For this reason I think the next iPhone will have the 1700MHz radio for T-Mobile as to have make it compatible across two carriers with little effort.
I hope the CDMA-based iPhone comes but the logistics are considerably less certain or clear.
I agree. If the exclusivity is up this month then best approach is to create an iPhone that supports Tmobile and that's available right away. This will ensure good sales for the next 5+ months until the new HW form factor is launched. At that point VZ & Sprint can be included.
I live in Atlanta where we have about, if not the best AT&T system. (This was the home of Cingular) I rarely have any network issues or dropped calls. Our Internet speed is almost always 2MB or more. My contract is up this summer. If AT&T's exclusivity ends I will entertain a switch, but not until another carrier has had the iPhone for a while. I want to see speed tests and read real iPhone customer reviews. Also, not being able to surf and talk at the same time is a deal breaker.
So if my iPhone were unlocked it wouldn't work on any other 3G network in the United States? So when I'm done with it I'll probably end up keeping it as a wifi device? I guess I could sell it to someone who has good AT&T service. But it won't be worth anything...
Maybe I'd keep it for vacations in Europe.
Whether you jailbreak your U.S. iPhone or purchase a carrier-unlocked iPhone from the grey market is immaterial.
Apple does not currently market iPhones that function with T-Mobile USA's 3G data network.
The next-generation iPhone will be smaller than the current version.
Not if even has a remote chance of matching the current advantage of many phones that are currently available.
As far the AT&T contract goes. It doesn't matter, Apple stuck with AT&T way too long and they could have broken their contract given the poor performance (Apple's Attorney's are smarter than that).
Both Apple and AT&T got greedy.
If the new tablet is released carrier free. Few with a current contract will pay extra for a 2nd Data Plan (Current e-book readers have free 3G for the life of the device).
By the way, in the three years I've had the original iPhone and the original (3G, I saw no reason to upgrade). I've never had a reason to access the Internet while on the phone.
I have had multiple accounts of typing an email or reading Associated Press and received a call and had to go back into the app I was in. For email at least it was saved for the AP app I had to find the article again and find the article and then start to find where I was interrupted.
That would not work for the new tablet. The return rate would be very large if you are reading a book and another (Apple Approved) app interrupted your reading.
The iPhone is due for Multi Task and the Tablet better have it.
The iPhone numbers (according to Geithner) are going to be stagnant and this quarter because of Android and the Mac sales they made may make them reach their goals.
That would scare the hell out of me if I were an Apple Stock Holder
I don't know who said this (Quote below); but they have a short memory. AT&T had horrible service (both customer service and network capability) and horrible call quality long before the iPhone and back when they were Cingular too. Many of us dropped (ha ha pun intended) AT&T and had switched to Verizon and were thrilled to have no dropped calls and near landline quality for calls vs. sounding like you are calling from the planet Mars. It was a huge disappointment to return to AT&T just to get access to the iPhone. If Apple is announcing a Verizon phone -- I will call AT&T as soon as it is available and say, "CANCEL MY ACCOUNT! CHOP CHOP WORK HARDER WORK FASTER MAKE IT SO!"
"Inside of AT&T, we are hearing that the iPhone is causing more trouble than ever before," the report said. "On some level, having the iPhone is hurting AT&T's image. Because they are the only company to carry it, and it's such a data hog, it's largely to blame for AT&T's network troubles. We don't remember hearing about AT&T's 'horrible network' before the iPhone--do you?"
I realize that there are regulatory matters, zoning, back haul capacity, tower sharing rights, but does it really take a year to get to the point of making any publicly apparent attempt at doing something about it? We had stories of towers being upgraded but it usually seemed to be a tepid response, I didn't see any improvements.
Actually, yes it does take more than year to put a new tower down, if at all. Sometimes the process can take up to 5 years and beyond. And that's not because the carriers want it that way, believe me. If they could, they would put one up the day after they apply.
Cities and counties DO NOT LIKE new towers. Swapping out antenna and equipment on existing towers isn't such a hassle, but to increase coverage in areas where there is none presently is a major hassle.
I, for one, would love to see AT&T's exclusivity end. If, for any reason, just to get all the whiners off the network and free up some bandwidth.
