3G iPhone could arrive overseas by early 2008

[AppleInsider]

Even though its vanguard cellphone isn't yet out the door, Apple is allegedly preparing a quick follow-up model with 3G wireless installed.

After threatening to drop a large-scale cellular service contract based on concerns that it would lock itself out of a trade-up to the iPhone, a Swedish firm has received assurances from its liaison at the provider that the coveted gadget would arrive as soon as September -- and, startlingly, that a version of the handset with 3G (third-generation) wireless Internet access would be in the provider's hands as soon as January of 2008. The contact at the carrier was especially confident, sources said.

If true, the new model would signal a revision to the iPhone just seven months after its slated June 2007 launch. It would be an even quicker response for European customers, who were originally told not to expect the Apple candybar phone in any form until late this year.

Apple hasn't been especially shy in beating the drums for its long-term 3G plans, as Apple chief executive Steve Jobs himself mentioned 3G in his Macworld keynote and later had his story backed by Cingular (now AT&T) distribution chief Glenn Lurie.

Most cellular-based Internet access in the world today, including the AT&T EDGE network which the iPhone will first use, is considered second-generation (2G). Few would mistake 2G-level wireless for a truly fast connection. Downloads typically crest at a few hundred kilobits per second even under ideal conditions; uploads are regularly far worse, frequently hovering around just above dial-up access.

3G ultimately amounts to the addition of extra channels on a cellphone network to boost those anemic speeds, particularly in terms of uploads. Where downstream access rarely exceeds 800Kbps on present 3G networks, upstream levels are a much healthier 400Kbps. The technology smoothes out wrinkles in mobile Internet access that make some tasks impractical or even impossible on 2G networks, such as uploading large photos in e-mail attachments or video messaging.

Apple's choice of cellphone networks would obligate it to use a particular form of 3G known as High-Speed Download Packet Access (HSDPA). At first, this would seem to be something of a misstep: the standard has barely lifted off the ground in the Cupertino-based company's home turf. Only a handful of US cities currently offer AT&T's particular brand of 3G to subscribers.

Attendees at January's Macworld Expo marvel over an iPhone prototype on display.

The situation was discouraging enough that Apple reportedly left out the technology in its inaugural phone due to the limited amount of HSDPA coverage in the country.

Thankfully, HSDPA also happens to represent Apple's best shot at selling the iPhone beyond American borders. In Europe, cheaper data rates and widespread 3G networks encourage Internet access from smartphones to the extent that many cellphone giants lavish more attention on their phone lineups for that continent than anywhere else. Nokia's range toppers, for example, are often badged as "multimedia computers" rather than cellphones.

It remains to be seen whether or not Apple will add any features to the Euro-friendly version. Most 3G cellphones outside of North America ship with front-facing cameras for video calls, but those phones released in the US (such as AT&T's BlackJack) have typically gone without added features beyond the extra speed.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[samurai1999]

Yes! 8)
The iPhone definitely needs to be 3G, with a front facing video-cam to be a success in Europe!


Not much point in shelling out so much dosh for anything less!



But it would be great to do some sort of iChat using the iPhone - so cool!
8)

Plus Apple should upgrade the 2Mpixel camera - 3-5M is getting to be the norm now.


Any news on when the carriers will be announced for Europe?
- I don't want to re-new my contract until I know which one to go with!

[Ireland]

iDon't give a crap about the camera myself, anyway in a device that thin trying to cram anything over a 2Mp camera in would be a waste of time. Now onto my real point, iDon't expect to see any non-3G iPhones in Europe at all. Oh and Mr. Samurai.. Video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid.

Word on the street is that it will be Vodafone.

[samurai1999]

Originally Posted by Ireland

iDon't give a crap about the camera myself, anyway in a device that thin trying to cram anything over a 2Mp camera in would be a waste of time.

Not sure why it would be a waste of time
- 2M Pixels is fairly old hat these days - my 2 year-old Sharp 902 has a 2MPixel camera
- and to be honest, it's pretty crap

The Sharp 910 has a 5M camera, but sadly is only available in Asia
http://www.handcellphone.com/archive...y/sharp-910sh/

The Meizu iPhone clone has a 3M camera
http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/02/...like.handheld/

The Samsung F700 has a 5M pixel camera
http://www.electronista.com/articles...ra.smart.f700/

Originally Posted by Ireland

Now onto my real point, iDon't expect to see any non-3G iPhones in Europe at all.

