or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Wi-Fi seen limiting battery life on MS iPod rival
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wi-Fi seen limiting battery life on MS iPod rival - Page 3

post #81 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
That's true. At Compuserve there wasn't much of anything at 300 baud.

We were all newbies at one point.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #82 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
This is where the iPod phone comes in. My treo 700p has EV-DO. This isn't as fast as WiFi, but it's plenty fast as it is. I clock between 400Kbs to almost 1Mbs anywhere I am. Including on the 43rd floor office of my wife's building in Queens. Try WiFi there.

Until WiFi is ubiquitous, as EV-DO is fast becoming, it simply is marginal. And EV-DO itself is getting faster. We will see 2Mbs before too long, and possibly even higher.

I would rather have that speed all over, than a higher one in a few spots here and there.

Bingo. This is why I said the iPod phone would have trouble being of use on networks other than Verizon, Sprint, and a handful of far eastern networks. As it turns out, mac users without EV-DO get really pissy when someone mentions this.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #83 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Bingo. This is why I said the iPod phone would have trouble being of use on networks other than Verizon, Sprint, and a handful of far eastern networks. As it turns out, mac users without EV-DO get really pissy when someone mentions this.

You do read the previous posts. I wish more people would.

WiFi is thought of as a panacea. Someday we will have very fast mobile internet service, I'm doubtful that it will be WiFi however. The technology isn't suited for that. That wasn't the point to it.

So, maybe we will have some cities with overall coverage. fine! So what happens when we are just outside of that coverage, such as on the highway? In a small town? WiFi wasn't meant for wide range coverage. There are WiFi antenna's that will give pretty wide coverage, but it's not nearly as good as a cell tower. It could take a hundred times as many WiFi transmitter/recievers to cover an area as broad cell towers can

My phone can be used as a modem through the USB port as well. Not bad..
post #84 of 102
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I can't see Apple adding something that is only available in the USA.

Surely you jest?
post #85 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

You do read the previous posts. I wish more people would.

WiFi is thought of as a panacea. Someday we will have very fast mobile internet service, I'm doubtful that it will be WiFi however. The technology isn't suited for that. That wasn't the point to it.

So, maybe we will have some cities with overall coverage. fine! So what happens when we are just outside of that coverage, such as on the highway? In a small town? WiFi wasn't meant for wide range coverage. There are WiFi antenna's that will give pretty wide coverage, but it's not nearly as good as a cell tower. It could take a hundred times as many WiFi transmitter/recievers to cover an area as broad cell towers can

My phone can be used as a modem through the USB port as well. Not bad..


How's HSDPA coverage in the USA? That's what most of Europe has and what most of the Far East have gone for instead of EV-DO. HSDPA allows up to 14.4Mb/s. Europe never did EV-DO.

There's also been a number of UMA trials recently where the phone hands off seamlessly (supposedly) from the network to local WiFi. I say supposedly as that's what the phone companies said about 3G handoffs back to GSM speeds but I found every 3G phone I tried would want to use 3G even if the signal was crap so it spent more time switching than was good when all you needed was standard GSM for a phone call.
post #86 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorya

Surely you jest?

No, I can't think of any particular hardware that Apple did that was just US. Software or services yes, happens all the time although they do eventually roll them out elsewhere. Satellite radio however is just a quaint US thing to get round the fact the country is too big for full terrestrial digital services.
post #87 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign

No, I can't think of any particular hardware that Apple did that was just US. Software or services yes, happens all the time although they do eventually roll them out elsewhere. Satellite radio however is just a quaint US thing to get round the fact the country is too big for full terrestrial digital services.

I suppose it would depend on whether is was CDMA or GSM. More people in the USA and Canada use CDMA, and as that's their home base...
post #88 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign

Satellite radio however is just a quaint US thing to get round the fact the country is too big for full terrestrial digital services.

So how do you explain the widespread use of Astra/SES and Eutelsat satellite TV in Europe? (Because your explanation of "country too big" doesn't work there.)
post #89 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

I suppose it would depend on whether is was CDMA or GSM. More people in the USA and Canada use CDMA, and as that's their home base...

Which goes to show that Apple doing phone hardware is going to be interesting as nobody uses the US version of CDMA outside the US and some developing countries where they can't support GSM.
post #90 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker

So how do you explain the widespread use of Astra/SES and Eutelsat satellite TV in Europe? (Because your explanation of "country too big" doesn't work there.)

You're conflating a few different posts here but, all the satellite services I know provide just TV and have been available for much longer than Digital Terrestrial services. Sky have been going since the 80s, Freeview a couple of years. We have no Satellite Radio services like XM or the other one you have in the US.

In the UK TV usage breaks down as...

8.1 million households using Sky TV (pay TV satellite)
7.1 million using Freeview (Free Digital Terrestrial)
6.4 million Analogue
3.3 million cable.

