CTV's tech guru reviews the highly-anticipated iPhone 4, which is available in Canada Friday, and discusses whether the 16G or 32G model is the best choice.
People only complained about AT&T's "weak" network --- because they compare it with Verizon's "THE network".
But when you actually do a international comparison, AT&T ended up with the 3rd fastest 3G iphone speed in the world.
So now instead of what he claims that Australia is 4 years ahead of US in mobile technology --- it is actually the other way around. Australian carriers are a couple of years behind AT&T --- which in turn AT&T is a couple of years behind Verizon.
AT&T's network ain't that bad when you compare it with the rest of the world.
Yeah, but do you remember, at the time when steve approached verizone to get the iPhone on " THE Network", verizone was afraid that " THE Network " would simply collaps?!
CDMA is dead. Verizon is so yesterday. Get over it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
So you getting 2Mbps download speeds to your CDMA phones yet?
Because I AVERAGE around 3.5Mbps with peaks around 5.5Mbps.
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.
Yeah, but do you remember, at the time when steve approached verizone to get the iPhone on " THE Network", verizone was afraid that " THE Network " would simply collaps?!
But who has the last laugh? Verizon beat AT&T in postpaid net adds in a iphone launch quarter.
samab, get real. Both Verizon and ATT are truly backward compared to what is available in much of the rest of the world, regardless of what some silly publication like Wired claims. Travel around, and you'll realize that these two pathetic companies are seriously holding our country back in terms of quality and service of cellular communications.
I vaguely recall that you work for Verizon (sorry if I am wrong about that), so perhaps you are not entirely unbiased.
Americans talk 3x more voice minutes than the rest of the world, SMS 3-4x more than Europeans, have more 3G penetration than Europe, use more 3G data, use more smartphones...
People only complained about AT&T's "weak" network --- because they compare it with Verizon's "THE network".
But when you actually do a international comparison, AT&T ended up with the 3rd fastest 3G iphone speed in the world.
So now instead of what he claims that Australia is 4 years ahead of US in mobile technology --- it is actually the other way around. Australian carriers are a couple of years behind AT&T --- which in turn AT&T is a couple of years behind Verizon.
AT&T's network ain't that bad when you compare it with the rest of the world.
Oh, samab, still shilling for Qualcomm? It's a little obvious when that's all you ever post about.
samab, get real. Both Verizon and ATT are truly backward compared to what is available in much of the rest of the world, regardless of what some silly publication like Wired claims. Travel around, and you'll realize that these two pathetic companies are seriously holding our country back in terms of quality and service of cellular communications.
I vaguely recall that you work for Verizon (sorry if I am wrong about that), so perhaps you are not entirely unbiased.
I can't totally agree.
My experience in Europe was pretty good. But man is it expensive. Not if you are staying in one place, but cross the borders and wham. Roaming is a bitch. What America doesn't take into consideration is the breadth of their (U.S.A. and Canada) countries. And that is North and South as well as East and West. Try calling Rome from the UK for what you can from NY to LA
As for the orient, it has issues as well. 3G Is not ubiquitous.
As I have always contended, wireless has one major characteristic. Anything that is placed in between the line of sight immediately impacts on the reception. When you factor in all the issues that can impede transmission, it is amazing just how good the technology is. Remember that much is dependent on natural, geographical, topographical, man-made and economical structures and considerations. And then there is man himself.
It must be nice to live in a country that one could walk across in a week or two, the government has built as state-of-art infrastructure without any regard for the inhabitants that paid for it, and has a universal network protocol that is standardize to all your continental neighbors.
Cripe. I'll bet there is many San Francisco's in the rest of the world either.
Oh, samab, still shilling for Qualcomm? It's a little obvious when that's all you ever post about.
I am not shilling for Qualcomm at all. I am supporting AT&T in this argument --- straight quantitative analysis do show that AT&T's network ain't that bad when you compare them with the rest of the world.
It seems others have already taken you to task about this comment, but this is completely irrelevant. The speed of the network is not the same thing as the coverage or the strength of the signal necessarily. Also, you are obviously a troll and you knew this already because your reference to that article is very selective. In the bulleted list you are referring to in the article it says this:
"Participants in Australia reported the slowest average 3G download speeds of about 759 Kbps."
But the very next line in the same set of points? ...
"The most ?0? results for 3G download speeds came from U.S. participants ? presumably those dropped from the 3G network. In the United States, 63 participants reported ?0″ Altogether there were 80 ?0″ figures reported."
