AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Bandwidth-guzzling iPhone called "Hummer of cellphones"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bandwidth-guzzling iPhone called "Hummer of cellphones" - Page 2

post #41 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Really- how would you know Verizon will be changing their policy or Sprint with their Blackberries?

I say “becoming more common” and you somehow infer Blackberries on Sprint. Way to be a comprehensive reader! The Pre on Sprint requires a data plan. The Storm on Verizon requires a data plan. Each new phone that has been designated an “iPhone-killer” by the media has typically been required to have a data plan. This is becoming a more common event in this category and I don’t expect it to change anytime soon.

Why are such a nasty person to everyone?


Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

If you pay the no commitment price ($500 for the 3G) you can.

I would love to have bought mine outright, but I do use data (10GB to 40GB a month since I tether). and there would be no cost benefit to paying for it outright from AT&T, Apple or eBay. If they offer legal tethering I will pay for it since it is a service beyond what I agreed to pay for with my contract, but since they don’t I will continue to tethering my iPhone until they offer it.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokessd View Post

They are charging me $40 a month for "DATA", the same as I pay for my comcast cable modem. The cable modem runs circles around the marginal 3G service I get from AT&T.

18 million times $40 is....well, a lot. It's not like it was a surprise that iPhones can use the data network. AT&T was just banking on the fact that nobody would want to (based on old shitty smartphone designs). That's their own mistake.

"Fix your network with the HUGE F'ing pile of cash you have from the iPhone subscriber base!", is the only advise I have.

Sheldon

I don't know of any wireless service that can outperform cable.

It was a surprise. Nobody and that includes a lot of guys here that never in their wildest imaginations ever thought that the iPhone would be so successful. In particular, Apple and every service provider, especially those that turned Apple down in the first place.

AT&T has spent billions of dollars installing and upgrading its infrastructure. Keep in mind all those European countries that were originally owned by the government and/or were built and many still are with tax payers monies.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomkarl View Post

I just placed a call to AT&T asking them where my MMS and tethering services were. Three rungs up the ladder and no one has an answer.

I urge all iPhone users to call them and demand to know where these promised services are. Their lame "we are working to be able to provide the best experience" means nothing.

This is so true.

Customer: Why can't we have a robust information infrastructure like every school-child in every other civilized country takes for granted, and has for the past seven years?

AT&T: It's your fault. We gave you a decent device, and you used it too much.

Customer: Where's all the money you got from us? How many years have you had to anticipate, react, and improve?

AT&T: We are working to be able to provide the best experience.

Customer: *&^%$#

AT&T: Have a nice day.
Journalism is publishing what someone doesn't want us to know; the rest is propaganda.
-Horacio Verbitsky (el perro), journalist (b. 1942)
Reply
Journalism is publishing what someone doesn't want us to know; the rest is propaganda.
-Horacio Verbitsky (el perro), journalist (b. 1942)
Reply
post #44 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:26am
More like the Ferrari or Lamborghini of cell phones.
(May be a gas guzzler but goes like heck and everyone would have one if they could afford it.)
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:29am
What a load of crap. iPhone users use a lot more bandwidth, because they have a product that is actually *usable*! Previous phones had crappy browsers that you wouldn't use if someone paid you. What a surprise that when a useful, easy to use, product comes out, people take advantage of it! Wow, poor AT&T, it sucks to sell a good product, I know, people might use it.

Btw, this, of course, has nothing to do with hummers. If your neighbour has a hummer, you should blow it up. If they have an iPhone, you should compliment them.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:31am
AT&T has enough blame, but what about Apple? It takes years to expand a Wireless Network. Given that.......

1. What forecast did Apple give AT&T as far as projected US sales of iPhones and estimated average bandwidth per user? I bet it was far lower than anyone had ever expected. Without accurate projections, how could any wireless carrier build out a capable network ahead of the demand? Remember, too, that when the iPhone first came out, the APP Store was not even on anyone's radar. Apple kept adding features without first checking for network capacity.

2. Why did Apple choose just one US Wireless Carrier? Remember, this was Apple's decision, not AT&T's. We all know the reason why....higher subsidies from a single carrier (versus multiple carriers). So all that money that could have been used by AT&T to expand the network is sitting in Apple's bank accounts.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

I don't know of any wireless service that can outperform cable.

