or Connect
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 3

post #81 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

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.

Why do you think (IS95/CDMA2000) CDMA failed? Why do you think both Nokia and SE virtually withdraw from the CDMA market? Qualcomm controlled the market, charged high prices for their chips and drove up the cost of phone development.

Qualcomm's technology and chips are the best around but manufacturers and carriers pay a very high premium for them. They're the Apple of the silicon world.
post #82 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by arlomedia View Post

"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.

Go get a free 3G Card for your PC....hardware is free and the monthly tethering costs will be the same.
post #83 of 146
I love this stupid hummer analogy. I could go on board of the iPhone were using more bandwidth to do the same thing, but that's not the case at all. The problem is that iPhone users actually enjoy using their phones to do these tasks, and use them more frequently. The iPhone is guilty of being usable and popular.

Agree with others. AT&T is overtaxing their network and needs to spend some profits on upgrading it to keep with present and future demand.
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #84 of 146
This is what happens when people move to a Telecom service based on the DEVICE, not the SERVICE. The service can't take it because they didn't build up the infastructure. The people are demanding more because they didn't care about the infastructure in the first place. If they did care, then they would have never switched regardless of device. Its not like the iPhone is that amazing anyhow.
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #85 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande View Post

I love this stupid hummer analogy. I could go on board of the iPhone were using more bandwidth to do the same thing, but that's not the case at all. The problem is that iPhone users actually enjoy using their phones to do these tasks, and use them more frequently. The iPhone is guilty of being usable and popular.

Agree with others. AT&T is overtaxing their network and needs to spend some profits on upgrading it to keep with present and future demand.

Excelnr point. AT&T has been building their network up and out faster than anyone. $18B this year, I think $12B last year. But that is besides the point. I think they need to do the responsible thing and stop selling iPhones or as many iPhones in certain areas until these problem areas hav been sufficently updated. I don't care how clean, wide, new or fast a highway is, if you get enough cars on it it will get conjested.
post #86 of 146
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!

Agreed. AT&T is a big whiner! They want is profit without doing any work. I think it's carryover from their monopolistic days. It's a competition, AT&T. And all you can do is gripe and moan while Verizon and Sprint push their networks further ahead?
post #87 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

Excelnr point. AT&T has been building their network up and out faster than anyone. $18B this year, I think $12B last year. But that is besides the point. I think they need to do the responsible thing and stop selling iPhones or as many iPhones in certain areas until these problem areas hav been sufficently updated. I don't care how clean, wide, new or fast a highway is, if you get enough cars on it it will get conjested.

BS. The responsible thing is for gready AT&T to stop adding more and more smartphones weekly and relentlessly advertising them (with their iPhone profits) at cheap price points all at the expense of iPhone users. The responsible thing is for AT&T to fix the network already (NYC being the first) and stop blaming it on iTunes App downloads. I shouldn't have to duck into a Starbucks to download- that's ridiculous!!
post #88 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

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.

The Tour also comes with a smaller screen and less internal storage than the iPhone, so RIM is cutting corners somewhere to make up for the cost of the radio chip.

i've also read that Qualcomm makes customers load their phones with Qualcomm software
post #89 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by faxthat View Post

Agreed. AT&T is a big whiner! They want is profit without doing any work. I think it's carryover from their monopolistic days. It's a competition, AT&T. And all you can do is gripe and moan while Verizon and Sprint push their networks further ahead?

Verizon and Sprint further ahead? You have to be kidding....they are all equally stressed. At least AT&T has higher speeds and a plan to double it again in the months ahead. Yes, all of them will go 4G....probably at the same time as the new cell phones are introduced.

