I tend to put ads like this in the same category as recent political ads. There's some truth to the claims but it's mostly smoke and mirrors, spin, and misdirection. The time is coming, however, when we'll see if the proof is in the pudding. At&t's exclusive agreement is running out. The iPhone will be available on other networks. Then and only then will we see if the anti-at&t raging is valid or not. We will see if Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile networks can handle the iPhone. Most analysts seem to think that iPhone users suck up much more bandwidth than Android users. Why that is I don't know but it appears to be factual.
So sit back and wait. We'll know soon enough.
I agree there's a lot of fudge in it, but I think it serves its purpose well. From an technologically ignorant consumer's perspective, I'm interested in the phone and might buy it because it's cooler than the iPhone by being able to video chat anywhere on a really fast network. Now that may be a faulty thought process, but it's pretty effectively induced by the commercial. That's what I like about it: cheeky, memorable, and with enough info to make me think about it.
YVW. Is it just me ... but it seems something not quite right about AI posting a Flash version and not even having the HTML 5 version to load when running ClicktoFlash ...
I just watched it on my iPhone...
(and not from the mobile site which I still boycott from the days of the black band headders and footers...
Agreed. I would use FaceTime so much more if it didn't require WiFi... oh, and I wasn't under the 200MB plan... can't imagine how much a FaceTime call would cost.
Gawd, I wouldn't. The last thing I want to do is piss my minutes down the drain via FaceTime when I have unlimited time via a high-speed Wifi network.
Who the hell wants to watch a bunch of people staring into a phone babbling along as they walk around in public. What an obnoxious reality.
Sprint's use of the higher 1700 MHz frequency restricts its penetration.
Penetration of building infrastructure of course.
In many cases, 4G will not go all the way.
Thus making Sprint the Christine O'Donnell of the cell phone industry.
Now you're expecting the average person to have a basic understanding of Wavelengths and Frequency. They'll just respond with, ``Just put in more towers to bump up the signal!'' as if flooding the area with increased RF is the answer.
Because it isn't there. Unless you suggest it's Apple's limitation, in which case it is Apple's fault.
How about neither? I expect AT&T is simply holding back for a bit on allowing that functionality for bandwidth reasons. Just as they did with other potential bandwidth suckers like tethering and MMS. It will be enabled eventually, though I'm hoping Facetime via 3g isn't degraded too badly.
How about neither? I expect AT&T is simply holding back for a bit on allowing that functionality for bandwidth reasons. Just as they did with other potential bandwidth suckers like tethering and MMS. It will be enabled eventually, though I'm hoping Facetime via 3g isn't degraded too badly.
Your typical voice call (with compression) is about 8kps.
Your typical video call (with compression) is about 512kps, or about 64 times that of a voice call.
AT&T has twice as many smartphones as its nearest competitor. I'm sure this is the reason why they don't want to open it up quite just yet. T-Mobile has far fewer customers, far fewer smartphones.
On the side, if you want to quickly burn up your monthly data allocation, just make a few quick video calls.
The 4G standard, LTE, is not compatible with the patchwork that T-Mobile has put together with WiMax + 3G. They'll have to eventually catch up. Will they leave their present "4G" customers behind when they DO make the transition?
No US carriers, or any carrier in the world is technically a 4G network. Nobody has deployed ITM-Advanced. T-Mobile uses HSPA+ technology, they don't use WiMax. Additionally, they don't have a "patchwork" network. HSPA+ will hit over 200M users by the end of 2010, over twice the deployment sizes of WiMax and LTE and will do so at 21Mbps. Next year, a second carrier channel will bump that speed to 42Mbps. Verizon and Sprint deployments won't touch that speed until 2012 or 2013.
T-Mobile is only using "4G" for marketing purposes, the same way Sprint and Verizon market WiMax and LTE as 4G when both of those technologies are not 4G.
No US carriers, or any carrier in the world is technically a 4G network.