Radio wise, we have free digital radio in the form of DAB and although you can get radio on your Sat TV box, I don't know of any non-TV sat boxes. Most cars now come with DAB.

The size of the country issue is because of population density. In the UK and Europe, it's both commercially and technically viable to have terrestrial digital services because you can put up masts close to each other and map the whole population. In the US, where you're spread out more, Satellite and Analogue services which can span more country make more sense except in cities.

Existing Satellite services exist still mostly because Rupert Murdoch buys up all the Football rights.
post #91 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign

Which goes to show that Apple doing phone hardware is going to be interesting as nobody uses the US version of CDMA outside the US and some developing countries where they can't support GSM.

As I say, Canada has it. A fair number of other countries, even in Europe, such as Ukraine, and Russia do as well.

In fact, mant GSM operators are, or will be, going to WCDMA.
post #92 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

As I say, Canada has it. A fair number of other countries, even in Europe, such as Ukraine, and Russia do as well.

They aren't in Europe and they use the GSM version of W-CDMA and have done for some years already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

In fact, mant GSM operators are, or will be, going to WCDMA.

You're confusing your CDMAs.

W-CDMA was used in Europe, Japan and pretty much everywhere other than the USA in the 3G UMTS standard since late 2001 in Japan and 2003 in Europe. It's not compatible with the USA's Qualcomm derived CDMA standard or EV-DO. It's also not very compatible with older GSM handsets either so everyone has to buy new handsets.

HSDPA is where GSM went next after 3G UMTS and that's being rolled out now across most of the world. In the USA, only Cinqular use it. It's sort of GSM's equivalent to EV-DO but at speeds of up to 14.4Mb/s so probably about as good as 802.11b in actual use.
post #93 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign

They aren't in Europe and they use the GSM version of W-CDMA and have done for some years already.



You're confusing your CDMAs.

W-CDMA was used in Europe, Japan and pretty much everywhere other than the USA in the 3G UMTS standard since late 2001 in Japan and 2003 in Europe. It's not compatible with the USA's Qualcomm derived CDMA standard or EV-DO. It's also not very compatible with older GSM handsets either so everyone has to buy new handsets.

HSDPA is where GSM went next after 3G UMTS and that's being rolled out now across most of the world. In the USA, only Cinqular use it. It's sort of GSM's equivalent to EV-DO but at speeds of up to 14.4Mb/s so probably about as good as 802.11b in actual use.

I'm not confusing them. It's isn't any more compatable with GSM, but the standard is similar in concept to CDMA. There is talk of moving to it here as well.
post #94 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

I'm not confusing them. It's isn't any more compatable with GSM, but the standard is similar in concept to CDMA. There is talk of moving to it here as well.

If that's the case, good. It's about time we all used the same standards. Are the non-GSM networks in the USA going to pick up all the other GSM functionality though - like international roaming, SIM cards and personalization? There's more to GSM than just the radio technology.
post #95 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign

If that's the case, good. It's about time we all used the same standards. Are the non-GSM networks in the USA going to pick up all the other GSM functionality though - like international roaming, SIM cards and personalization? There's more to GSM than just the radio technology.

Internation roaming is a business matter rather than a technology matter. There are phones that incorporate both standards. I would imagine that if most carriers eventually go to WCDMA, that issue will fade. Then it's just a matter of cross payments between carriers.

Sim cards aren't necessary. That's done with CDMA from the phone companies themselves. Same thing with personalization.
post #96 of 102
God you're in an argumentative mood today.

Sorry, you're completely wrong, again. Most carriers ARE W-CDMA already. Please read back what I wrote. Sim cards ARE necessary since that's where personal info is stored in GSM, not at the phone company. My phone book is on my SIM, not at the phone co.
post #97 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign

God you're in an argumentative mood today.

Sorry, you're completely wrong, again. Most carriers ARE W-CDMA already. Please read back what I wrote. Sim cards ARE necessary since that's where personal info is stored in GSM, not at the phone company. My phone book is on my SIM, not at the phone co.

I'm talking about here, where they're not.

It's well known here that CDMA does this without sim cards. It's up to the carriers to allow it or not. I don't understand the problem. I've had friends move from one phone company to another, using CDMA, and keeping their phone, if the company is willing to lose a phone sale. The phone book is on your phone AND at the company.

Here, I just looked this up.

Don't anyone say that finding specific info on the web is easy, it's not.

here's the quote, the link follows.

"Even the GSM SIM card advantage, that allows you to change your cell phone and keep your phone list, is being surplaced by some CDMA operators with a service that allows you to store your phone book on the operator's database, allowing you to recover your phone book even if your cell phone is stolen (which is not possible with GSM, since if your cell phone is stolen, your SIM card will be stolen together). Notice that recently a new accessory called SIM backup was released, which allows you to backup the data stored in your SIM card. Also some GSM operators are offering a similar backup service."

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/151
post #98 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign

In the UK TV usage breaks down as...