Where I live in the SF Bay Area, 3G has always rocked hard. I've never had a problem here, or anywhere else for that matter. The iPhone and AT&T was a good match. If it opens up to other carriers, well, good for whoever wants an iPhone and doesn't want to put up with AT&T in their area.
Good riddance!! Switch to verizon or tmobile (stop and get a whaamburger and some French cries on your way). The perfect service I've had with AT&T/Cingular will only get better.
Fact is, buying an iPhone with AT&T was a concious choice we all made.
You could have had Verizon this whole time and been enjoying all the things their horrible phones didn't do.
Smaller screen and possibly thicker, especially with the iPod touch, mostly to accommodate autofocusing camera elements.
The current iPod nano has a video-only camera because high-quality autofocus camera mechanisms wouldn't fit in the device and thus provide decent still images. This is allegedly why the proposed camera for the last iPod touch was yanked late in the development cycle.
Apple is all about the user experience and to have one phone be able to use data and voice simultaneously and another not wouldn't be acceptable.
Nobody is going to open up free 3G for the life of an Apple tablet like a Kindle. And nobody I know, even a hardcore apple fan like myself is going to shell out another 50 or 60 bucks for yet another data plan. And how often are you really going to be using data on your phone and your tablet at the same time? Never.
Which is why my money says that an Apple tablet won't have 3G and this will be when AT&T opens up tethering to the iPhone with no additional fee. And they'll subsidize the unit just like a phone or package the two.
And they'll keep the exclusivity and way bump up their network within 6 months when the tablet appears.
I thought that was Allitel, you know the company Verizon bought so they could paint pretty pictures of cows and cornfields with 3G coverage on maps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
Many years of customer surveys by Consumer Reports will back that up. ATT has always been at the bottom of the ratings. Apparently this analyst, like so many others, didn't do any actual research of the facts before releasing the findings.
If Apple opened the iPhone to one or two smaller carriers who operate on the 850-2100MHz 3.5G network, it would shut all the whiners about exclusivity up, as it would no longer be exclusive to AT&T.
I think they'd still whine anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KangaMoJo
Apple is all about the user experience and to have one phone be able to use data and voice simultaneously and another not wouldn't be acceptable.
Nobody is going to open up free 3G for the life of an Apple tablet like a Kindle. And nobody I know, even a hardcore apple fan like myself is going to shell out another 50 or 60 bucks for yet another data plan. And how often are you really going to be using data on your phone and your tablet at the same time? Never.
Which is why my money says that an Apple tablet won't have 3G and this will be when AT&T opens up tethering to the iPhone with no additional fee. And they'll subsidize the unit just like a phone or package the two.
And they'll keep the exclusivity and way bump up their network within 6 months when the tablet appears.
Technically, there are quite a few GSM carriers, but AT&T and T-Mobile are the only ones with UTMS/HSPA 3G networks. The rest of edge only for data.
I was referring to national carriers, not regional ones. The only two national coast-to-coast carriers operating on GSM are AT&T and T-Mobile. Further, the majority of the regional GSM carriers are using AT&T and T-Mobile's network.
In my experience, Verizon is pretty horrible in terms of customer service and great at raping customers in terms of billing. Apple would be smarter to go with just AT&T and T-Mobile (at least for a while).
First, adding T-Mobile will not irk AT&T as bad as if Apple embraced Verizon full force right away. Apple and AT&T for the most part seemed to work well together, and AT&T was willing to give Apple the chance other networks weren't so keen to do. If possible, it is worth trying to preserve that relationship. Second, as Apple points out in it's commercials, Verizon's network will not let users do data and voice at the same time. That is pretty lame. Third, embracing T-Mobile gives T-Mobile a chance to steal some customers away from the two big dogs, which can't help but to benefit consumers. Fourth, T-Mobile is probably more open to working with Apple as it is more hungry. Verizon has also given Apple a hard time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Another option could be the smallest of the "big four" U.S. carriers, T-Mobile. While some have predicted the iPhone could find a home on the network in 2010 due to its GSM-based network being compatible with Apple's handset, there is one technical limitation: the iPhone is not currently capable of connecting to T-MObile's high-speed 3G network.