So does that mean no iPhone until January 2008 or a 3G iPhone in September?
I know which I'd prefer!

Originally Posted by Ireland

Oh and Mr. Samurai.. Video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid.

Yeah? And you smell of sprouts!

Originally Posted by Ireland

Word on the street is that it will be Vodafone.

Yo man, get down with the kids on the street!

[Louzer]

Originally Posted by Ireland

iDon't give a crap about the camera myself, anyway in a device that thin trying to cram anything over a 2Mp camera in would be a waste of time. Now onto my real point, iDon't expect to see any non-3G iPhones in Europe at all. Oh and Mr. Samurai.. Video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid.

He didn't say video conferencing. Just iChat. (I don't know, maybe text messaging doesn't do it for him).

[EruIthildur]

Hmmm... Now Cingular needs to get 3G for us in the states...

[TenoBell]

5MP over 2MP means next to nothing. The really important parts of a camera is the lens and the A/D electronic processing. Camera phones are surly using the cheapest lens possible and there isn't much room for sophisticated electronic processing. When you increase the megapixels under those conditions all you are doing is taking a larger crappy picture, that only takes up more storage space than if you'd taken a smaller crappy picture.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by samurai1999

Not sure why it would be waste of time
- 2M Pixels is fairly old hat these days - my 2 year-old Sharp 902 has a 2MPixel camera
- and to be honest, it's pretty crap

The Sharp 910 has a 5M camera, but sadly is only available in Asia
http://www.handcellphone.com/archive...y/sharp-910sh/

The Meizu iPhone clone has a 3M camera
http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/02/...like.handheld/

Megapixels is not a measure of capture quality. Apparently the megapixel myth is stronger than the megahertz myth. Unless it is a phone strapped onto a decent camera, rather than a too-tiny sensor strapped onto a phone, a 5MP image captured from a phone is not going to be much better than a 2MP image, and it may even be lower quality.

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by TenoBell

5MP over 2MP means next to nothing. The really important parts of a camera is the lens and the A/D electronic processing. Camera phones are surly using the cheapest lens possible and there isn't much room for sophisticated electronic processing. When you increase the megapixels under those conditions all you are doing is taking a larger crappy picture, that only takes up more storage space than if you'd taken a smaller crappy picture.

That is very true. I have a Nokia 6256 cellphone myself, and while its camera is a measly 0.3 megapixels (640x480), it actually takes as good or better pictures than some of my friend's 1.3 megapixel cameras. They are quite displeased by the fact.

It isn't just about the resolution, obviously.

.

[TBaggins]

From the article:

Most cellular-based Internet access in the world today, including the AT&T EDGE network which the iPhone will first use, is considered second-generation (2G). Few would mistake 2G-level wireless for a truly fast connection. Downloads typically crest at a few hundred kilobits per second even under ideal conditions; uploads are regularly far worse, frequently hovering around just above dial-up access.

EDGE is worse than that, actually. A 'few hundred kilobits' d-load speeds are more THEORETICAL maximums with EDGE than anything... real world, you'll see download speeds that are much closer to dialup.

Cingular/ATT themselves do not claim such broadband speeds on their own website:

The Cingular EDGE network is available in more than 13,000 cities and towns and in areas along 40,000 miles of highways. It provides average data speeds between 75-135Kbps.

http://www.cingular.com/learn/why/technology/edge.jsp

So obviously, if you care about mobile web-surfing much, you'll wait for the 3G iPhone. And for Cingular/ATT to offer a LOT MORE 3G coverage than they currently do.

.

[Charko]

TenoBell,

exactly!
This obsession with pixels is what is really 'old hat'. I'm surprised that there are still people who haven't grasped this basic fact:-
It's the quality of the lens and the rest of the hardware that make a good camera. In that respect things haven't changed at all since the days of 'analogue' photograpgy.