This is the real problem with the so-called "death grip" issue. The networks in the USA basically are old-school and suck rather badly. This isn't reported on, because most of the people doing the complaining are Americans and it's a "negative" message which the media avoids like the plague now they are more concerned with ratings than facts.
You don't tell your customers, or your audience, that something is their fault or endemic to choice they made. Ergo and ipso facto, no one has the guts to tell people that the problem with the antenna is really just bad infrastructure combined with obese American hands. (Higher BMI equals more interference with the antenna when you touch it.)
This is what Apple, and the news media would like to tell you, but can't. It's *your* fault America.
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.
Just ordered iPhone 4 (32GB) from Apple Australia (web order) soon after the site started accepting web orders. Delivery 27 August! Another four week wait!?
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.
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.
By the end of the year We already have 10 Mbps in all big cities and even more than that.
I don't think 2 years is excessive for a comparison chart, but if someone has a newer one please post it.
It's possible for a mobile network operator to be both the fastest and slowest network at the same time.
It's possible for a mobile network operator both cutting edge And antiquated at the same time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG4G
You do have to remember when referring to The Daily Telegraph's report that the mobile cell towers have a much better coverage in Australia than they do in the States. Australian telecommunications technology is around 4 years ahead of the US, and our coverage with 3G is basically ubiquitous.
The signals received by an iPhone 4 in Australia will generally be extremely high quality - well into the "5-bar spectrum", and so no amount of touching to that antenna will cause an iPhone to lose even a bar. Say it drops from -51 to -66. It still won't cause even a bar to drop, here in Australia, due to the high quality of our mobile networks.
[...]
There was an article yesterday stating the iPhone was recommended for low signal and rural areas for its superior reception. There are many other reports showing the iPhone 4 can maintain a connection where other phones would say No Service or drop the call.
The speed of the network is not the same thing as the coverage or the strength of the signal necessarily.
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.
Comments
American comparison is skewed because Americans compare AT&T's "weak" network with Verizon's "THE network" --- the bell curve was skewed.
CDMA is dead. Verizon is so yesterday. Get over it.
Reviewing the newly released iPhone 4
CTV's tech guru reviews the highly-anticipated iPhone 4, which is available in Canada Friday, and discusses whether the 16G or 32G model is the best choice.
The video speaks for itself
http://www.ctv.ca/canadaam/
Because I AVERAGE around 3.5Mbps with peaks around 5.5Mbps.
American comparison is skewed because Americans compare AT&T's "weak" network with Verizon's "THE network" --- the bell curve was skewed.
No, it has EVERYTHING to do with what he said.
People only complained about AT&T's "weak" network --- because they compare it with Verizon's "THE network".
But when you actually do a international comparison, AT&T ended up with the 3rd fastest 3G iphone speed in the world.
So now instead of what he claims that Australia is 4 years ahead of US in mobile technology --- it is actually the other way around. Australian carriers are a couple of years behind AT&T --- which in turn AT&T is a couple of years behind Verizon.
AT&T's network ain't that bad when you compare it with the rest of the world.
Yeah, but do you remember, at the time when steve approached verizone to get the iPhone on " THE Network", verizone was afraid that " THE Network " would simply collaps?!
CDMA is dead. Verizon is so yesterday. Get over it.
So you getting 2Mbps download speeds to your CDMA phones yet?
Because I AVERAGE around 3.5Mbps with peaks around 5.5Mbps.
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.
Yeah, but do you remember, at the time when steve approached verizone to get the iPhone on " THE Network", verizone was afraid that " THE Network " would simply collaps?!
But who has the last laugh? Verizon beat AT&T in postpaid net adds in a iphone launch quarter.
One customer reportedly referred to the launch as an "epic fail."
Before or after he bought the iPhone 4?
samab, get real. Both Verizon and ATT are truly backward compared to what is available in much of the rest of the world, regardless of what some silly publication like Wired claims. Travel around, and you'll realize that these two pathetic companies are seriously holding our country back in terms of quality and service of cellular communications.
I vaguely recall that you work for Verizon (sorry if I am wrong about that), so perhaps you are not entirely unbiased.
Americans talk 3x more voice minutes than the rest of the world, SMS 3-4x more than Europeans, have more 3G penetration than Europe, use more 3G data, use more smartphones...
But who has the last laugh? Verizon beat AT&T in postpaid net adds in a iphone launch quarter.
Well who cares? Me definitely not.
Well who cares? Me definitely not.
What was Bee Gees singing: I started a joke, which started the whole world crying , But I didn't see that the joke was on me.
No, it has EVERYTHING to do with what he said.
People only complained about AT&T's "weak" network --- because they compare it with Verizon's "THE network".