Why those guys would even compare the cost differences between coax to your home and nationwide wireless infrastructure costs and speeds is beyond silly.

Quote:
AT&T has spent billions of dollars installing and upgrading its infrastructure. Keep in mind all those European countries that were originally owned by the government and/or were built and many still are with tax payers monies.

We also need to keep in mind the geotechnical differences between many European nations and large open nations like the US.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

1. It will be interesting if, once tethering is enabled, it will force Verizon to lower their data charges (currently $60/month with a 5 GB cap). A lot of folks have stayed with Verizon because they dislike ATT, but tethering could be the last straw that gets them to switch. I know it would tempt me. Maybe I'll use it as a barganning chip to try and negotiate a lower rate for Verizon's mi-fi card and just get a touch.

Whoever said that the iphone tethering is going to be free? And AT&T charges the same $60 for a data card plan.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux View Post

If they offered the 3GS for that I would jump, but not the 3G. I want it primarily for the hardware improvements.

You can't have it both way. You can't ask someone to pay portion of your iPhone cost and not commit to their conditions. The iPhone no commitment prices are $499 (8GB 3G), $599 (16GB 3GS), or $699 (32GB 3GS).
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:33am
We don't even have smartphones and my wife and I get about the same level of service on Verizon as some iPhone users get on AT&T. Delayed SMS/MMS messages, dropped calls with full bars, messed up audio during calls, horribly slow data, etc... This is in Columbus, Ohio mind you. I fear the day the iPhone comes to Verizon. Their network is going to come to a crashing halt in less than 24 hours.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

I say becoming more common and you somehow infer Blackberries on Sprint. Way to be a comprehensive reader! The Pre on Sprint requires a data plan. The Storm on Verizon requires a data plan. Each new phone that has been designated an iPhone-killer by the media has typically been required to have a data plan. This is becoming a more common event in this category and I dont expect it to change anytime soon.

Why are such a nasty person to everyone?

You said:
Quote:
Note that AT&T is not the first or the least to require data plans for a smartphone. This is becoming a more common event in this category and I dont expect it to change anytime soon.

Blackberries are smartphones. I'm not gonna argue with you- you're way too sensitive yet always make these unfounded pronouncements.

Quote:
Why are such a nasty person to everyone?

??? ????
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

You can't have it both way. You can't ask someone to pay portion of your iPhone cost and not commit to their conditions. The iPhone no commitment prices are $499 (8GB 3G), $599 (16GB 3GS), or $699 (32GB 3GS).

Wow - thanks for the listing. I will treat my precious 32G much beter now.
But tell me- where did I commit to lousy connectivity? I must have missed that clause.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

I would love to have bought mine outright, but I do use data (10GB to 40GB a month since I tether). and there would be no cost benefit to paying for it outright from AT&T, Apple or eBay. If they offer legal tethering I will pay for it since it is a service beyond what I agreed to pay for with my contract, but since they don’t I will continue to tethering my iPhone until they offer it.

I would have paid the full price if it was unlocked without a contract. But since it is locked to AT&T (officially) and I personally need the data plan there was no point of paying $400 more.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:43am
Conflating data guzzling with gas guzzling is intellectually dishonest, professionally dubious and lame.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations View Post

AT&T has enough blame, but what about Apple? It takes years to expand a Wireless Network. Given that.......

1. What forecast did Apple give AT&T as far as projected US sales of iPhones and estimated average bandwidth per user? I bet it was far lower than anyone had ever expected. Without accurate projections, how could any wireless carrier build out a capable network ahead of the demand? Remember, too, that when the iPhone first came out, the APP Store was not even on anyone's radar. Apple kept adding features without first checking for network capacity.

2. Why did Apple choose just one US Wireless Carrier? Remember, this was Apple's decision, not AT&T's. We all know the reason why....higher subsidies from a single carrier (versus multiple carriers). So all that money that could have been used by AT&T to expand the network is sitting in Apple's bank accounts.

Apple has been as surprised as everyone else by the iPhone's popularity. Back in the EDGE model sales were pretty bad because of the high price and lack of features compared to much cheaper phones. with the 3G, OS 2 and the app store it has been a steamroller and they can't make them fast enough.

