it, don't. I posted links to the Nokia site showing their smartphone product listing. As far as I know this was the only link that I stated as being factual. By all means, please clue me in.

[JeffDM]

Anything insulting in his direction was a result of this.

"He started it first" is not an excuse. As far as I'm concerned, it's the pot calling the kettle black.

Which facts are you talking about?

How about you be specific in why the Anand article was "toilet paper"? At least it was a cited reference, more than I've ever seen you cite in any discussion.

You seem to think that anything I say or you actually matters. If you do not like what I say or do not want to believe it, don't. I posted links to the Nokia site showing their smartphone product listing. As far as I know this was the only link that I stated as being factual. By all means, please clue me in.

I didn't say that you're lying, but it's more believable if you can cite a reference.

[lundy]

Posts containing personal attacks have been deleted.

All That Typing Down The Drain
Just Because You Called A Name.

[sapporobaby]

"He started it first" is not an excuse. As far as I'm concerned, it's the pot calling the kettle black.



How about you be specific in why the Anand article was "toilet paper"? At least it was a cited reference, more than I've ever seen you cite in any discussion.



I didn't say that you're lying, but it's more believable if you can cite a reference.


*********This is what I said exactly ***********

#####It is probably in one of the stalls being used for toilet paper. They all came back with one baseline fact. The article is based on US phones, US networks with most likely US components derived by Motorola. 3G has been around in Europe for a bit longer and the networks are pretty well optimized for max performance.######

Note the word, "probably", and note the rest of the statement. Where they, the resources I know at Nokia and SE, thought the article was crap. My only opinion came in when referring to the restroom toilet facilities. Would going there taking a picture with a printed copy of the article on the floor qualify as proof?

[JeffDM]

Note the word, "probably", and note the rest of the statement. Where they, the resources I know at Nokia and SE, thought the article was crap. My only opinion came in when referring to the restroom toilet facilities. Would going there taking a picture with a printed copy of the article on the floor qualify as proof?

No, I just wanted to better understand *why* they thought it was crap, not what they did with it. As you said before, opinions are usually worthless. I've not seen that kind of battery life comparison done anywhere else, but then, I really don't spend much time thinking about mobile phone circuitry.

[sapporobaby]

No, I just wanted to better understand *why* they thought it was crap, not what they did with it. As you said before, opinions are usually worthless. I've not seen that kind of battery life comparison done anywhere else, but then, I really don't spend much time thinking about mobile phone circuitry.

The guys I spoke with were network designers, and one was a phone designer/engineer (he prefers to consider himself an artist) :)

Anyway, they all said the test was aimed at US phones, with US networks were as Asian, European, and Mid Eastern 3G networks were more or less the same. Much of this was way over my head, but I understood some of it. In the end, they said that if a Nokia with a 1050 mAh 3.7v battery can run a phone all day with 3G, the iPhone should be able to last all day as well. They felt the lack of 3G was marketing hype because AT&T didn't have the network at the time and Apple wanted the phone out there.

Who knows?

By the way, as an aside. I have written several times that I like your post as they tend to be insightful. I have no truck against you or anyone here, however until Lundy or someone else in authority says that I can not express my opinions I will continue. I may be passionate about what I believe but I can 99.9999999999999999999999999% assure you that anything I say here, I have either lived it, seen it, will do it, etc.... I rarely will jump into a conversation without knowing what I am talking about.

[drwho4]

One Apple iPhone owner has posted to YouTube a video shootout that pits an iPhone running on a 2.5G EDGE network against one rigged with 3G HSDPA access in a simulated speed test.

The mock 3G iPhone was connected via WiFi to an iMac whose internet connection was supplied with a HSDPA modem and then shared, while the traditional 2.5G iPhone was run on a standard overseas EDGE wireless network.

Based on the test results, which are largely theoretical given fluctuations in mobile wireless speeds from region to region and provider to provider, the 3G iPhone loaded the same web page as the 2.5G iPhone in nearly half the time.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=4023)

This is not accurate. Ad-Hoc networking uses 802.11b as the transmission standard. 802.11b has a maximum raw data rate of 11 Mbit/s and uses the same CSMA/CA media access method defined in the original standard. Due to the CSMA/CA protocol overhead, in practice the maximum 802.11b throughput that an application can achieve is about 5.9 Mbit/s using TCP and 7.1 Mbit/s using UDP. Industry sources state that 3G can be expected to provide 384 Kbps at or below pedestrian speeds, but only 128 Kbps in a moving car. This is an extreme differnce from what was displayed in this video. Nice try but next time check your facts.... The 3G would be waaay faster than the other.

