Video speed test: 2.5G EDGE iPhone vs. mock 3G HSDPA iPhone - Page 4

Originally Posted by merdhead

Right, you can't actually successfully argue your point, so you're going to convince us all about how right you are by telling us that you own a Nokia product. Congratulations on your purchase.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

Uhhhh.... Here we go again. Nokia's devices, the IT are positioned for the particular market that they are aimed. They did not develop an iPod then stick a phone on it and call it revolutionary. Nokia developed a Linux tablet that is clearly aimed at a select market.

As far as the third world is concerned, the US seems to fit that bill in regards to Nokia. In the Mid East, Europe, Asia, and parts of South America, Nokia high-end phones are selling and selling quite well. Could you provide a reference as to what you consider a low-end phone. To have a much better idea of the Nokia portfolio, I would suggest you visit: www.nokia.co.uk. Here you will find a plethora of high-end phones that have better specs, and features that the iPhone is sorely lacking. Nokia actually has a smartphone line that performs smartphone functions.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

You are mostly comparing surface elements. The hardware and the missing functionality that other phones currently have.

What truly is revolutionary about the iPhone is the software. The OS and the API's have not even been used to their fullest potential.

Originally Posted by merdhead

Right, you can't actually successfully argue your point, so you're going to convince us all about how right you are by telling us that you own a Nokia product. Congratulations on your purchase. I can see that not only does it allow you to surf the net at an amazing 7.2Mbps, but it also lets you be smug and condescending. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to assist the user with respect to intelligence or wisdom. Maybe if you went out and spent more money on some consumer electronics you'd eventually get that? And you'd be more attractive to opposite sex too. Be sure to tell us how you go.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

Sapporbaby has claimed for awhile to own two Nokia phones, an iPhone, and an iPod Touch.

What good is the OS if the rest of the phone is not up to it. As I disclaimed, these are my opinions that I developed after years of using smartphones. In comparison, the iPhone falls way short. Now if you have experience with other phones by all means bring it forth. For many, the iPhone is their first entry into the "smartphone" arena, but for others, the iPhone is just a natural progression.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

Again you are looking at the surface. The underlying code structure is more important. The iPhone is using the same foundation and API's as the desktop OS. This is something no one else has done. This will allow the iPhone to run applications that in ways that other phones will not be able to.

Perhaps you just don't fully grasp what that means and you will have to wait and see what will come from it.

Originally Posted by chadisawesome

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you. the real noticeable difference with edge/3g will be when you tether your phone to your computer... which you can't do

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

Perhaps I do. Perhaps others have thought of this, but it did not seem applicable for their applications. Maybe SE and Nokia, and some of the other manufacturers do not see this as being important for their business. At the moment, many still don't. For Apple this is the right thing to do. Fine. Just because Apple thinks it is good, does not mean it the best thing in the world. Nokia and SE will still continue to do well with reincarnated versions of Symbian and beyond. This seems to be lost on anyone other than the most diehard Apple fans.

Personally, my money goes with what works. If it is Apple, Steve can buy a new mock-turtle neck on my dime. If Nokia fits the bill, then they get my money as well. I do not fall for the old Jedi Mind Trick.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

??????????????????? Not sure what the significance of this is but okay.

BTW, everyone here claims something. I have not seen anyone post a receipt of their devices here online, so it could be assumed that everyone here is: "claiming".

Originally Posted by TenoBell

You say you own an iPhone, admit you rarely use it. Many of your comments sound as if you've never touched one.

Yes anyone can claim anything but there is a limit on what sounds believable. Most of the time people sound believable, sometimes they don't.

And your point is? I can use it as little or as much as I like. I paid for it. I do not use it as much simply because it is a crippled device (my opinion). I use the iPod functions mostly. Would you like me to chart my usage and report back to you?

Originally Posted by TenoBell

Again you are looking at the surface. The underlying code structure is more important. The iPhone is using the same foundation and API's as the desktop OS. This is something no one else has done. This will allow the iPhone to run applications that in ways that other phones will not be able to.

Perhaps you just don't fully grasp what that means and you will have to wait and see what will come from it.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

Apple and others have been Nokia killers for as long as there were phones. At one time Ericsson was one paycheck away from buying Nokia, and look where things are now. If you are deluded enough to think that Nokia will simply sit by and not make a fight of the game proves that you lack the understanding involved to see products on a global scale.