Apple went to VZ first and Verizon told them no thank you and the cell phone market was already crowded. Sprint has a much smaller 3G network than AT&T. T-Mobile is only now starting to sell a few 3G phones and their coverage is even worse than AT&T.

and if Apple went with VZ it would be a much more expensive phone due to the radio requirements
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intense View Post

eventually around the world, slow internet will be an issue of the past


It will be a long time coming. Historically, the capacity of any new system is usually well behind the demand for it. One can look at hard drives, memory, or the interstate highway system as examples. As soon as more capacity is available the usage increases to fill it to the maximum. I can't wait for the jet packs and flying cars, that will be hilarious.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #57 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

You said:


Blackberries are smartphones. I'm not gonna argue with you- you're way too sensitive yet always make these unfounded pronouncements.

??? ????

I know what I said, i even repeated it to you. You somehow inferred that because I stated that its "becoming more common" with smartphones that this automatically included Blackberries on Sprint. More common doesnt mean all smartphones. It certainly doesnt mean the average cheap Blackberry. Ive read your posts for a long time, you are angry, short-sided and just not very good at any complex thought or idea, but I dont think its too much to ask you to at least re-read what you are going to respond to on this forum. It would go a long way to not have all have the slowest posters hate you around here. Again, more common does not mean any and all you wish to make include.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations View Post

Apple kept adding features without first checking for network capacity.

Oh, yes, they did check. You couldn't download anything weighting more, than 10MB, from iTunes store over 3G. The warning popped up. WiFi only.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #59 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

I would have paid the full price if it was unlocked without a contract. But since it is locked to AT&T (officially) and I personally need the data plan there was no point of paying $400 more.

In another country I would have but in the US, AT&T is the only place I can use it anyway. The Dev Teams unlock works very well so we are not without options.


Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

and if Apple went with VZ it would be a much more expensive phone due to the radio requirements

And we wouldnt be able to use data while on a call. I know I certainly take this option for granted now.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Oh, yes, they did check. You couldn't download anything weighting more, than 10MB, from iTunes store over 3G. The warning popped up. WiFi only.

Well, clearly, they ignored the total number of concurrent users.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:55am
But the Hummer uses more gas to do the same thing.

The iPhone just enabled us to do more of what the "mobile future" is supposed to have promised.

If all I wanted was to text, it's the same bandwidth use as a Blackberry. Or close enough.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

and if Apple went with VZ it would be a much more expensive phone due to the radio requirements

There are a million websites on the iphone tear downs --- the most expensive parts are the memory, the display and the touch sensitive modules. Doing a VZ iphone would add maybe $2 on the parts list.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:55am
While I am all for competition in the marketplace, I fear any carrier that receives such a hot product cannot predict the overwhelming demand placed on its infrastructure. Yes, one could argue to just build more towers, do the upgrades in advance, but all these carriers are a business. They will not incur a giant expense with no cash flow coming in to cover. It's a bad PR thing, but it makes most business sense to release these then build infrastructure. You have people on 2 year contracts, they aren't going anywhere. Yes you can call, whine, moan, bitch all you want up the "ladder", but it's not going to get a tower built any quicker or approved any quicker.

Once your 2 year agreement is up, you have every right to switch to any carrier you want. This may be a great balancing act for AT&T to off-load these customers who use up bandwidth and customer service hours spent whining about their service.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:56am
I don't discount anyone else's bad experience. But I'm thrilled with AT&T. I live in Southern California and my 3G data service is good. Every now and then it will drop off, but a restart of my 3GS usually fixes it. I don't experience dropped calls either. Customer service has been great both at the stores and via telephone. Even if Verizon had the IPhone and I was out of contract I would not make the switch. I'm very happy with AT&T. The one caveat I should add is that I came from Sprint which was so bad on every level that the bar was set pretty low.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:57am
I'm confused. Do they want us to stay in the 20th century and just use cell phones for talking on and perhaps charging too much for text messages? Or do they want us to use these high speed phone networks (such as 3G). Are those high speed networks only for a few?