[solipsism]

The 3G would be waaay faster than the other.

Could you clarify as to why you think HSDPA would be way faster than EDGE? I assume by way faster you mean more than 2x faster.

[one9deuce]

sapporobaby, yes we all continue to say "Look what Apple is going to do with the iPhone".

But soon, oh so very very soon, we will be saying "Look what Apple did with the iPhone".

And Nokia will be down for the count.

addabox, you are EXACTLY right. The future is mobile computing, and who better to make computers than Apple? Nokia got their dominance by making cheap phones. Apple's dominance will be based on...................OSX :D

[sapporobaby]

Could you clarify as to why you think HSDPA would be way faster than EDGE? I assume by way faster you mean more than 2x faster.

Here you go:

HSDPA

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-hsdpa.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSDPA

EDGE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Data_Rates_for_GSM_Evolution

http://www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com/global/Press/Press+releases/news-archive/Nokia_Siemens_Networks_doubles_EDGE_data_speed.htm

http://www.tech-faq.com/edge.shtml

[solipsism]

Here you go:
HSDPA
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-hsdpa.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSDPA
EDGE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Data_Rates_for_GSM_Evolution
http://www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com/global/Press/Press+releases/news-archive/Nokia_Siemens_Networks_doubles_EDGE_data_speed.htm
http://www.tech-faq.com/edge.shtml

I know the theoretical speeds of the different technologies, but this doesn't explain why he thinks it should be "waaay faster." There are many things to consider when doing real world tests and having a radio a theoretical ceiling of 7.2MB/s doesn't mean you're going to get "waaay faster" speeds over EDGE just because it's in there.

[nicegoogly]

That was the last one from my mind. I'm talking amore about the AI articles where Apple is accused of using technology that someone else patented and the articles where a new Apple patent comes up that has been used by others for some time.• AU articles regarding patents (http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=appleinsider+patent&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8)

If Apple sues "Pshystar" or cease and desist letters they will look like the bad guy, but I don't think Apple is worried about it right now. Despite Psystar's sketchy start their machines are still questionable.

They send you the $129 copy of Leopard unopened—because you need an OSx86 version—which I think they sell you for $150. So if you need to reinstall Leopard you have to pull out the HDD and ship it to them. They then have access to al your files so you could save a few bucks on a garage-built machine that doesn't have the more optimized drivers and where getting the device fixed under warranty will be a crap shoot.

Plus, you can't setup BootCamp, use the Leopard Install DIsc, or update the OS and a good deal of the Apps. It also doesn't come with any iLife apps. My point is, I don't think Apple is worried about them; The vast other home built OSx86 projects will certainly trump what Psystar can sell. SWIM has been using a Dell as home server running OS X for a couple years now.It works great!

I think they realized that litigation may stall them but not solve the larger problem. I suspect that they may be working with Intel, or perhaps with P.A. Semi now, to use HW authentication to make the clones harder to crack.



But MS makes money from their OS. They don't produce desktop hardware (save for their mice). Apple bread and butter is the HW so virtual OS X isn't an attractive option to Apple, especially if they were to be required to supply support for all the drivers of the various HW that MS has to deal with.

When Vista first came out MS did try to enforce via the EULA that only the more expensive copies could be used virtually. This was recently changed, probably as a result of poor Vista sales

Though, Leopard Server now allows virtualization, so some things have changed.


Longwinded is fine, it's the lack of paragraphs that we get upset with. :D

As far as Apple's patent issues will probably be settled out of court. Sony, for years, had a patent infringement case some time ago regarding their rumble technology in their playstation controllers and payed out the better part of 90 million dollars. Sometimes great companies need to crib from other creators. They just need to open their wallet a little faster to not look so redfaced. The litigation costs on this nonsense is astronomical, they may look to deal if the patent holders are reasonable.

Not the first time Apple has gotten singed: iTunes led the way for protected and properly purchased music. Then they were sued by Eminem for using his song without permission in their commercial. They dealt him out with some cash and a promotion on iTunes of his greatest hit album.

Also, I agree with your assessment of garage built macs. If you want a quality product, pay the damn money.

[Abster2core]

They (Pystar) send you the $129 copy of Leopard unopened…

Perhaps not in all cases…

"The included copy of Leopard was out of the shrinkwrap, but there's no way to install it -- it shows up in Startup Disk but it won't restart, and it's not recognized at boot." *

This suggests that the copy was likely opened, which as you rightfully implied isn't useful unless one has a real Mac to use it in.