Originally Posted by Lundy

NO MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS. Last warning.

Originally Posted by notabull

One of the reasons that web site loads are not as fast on 3G as a straight download test would imply is that 3G latency is not significantly improved compared to 2.5G. A web page load of cnn.com will establish half a dozen TCP connections and send out maybe a hundred or more individual HTTP GET requests. Loading a web page quickly, therefore, requires good bandwidth *and* low latency. 3G gives the former, but still lacks in latency. A good latency with 3G is maybe 60-80ms compared with 10-30ms that you might get from your cable broadband.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

Your comments about the iPhone have been negative to an extreme.

Originally Posted by TBaggins

Whoa... didn't Sapporo just get yelled at by the mods a page back for saying much the same thing Teno is above?
People on both sides of the debate need to chill.

.

Originally Posted by TBaggins

Whoa... didn't Sapporo just get yelled at by the mods a page back for saying much the same thing Teno is above? .

Originally Posted by TBaggins

Well, if you're going to be that way about it, T, stating your opinion of someone else's opinion as fact, allow me to step in and say that, in the year-plus I've had of listening to *your* comments about the iPhone, they've been positive to an extreme, to the point of being rather Pollyanish. You've also hewed to the Apple party line with amazing consistency in almost every case, to the point where, sometimes, I had the uncanny feeling that I was actually reading an Apple press release or marketing dept talking points.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

The Apple party line:

"Apple Rocks - Nokia Sucks."

"Apple will dominate the mobile phone market."

"Why would anyone use any phone other than the iPhone."

I've never said any of these things. But I've seen people who have. I've never criticized anyone who did not want to use the iPhone. I've only argued with people whom I feel unfairly downplayed the iPhone's advantages or seem to claim the iPhone has no advantages.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

Perhaps their is a fine line. But their a difference between questioning someone's understanding of a given topic and question their intelligence.

I feel I questioned Sappor's understanding of software, but I did not question Sappor's intellectual ability to understand.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

***Sigh***

Before continuing, maybe it would be a good idea to start from the beginning of this thread as many of your statements have been addressed by me and a few others.

As to convincing you. I thought I made it clear that I could not care what you believe or do not believe. I just don't. I did not know a phone was designed to assist with intelligence (can be gained with reading and experiencing new things), wisdom (starts with seeing the world from more than one prospective).

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

I missed this, but I will comment on it none the less.

I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.

* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.

* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't

As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.

Originally Posted by merdhead

Yeah I've read the whole thread, but the arguments don't carry any weight. You're "sighing" instead of actually making a point proves that. The other thing I've noticed is that you've spent the whole thread attacking people instead of their arguments and keep coming up with non-sequiturs to try to make your point.

Nokia haven't had any real competition for some time, they've produced mediocre products that excite only people who get excited by specifications (what's the point of 7.2Mbps per second if your browser experience sucks?) and now Apple is giving them a run for their money.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

I understand how the software works but I do not think the iPhone will be the global phone dominator anymore than I think Nokia will. Nokia dominates now in terms of sheer numbers. They have more phones out there. Your comment that only Apple has the ability to do the seemingly impossible with the integration of a desktop OS on a mobile device. Sorry but I do not buy it. I am quite sure Apple, SE, Nokia, hell even Motorola have competent engineers that can do the seemingly impossible. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they can't. I can use your same argument as an example.

* The iPhone doesn't have 3G, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone doesn't make video calls, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support OBEX or SyncML, so Apple can't do it.
* The iPhone does not support tethering via BT, so Apple can't do it.
* Apple doesn't sell BSS/OSS's, so they can't.
* Apple doesn't sell, design, or market basestations, so they can't

As you can see these are pretty weak arguments but they are in line with what you put forth. I have full confidence that Apple, Nokia, SE and others can do pretty much whatever they feel would be in the best interst of their bottom line.

As a phone, a smartphone it is lacking, pure and simple. It has the potential to be much, much better.

Originally Posted by merdhead

I don't think you do understand software. Microsoft, a huge and very well funded corp had been chasing Apple in software for decades and each time has failed miserably.