Just because some engineer at Sprint placed a 4G call using a single 4G Cell tower doesn't make them the leader. That was pure hype for their commercials "The First 4G Network". Baloney.
post #90 of 146
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ptysell View Post

AT&T better step up before
September 22, 2009 at 5:18 pm EDT

i agree. any iphone user who wants to use mms ought to call and ask for more info. you'll get the pat "we don't know" but at least they'll hear from you.

i called 611 and spoke with carol portar, mike lance, vanessa bermudas, and christine casey. all grunts; all who answered "we don't know". (several calls, only one was dropped. honestly. ;-)

so then i called at&t's main number (210.821.4105) and asked for the office of ralph de la vega. you have to get past the operator (don't tell them you're calling in regard to your service or they'll just connect you back to the "we don't know" folks). once at ralph's office (i can call you ralph, right?) i spoke with executive assistant torian thompson. when asked when mms would be enabled for my account he said -- wait for it -- "we don't know". not only don't we know, but we don't have any additional information. and we don't even know when we'll know. so i told torian i was excited for when other carrier's would have the iphone so i could leave at&t.

so at&t said late summer. they have 19 days until the *end* of summer. and they don't know. typical corporate america dictating to the consumer rather than the other way around.

call and make your voice heard. caring costs extra(sm).
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
post #91 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

But tell me- where did I commit to lousy connectivity? I must have missed that clause.

As I've said to you many times before, you should please to stick to facts. When you said "I agree" to AT&T's service agreement for the iPhone, you agreed to this - hint, look at the part in CAPS (with heartfelt apologies in advance to all other AI readers):

SERVICE LIMITATIONS and LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Limitations of liability set forth herein govern unless they are prohibited by applicable law. Service may be interrupted, delayed, or otherwise limited for a variety of reasons, including environmental conditions, unavailability of radio frequency channels, system capacity, priority access by National Security and Emergency Preparedness personnel in the event of a disaster or emergency, coordination with other systems, equipment modifications and repairs, and problems with the facilities of interconnecting carriers. We may block access to certain categories of numbers (e.g., 976, 900, and international destinations) at our sole discretion. Your plan may include the ability to make and/or receive calls while roaming internationally. Certain eligibility restrictions apply which may be based on service tenure, payment history and/or credit and AT&T, in its sole discretion, may block your ability to use your phone while roaming internationally until eligibility criteria is met. International roaming rates, which vary by country, will apply for all calls placed or received while outside the U.S., Puerto Rico and USVI. Compatible international-capable device required. If you want to block the ability to make and/or receive calls or use data functions while roaming internationally, dial 1-916-843-4685. When outside the U.S., Puerto Rico and USVI, you will be charged normal international roaming airtime when incoming calls are routed to voicemail, even if no message is left. For more information and for a list of currently available countries and carriers go to att.com/wirelessinternational. Many devices including iPhone transmit and receive data messages without user intervention and can generate unexpected charges when powered "on" outside the United States, Puerto Rico and USVI. AT&T may send "alerts" via SMS or email to notify you of data usage. These are courtesy alerts. There is no guarantee you will receive them. They are not a guarantee of a particular bill limit. We may, but do not have the obligation to, refuse to transmit any information through the service and may screen and delete information prior to delivery of that information to you. There are gaps in service within the service areas shown on coverage maps, which, by their nature, are only approximations of actual coverage. WE DO NOT GUARANTEE YOU UNINTERRUPTED SERVICE OR COVERAGE. WE CANNOT ASSURE YOU THAT IF YOU PLACE A 911 CALL YOU WILL BE FOUND. Airtime and other service charges apply to all calls, including involuntarily terminated calls. AT&T MAKES NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, SUITABILITY, OR PERFORMANCE REGARDING ANY SERVICES OR GOODS, AND IN NO EVENT SHALL AT&T BE LIABLE, WHETHER OR NOT DUE TO ITS OWN NEGLIGENCE, for any: (a) act or omission of a third party; (b) mistakes, omissions, interruptions, errors, failures to transmit, delays, or defects in the service provided by or through us; (c) damage or injury caused by the use of service or Device, including use in a vehicle; (d) claims against you by third parties; (e) damage or injury caused by a suspension or termination of service by AT&T; or (f) damage or injury caused by failure or delay in connecting a call to 911 or any other emergency service. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if your service is interrupted for 24 or more continuous hours by a cause within our control, we will issue you, upon request, a credit equal to a pro-rata adjustment of the monthly service fee for the time period your service was unavailable, not to exceed the monthly service fee. Our liability to you for service failures is limited solely to the credit set forth above. Unless applicable law precludes parties from contracting to so limit liability, and provided such law does not discriminate against arbitration clauses, AT&T shall not be liable for any indirect, special, punitive, incidental or consequential losses or damages you or any third party may suffer by use of, or inability to use, service or Equipment provided by or through AT&T, including loss of business or goodwill, revenue or profits, or claims of personal injuries. To the full extent allowed by law, you hereby release, indemnify, and hold AT&T and its officers, directors, employees and agents harmless from and against any and all claims of any person or entity for damages of any nature arising in any way from or relating to, directly or indirectly, service provided by AT&T or any person's use thereof (including, but not limited to, vehicular damage and personal injury), INCLUDING CLAIMS ARISING IN WHOLE OR IN PART FROM THE ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE OF AT&T, or any violation by you of this Agreement. This obligation shall survive termination of your service with AT&T. AT&T is not liable to you for changes in operation, equipment, or technology that cause your Device or software to be rendered obsolete or require modification. SOME STATES, INCLUDING THE STATE OF KANSAS, DO NOT ALLOW DISCLAIMERS OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR LIMITS ON REMEDIES FOR BREACH. THEREFORE, THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS OR EXCLUSIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. THIS AGREEMENT GIVES YOU SPECIFIC LEGAL RIGHTS, AND YOU MAY HAVE OTHER RIGHTS WHICH VARY FROM STATE TO STATE.
post #92 of 146
I'm all in favor of AT&T fixing their network. But maybe you hens shouldn't cackle so much. Not even for the benefit of AT&T. Just for the sake of shutting the F up.