8.1 million households using Sky TV (pay TV satellite)
7.1 million using Freeview (Free Digital Terrestrial)
6.4 million Analogue
3.3 million cable.


i think, while interesting, that those figures are not totally reflective, as im fairly sure they refer to number fo freeview receivers SOLD and i know many people have bought 2 or more. I myself have 4.

can you show your surce for these figures PER HOUSEHOLD ?

post #99 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trendannoyer

i think, while interesting, that those figures are not totally reflective, as im fairly sure they refer to number fo freeview receivers SOLD and i know many people have bought 2 or more. I myself have 4.

can you show your surce for these figures PER HOUSEHOLD ?


Ofcom - http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2006/06/nr_20060607

I've personally got none. Just an old analogue TV that keeps losing it's tuning. Can't get digital here. Don't want a sat dish on the house or cable. I don't even get Channel 5 here. No great loss - the less TV the better. I quite often go weeks without watching TV.
post #100 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

I'm talking about here, where they're not.

It's well known here that CDMA does this without sim cards. It's up to the carriers to allow it or not. I don't understand the problem. I've had friends move from one phone company to another, using CDMA, and keeping their phone, if the company is willing to lose a phone sale. The phone book is on your phone AND at the company.

Here, I just looked this up.

Don't anyone say that finding specific info on the web is easy, it's not.

here's the quote, the link follows.

"Even the GSM SIM card advantage, that allows you to change your cell phone and keep your phone list, is being surplaced by some CDMA operators with a service that allows you to store your phone book on the operator's database, allowing you to recover your phone book even if your cell phone is stolen (which is not possible with GSM, since if your cell phone is stolen, your SIM card will be stolen together). Notice that recently a new accessory called SIM backup was released, which allows you to backup the data stored in your SIM card. Also some GSM operators are offering a similar backup service."

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/151

What I'd rather have is a full phone catalog at operators side, and a personalized friend list at my sim card. If some one is not on my personal phonebook, I could make a broader search from operators database directly from phones interface, not by sending sms query.

Sim card is truly the way to go, what about the situation that your phone broke, or your battery went flat when you need to make call, with sim card you just borrow another phone, and your personal data follows.

Also the system where phone companies own phones is down right stupid, do you really change your plan if you can't get the phone you like? Phone and the plan should allways be separated. Get the best from both worlds. Not something your provider chose for you.
post #101 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Project2501

What I'd rather have is a full phone catalog at operators side, and a personalized friend list at my sim card. If some one is not on my personal phonebook, I could make a broader search from operators database directly from phones interface, not by sending sms query.

Sim card is truly the way to go, what about the situation that your phone broke, or your battery went flat when you need to make call, with sim card you just borrow another phone, and your personal data follows.

Also the system where phone companies own phones is down right stupid, do you really change your plan if you can't get the phone you like? Phone and the plan should allways be separated. Get the best from both worlds. Not something your provider chose for you.

Neither way is perfect, as usual. But the phone companies don't "own" the phones. There are phones you can get from phone stores that will work as well.
post #102 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse

Really?. The ability to update your music at a hotspot is not usefull?. You can't see that?.

i personally wouldn't find that useful at all. the music player should hold enough music until i get home and if i am on the go i would rather save my battery life so i can listen to music. plus it would be a bitch to download any substantial amount of music

Quote:
How about after zune comes out, google comes out with a tool to let you access your music from anywhere there is a wi-fi hotspot (oh, i don't know, AT A FRIGGIN HOTEL YOU JUST CHECKED INTO). How about maybe you couldn't hold all your songs on the zune so now you want to upload new songs you already bought (say you have 10,000 songs but your zune only holds 1000). Hmm, google allows you to do this at a wi-fi spot so that YOU DON'T HAVE TO FRIGGIN FLY HOME FROM CALIFORNIA TO NEW YORK JUST TO ACCESS YOUR F**KING COMPUTER TO UPDATE YOUR MUSIC ON THE ZUNE.

If my zune had the memory capacity of a cell phone that may come in useful but most likely not. plus if you had 9,000 songs that would take forever to download and your battery would be dead by then.

Quote:
You should check your vision. It is very limited. It's possible you need eyeware prescription. If you can't see the possibilities, you might want to go to walmart and buy a packet of imagination.

why don't you do us all a favor and jump off a cliff.

Quote:
I hate when dumbasses like you come out and say "i don't see a reason to use x feature cause i wouldn't". Who gives a rat ass what you would use?. Personally, I think battery life is a real concern. My ipod nano does not have wireless and already i bitch about the battery life but that does not mean just cause the battery life sucks, the idea of wireless sucks. If somehow someone could wave a magic wand and give me wireless player with great battery life with similiar form factor, i'd give you my ipod nano for free.. all you would have to do is pay shipping and handling (cause then, it would be worthless).

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Wi-Fi seen limiting battery life on MS iPod rival