Why would Nokia, SE or anyone else succeed instead? It hasn't anything to do with the desktop or anything else. It's the fact they understand the issues, the users and software and have the good taste and skills to deliver.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Originally Posted by TenoBell

You don't have to take what I've said about the OS look at what has been done. Its indisputable that no one else has done it. Neither of us can really say for sure whether Nokia engineers could or could not do what Apple has done. What we can say is that its not simple to do and so far they have not done it.

A feature list is just a feature list. It has nothing to do with a company's ability to develop a software platform.

Apple doesn't make base stations. Exactly what base stations are you talking about?

What you have listed are not in line with what I was talking about at all. I'm talking about the OS and underlying development platform. You list features and software that works on top of the OS.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.

That's fine for you. But the iPhone has undeniably raised the stakes in the mobile market.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

A estimation you have made looking at the length of feature lists and not the quality of the features. Not the underlying software and inner workings of each phone.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

My sighing comes from the fact that I am tired of making the same argument over and over. As I have said, and since you say you read the entire thread, you should agree, the iPhone as an iPod is a great device. It has no competition in the area of media experience, or web browsing. In the telephone area, it is lacking.

It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these.

To this end you are incorrect and seem to have jumped on the "attacking people" bandwagon. Anything, anything, anything I say in the form of a personal attack towards a person usually comes in a response salvo. Key word here being usually. Do you consider the lack of features that I mentioned above as non-sequiturs? Most biz users don't. Discerning users can tell the difference between smoke and mirrors. Jedi Mind tricks and real features designed for biz users.

The more this "debate" transpires the more it is apparent that Apple and Nokia are not in a head to head competition per se. Nokia makes phones that play music while Apple makes music players that have minimal telephony features. Literally Apples and reindeer (Finland). In the future, Apple will hopefully get smart and buy/hire/import real telephony engineers, and Nokia will do the same with media companies (software guys) to develop products that will appeal to all masses. Nokia is not going to be run off any time soon by Apple or anyone else for that matter.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

So, to continue to say, "look what we have done, that you didn't do, or can't" is a baseless argument.

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! People buy things for features. Symbian is the development platform. You do understand this right?

Great. You have a wonderful browsing experience but I need to use biz functions that are not there. WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!! I can browse but not send a biz contact via OBEX transfer. Darn, I need SyncML, but wait the iPhone does not have that. I want to have a vid call. Oppsssss. Not possible with my iPhone. Well, at least my web browser is great. Hell, screw work. I will just watch a vid instead. The iPhone a great work killer.

It's so-called smartphone status is one dimensional if you consider the lack of smartphone features. A great web browsing experience or the ability to watch vids or listen to music does not make a smartphone. The ability to store and forward docs, VoIP calling, video conferencing, doc editing, OBEX support are smartphone features. The iPhone has none of these.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

From what I've seen Symbian has no equivalent to Cocoa Touch, Core Video, Core Audio, Core Image, or Core Animation.

Yes but listing features and applications tells you little about how Symbian works or its development platform.

Its unreasonable to be disappointed with Apple for not including features that were never listed. The iPhone version 1 was not developed as a business device. I seriously doubt many consumers are making common use of OBEX or SyncML.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

Who cares? Do you need to know about Cocoa Touch, Core Video, etc.... to operate your iPhone? I don't. This is a very, very weak argument put forth on your part. You are arguing vaper here.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

This is from your perspective of what you want. Most consumers don't use the functions you have listed.

Surveys of phone users have found email to be the most used features, generally followed by SMS and internet. Watching video and listening to music are generally pretty far down the list.

Word processing, VoiP calling, video conferencing, OBEX - none of these are even on any survey list of most used features.

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

I do use VoIP almost daily but does the lack of it in an iPhone mean I should find other means until Apple deems it important enough to include?

Originally Posted by solipsism

I think his point is that Mobile OS X foundation has the ability to grow faster and farther than other mobile platforms by allowing greater expandability with less limitations therein.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

This is from your perspective of what you want. Most consumers don't use the functions you have listed.

Surveys of phone users have found email to be the most used features, generally followed by SMS and internet. Watching video and listening to music are generally pretty far down the list.

Word processing, VoiP calling, video conferencing, OBEX - none of these are even on any survey list of most used features.