Sounds like they did a poor forecast and are trying to shift the blame elsewhere, such as the customer.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 146
9/3/09 at 9:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations View Post

Well, clearly, they ignored the total number of concurrent users.

Umm... And what were Apple folks supposed to do to that number of AT&T customers?

AT&T should have had a look around to learn how to have delivered their service without having hurt their reputation...

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #67 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:01am
C'mon people. Use as much bandwidth as you can, on all the networks. Demand always forces supply. In a few years, we'll all enjoy blinding speeds just like one day we wished for a real browser on the phone.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

There are a million websites on the iphone tear downs --- the most expensive parts are the memory, the display and the touch sensitive modules. Doing a VZ iphone would add maybe $2 on the parts list.

He said radio requirements. Qualcoms per unit licensing is reported to be quite outrageous. Ive read that it would have added ~$40 per unit.
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Since the beginning of this semester 2 weeks ago me and many of my friends have been experiencing many dropped calls during morning and early afternoon hours within our university campus. The problem seems worst during the 10 minutes between classes. AT&T was always excellent in our area but I guess they are really having trouble keeping up with demand. The good news is their 3G coverage approaching our town and now just few miles away vs. 30 miles early this summer.

Same here in Oklahoma. I'll be talking to a friend and then I can't hear them but they can hear me. All own iPhones too and it happens the other way around as well. Luckily I haven't had that happen to me while talking to a client. Think it might be an network upgrade issue? I can only hope... Get with it AT&T...
Mr. Scott
Reply
Mr. Scott
Reply
post #70 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations View Post

AT&T has enough blame, but what about Apple? It takes years to expand a Wireless Network. Given that.......

1. What forecast did Apple give AT&T as far as projected US sales of iPhones and estimated average bandwidth per user? I bet it was far lower than anyone had ever expected. Without accurate projections, how could any wireless carrier build out a capable network ahead of the demand? Remember, too, that when the iPhone first came out, the APP Store was not even on anyone's radar. Apple kept adding features without first checking for network capacity.

2. Why did Apple choose just one US Wireless Carrier? Remember, this was Apple's decision, not AT&T's. We all know the reason why....higher subsidies from a single carrier (versus multiple carriers). So all that money that could have been used by AT&T to expand the network is sitting in Apple's bank accounts.

I definitely agree with this. Most here are way too quick to blame AT&T for anything and everything, yet they don't have all the facts to make a sound judgment - their judgement is based on face value alone. What if Apple massively underestimated the anticipated data usage of each iPhone owner? Was AT&T aware of the extra bandwidth guzzling features that Apple planned to add? For all we know, AT&T have built their network exactly to the requirements that Apple advised them too, and that Apple made an error on the anticipated demand and bandwidth requirements of the device.
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:17am
I've been having problems with O2 in the UK for months now.

When I first got my iPhone, the network was fine, however now I can't make a call without it failing, and most people that try to call me go straight through to voicemaill, then voicemails often don't show up until the following morning.

It's rubbish and O2 are not providing the service we are paying for!

The iPhone is great, but I'm finding it amost impossible to use, and think I'm going to ditch the network moths ahead of my contract running out to Jailbreak my phone and use it on a network that can provide the service they sell.

Apple why are you restricting us to these sub standard networks???????
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:25am
Shouldn't this crap have been sorted out before Apple and AT&T formed a mutually-exclusive relationship?

Great job at the whiteboard, guys...
It's drk_one for a reason...
Reply
It's drk_one for a reason...
Reply
post #73 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

He said radio requirements. Qualcoms per unit licensing is reported to be quite outrageous. Ive read that it would have added ~$40 per unit.

Qualcomm is the largest wireless chipset manufacturers in the world and they wouldn't be number 1 if using their chips would add $40 per unit.

http://www.sramanamitra.com/2009/07/...adcom-stmicro/

All the recent Verizon Blackberries come with Qualcomm worldphone chipsets --- ev-do and HSDPA and GSM combined. And it didn't break Verizon's bank to subsidize these blackberries.

Adding ev-do radio would increase the parts list cost by a couple of dollars, that's it.
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:37am
Hummer of cell phones? Hmm... so what would one call all of those fancy tv-streaming, all-in-one, bandwidth-hogging phones sold in Japan that has been doing just about the same stuff for years? I don't hear them complaining about network capacity problems. Sure they are a much smaller country with less space.