That’s an erroneous idea as stated which is why they state it ‘4G’ all they want. It has a lose reference to generation and sequential numbering of that generation. The iPhone is 4G because it’s the 4th generation iPhone. Apple could market it as iPhone 4G if they wanted. Subsequently, T-Mobile can refer to each data acronym change as a generational change, or make an arbitrary download speed demarkation point to denote different generations. Unless they are specifically stating that HSPA+ is 4G as defined by the ITU then they are not in violation of anything, which is why arguing that this isn’t ‘4G’ is silly.
It makes a good point well, and the chick is undeniably hot.
Won't be long before it's irrelevant once Apple moves on to other carriers, but till then this is a good ad.
You know what I would saddle?
Her!
But seriously, the term "4G" is so overused in marketing now (it originally meant LTE), AT&T could simply rebrand their 3G service "4G" and claim to be the biggest.
Pretty funny story. Most of Tmobiles coverage is through roaming agreements with AT&T (or their subsidiaries).
Hasn't AT&T sold more iPhones than tmobile has sold all of their smart-phones? Whole thing is quite strange, seems like their goal is to get Apple to sell the iPhone on t-mobile more than anything.
Something is starting to smell over at T-Mumble..they are trying to make fun of Apple badly, brow beat their other competitors and really treat these customers like third-class citizens... If I were a betting man, this looks like a carrier clean up so it can be bought. By NOKIA??
T-Mumble's network is running out of steam, Nokia needs to dump MILLIONS of old, S3-based handsets in the market before it can start a new, and this seems that two European companies like this coming together would make sense...
Then, with Nokia-Mumble is the only place you can upgrade to a can-and-string device next year!!!
Comments
I tend to put ads like this in the same category as recent political ads. There's some truth to the claims but it's mostly smoke and mirrors, spin, and misdirection. The time is coming, however, when we'll see if the proof is in the pudding. At&t's exclusive agreement is running out. The iPhone will be available on other networks. Then and only then will we see if the anti-at&t raging is valid or not. We will see if Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile networks can handle the iPhone. Most analysts seem to think that iPhone users suck up much more bandwidth than Android users. Why that is I don't know but it appears to be factual.
So sit back and wait. We'll know soon enough.
I agree there's a lot of fudge in it, but I think it serves its purpose well. From an technologically ignorant consumer's perspective, I'm interested in the phone and might buy it because it's cooler than the iPhone by being able to video chat anywhere on a really fast network. Now that may be a faulty thought process, but it's pretty effectively induced by the commercial. That's what I like about it: cheeky, memorable, and with enough info to make me think about it.
1) Who said AT&T can?t make it work?
Because it isn't there. Unless you suggest it's Apple's limitation, in which case it is Apple's fault.
YVW. Is it just me ... but it seems something not quite right about AI posting a Flash version and not even having the HTML 5 version to load when running ClicktoFlash ...
I just watched it on my iPhone...
(and not from the mobile site which I still boycott from the days of the black band headders and footers...
Agreed. I would use FaceTime so much more if it didn't require WiFi... oh, and I wasn't under the 200MB plan... can't imagine how much a FaceTime call would cost.
Gawd, I wouldn't. The last thing I want to do is piss my minutes down the drain via FaceTime when I have unlimited time via a high-speed Wifi network.
Who the hell wants to watch a bunch of people staring into a phone babbling along as they walk around in public. What an obnoxious reality.
Sprint's use of the higher 1700 MHz frequency restricts its penetration.
Penetration of building infrastructure of course.
In many cases, 4G will not go all the way.
Thus making Sprint the Christine O'Donnell of the cell phone industry.
Now you're expecting the average person to have a basic understanding of Wavelengths and Frequency. They'll just respond with, ``Just put in more towers to bump up the signal!'' as if flooding the area with increased RF is the answer.
Because it isn't there. Unless you suggest it's Apple's limitation, in which case it is Apple's fault.
How about neither? I expect AT&T is simply holding back for a bit on allowing that functionality for bandwidth reasons. Just as they did with other potential bandwidth suckers like tethering and MMS. It will be enabled eventually, though I'm hoping Facetime via 3g isn't degraded too badly.