T-Mobile 3G operates on a unique 1700MHz spectrum. The iPhone is currently compatible with UMTS/HSDPA 3G connections at the frequencies 850MHz, 1900MHz and 2100MHz. It would be necessary, therefore, for Apple to build a new hardware model that supports T-Mobile's 3G frequency
This is a correct statement. The problem, however, is that AT&T doesn't do this. Calls that start on the UMTS/HSDPA network, which are packet switched, do not transverse to the Edge network, which is circuit switched, no matter what handset you use. The 3GSM standard does not allow for you to go backward (form Edge to UMTS/HSDPA)... at least not that I have seen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hellokitty
"HotHardware alleges, without any evidence to support the claim, that the iPhone doesn't handle the switch from 3G to EDGE connections well, and frequently drops calls when 3G access is lost."
No phone can switch a call between 3G and EDGE. If a call starts on 3G, in must end on 3G. Or, alternatively, end when 3G coverage vanishes. AT&T's 3G coverage gaps and insufficient network capacity are to blame.
So then when I get a call and it starts in 3G and ends up in GPRS, what does that mean? There have been many calls where my 3G indicator ended up as a small circle when I was done.
Is it true what they say about Verizon's network that you can't surf and talk at the same time?
Yes, this is a true statement. This has nothing to do with Verizon though. Rather, it's a CDMA issue. Voice calls on the CDMA network use the CDMA2000 circuit switched network (similar to GSM/EDGE 2G phone calling on GSM networks). EvDO, CDMA's version of 3G, does not handle voice communications (in fact, EvDO used to stand for Evolution, Data-Only until marketing got ahold of it. Now, it stands for Evolution, Data Optimized). As with GSM, when you are making calls on the 2G network, you cannot have simultaneous data. With GSM based 3G (UMTS/HSDPA/HSPA), both voice calls and data are routed on the same packet switched network. So, if you are using an AT&T 3G phone and start a call on the 3G network, you can talk and surf at the same time.
For many people, this is a severe limitation. For me, being both a Verizon and AT&T customer living in the Dallas/Fort Worth area (one of the most heavily congested areas for both networks), I actually prefer the way CDMA does it versus GSM. Since AT&T's network never seems to handoff 3G calls to 2G when I hit 3G dead zones, I deal with a TON of dropped calls, more so on my iPhone than with my BlackBerry Bold. With my Verizon Tour, I have far fewer drops (I have to loose signal completely to have a drop versus just loosing 3G). Even further, me working in IT, I know how critical QoS is. Part of the reason why there are so many dropped calls on AT&T is due to the fact that on the 3G network, calls are competing with data for bandwidth. With so many full-internet phones on their network (such as the iPhone and others that can fully access the internet without going through proxies), running out of bandwidth within your tower is a real possibility. When this happens, you drop as well. For me, having a separate network for voice and data is critical, even if it means that I can't surf while talking (unless I'm on a Wi-Fi network, which the majority of the time, I am).
Comments
For this reason I think the next iPhone will have the 1700MHz radio for T-Mobile as to have make it compatible across two carriers with little effort.
I hope the CDMA-based iPhone comes but the logistics are considerably less certain or clear.
I agree. If the exclusivity is up this month then best approach is to create an iPhone that supports Tmobile and that's available right away. This will ensure good sales for the next 5+ months until the new HW form factor is launched. At that point VZ & Sprint can be included.
I've travelled all over the US and Europe, I could be reached almost everywhere and never had to switch phones.
Also, I like to be able to use my phone while checking the online menu of a restaurant for example.
I receive top notch service at my local AT&T store and I have no reason to abandon AT&T.
So I suggest that all of you whiners switch to Verizon, and leave the full AT&T bandwidth for me!
So if my iPhone were unlocked it wouldn't work on any other 3G network in the United States? So when I'm done with it I'll probably end up keeping it as a wifi device? I guess I could sell it to someone who has good AT&T service. But it won't be worth anything...
Maybe I'd keep it for vacations in Europe.
Whether you jailbreak your U.S. iPhone or purchase a carrier-unlocked iPhone from the grey market is immaterial.
Apple does not currently market iPhones that function with T-Mobile USA's 3G data network.
End of discussion.
No.
The next-generation iPhone will be smaller than the current version.
Not if even has a remote chance of matching the current advantage of many phones that are currently available.
As far the AT&T contract goes. It doesn't matter, Apple stuck with AT&T way too long and they could have broken their contract given the poor performance (Apple's Attorney's are smarter than that).