I think this just shows how behind the US network infrastructure is compared to the rest of the developed nations.

Me think the iPhone gave the US networks a long-needed kick in the a**. Even for those that don't yet have the iPhone on their network, they too are upgrading their networks. They see what is in store for them and don't want to be caught with their pants down.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

I know what I said, i even repeated it to you. You somehow inferred that because I stated that it’s "becoming more common" with smartphones that this automatically included Blackberries on Sprint. More common doesn’t mean all smartphones. It certainly doesn’t mean the average cheap Blackberry. I’ve read your posts for a long time, you are angry, short-sided and just not very good at any complex thought or idea, but I don’t think it’s too much to ask you to at least re-read what you are going to respond to on this forum. It would go a long way to not have all have the slowest posters hate you around here. Again, more common does not mean any and all you wish to make include.

"You're too this, you're too that." Whines. I
And if you have to re-explain it over and over than your meandering doesn't belong on any forum.

And your passive/agressive nonsense is really frightening.
Remember it was you that wrote this morning (which besides making absolutely NO sense, was totally trying to be condescending):
Quote:
Aren’t you two brilliant. How can anyone argue with your logic that slower bandwidth should less than faster bandwidth, regardless of the medium in which it is sent?

The bottom line is that you're the only one on here that defends AT&T by making up such lame excuses without telling us who else is doing the same.
Later.
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intense View Post

eventually around the world, slow internet will be an issue of the past

And then they'll begin marketing a new generation of devices that will eat all of that up.

I've been waiting for a responsive computer that simply works as fast as I can give it input since my Commodore 64 (which came closer than any machine I have TODAY).

Overhead, code bloat, multi-user drag and other bottlenecks always seem to stay a step or two ahead of improvements in hardware and even software (e.g., the leaner, meaner Snow Leopard).

So I know only one thing ... as long as I'm using computers I expect beachballs, hour glasses, progress bars or whatever the current icon of "I can't keep up with you, sorry" is.

Sigh..... \

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #77 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

"You're too this, you're too that." Whines. I
And if you have to re-explain it over and over than your meandering doesn't belong on any forum.

And your passive/agressive nonsense is really frightening.
Remember it was you that wrote this morning (which besides making absolutely NO sense, was totally trying to be condenscending):

Later.

Youre so right. I cant imagine how I missed your infallible logic that per-kilobyte costs for cable and wireless costs are exactly the same. How dare a nationwide cellular service that is subsidizing hundreds of dollars per device charge more for slower data than a regional cable company. I now see your genius, oh wise one.
Reply
Reply
post #78 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:55am
AT&T better step up before
September 22, 2009 at 5:18 pm EDT
When summer officially ends and Fall officially begins.

Until then, any MMS lawsuit is not warranted per the AT&T "late summer" promise to deliver MMS. Once that date/time rolls around, lawsuits will be warranted.
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:55am
"The report suggests that AT&T's reputation could be tarnished because, for some users, its network is unable to keep up with demand."

COULD BE tarnished? Ha!

There are two things keeping me from getting an iPhone: 1) no tethering, 2) AT&T.
Reply
Reply
post #80 of 146
9/3/09 at 10:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phizz View Post

For the world to move forward and a telco to stay relevant these networks will need to be capable of many times more capacity still. Quit whining and get building!

this seems to sum up the thread so far, but it's bad logic. It is not the whiners who will do the building. They are not mutually exclusive--in fact the article makes rather clear that both are happening and have been happening all along.

Nobody would argue that AT&T didn't underestimate the usage demands that the iPhone would create. OK, their bad. But did anyone really expect the iPhone users to use 10X the bandwidth? The "they are sitting on all this money doing nothing" argument is childish. It takes years to build out infrastructure like this-- they can't just throw billions at it to make it go away. Meanwhile, iPhone sales are just accelerating...

I'm not apologizing for AT&T, but I see their situation realistically. I'm just not sure I see the point of raising our bloodpressure whinining about how they are doing nothing...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Bandwidth-guzzling iPhone called "Hummer of cellphones"