Well, the mistake in your reasoning is assuming that they are a) doing so for rational reasons and b) that copying the US is a good thing. I think the only thing the EU will accomplish is to turn their wireless networks into as big a mess as ours are. The American system is a huge negative, and the EU will soon discover that they've made a huge mistake.
The worldwide launch of the iphone has taught people many things --- the grass is not greener on the other side of the Atlantic.
Europe doesn't even have ETF (let alone pro-rated ETF) --- so while it is geek-talk technically easier to swap carriers just by changing SIM cards, it is financially not viable to change carriers in Europe.
So you getting 2Mbps download speeds to your CDMA phones yet?
Because I AVERAGE around 3.5Mbps with peaks around 5.5Mbps.
but by they end of the year they'll be better than us, just you wait and see
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab
By the end of the year, 1/3 of US will have Verizon's LTE with 5-12 mbps average speed and 50 mbps peak.
April 09 Telstra had 21Mbps peak. and "Telstra has advised during Mobile World Congress February 2010 that its network now supports 42Mbps and this has been deployed to nearly all sites." These are not vapour-stats like you are clinging onto.
The here and now is that AT&T iphone users get the upper end of the speed scale when compare to other iphone users around the world.
Then why does it drop out in the US and noone in the Australia reports seems to be able to get a call to drop? Speed and call retention are inextricably linked.
The worldwide launch of the iphone has taught people many things --- the grass is not greener on the other side of the Atlantic.
Europe doesn't even have ETF (let alone pro-rated ETF) --- so while it is geek-talk technically easier to swap carriers just by changing SIM cards, it is financially not viable to change carriers in Europe.
What it's taught Apple is that launching the iphone in a country with a second-rate network is a pretty bad place to introduce your new product.
As to it being financially viable to swap carriers in Europe, that's just not true. Most consumers consider it straightforward and worthwhile to change carriers from time to time because there's something called real competition unlike the uncompetitive iPhone market in the US. The outcomes speak for themselves.
Then why does it drop out in the US and noone in the Australia reports seems to be able to get a call to drop? Speed and call retention are inextricably linked.
I don't care for pissing contests one iota - I simply do not care if the US, South Korea, Finland or wherever have the "best" or "fastest" network. However, the recognised speed/strength of Telstra's network, combined with the anecdotal reports of iPhone 4 usage here today (believe me when i say i've spent way too much time trawling discussion boards today!) have to make one wonder about what our American friends are putting up with on AT&T. Strangely even users of Optus' much derided network are reporting little effect of the antenna issues, and virtually no dropped calls.
As to it being financially viable to swap carriers in Europe, that's just not true. Most consumers consider it straightforward and worthwhile to change carriers from time to time because there's something called real competition unlike the uncompetitive iPhone market in the US. The outcomes speak for themselves.
Same in Australia. Carriers will even give you (often quite substantial) credits to offset any penalties you incur from breaking contracts.
what dumbass is blaming AT&T for Apples design screw up?
Since it is a US only issue (from my own experience and various reports from around the world) is either AT&T or you Amercans eith your HUGE reception blocker HANDS!
AT&T is perceived by Americans to have an inferior network (whether speed or coverage) only because Americans compare AT&T with Verizon.
People are going to complain no matter what. When O2 was announced as the original iphone carrier in the UK, plenty of Brits were complaining that Apple picked the wrong network carrier.
It is just the matter of the public perception. When you hear it every single day, you start believing in it.
In conclusion, I really doubt that other carriers around the world have much superior networks than AT&T. It just feels that way to people because you keep on hearing about Americans complaining about how AT&T's network is inferior to Verizon's network.
I know what you are saying about perception and undoubtedly it plays some part, but overall I think you are assuming a lot here and for that reason could easily be dead wrong on this. You have no actual data other than a hunch that it's perception driven.
I think the antenna issue is a good example of (somewhat) hard data. It's an observable physical flaw that seems to occur with much higher regularity on American networks vs. International ones. The data that exists is mostly anecdotal of course, but I have yet to find or hear of anyone in my country having any problem at all on any of the five main carriers of iPhone. Anecdotally, I'm hearing the same from friends and acquaintances in Australia, Europe, and New Zealand. I don't know anyone personally in Japan, but I hear it's the same over there.