[Charko]

Whoops! Make that 'photography'.

... to continue my rant:- there are a lot of relatively cheap 8 MP cameras on the market and a 5 MP Zeiss that'll knock you back $2000 or more.

[Buck]

So whatever happened to the idea of the LCD screen that serves also as a camera?
By the way, are there any working prototypes even?

[samurai1999]

Originally Posted by Charko

TenoBell,
It's the quality of the lens and the rest of the hardware that make a good camera. In that respect things haven't changed at all since the days of 'analogue' photograpgy.

Well, to be honest, I realise that, but I think that in the highly competitive world of mobile phones, it's important to hit all the right bullet points.

So, that is why they need to have good optics, good signal processing, and a better sensor.

I'm sure the iPhone will be a great success anyway, but a 2M pixel camera isn't going to look too good in 2008, given most manufacturers have moved beyond that already.

e.g.
http://europe.nokia.com/phones/n95

- and even if noone *really* needs it, it's *still* old-hat, and *still* isn't good enough to replace a $100 camera, let alone anywhere near the level of an standard 35mm analogue camera.


Also, 2M pixel really means 2M/3 Red, 2M/3 Green & 2M/3 Blue pixels (or similar)
- so the Luma (detail) resolution is really only 600K pixels, which is only slightly more than SD video (720x576 in PAL) - i.e. not that great.

[Daddy B]

3G will be fine.. but we are still missing the openess of the iPhone, allowing to deploy custom apps on it.
btw, visit http://www.freetheiphone.com if you support this.

DB.

[vmardian]

After threatening to drop a large-scale cellular service contract based on concerns that it would lock itself out of a trade-up to the iPhone, a Swedish firm has received assurances from its liaison at the provider that the coveted gadget would arrive as soon as September -- and, startlingly, that a version of the handset with 3G (third-generation) wireless Internet access would be in the provider's hands as soon as January of 2008. The contact at the carrier was especially confident, sources said.

Is it just me or could this paragraph difficult to read?

[zunx]

The real revolution will come with the iPhone 4G

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G

The ultimate handheld presentation remote that is a full fledged presentation tool that is a full computer having Mac OS X built-in.

[vinney57]

Originally Posted by Daddy B

3G will be fine.. but we are still missing the openess of the iPhone, allowing to deploy custom apps on it.
btw, visit http://www.freetheiphone.com if you support this.

DB.

Oh please. Complain about something important you terribly nice person who is both handsome and intelligent.

Mod Edit: I'm getting tired of people reporting this post.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by samurai1999

Also, 2M pixel really means 2M/3 Red, 2M/3 Green & 2M/3 Blue pixels (or similar)
- so the Luma (detail) resolution is really only 600K pixels, which is only slightly more than SD video (720x576 in PAL) - i.e. not that great.

It's not really anything like that or nearly that bad. The luma mostly comes from green, and on most of the camera sensors I've cared to look at, half of the cells are green, 1/4th are red and 1/4th are blue, but I think the algorithms interpolate the luma from ALL cells.

At least you do seem to understand that the megapixels on cameras are just to make a bullet point look good. It's a pretty sad farce. I don't mind a camera on a phone, it would be convenient, but I would never be under any confusion that it would properly replace the quality of a dedicated camera any time soon.

[kenaustus]

How difficult would it be to include 3G in the iPhone, but not "activated" - just like the situation with WiFi? Not being an engineer I don't have a clue, but feel that Apple might have taken the same as they did with the C2D Macs, allowing activation for a massive $1.99 when AT&T is ready, and delivering the 3G to Europe, starting with the first one.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by samurai1999

Well, to be honest, I realise that, but I think that in the highly competitive world of mobile phones, it's important to hit all the right bullet points.

So, that is why they need to have good optics, good signal processing, and a better sensor.

I'm sure the iPhone will be a great success anyway, but a 2M pixel camera isn't going to look too good in 2008, given most manufacturers have moved beyond that already.

You make out you get it, well in fact you don't really get it.

Click here, then click "GET EPISODE" on the highlighted episode, then listen to that episode and learn.

[Joe_the_dragon]

How will apple handel the iphone in the UK where all phones must be unlocked?