Both Apple and AT&T got greedy.
If the new tablet is released carrier free. Few with a current contract will pay extra for a 2nd Data Plan (Current e-book readers have free 3G for the life of the device).
By the way, in the three years I've had the original iPhone and the original (3G, I saw no reason to upgrade). I've never had a reason to access the Internet while on the phone.
I have had multiple accounts of typing an email or reading Associated Press and received a call and had to go back into the app I was in. For email at least it was saved for the AP app I had to find the article again and find the article and then start to find where I was interrupted.
That would not work for the new tablet. The return rate would be very large if you are reading a book and another (Apple Approved) app interrupted your reading.
The iPhone is due for Multi Task and the Tablet better have it.
The iPhone numbers (according to Geithner) are going to be stagnant and this quarter because of Android and the Mac sales they made may make them reach their goals.
That would scare the hell out of me if I were an Apple Stock Holder
"Inside of AT&T, we are hearing that the iPhone is causing more trouble than ever before," the report said. "On some level, having the iPhone is hurting AT&T's image. Because they are the only company to carry it, and it's such a data hog, it's largely to blame for AT&T's network troubles. We don't remember hearing about AT&T's 'horrible network' before the iPhone--do you?"
I realize that there are regulatory matters, zoning, back haul capacity, tower sharing rights, but does it really take a year to get to the point of making any publicly apparent attempt at doing something about it? We had stories of towers being upgraded but it usually seemed to be a tepid response, I didn't see any improvements.
Actually, yes it does take more than year to put a new tower down, if at all. Sometimes the process can take up to 5 years and beyond. And that's not because the carriers want it that way, believe me. If they could, they would put one up the day after they apply.
Cities and counties DO NOT LIKE new towers. Swapping out antenna and equipment on existing towers isn't such a hassle, but to increase coverage in areas where there is none presently is a major hassle.
I, for one, would love to see AT&T's exclusivity end. If, for any reason, just to get all the whiners off the network and free up some bandwidth.
No.
The next-generation iPhone will be smaller than the current version.
Compromise.
Thinner with a larger screen.
More slender...
Fact is, buying an iPhone with AT&T was a concious choice we all made.
You could have had Verizon this whole time and been enjoying all the things their horrible phones didn't do.
Compromise.
Thinner with a larger screen.
More slender...
Actually, I see the opposite.
Smaller screen and possibly thicker, especially with the iPod touch, mostly to accommodate autofocusing camera elements.
The current iPod nano has a video-only camera because high-quality autofocus camera mechanisms wouldn't fit in the device and thus provide decent still images. This is allegedly why the proposed camera for the last iPod touch was yanked late in the development cycle.
Nobody is going to open up free 3G for the life of an Apple tablet like a Kindle. And nobody I know, even a hardcore apple fan like myself is going to shell out another 50 or 60 bucks for yet another data plan. And how often are you really going to be using data on your phone and your tablet at the same time? Never.
Which is why my money says that an Apple tablet won't have 3G and this will be when AT&T opens up tethering to the iPhone with no additional fee. And they'll subsidize the unit just like a phone or package the two.
And they'll keep the exclusivity and way bump up their network within 6 months when the tablet appears.
All the Verizon talk is BS.
Many years of customer surveys by Consumer Reports will back that up. ATT has always been at the bottom of the ratings. Apparently this analyst, like so many others, didn't do any actual research of the facts before releasing the findings.
If Apple opened the iPhone to one or two smaller carriers who operate on the 850-2100MHz 3.5G network, it would shut all the whiners about exclusivity up, as it would no longer be exclusive to AT&T.
I think they'd still whine anyway.
Apple is all about the user experience and to have one phone be able to use data and voice simultaneously and another not wouldn't be acceptable.
Nobody is going to open up free 3G for the life of an Apple tablet like a Kindle. And nobody I know, even a hardcore apple fan like myself is going to shell out another 50 or 60 bucks for yet another data plan. And how often are you really going to be using data on your phone and your tablet at the same time? Never.
Which is why my money says that an Apple tablet won't have 3G and this will be when AT&T opens up tethering to the iPhone with no additional fee. And they'll subsidize the unit just like a phone or package the two.
And they'll keep the exclusivity and way bump up their network within 6 months when the tablet appears.
All the Verizon talk is BS.