So yeah, most of the evidence is anecdotal and some of it is questionable, but it's interesting that there seems to be a clear difference between the experience of users in the USA and users in other countries. It does correlate to the superior coverage and the newer systems in those countries. These are all very suggestive facts even if nothing can be categorically proven from them.
I think the case for the networks being a real physical difference between cases of fail and non-fail is better than the case for it all being perception based at this point.
but by they end of the year they'll be better than us, just you wait and see
April 09 Telstra had 21Mbps peak. and "Telstra has advised during Mobile World Congress February 2010 that its network now supports 42Mbps and this has been deployed to nearly all sites." These are not vapour-stats like you are clinging onto.
Kind of browsing through this thread a bit. Has anyone bothered to point out to Samab that the Wired “article” he linked to was posted/printed almost two years ago, well before Telstra’s two major system upgrades?
About his OP, I’m basing my opinions on comments directly from ATTWS field techs made to me on my project sites - they don’t have sufficient backhaul, they haven’t much experience with dual frequency WCDMA network load balancing, they’re months behind in their equipment upgrade and repair schedules. I compare ATTWS’s WCDMA network performance to what works in Europe - ATTWS doesn’t implement the dual-channel communication “method” in its devices when compared to the European networks I’ve been exposed to (1900 in one direction/2100 in the other direction). VZW ports the vast amount of its data consumption on a different channel and fully separates HS data from voice by design. None of the US carriers offer an optimal wireless data experience for its customers when compared to the offerings available elsewhere - citing an article two years and two massive system upgrades ago isn’t doing the readers of this thread any good either. Telstra’s network is vastly improved from just a year ago, and since they’ve offered to lose their wireline network in exchange for future massive backhaul upgrades to support their wireless network, they’ll blow away anything the US market can offer for maybe 10-20 years.
By the end of the year, 1/3 of US will have Verizon's LTE with 5-12 mbps average speed and 50 mbps peak.
It's just a matter of perspective. AT&T's network looks weak only because people are comparing it with Verizon's network. Quantitative analysis has shown that AT&T's network ain't that bad when comparing it with the rest of the world.
NO freakin way VZ is able to do that. They just started and they are behind Sprint in the rollout. VZ also stopped rolling out FIOS, the fiber to the home that is rated slower than comcast cable by speedtest.net.
Please don't praise our backward maintaining cell companies, both ATT and VZ. They are being forced to upgrade and not doing it pro-actively, but re-actively.
What it's taught Apple is that launching the iphone in a country with a second-rate network is a pretty bad place to introduce your new product.
As to it being financially viable to swap carriers in Europe, that's just not true. Most consumers consider it straightforward and worthwhile to change carriers from time to time because there's something called real competition unlike the uncompetitive iPhone market in the US. The outcomes speak for themselves.
samab is never bothered by facts that contradict his goal of promoting CDMA.
I really am pissed at how badly Apple handles it's international product launches. Right up until hours before the release of the product, there's no pre-orders, and worse no information (at all!) on what they are actually going to do or what their policies are going to be. It's as if Apple figures it's job is "done" when the truck finally drives up to the international location and dumps a load of boxes. All they care about is shovelling out the product, there is no customer care, and no communication beyond the rumours you hear on the web.
I phoned my local Apple store last night and was told that the managers had been specifically instructed by Apple headquarters not to give out *any* information on sales before the actual launch today. It's not like I was asking for inside info either. I was asking stuff like "will I be *able* to buy it online?" and they stonewalled me and said they were under strict orders not to communicate *anything* to the customer.
I know it's nice for Apple that a lot of obsessive types take the day off from work and line up just on the possibility that the iPhone will be for sale, but they shouldn't expect all their sales to be that way. If I now have to wait three or four more weeks, why the f*ck couldn't I pre-order it three weeks ago? If they have stock in the store, why can't I set my order for in store pickup? If I was able to take the day off work, I could just walk into the Apple store and buy one but now I have to wait three weeks even though I live within fifteen minutes of the Apple store. Alternatively, I could have called in sick or something and went downtown to line up with all the losers, but because they won't tell you how many they have (even wild approximations are verboten apparently), one could line up for hours and not get one.