Though it's become acceptable behavior, you still look uber r'tarded most places you use your phone. Here's a list of places to not use your phone if you don't want to look r'tarded:

The thrift store
The grocery store
Ridding your bicycle
Ridding your motorcycle
The movies
Concerts
While you're playing video games
A court room
Any pizza place
check cashing places
An elevator
While your taking a dump in a bar bathroom
Any public restroom
Standing in line
Any place that sells or changes tires
while driving
And while your at shopko, kmart, walmart, sams club and costco

As someone who doesn't use a cell phone, believe me, there's a lot of people using phones where they really should not. Really, I just came in for a tire change. Not to hear how you put the bitch out on the street and kicked her mom. And that's a true story. And I could go on and on.

There is observation and accountability for the things you say and do. Someone is always keeping a log. And the one I keep is F'n huge.
post #93 of 146
It seems to me that it could be pretty cost/ and time-effective to install a "parallel" Wi-Fi/hotspot network alongside their cellular network.

Wi-Fi is still faster than 3G, is cheaper to deploy, and doesn't have the same regulatory overhead as new towers. So it could be deployed faster, and could take a tremendous burden off the 3G network.

There would be upsides for AT&T across the board. Less pressure on the 3G network and improvement in overall network reliability, which would be good for their brand and sales, and they could further monetize that Wi-Fi network outside the support it provides for their wireless customers.

Pretty much everywhere that AT&T has wireless hotspots now, the voice service is better. Maybe it's just coincidence?

I could be completely wrong about all my assumptions above, but the idea has been nagging at me. It just kind of makes sense, no?
post #94 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

As I've said to you many times before, you should please to stick to facts. When you said "I agree" to AT&T's service agreement for the iPhone, you agreed to this - hint, look at the part in CAPS (with heartfelt apologies in advance to all other AI readers):

SERVICE LIMITATIONS and LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.............
..............THEREFORE, THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS OR EXCLUSIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. THIS AGREEMENT GIVES YOU SPECIFIC LEGAL RIGHTS, AND YOU MAY HAVE OTHER RIGHTS WHICH VARY FROM STATE TO STATE.