Technically, there are quite a few GSM carriers, but AT&T and T-Mobile are the only ones with UTMS/HSPA 3G networks. The rest of edge only for data.
I was referring to national carriers, not regional ones. The only two national coast-to-coast carriers operating on GSM are AT&T and T-Mobile. Further, the majority of the regional GSM carriers are using AT&T and T-Mobile's network.
First, adding T-Mobile will not irk AT&T as bad as if Apple embraced Verizon full force right away. Apple and AT&T for the most part seemed to work well together, and AT&T was willing to give Apple the chance other networks weren't so keen to do. If possible, it is worth trying to preserve that relationship. Second, as Apple points out in it's commercials, Verizon's network will not let users do data and voice at the same time. That is pretty lame. Third, embracing T-Mobile gives T-Mobile a chance to steal some customers away from the two big dogs, which can't help but to benefit consumers. Fourth, T-Mobile is probably more open to working with Apple as it is more hungry. Verizon has also given Apple a hard time.
Another option could be the smallest of the "big four" U.S. carriers, T-Mobile. While some have predicted the iPhone could find a home on the network in 2010 due to its GSM-based network being compatible with Apple's handset, there is one technical limitation: the iPhone is not currently capable of connecting to T-MObile's high-speed 3G network.
T-Mobile 3G operates on a unique 1700MHz spectrum. The iPhone is currently compatible with UMTS/HSDPA 3G connections at the frequencies 850MHz, 1900MHz and 2100MHz. It would be necessary, therefore, for Apple to build a new hardware model that supports T-Mobile's 3G frequency
This is a correct statement. The problem, however, is that AT&T doesn't do this. Calls that start on the UMTS/HSDPA network, which are packet switched, do not transverse to the Edge network, which is circuit switched, no matter what handset you use. The 3GSM standard does not allow for you to go backward (form Edge to UMTS/HSDPA)... at least not that I have seen.
"HotHardware alleges, without any evidence to support the claim, that the iPhone doesn't handle the switch from 3G to EDGE connections well, and frequently drops calls when 3G access is lost."
No phone can switch a call between 3G and EDGE. If a call starts on 3G, in must end on 3G. Or, alternatively, end when 3G coverage vanishes. AT&T's 3G coverage gaps and insufficient network capacity are to blame.
So then when I get a call and it starts in 3G and ends up in GPRS, what does that mean? There have been many calls where my 3G indicator ended up as a small circle when I was done.
Also, not being able to surf and talk at the same time is a deal breaker.
Is it true what they say about Verizon's network that you can't surf and talk at the same time?
Yes, this is a true statement. This has nothing to do with Verizon though. Rather, it's a CDMA issue. Voice calls on the CDMA network use the CDMA2000 circuit switched network (similar to GSM/EDGE 2G phone calling on GSM networks). EvDO, CDMA's version of 3G, does not handle voice communications (in fact, EvDO used to stand for Evolution, Data-Only until marketing got ahold of it. Now, it stands for Evolution, Data Optimized). As with GSM, when you are making calls on the 2G network, you cannot have simultaneous data. With GSM based 3G (UMTS/HSDPA/HSPA), both voice calls and data are routed on the same packet switched network. So, if you are using an AT&T 3G phone and start a call on the 3G network, you can talk and surf at the same time.
For many people, this is a severe limitation. For me, being both a Verizon and AT&T customer living in the Dallas/Fort Worth area (one of the most heavily congested areas for both networks), I actually prefer the way CDMA does it versus GSM. Since AT&T's network never seems to handoff 3G calls to 2G when I hit 3G dead zones, I deal with a TON of dropped calls, more so on my iPhone than with my BlackBerry Bold. With my Verizon Tour, I have far fewer drops (I have to loose signal completely to have a drop versus just loosing 3G). Even further, me working in IT, I know how critical QoS is. Part of the reason why there are so many dropped calls on AT&T is due to the fact that on the 3G network, calls are competing with data for bandwidth. With so many full-internet phones on their network (such as the iPhone and others that can fully access the internet without going through proxies), running out of bandwidth within your tower is a real possibility. When this happens, you drop as well. For me, having a separate network for voice and data is critical, even if it means that I can't surf while talking (unless I'm on a Wi-Fi network, which the majority of the time, I am).