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by kenaustus

How difficult would it be to include 3G in the iPhone, but not "activated" - just like the situation with WiFi? Not being an engineer I don't have a clue, but feel that Apple might have taken the same as they did with the C2D Macs, allowing activation for a massive $1.99 when AT&T is ready, and delivering the 3G to Europe, starting with the first one.

Maybe. I get the impression that it's currently an issue of time-to-market, network availability and also FCC certification. I don't even know how closely it could mirror the computer "n" activation situation.

[samurai1999]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

It's not really anything like that or nearly that bad. The luma mostly comes from green, and on most of the camera sensors I've cared to look at, half of the cells are green, 1/4th are red and 1/4th are blue, but I think the algorithms interpolate the luma from ALL cells.

You're right the effective resolution isn't quite as bad as I said - but it's probably below 50% of the 'pixel' count

Originally Posted by JeffDM

At least you do seem to understand that the megapixels on cameras are just to make a bullet point look good. It's a pretty sad farce. I don't mind a camera on a phone, it would be convenient, but I would never be under any confusion that it would properly replace the quality of a dedicated camera any time soon.

LoL! Mac-heads are so condescending!

Anyway, I would say that the iPhone, as currently announced, has 3 main weaknesses:
- no 3G
- no 2nd camera
- Main camera trailing-edge technology

The lack of 3G would almost certainly stop me buying it, and alot of other people as well, I expect.
- however, this looks like being sorted out pretty soon after, if not before, it launches in Europe.

The lack of a forward facing video camera would also be a downer, and might stop me buying it, given that nearly all 3G phones currently have this (although many of the Smartphones like the N61 don't). Given that my current phone has had this for 2 years, I would be loath to drop this feature, as it's great fun if you ever manage find someone who can video-call you back!

The Main camera spec is probably the least of my concerns, and probably wouldn't stop me buying it, but at 2M it's not going to replace the need for a proper camera.
It's good enough for spur-of-the-moment photos, but not good enough as a proper camera replacement.
- it may be expecting too much for a phone camera to do this, but if you look at the Nokia range, I would say that they are making an attempt to do exactly that. They're rapidly moving to 5M pixels with a good lens (Carl Zeiss).
- Sony Ericsson similarly

I would say that, by the time the iPhone lauches in Europe, let alone the Asian launch, the 2M pixel camera will be looking a 'bit shabby'. My guess is that Apple will address this as soon as possible, if not before!

You should also bear in mind that Apple is asking top-dollar for this thing, and so it's not unreasonable to expect a top-spec piece of equipment in return.

I don't mean to spoil anyone's weekend by suggesting that the iPhone is anything other than perfect, but it ain't.

[JeffDM]

I think most of us are aware of the shortcomings. I most likely won't be getting the first generation model. The camera is the least of my concerns.

Besides, 5MP camera on a phone isn't going to approach my 3MP consumer camera, unless it's a regular camera with a phone attached rather than the other way around. Heck, my dad bought a fancy new 8MP consumer camera that has nicer bullet point specs but it's not as good as my 3MP that's three years older than his, and about the same size. Megapixels are probably the worst yardstick ever concieved for comparing cameras. Multiplying the number of dots it can record doesn't fix the fundemental problems, and it can make them worse because there are fewer photons per cell, and makes the picture noisier and less sensitive in low light. So you might have high spacial resolution, you'll get about GIF-quality color at best.

[json]

Originally Posted by Ireland

Word on the street is that it will be Vodafone.

Oh please no!

I am only speaking on behalf of us Swedes now, especially we who live outside of the main three cities.
For us there is only one viable option: Telia.

Much can be said about Telia, and at least some of it not very flattering, but when it comes to geographical coverage and (most of the time) service availability there is no comparison whatsoever in Sweden.

The best for us customers would of course be that the iPhone was not connected to just one operator, but if it must be limited then I sincerely hope that it will be Telia in Sweden.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by json

Oh please no!

I am only speaking on behalf of us Swedes now, especially we who live outside of the main three cities.
For us there is only one viable option: Telia.

Look at the map, it clearly says partner for Sweden, I'm guessing that partner would be Telia, they would subcontract Swedish contracts to Telia in Sweden.