But when you actually do a international comparison, AT&T ended up with the 3rd fastest 3G iphone speed in the world.
So now instead of what he claims that Australia is 4 years ahead of US in mobile technology --- it is actually the other way around. Australian carriers are a couple of years behind AT&T --- which in turn AT&T is a couple of years behind Verizon.
AT&T's network ain't that bad when you compare it with the rest of the world.
Oh, samab, still shilling for Qualcomm? It's a little obvious when that's all you ever post about.
What was Bee Gees singing: I started a joke, which started the whole world crying , But I didn't see that the joke was on me.
I am sorry, when people are making fun of you. But as a personal advise I suggest you should be a little bit more realistic.
samab, get real. Both Verizon and ATT are truly backward compared to what is available in much of the rest of the world, regardless of what some silly publication like Wired claims. Travel around, and you'll realize that these two pathetic companies are seriously holding our country back in terms of quality and service of cellular communications.
I vaguely recall that you work for Verizon (sorry if I am wrong about that), so perhaps you are not entirely unbiased.
I can't totally agree.
My experience in Europe was pretty good. But man is it expensive. Not if you are staying in one place, but cross the borders and wham. Roaming is a bitch. What America doesn't take into consideration is the breadth of their (U.S.A. and Canada) countries. And that is North and South as well as East and West. Try calling Rome from the UK for what you can from NY to LA
As for the orient, it has issues as well. 3G Is not ubiquitous.
As I have always contended, wireless has one major characteristic. Anything that is placed in between the line of sight immediately impacts on the reception. When you factor in all the issues that can impede transmission, it is amazing just how good the technology is. Remember that much is dependent on natural, geographical, topographical, man-made and economical structures and considerations. And then there is man himself.
It must be nice to live in a country that one could walk across in a week or two, the government has built as state-of-art infrastructure without any regard for the inhabitants that paid for it, and has a universal network protocol that is standardize to all your continental neighbors.
Cripe. I'll bet there is many San Francisco's in the rest of the world either.
Oh, samab, still shilling for Qualcomm? It's a little obvious when that's all you ever post about.
I am not shilling for Qualcomm at all. I am supporting AT&T in this argument --- straight quantitative analysis do show that AT&T's network ain't that bad when you compare them with the rest of the world.
Total BS.
Australia had the SLOWEST 3G iphone speed in the wired.com survey.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2008/08/global-iphone-3/
It seems others have already taken you to task about this comment, but this is completely irrelevant. The speed of the network is not the same thing as the coverage or the strength of the signal necessarily. Also, you are obviously a troll and you knew this already because your reference to that article is very selective. In the bulleted list you are referring to in the article it says this:
"Participants in Australia reported the slowest average 3G download speeds of about 759 Kbps."
But the very next line in the same set of points? ...
"The most ?0? results for 3G download speeds came from U.S. participants ? presumably those dropped from the 3G network. In the United States, 63 participants reported ?0″ Altogether there were 80 ?0″ figures reported."
This is the real problem with the so-called "death grip" issue. The networks in the USA basically are old-school and suck rather badly. This isn't reported on, because most of the people doing the complaining are Americans and it's a "negative" message which the media avoids like the plague now they are more concerned with ratings than facts.
You don't tell your customers, or your audience, that something is their fault or endemic to choice they made. Ergo and ipso facto, no one has the guts to tell people that the problem with the antenna is really just bad infrastructure combined with obese American hands. (Higher BMI equals more interference with the antenna when you touch it.)
This is what Apple, and the news media would like to tell you, but can't. It's *your* fault America.
Just ordered iPhone 4 (32GB) from Apple Australia (web order) soon after the site started accepting web orders. Delivery 27 August! Another four week wait!?
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.
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.
By the end of the year
You do have to remember when referring to The Daily Telegraph's report that the mobile cell towers have a much better coverage in Australia than they do in the States. Australian telecommunications technology is around 4 years ahead of the US, and our coverage with 3G is basically ubiquitous.
The signals received by an iPhone 4 in Australia will generally be extremely high quality - well into the "5-bar spectrum", and so no amount of touching to that antenna will cause an iPhone to lose even a bar. Say it drops from -51 to -66. It still won't cause even a bar to drop, here in Australia, due to the high quality of our mobile networks.
[...]
There was an article yesterday stating the iPhone was recommended for low signal and rural areas for its superior reception. There are many other reports showing the iPhone 4 can maintain a connection where other phones would say No Service or drop the call.
The speed of the network is not the same thing as the coverage or the strength of the signal necessarily.
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.