Only you would have literally taken my statement seriously?
Anybody knows every contract has disclaimers.
post #95 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

I work across the street from their store, I'll go in there at lunch and demand to know!

The Donger want to know -- if you leave work, who then will be making the french fries?

Must go now! French frie make The Donger need food!
post #96 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Only you would have literally taken my statement seriously?
Anybody knows every contract has disclaimers.

And only you wouldn't take a contract seriously. Only you would re-post the entire contract instead of editing it out. And only you would never have a worthwhile thing to add to a thread.
post #97 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by dadsgravy View Post

I'm all in favor of AT&T fixing their network. But maybe you hens shouldn't cackle so much. Not even for the benefit of AT&T. Just for the sake of shutting the F up.

Though it's become acceptable behavior, you still look uber r'tarded most places you use your phone. Here's a list of places to not use your phone if you don't want to look r'tarded:

The thrift store
The grocery store
Ridding your bicycle
Ridding your motorcycle
The movies
Concerts
While you're playing video games
A court room
Any pizza place
check cashing places
An elevator
While your taking a dump in a bar bathroom
Any public restroom
Standing in line
Any place that sells or changes tires
while driving
And while your at shopko, kmart, walmart, sams club and costco

As someone who doesn't use a cell phone, believe me, there's a lot of people using phones where they really should not. Really, I just came in for a tire change. Not to hear how you put the bitch out on the street and kicked her mom. And that's a true story. And I could go on and on.

There is observation and accountability for the things you say and do. Someone is always keeping a log. And the one I keep is F'n huge.

The Donger not surprised you not use cell phone. Who would want to talk to you?
post #98 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

And only you wouldn't take a contract seriously. Only you would re-post the entire contract instead of editing it out. And only you would never have a worthwhile thing to add to a thread.

Well that post surely adds to the discussion.

Still waiting for you to tell me what other carrier won't also allow just voice on their smartphones. Waiting.
post #99 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongDukDong View Post

The Donger want to know -- if you leave work, who then will be making the french fries?

Must go now! French frie make The Donger need food!

What would you know about a french fry? They make those where Donger dwells?
post #100 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by carloblackmore View Post

I think a Formula 1 race car would be a more appropriate analogy if you want to discuss bandwidth usage. iPhones use up a lot of bandwidth (just like a F1 car uses up tons of gas per mile), but you also get magnificent performance, speed, handling, ergonomics, telemetry, and precision.

Unless you are Luca Badoer. Oh, well, he lost his ride today.
post #101 of 146
I just heard the geniuses on CNBC regurgitating the "Hummer of smart Phones" headline on their network - as if iPhone users are personally burning through our "precious data supply," and linking it to the other headline about Sony Walkmans outselling iPods for a brief period.

All kinds of gloom and doom talk followed, none of which mentioned,

a) the iPod figures for Japan did NOT include iPhone sales, and every iPhone as everyone here knows IS an iPod, nor

b) that the proper view is that Apple is the first company to deliver a PC equivalent quality experience on the net on a phone, not that it's a "data guzzler" - i.e., it's the first to deliver the data people expect at a speed they can live with (if their carrier can only keep up!).

I'm surprised they didn't talk about having to import data from hostile nations......

Talk about shallow!! These talking heads are moving markets - if they're that far off on stories even a casual hobbyist like me can see through, are they that far off on most or all stories.

miles wide and an inch deep: a river lots of people can wade in, but where no one should expect to swim......

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

Reply

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

Reply
post #102 of 146
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).

Sorry - I wasn't aware one could buy a 3GS without a contract; I thought the offer only included the 3G. Just curious - where did you find that info? I've looked through the AT&T site and couldn't find it.