Absolutely abysmal customer service if you ask me. My local Apple store has joined the ranks of places like WallMart and RadioShack in my town. It *looks* like an Apple store, but it runs like any other run-of-the-mill crappy department store.
Apple has no personal animosity for the rest of the world. We can't get phones here in the US, either. The chinese slave labor force just can't handle the amount of phones being ordered by Apple. It;s no accident that Apple is rolling the release out a few countries at a time. There is just not enough phones to go around. Please don't hate my Apple. We get enough of that from the disciples of MSFT and GOOG.
Kind of browsing through this thread a bit. Has anyone bothered to point out to Samab that the Wired ?article? he linked to was posted/printed almost two years ago, well before Telstra?s two major system upgrades?
Yes, it was pointed out that they?ve upgraded their network. However that doesn?t tell us how fast the average user will get. Even if they have updated al their towers with the faster commercial HSPA available there are still backbone speed issues, other HW and configuration considerations, possible throttling well below the tower spec capabilities, land (perhaps most importantly) the ?weakest link? as the devices can?t possible operate at those speeds.
The US MNO setup is a great example of different networks all have vastly different pros and cons. Because of this I don?t think we can award a best/worst without quantifying the hell out of it.
I purchased my iphone 4 on launch day in the US i did experience many drop calls in weak sigal areas, since then i´ve been in Mexico, Germany, England and France in NONE of those places did i drop ONE phone call i could not even replicate de issue by droping bars so i really believe 100% thi is an AT&T issue.
I will second that. A friend of mine calls his wife on his daily commute and they both have AT&T. They were dropping as many calls with their iPhones as their Motorola RAZR flip phones before. It's AT&T.
Comments
signal strength seems to be an entirely different matter. your defensiveness on this is lollable.
3G speed is dependent on signal strength.
Well, the mistake in your reasoning is assuming that they are a) doing so for rational reasons and b) that copying the US is a good thing. I think the only thing the EU will accomplish is to turn their wireless networks into as big a mess as ours are. The American system is a huge negative, and the EU will soon discover that they've made a huge mistake.
The worldwide launch of the iphone has taught people many things --- the grass is not greener on the other side of the Atlantic.
Europe doesn't even have ETF (let alone pro-rated ETF) --- so while it is geek-talk technically easier to swap carriers just by changing SIM cards, it is financially not viable to change carriers in Europe.
So you getting 2Mbps download speeds to your CDMA phones yet?
Because I AVERAGE around 3.5Mbps with peaks around 5.5Mbps.
but by they end of the year they'll be better than us, just you wait and see
By the end of the year, 1/3 of US will have Verizon's LTE with 5-12 mbps average speed and 50 mbps peak.
April 09 Telstra had 21Mbps peak. and "Telstra has advised during Mobile World Congress February 2010 that its network now supports 42Mbps and this has been deployed to nearly all sites." These are not vapour-stats like you are clinging onto.
3G speed is dependent on signal strength.
see above, we've got you covered on both then.
The here and now is that AT&T iphone users get the upper end of the speed scale when compare to other iphone users around the world.
Then why does it drop out in the US and noone in the Australia reports seems to be able to get a call to drop? Speed and call retention are inextricably linked.
The worldwide launch of the iphone has taught people many things --- the grass is not greener on the other side of the Atlantic.
Europe doesn't even have ETF (let alone pro-rated ETF) --- so while it is geek-talk technically easier to swap carriers just by changing SIM cards, it is financially not viable to change carriers in Europe.
What it's taught Apple is that launching the iphone in a country with a second-rate network is a pretty bad place to introduce your new product.
As to it being financially viable to swap carriers in Europe, that's just not true. Most consumers consider it straightforward and worthwhile to change carriers from time to time because there's something called real competition unlike the uncompetitive iPhone market in the US. The outcomes speak for themselves.
Then why does it drop out in the US and noone in the Australia reports seems to be able to get a call to drop? Speed and call retention are inextricably linked.