How about neither? I expect AT&T is simply holding back for a bit on allowing that functionality for bandwidth reasons. Just as they did with other potential bandwidth suckers like tethering and MMS. It will be enabled eventually, though I'm hoping Facetime via 3g isn't degraded too badly.
Your typical voice call (with compression) is about 8kps.
Your typical video call (with compression) is about 512kps, or about 64 times that of a voice call.
AT&T has twice as many smartphones as its nearest competitor. I'm sure this is the reason why they don't want to open it up quite just yet. T-Mobile has far fewer customers, far fewer smartphones.
On the side, if you want to quickly burn up your monthly data allocation, just make a few quick video calls.
The 4G standard, LTE, is not compatible with the patchwork that T-Mobile has put together with WiMax + 3G. They'll have to eventually catch up. Will they leave their present "4G" customers behind when they DO make the transition?
No US carriers, or any carrier in the world is technically a 4G network. Nobody has deployed ITM-Advanced. T-Mobile uses HSPA+ technology, they don't use WiMax. Additionally, they don't have a "patchwork" network. HSPA+ will hit over 200M users by the end of 2010, over twice the deployment sizes of WiMax and LTE and will do so at 21Mbps. Next year, a second carrier channel will bump that speed to 42Mbps. Verizon and Sprint deployments won't touch that speed until 2012 or 2013.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G
T-Mobile is only using "4G" for marketing purposes, the same way Sprint and Verizon market WiMax and LTE as 4G when both of those technologies are not 4G.
Gawd, I wouldn't. The last thing I want to do is piss my minutes down the drain via FaceTime when I have unlimited time via a high-speed Wifi network.
Who the hell wants to watch a bunch of people staring into a phone babbling along as they walk around in public. What an obnoxious reality.
That would mane a great Window phone 7 commercial.
No US carriers, or any carrier in the world is technically a 4G network.
That’s an erroneous idea as stated which is why they state it ‘4G’ all they want. It has a lose reference to generation and sequential numbering of that generation. The iPhone is 4G because it’s the 4th generation iPhone. Apple could market it as iPhone 4G if they wanted. Subsequently, T-Mobile can refer to each data acronym change as a generational change, or make an arbitrary download speed demarkation point to denote different generations. Unless they are specifically stating that HSPA+ is 4G as defined by the ITU then they are not in violation of anything, which is why arguing that this isn’t ‘4G’ is silly.
It's a pretty effective commercial. I like it.
This is a warm up for what's to come when AT&T looses exclusivity, they're gonna be forced to open up FaceTime over 3G.
It makes a good point well, and the chick is undeniably hot.
Won't be long before it's irrelevant once Apple moves on to other carriers, but till then this is a good ad.
You know what I would saddle?
Her!
But seriously, the term "4G" is so overused in marketing now (it originally meant LTE), AT&T could simply rebrand their 3G service "4G" and claim to be the biggest.
Hasn't AT&T sold more iPhones than tmobile has sold all of their smart-phones? Whole thing is quite strange, seems like their goal is to get Apple to sell the iPhone on t-mobile more than anything.
Hmm.
T-Mumble's network is running out of steam, Nokia needs to dump MILLIONS of old, S3-based handsets in the market before it can start a new, and this seems that two European companies like this coming together would make sense...
Then, with Nokia-Mumble is the only place you can upgrade to a can-and-string device next year!!!
You know what I would saddle?
Her!
Ha! I was just going to say she looks like a horse. You beat me to it.
Every single one of Apple's competitors parodies its ads. Why? Because they can't come up with anything creative on their own.
Not only have the ads been smart, they have been effective financially.
Island of misfit toys --- Verizon beat AT&T Wireless in postpaid net adds last Christmas quarter.
Funny T-Mobile in the UK are saddled with the 'slow' 3G network as well, they forgot to mention that.
As T-Mobile actually sell the iPhone 4 in the UK (on a slow 3g network), they will probably need to be a bit more sensitive to their phone supplier!
Yeah...except this advert is for T-Mobile USA, not UK. Separate companies in separate countries.
Further to this, the slow 3G we have on T-Mobile UK? based on what? I get HSPA everywhere I go on my HTC Desire.