Edit: nevermind - I just found it:

http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/in...iphone-faq.jsp
post #103 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

i've had my 3GS since launch and I think one month i was at 1GB plus or minus a few hundred MB

just because of this article i think i'll turn my wifi off and try to hit 5GB next month

I stood in line for the original iPhone - I came from Verizon and ya, there's no comparison. AT&Ts network was crap then and has not improved. And ya, I have the basic plan, but $68/mo. is crazy hi. Hopefully Verizon will get in and bring some sanity to the monthly cost. Hopefully, but I'm not holding my breath - I'll probably jump ship to them either way.
post #104 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

Why do you think (IS95/CDMA2000) CDMA failed? Why do you think both Nokia and SE virtually withdraw from the CDMA market? Qualcomm controlled the market, charged high prices for their chips and drove up the cost of phone development.

Qualcomm's technology and chips are the best around but manufacturers and carriers pay a very high premium for them. They're the Apple of the silicon world.

GSM fanbois don't realized this --- Qualcomm WON the war.

Right now, Qualcomm is the largest mobile chipset manufacturer in the world, and they are largest company in the mobile industry --- larger than Nokia, larger than Siemens, larger than Ericsson, larger than Texas Instruments.
post #105 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Still waiting for you to tell me what other carrier won't also allow just voice on their smartphones. Waiting.

How many times do you need to be told the same thing? A reading comprehension course would do you some good. The Palm Pre on Sprint REQUIRES a data plan. The BB Storm on Verizon REQUIRES a data plan. As higher-end smartphones get larger subsidizes to egret compete with the iPhone I suspet this trend Apple started to continue. No one said that every cheap ass smartphone on every carrier I requiring it. LEARN TO READ!
post #106 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

How many times do you need to be told the same thing? A reading comprehension course would do you some good. The Palm Pre on Sprint REQUIRES a data plan. The BB Storm on Verizon REQUIRES a data plan. As higher-end smartphones get larger subsidizes to egret compete with the iPhone I suspet this trend Apple started to continue. No one said that every cheap ass smartphone on every carrier I requiring it. LEARN TO READ!

YES- You're the one who SAID IT!:

Quote:
Starting Sunday, all AT&T phones under the category of smartphone will be required to have a $30/month data plan.

And then you say AT&T is not the first nor least. And I asked - then who else IS?
Are you THAT dense or just can't write?
post #107 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

The Tour also comes with a smaller screen and less internal storage than the iPhone, so RIM is cutting corners somewhere to make up for the cost of the radio chip.

i've also read that Qualcomm makes customers load their phones with Qualcomm software

If you look at the Blackberry Storm teardown, you will notice that the Qualcomm MSM7600 chip is the most expensive item at $35. But the MSM7600 is a dual CPU core chip which acts as both the baseband processor and the application processor. It also includes the GPS module and the Audio codec module within the MSM7600 chip.

If you look at the iphone 3Gs teardown:

http://www.isuppli.com/News/Pages/iP...-Reveals.aspx?

That's $14.46 for the application processor, $13 for the baseband processor, $2.25 for the GPS module and $1.15 for the Audio codec --- for a grand total of $30.86.

So the difference is $4.
post #108 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

YES- You're the one who SAID IT!:



And then you say AT&T is not the first nor least. And I asked - then who else IS?
Are you THAT dense or just can't write?

Back to reading comprehension. I wrote:

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

Since when does the word 'a' does mean 'all'? Keep up with your backtracking and your inability to ever admit that you can't read well or that you've simply made a mistake, because at least you can reinforce what we all think about you around here.
post #109 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux View Post

So why doesn't AT&T offer a voice-only plan yet? I don't want to pay for data (Wifi is fine for my specific needs) so I wouldn't be using up their precious bandwidth.