I don't care for pissing contests one iota - I simply do not care if the US, South Korea, Finland or wherever have the "best" or "fastest" network. However, the recognised speed/strength of Telstra's network, combined with the anecdotal reports of iPhone 4 usage here today (believe me when i say i've spent way too much time trawling discussion boards today!) have to make one wonder about what our American friends are putting up with on AT&T. Strangely even users of Optus' much derided network are reporting little effect of the antenna issues, and virtually no dropped calls.
As to it being financially viable to swap carriers in Europe, that's just not true. Most consumers consider it straightforward and worthwhile to change carriers from time to time because there's something called real competition unlike the uncompetitive iPhone market in the US. The outcomes speak for themselves.
Same in Australia. Carriers will even give you (often quite substantial) credits to offset any penalties you incur from breaking contracts.
I guess we can all go back to blaming AT&T for the reception problems here?
what dumbass is blaming AT&T for Apples design screw up?
what dumbass is blaming AT&T for Apples design screw up?
Not you, apparently.
Peak theoretical speeds that have no relevance to real life usage.
I personaly always have ~8 Mbps
what dumbass is blaming AT&T for Apples design screw up?
Since it is a US only issue (from my own experience and various reports from around the world) is either AT&T or you Amercans eith your HUGE reception blocker HANDS!
AT&T is perceived by Americans to have an inferior network (whether speed or coverage) only because Americans compare AT&T with Verizon.
People are going to complain no matter what. When O2 was announced as the original iphone carrier in the UK, plenty of Brits were complaining that Apple picked the wrong network carrier.
It is just the matter of the public perception. When you hear it every single day, you start believing in it.
In conclusion, I really doubt that other carriers around the world have much superior networks than AT&T. It just feels that way to people because you keep on hearing about Americans complaining about how AT&T's network is inferior to Verizon's network.
I know what you are saying about perception and undoubtedly it plays some part, but overall I think you are assuming a lot here and for that reason could easily be dead wrong on this. You have no actual data other than a hunch that it's perception driven.
I think the antenna issue is a good example of (somewhat) hard data. It's an observable physical flaw that seems to occur with much higher regularity on American networks vs. International ones. The data that exists is mostly anecdotal of course, but I have yet to find or hear of anyone in my country having any problem at all on any of the five main carriers of iPhone. Anecdotally, I'm hearing the same from friends and acquaintances in Australia, Europe, and New Zealand. I don't know anyone personally in Japan, but I hear it's the same over there.
So yeah, most of the evidence is anecdotal and some of it is questionable, but it's interesting that there seems to be a clear difference between the experience of users in the USA and users in other countries. It does correlate to the superior coverage and the newer systems in those countries. These are all very suggestive facts even if nothing can be categorically proven from them.
I think the case for the networks being a real physical difference between cases of fail and non-fail is better than the case for it all being perception based at this point.
but by they end of the year they'll be better than us, just you wait and see
April 09 Telstra had 21Mbps peak. and "Telstra has advised during Mobile World Congress February 2010 that its network now supports 42Mbps and this has been deployed to nearly all sites." These are not vapour-stats like you are clinging onto.
Kind of browsing through this thread a bit. Has anyone bothered to point out to Samab that the Wired “article” he linked to was posted/printed almost two years ago, well before Telstra’s two major system upgrades?
About his OP, I’m basing my opinions on comments directly from ATTWS field techs made to me on my project sites - they don’t have sufficient backhaul, they haven’t much experience with dual frequency WCDMA network load balancing, they’re months behind in their equipment upgrade and repair schedules. I compare ATTWS’s WCDMA network performance to what works in Europe - ATTWS doesn’t implement the dual-channel communication “method” in its devices when compared to the European networks I’ve been exposed to (1900 in one direction/2100 in the other direction). VZW ports the vast amount of its data consumption on a different channel and fully separates HS data from voice by design. None of the US carriers offer an optimal wireless data experience for its customers when compared to the offerings available elsewhere - citing an article two years and two massive system upgrades ago isn’t doing the readers of this thread any good either. Telstra’s network is vastly improved from just a year ago, and since they’ve offered to lose their wireline network in exchange for future massive backhaul upgrades to support their wireless network, they’ll blow away anything the US market can offer for maybe 10-20 years.
By the end of the year, 1/3 of US will have Verizon's LTE with 5-12 mbps average speed and 50 mbps peak.