[rjwill246]

Originally Posted by samurai1999

I don't mean to spoil anyone's weekend by suggesting that the iPhone is anything other than perfect, but it ain't.

Well, you are not raining on my parade. This will be a great device and as a phone, which is what I need most, rather than a camera, and with OSX apps and capabilites, I think it is going to be worth it as the pricing structure will be competitive-- you just haven't seen the final details of that yet. Considering that there are many more expensive phones available today that sell despite the price tags, and given Apple's almost flawless ability to nail price points these days, I am sure this is going to sell just like the iPod--- moderate growth, then explosive as gens 2 and 3 become incredible devices.

Plus you certainly don't have to buy one.

[grabberslasher]

Originally Posted by Ireland

iDon't give a crap about the camera myself, anyway in a device that thin trying to cram anything over a 2Mp camera in would be a waste of time. Now onto my real point, iDon't expect to see any non-3G iPhones in Europe at all. Oh and Mr. Samurai.. Video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid.

Word on the street is that it will be Vodafone.

O2 is the Irish carrier of the iPhone. I can't reveal my sources on that, but it's a 100% certainty from what I've been told.

[samurai1999]

Originally Posted by rjwill246

Well, you are not raining on my parade. This will be a great device and as a phone, which is what I need most, rather than a camera, and with OSX apps and capabilites, I think it is going to be worth it as the pricing structure will be competitive-- you just haven't seen the final details of that yet. Considering that there are many more expensive phones available today that sell despite the price tags, and given Apple's almost flawless ability to nail price points these days, I am sure this is going to sell just like the iPod--- moderate growth, then explosive as gens 2 and 3 become incredible devices.

Plus you certainly don't have to buy one.

I think it's a great, possibly brilliant, device too.

And, of course, it's just the first of what will be a long line of iPhones.

I'm pretty excited about it, and can't wait to see it released in Europe (with 3G of course!).
- and when it is released, I might even buy it
- and I'm with vodofone already, so that's not a problem

[jasondotcom]

No coverage in Norway? Not going to happen. 8)

Originally Posted by Ireland

iDon't give a crap about the camera myself, anyway in a device that thin trying to cram anything over a 2Mp camera in would be a waste of time. Now onto my real point, iDon't expect to see any non-3G iPhones in Europe at all. Oh and Mr. Samurai.. Video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid.

Word on the street is that it will be Vodafone.

[Zandros]

Originally Posted by Ireland

Look at the map, it clearly says partner for Sweden, I'm guessing that partner would be Telia, they would subcontract Swedish contracts to Telia in Sweden.

No. Telenor bought Vodafone in Sweden (old Europolitan) and rebranded it. I would not go as far as to say that Telia is the only decent carrier, Tele2Comviq is good enough, but perhaps not in the northern inland.

Video conferencing over the phone IS a gimmick. Basically the only people who use it are deaf.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by grabberslasher

O2 is the Irish carrier of the iPhone. I can't reveal my sources on that, but it's a 100% certainty from what I've been told.

Well done, good investigating. To be honest I could give a rats ass who carries the iPhone in Ireland. If I had a moment with Steve Jobs, and he said; "do you have a question you want to ask me?" I'd say; "Where the fuck is the Irish Apple Store? I was talking to a guy who works at your your European headquarters in Cork recently, and he told me he had to ring in the place where he works to order his own Mac. What the fuck is the story with that? Now excuse me for being rude, but besides England Apple's whole slow growth and lack of Apple stores in Europe is inexcusable IMO. I think Apple needs to get off their lazy asses and address Europe properly. Just build damn sheds if you have to, cause people are crying out for your stores here, and there's none. It's a fucking joke."

[cnocbui]

Originally Posted by Ireland

iDon't give a crap about the camera myself, anyway in a device that thin trying to cram anything over a 2Mp camera in would be a waste of time. Now onto my real point, iDon't expect to see any non-3G iPhones in Europe at all. Oh and Mr. Samurai.. Video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid.
[/IMG]

I wish you would change your user name, your half-assed opinions are giving the country a bad name!