For the same reason that they don't offer a low-minute voice plan with a data plan. I'd be happy with paying for limited minutes and then 5gb of data at $30.00 but I can't get it. No iPhone for me
post #110 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea View Post

For the same reason that they don't offer a low-minute voice plan with a data plan. I'd be happy with paying for limited minutes and then 5gb of data at $30.00 but I can't get it. No iPhone for me

I actually have an AT&T $29/month plan with 200 minutes (plus free nights/weekends) which serves my limited voice needs, and I tried my SIM card in a friend's iPhone and it worked fine. So I'm inclined to get a 'no commitment' 3GS and keep my existing service, and live off of Wifi with no data plan. Total 2-year savings (after fees and taxes): ~ $800

Edit: cost breakdown (estimated):

No Commitment 3GS = $600
$29/mo + fees: ~$40 x 24 months = $960
All in (24 months) = $1560

------

Standard 2-year 3GS = $200
$70/mo + fees: ~$90 x 24 months = $2160
All in (24 months) = $2360

Obviously the former scenario comes with fewer minutes and no data access, but that's a tradeoff I'm willing to live with. I really want it for the hardware and apps.
post #111 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux View Post

I actually have an AT&T $29/month plan with 200 minutes (plus free nights/weekends) which serves my limited voice needs, and I tried my SIM card in a friend's iPhone and it worked fine. So I'm inclined to get a 'no commitment' 3GS and keep my existing service, and live off of Wifi with no data plan. Total 2-year savings (after fees and taxes): ~ $800

I'm getting $40 x 24 = $960, and that doesn't include any taxes. You can save a lot but paying an additional $400 the device up front does need to removed from the total savings and if you keep your phones more than 2 years on average then you include some additional savings. For me, this is not a good plan as I use AT&T network a lot. In all honesty, I abuse t he he'll out of it. I'm average at least a dozen GBs a month.
post #112 of 146
Like I tell my kids: no matter what they may say in their marketing propaganda, banks, insurance companies and utilities (read ATT) are not your friends.

It's strictly a business arrangement. The minute they stop making money off you, they'll cut you off and walk away.
Anthracite
Reply
Anthracite
Reply
post #113 of 146
Ordinarily I would be more understanding...because I would think that ordinarily building out something like a national network would be something that takes more time than a couple of weekends here or there. It is also no secret that the iPhone has literally ubered any and all sales forcasts set in place by both Apple and AT&T...starting with the 2G, continuing with the 3G, and overkilling all forcasts with the 3GS (even though some are simply replacements), so AT&T is stuck playing catch up, while Apple bathes in $$$ (you don't pay them monthly...but they make more pure margin off you in the time it takes you to swipe your credit card than AT&T probably does in 1 or 2 years). So yeah...ordinarily I would see the scope of the situation...

BUT...

I know AT&T is hiding that 'I Dream of Genie' chick somewhere in the bowels of their headquarters. They could just make her blink and do that weird thing with her nose and the problem would be fixed...but they don't. They could also use her to make me into a super attractive and cool dude, but they don't. Why? I'm not sure, probably because they are pure evil and stab puppies in the ear. I just know the grass is greener on the other side because AT&T waters their with acid. Verizon and the rest of the world have absolutely no issues with anything, and could take a bazillion iPhones on their network no sweat. I have also heard never-neverland is covered everywhere, and has download speeds measured in terabits. Yeah.

I think that sums it up pretty well. I should note I am lucky enough to live in an area where I have had no problems and have been very happy with service (Minneapolis area - which has had 850Mhz running for quite some time). But still, they are evil guys...think of the poor puppies.
post #114 of 146
I got my 3GS this summer and have no problems getting great 3G speeds and great coverage - at home (testing w/o WIFI), work and about town. Maybe there is a lot worse iphone density by the UT campus. Although I am a very light voice user, I have had no problems with dropped calls.

Just glad I don't live in a dense urban area like NYC - where the airwaves are like trying to drive your car out of Manhattan via the Holland tunnel at 5PM (used to live in NJ).
post #115 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

Hey, don't even fret...you or ATT. Once the ATT/Apple contract is up and Verizon(hoping) gets the phone, ATT's network should be back to normal...that is once everyone bolts to a better network

Verizon will in most likelyhood never, ever get an iPhone. It is a CDMA network and I doubt very much if Apple would ever waste the resources to make a version of the iPhone for only one network.