It's just a matter of perspective. AT&T's network looks weak only because people are comparing it with Verizon's network. Quantitative analysis has shown that AT&T's network ain't that bad when comparing it with the rest of the world.
NO freakin way VZ is able to do that. They just started and they are behind Sprint in the rollout. VZ also stopped rolling out FIOS, the fiber to the home that is rated slower than comcast cable by speedtest.net.
Please don't praise our backward maintaining cell companies, both ATT and VZ. They are being forced to upgrade and not doing it pro-actively, but re-actively.
What it's taught Apple is that launching the iphone in a country with a second-rate network is a pretty bad place to introduce your new product.
As to it being financially viable to swap carriers in Europe, that's just not true. Most consumers consider it straightforward and worthwhile to change carriers from time to time because there's something called real competition unlike the uncompetitive iPhone market in the US. The outcomes speak for themselves.
samab is never bothered by facts that contradict his goal of promoting CDMA.
Total BS.
Australia had the SLOWEST 3G iphone speed in the wired.com survey.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2008/08/global-iphone-3/
He was talking about reception but speed my friend
Yeah. I'm in Canada but got the same sad news.
I really am pissed at how badly Apple handles it's international product launches. Right up until hours before the release of the product, there's no pre-orders, and worse no information (at all!) on what they are actually going to do or what their policies are going to be. It's as if Apple figures it's job is "done" when the truck finally drives up to the international location and dumps a load of boxes. All they care about is shovelling out the product, there is no customer care, and no communication beyond the rumours you hear on the web.
I phoned my local Apple store last night and was told that the managers had been specifically instructed by Apple headquarters not to give out *any* information on sales before the actual launch today. It's not like I was asking for inside info either. I was asking stuff like "will I be *able* to buy it online?" and they stonewalled me and said they were under strict orders not to communicate *anything* to the customer.
I know it's nice for Apple that a lot of obsessive types take the day off from work and line up just on the possibility that the iPhone will be for sale, but they shouldn't expect all their sales to be that way. If I now have to wait three or four more weeks, why the f*ck couldn't I pre-order it three weeks ago? If they have stock in the store, why can't I set my order for in store pickup? If I was able to take the day off work, I could just walk into the Apple store and buy one but now I have to wait three weeks even though I live within fifteen minutes of the Apple store. Alternatively, I could have called in sick or something and went downtown to line up with all the losers, but because they won't tell you how many they have (even wild approximations are verboten apparently), one could line up for hours and not get one.
Absolutely abysmal customer service if you ask me. My local Apple store has joined the ranks of places like WallMart and RadioShack in my town. It *looks* like an Apple store, but it runs like any other run-of-the-mill crappy department store.
Apple has no personal animosity for the rest of the world. We can't get phones here in the US, either. The chinese slave labor force just can't handle the amount of phones being ordered by Apple. It;s no accident that Apple is rolling the release out a few countries at a time. There is just not enough phones to go around. Please don't hate my Apple. We get enough of that from the disciples of MSFT and GOOG.
Kind of browsing through this thread a bit. Has anyone bothered to point out to Samab that the Wired ?article? he linked to was posted/printed almost two years ago, well before Telstra?s two major system upgrades?
Yes, it was pointed out that they?ve upgraded their network. However that doesn?t tell us how fast the average user will get. Even if they have updated al their towers with the faster commercial HSPA available there are still backbone speed issues, other HW and configuration considerations, possible throttling well below the tower spec capabilities, land (perhaps most importantly) the ?weakest link? as the devices can?t possible operate at those speeds.
The US MNO setup is a great example of different networks all have vastly different pros and cons. Because of this I don?t think we can award a best/worst without quantifying the hell out of it.
I purchased my iphone 4 on launch day in the US i did experience many drop calls in weak sigal areas, since then i´ve been in Mexico, Germany, England and France in NONE of those places did i drop ONE phone call i could not even replicate de issue by droping bars so i really believe 100% thi is an AT&T issue.
I will second that. A friend of mine calls his wife on his daily commute and they both have AT&T. They were dropping as many calls with their iPhones as their Motorola RAZR flip phones before. It's AT&T.