*Hands-on test of Mac Cloner Psystar’s Open Computer reveals: ‘It’s LOUD. Crazy loud.’ http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/17159/

[sapporobaby]

sapporobaby, yes we all continue to say "Look what Apple is going to do with the iPhone".

But soon, oh so very very soon, we will be saying "Look what Apple did with the iPhone".

And Nokia will be down for the count.

addabox, you are EXACTLY right. The future is mobile computing, and who better to make computers than Apple? Nokia got their dominance by making cheap phones. Apple's dominance will be based on...................OSX :D

Apple and others have been Nokia killers for as long as there were phones. At one time Ericsson was one paycheck away from buying Nokia, and look where things are now. If you are deluded enough to think that Nokia will simply sit by and not make a fight of the game proves that you lack the understanding involved to see products on a global scale.

Nokia has the cash, and the knowledge to compete against Apple on a one to one, technology to technology level. I am sorry for you if you have only seen inexpensive Nokia phones and this is your basis for world domination. Mobile computing has been a part of Nokia's portfolio for quite a while. Ever hear of the N770, N800, N810, N810 WiMax, Nokia Communicators? There are all mobile computers. Some with touch screens, some without, some smart phones, some Internet Tablets. You seeming limited exposure to higher end products is a classic example what the iPhone is failing in Europe. It is an unsophisticated being sold in a highly sophisticated market. Apple was smart to start small and then think larger.

[merdhead]

I know the theoretical speeds of the different technologies, but this doesn't explain why he thinks it should be "waaay faster." There are many things to consider when doing real world tests and having a radio a theoretical ceiling of 7.2MB/s doesn't mean you're going to get "waaay faster" speeds over EDGE just because it's in there.
What? Of course HSPA is faster than EDGE. For the same available signal quality it delivers greater bandwidth. It uses more efficient encoding which packs more data into the same amount of spectrum.

I can't believe you're even having the discussion.

[solipsism]

What? Of course HSPA is faster than EDGE. For the same available signal quality it delivers greater bandwidth. It uses more efficient encoding which packs more data into the same amount of spectrum.

I can't believe you're even having the discussion.

What do you mean by "What?" And what discussion are you talking about? The idea that having a 3G radio in a device means you get a certain data rate is an illogical assumption. I clearly stated that I am aware of the theoretical speeds of the different technologies; when did I state that HSPA was slower than EDGE?

[sapporobaby]

What? Of course HSPA is faster than EDGE. For the same available signal quality it delivers greater bandwidth. It uses more efficient encoding which packs more data into the same amount of spectrum.

I can't believe you're even having the discussion.

I do not think he is implying EDGE is faster than HSDPA. However, if you look at a couple of the links I supplied, you will see that Nokia (the company that many think will be dominated by Apple - don't make me laugh) has raised the previous speeds of EDGE. I think he was just making a comparison.

[solipsism]

I do not think he is implying EDGE is faster than HSDPA. However, if you look at a couple of the links I supplied, you will see that Nokia (the company that many think will be dominated by Apple - don't make me laugh) has raised the previous speeds of EDGE. I think he was just making a comparison.

I didn't say or imply once that EDGE was faster, I was only stating—apparently poorly—that having a 3G radio in a consumer device does not mean you'll get 3G speeds or that webpages will load in at a rate proportional to the theoretical speeds that can be achieved by different cell technologies. That there are many other factors that determine the actual time it takes for a page to load. Hence my original question to Drwho4 as to why he thinks it should be "waaay faster."

[sapporobaby]

I didn't say or imply once that EDGE was faster, I was only stating—apparently poorly—that having a 3G radio in a consumer device does not mean you'll get 3G speeds or that webpages will load in at a rate proportional to the theoretical speeds that can be achieved by different cell technologies. That there are many other factors that determine the actual time it takes for a page to load. Hence my original question to Drwho4 as to why he thinks it should be "waaay faster."

I think you got mixed up here. I was agreeing with you in reply to Drwho4's reply.

In pure data transfers, HSDPA will simply smoke EDGE. As you said there are many factors that can determine how web pages are rendered. Data speeds are just one factor.

[lundy]

Apple and others have been Nokia killers for as long as there were phones. At one time Ericsson was one paycheck away from buying Nokia, and look where things are now. If you are deluded enough to think that Nokia will simply sit by and not make a fight of the game proves that you lack the understanding involved to see products on a global scale.