You might have no use for greater camera resolution but I certainly do and so I expect would many others. I recently got some great shots while skiing using my 2mp phone camera - just wish I had even more res.

And why don't you go tell all the deaf people who communicate with each other by signing over video conference calls that you think the feature they rely on is stupid.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by cnocbui

I wish you would change your user name, your half-assed opinions are giving the country a bad name! You might have no use for greater camera resolution but I certainly do and so I expect would many others. I recently got some great shots while skiing using my 2mp phone camera - just wish I had even more res.

And why don't you go tell all the deaf people who communicate with each other by signing over video conference calls that you think the feature they rely on is stupid.

I can't change my username, and if I could I certainly wouldn't do it for a noob like you. I take it you are not aware of the Megapixel myth? Well you are a noob. Noob is as noob does. I happen to have a deaf freind, and he finds texting quite adequate. He has also told me he thinks video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid, as like most people. Sitting somewhere in public or standing on the street anywhere talking to your hand is the most ridiculous things ever and the connection is never really as good as is should be. Give me a break you idiot. Thank God Apple had the sense you clearly don't have, otherwise the iPhone would probably be petrol powered too.

[samurai1999]

Originally Posted by Ireland

I can't change my username, and if I could I certainly wouldn't do it for a noob like you. I take it you are not aware of the Megapixel myth? Well you are a noob. Noob is as noob does. I happen to have a deaf freind, and he finds texting quite adequate. He has also told me he thinks video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid, as like most people. Sitting somewhere in public or standing on the street anywhere talking to your hand is the most ridiculous things ever and the connection is never really as good as is should be. Give me a break you idiot. Thank God Apple had the sense you clearly don't have, otherwise the iPhone would probably be petrol powered too.

I think you need to take some prozac, mate!


Or maybe a few pints of Guiness!

or Murphy's or Jamieson's

Chill man!

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by samurai1999

I think you need to take some prozac, mate!

We all need a little help from our friends now and then. I am going off to the pub with some ladies now, so that will have to do

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by vinney57

Oh please. Complain about something important you (deleted).

That was really uncalled for, even though it wasn't directed at me.


.

[phasornc]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

The situation was discouraging enough that Apple reportedly left out the technology in its inaugural phone due to the limited amount of HSDPA coverage in the country.

Okay can anybody tell me why on earth I would get a $599 phone with 2 year contract and no HSDPA in June 2007.

As of November Cingular had (according to them: HSDPA in 134 US markets with populations of 100,000 or more. This may be less than Verizon or Sprint but how saturated do you think HSDPA will be a year from now when you still have 16 months left on your iPhone contract?

Cingular/AT&T currently offers the following HSDPA phones:
Samsung Blackjack $199
Cingular SYNC by Samsung $49 (in black, red and blue)
Cingular 8525 $399
MOTORAZR V3xx $49 ($99 for Dolce and Gabana Gold)
Samsung ZX20 $129 (currently also refurbed for $49)
Palm Treo 750 $399
LG CU500 $49
LG CU400 $9 (yes $9 and it plays streaming MPEG4 and Real Video, Bluetooth, push to talk )
Samsung ZX20 $129
Samsung ZX10 $49

And anyway I bet the people most likely to spend $500 or $600 are likely to live in one of the HSDPA markts. So why does Apple cripple their phone?

Remember when Steve announced that the iMac will have a 33.6 modem? I sense another retraction coming....

[TenoBell]

Anyway, I would say that the iPhone, as currently announced, has 3 main weaknesses:
- no 3G
- no 2nd camera
- Main camera trailing-edge technology

Unless Apple plans to only release a 3G model in Europe and Asia, they should go ahead and have 3G across the board now. Doesn't make much sense to add 6 months later.

The forwared facing camera would be cool. Jobs was coy about iChat on the iPhone, when asked about it he said he sees no reason why iChat cannot be included, I believe it'll be there. No camera for iChat would be an odd ommision considering every Mac ships with a camera. Such a camera could get away with being low resolution and comparatively cheap.

My biggest concern at the moment is storage. 4/8GB with no way to add additional storage is pretty slim for a device that stores and displays documents, pictures, audio, and video.