If anyone would get it it would be T-Mobile.
post #116 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by jodyfanning View Post

Verizon will in most likelyhood never, ever get an iPhone. It is a CDMA network and I doubt very much if Apple would ever waste the resources to make a version of the iPhone for only one network.

If anyone would get it it would be T-Mobile.

T-Mobile’s 3G coverage has gotten better but I’m not sure it’s still all that great in comparison to the Big 3. It would only mean a new chip that had the additional radio frequency. I’d think Apple would just use that chip for the whole of the US, and not actually create two separate model lines that had to be stocked for the US market.
post #117 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

Hey, don't even fret...you or ATT. Once the ATT/Apple contract is up and Verizon(hoping) gets the phone, ATT's network should be back to normal...that is once everyone bolts to a better network

Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

GSM fanbois don't realized this --- Qualcomm WON the war.

Right now, Qualcomm is the largest mobile chipset manufacturer in the world, and they are largest company in the mobile industry --- larger than Nokia, larger than Siemens, larger than Ericsson, larger than Texas Instruments.

Are you totally off your rocker?

Revenue year ending 08.

Nokia, $71,485,887,000
Qualcomm, $11,142,000,000

I think there is a slight difference there.
post #118 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

T-Mobiles 3G coverage has gotten better but Im not sure its still all that great in comparison to the Big 3. It would only mean a new chip that had the additional radio frequency. Id think Apple would just use that chip for the whole of the US, and not actually create two separate model lines that had to be stocked for the US market.

It is not just "a new chip" they have to redesign the logic boards and all the RF parts inside the phone, it is a major cost.

And they would have to still keep a GSM/UMTS version for the other networks. So yes they would need two product lines.

And then how could everyone suddenly move to Verizon? They all have phones that only work in AT&T / T-Mobile. Don't tell me you think everyone is going to buy a new phone and pay to dump their existing contract?
post #119 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by jodyfanning View Post

It is not just "a new chip" they have to redesign the logic boards and all the RF parts inside the phone, it is a major cost.

And they would have to still keep a GSM/UMTS version for the other networks. So yes they would need two product lines.

And then how could everyone suddenly move to Verizon? They all have phones that only work in AT&T / T-Mobile. Don't tell me you think everyone is going to buy a new phone and pay to dump their existing contract?

That is if they wanted to make a Verizon, Sprint or any CDMA-based iPhone. T-Mobile is GSM, using the same GSM frequencies as AT&T and has UMTS like AT&T, but requires Band IV (W-CDMA’s 1700MHz frequency) for 3G. While this chip would require a reworking and testing Apple could make this a single model. But you are right, this still requires a lot of R&D and even FCC testing to get approval. However, I doubt they’d do it mid model for ease of service by preventing any hiccups so if we are to expect T-Mobile to be added we’d have to wait until that late Sprint event to hear info about T-Mobile being added when Apple announces the new iPhone HW.
post #120 of 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

That is if they wanted to make a Verizon, Sprint or any CDMA-based iPhone. T-Mobile is GSM, using the same GSM frequencies as AT&T and has UMTS like AT&T, but requires Band IV (W-CDMAs 1700MHz frequency) for 3G. While this chip would require a reworking and testing Apple could make this a single model. But you are right, this still requires a lot of R&D and even FCC testing to get approval. However, I doubt theyd do it mid model for ease of service by preventing any hiccups so if we are to expect T-Mobile to be added wed have to wait until that late Sprint event to hear info about T-Mobile being added when Apple announces the new iPhone HW.

T-Mobile is a minor change (reasonably minor), but for everyone expecting a Verizon (or Sprint) version I think they are going to be disappointed.

The world has basically standardized on GSM/UMTS and now LTE. CDMA is a deadend.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Bandwidth-guzzling iPhone called "Hummer of cellphones"