NO MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS. Last warning.

[sapporobaby]

NO MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS. Last warning.

What was I thinking. Yes of course Nokia will be dominated by a company with only one crippled product. Tomorrow flags in Helsinki will be flown at half mast in honor of Apple driving them out of business with an iPod that can make calls. Huge layoffs globally are expected. Steve Jobs has decreed from on high he will personally give each layed off employee one million dollars from petty cash. Steve Jobs is looking to move into the roll of master of the universe on a full time basis. More to come.

[solipsism]

What was I thinking. Yes of course Nokia will be dominated by a company with only one crippled product. [...]

Replying to a forum moderator with sarcasm isn't wise.

[sapporobaby]

Replying to a forum moderator with sarcasm isn't wise.

Hey Solipsism,

I am not angry at Lundy. He is doing a pretty thankless job for the most part and he is pretty much right. I just was having a bit of fun. I realized as I wrote it that I highlighted his response instead of the other one. I wrote it from my phone so I did not feel like going back to correct it, but you have a point.

Thanks in advance.

[merdhead]

I do not think he is implying EDGE is faster than HSDPA. However, if you look at a couple of the links I supplied, you will see that Nokia (the company that many think will be dominated by Apple - don't make me laugh) has raised the previous speeds of EDGE. I think he was just making a comparison.
The enhanced EDGE isn't actually deployed anywhere, so its besides the point. The fact is that EDGE tops out at about 240Kbps and HSPA at 1.8 or 3.6Mbps. It's "waaay" faster. Saying that rendering means it makes less difference is meaningless. So does the server you are downloading from, congestion on the internet and the type of content you are downloading. Conversely you might be downloading a movie or file or they might put a faster processor in the 3G model and rendering will have no or less affect. The point is that the data transfer is significantly faster with HSPA and that impacts significantly on performance.

[lundy]

So because you are not permitted to impugn solipsism's capacity to understand something, then that prohibits you from making your argument about Nokia and the iPhone?

Make any argument you want about Nokia.
Make any argument you want about the iPhone.

Do not make any argument about someone's ability to understand something. That is irrelevant and against the posting guidelines.

I suppose I could make an argument about your ability to understand what constitutes a personal attack, but that would itself be a personal attack, so I won't make that argument.

[sapporobaby]

The enhanced EDGE isn't actually deployed anywhere, so its besides the point. The fact is that EDGE tops out at about 240Kbps and HSPA at 1.8 or 3.6Mbps. It's "waaay" faster. Saying that rendering means it makes less difference is meaningless. So does the server you are downloading from, congestion on the internet and the type of content you are downloading. Conversely you might be downloading a movie or file or they might put a faster processor in the 3G model and rendering will have no or less affect. The point is that the data transfer is significantly faster with HSPA and that impacts significantly on performance.

Well, uhhhh.... whatever. I am enjoying my 7.2 mb/sec on my Nokia so I really do not care much what my iPhone is doing. I have been enjoying 3G speeds, video calls, IPTV and such for a while now. So once again, EDGE, smedge. I could not care less.

[sapporobaby]

So because you are not permitted to impugn solipsism's capacity to understand something, then that prohibits you from making your argument about Nokia and the iPhone?

Make any argument you want about Nokia.
Make any argument you want about the iPhone.

Do not make any argument about someone's ability to understand something. That is irrelevant and against the posting guidelines.

I suppose I could make an argument about your ability to understand what constitutes a personal attack, but that would itself be a personal attack, so I won't make that argument.

I think I agreed with solipsism's point. At least I said I did, so this would imply that I do understand what he is trying to say. I also made note of his point about the forum moderator. I understood this as well. Considering I just made an argument about me understanding myself, did I make a personal attack on me?

This was a joke. I catch your drift.

To sum up solipsism was correct and I agree with him.

[merdhead]

What was I thinking. Yes of course Nokia will be dominated by a company with only one crippled product. Tomorrow flags in Helsinki will be flown at half mast in honor of Apple driving them out of business with an iPod that can make calls. Huge layoffs globally are expected. Steve Jobs has decreed from on high via if will personally give each layed off employee one million dollars from petty cash. Steve Jobs is looking to move into the roll me master of the universe on a full time basis. More to come.
Well judging by the way it's developing a half-baked touchscreen device in a blind panic I'd say that Nokia is at least shitting itself at the moment. Longer term, if Apple d