Many people don't need something they don't have, so that's understandable. But ask them what the would like and I'm willing to brt reasonably priced data plans would be at the top of the list.
I don't need LTE. I don't stream anything. I don't need to get my email 2 seconds faster nor do I need a webpage to load a few seconds faster.
If it even was seconds. Its less then that!
A webpage is usually about 1 meg. If you got real world 40Mbit 3G it takes 0.2 seconds to load the page. With 80Mbit LTE it takes 0.4 sec.
Tech nerds that love to have long spec list with WAP,GPRS,LTE,HSPA+,BT4-EDR,AMOLED,803.11AC,5.5inch,Android 4.11 build 6969 and so on...
Ordinary people care about the experience. No one buys a car just because one car have better tech specs. Computer nerds needs to understand that the computer world is the same.
Mostly Fandroid and PC users. "you get much more hardware for the same price as Apple. You are stupid buying Apple. You have to be a soccer mom"
True that 3g speed probably is good enough for most users. The problem is, 90% of the places I go (all well populated towns and cities in the Philadelphia area) have awful 3g speed on ATT. I know they can support it. Oddly, there are few spots right in the middle of Center City Philadelphia that oddly get very fast 3g speed for me. Then step a few miles away and smartphones are useless.
So... I want 4g speed... not for HD video or streaming vid phone calls... but simply so that I can check emails, web pages and facebook without having to wait 90 seconds for each page to load.
Why is this news? If they don't want it, turn it off? For those that have experienced it, it's not and day for a mobile device browsing experience. I suspect many in this poll haven't used LTE or have no understanding of what it is compared to what they have now, or if most consumers are even aware of what they have now. Most tech heads will understand the benefits. Most 'users' will not notice or just don't care.
Maybe its propaganda put out by a major carrier (or carriers) who isn't fully ready to support LTE... and with consumers knowing this they fear a mass exodus of consumers when the 5 comes out.
Here is the script you will be hearing all across the non-LTE areas of the country:
"We wont have LTE in your area until 2013... but truthfully 47% of consumers say they don't need LTE... and the 53% are the heavy users downloading video... you're probably not a heavy video user, right? and truthfully all carriers have a cap on downloads so you get that fast video and then by the second week you are over your data plan. Kind of funny isnt it? So you really don't need LTE today"
I don't really feel the need to have it on my phone either. 3G is adequate for me. I only use Safari mobile for brief things and most of the time I'm on a WiFi network anyways. I mostly use my iPhone for email, texting, calling, and certain apps which don't use a lot of bandwidth.
To me, I see 4G is a nice to have...not a need to have. I'm not going to complain if all of a sudden I start getting 4G, but I'm not going to go buy all new hardware just to get it either. I don't feel its necessary.
Another day, another stupid analyst survey. The carriers have done a great job of mucking up with 4G, let alone the difference between 4G LTE vs 4G (HSDPA/HSUPA) and that neither was the spec for 4G anyways. So its not surprising customers don't think they need it. If you are on CDMA then yes you really do want LTE, but you don't want the new data plans that are no where near as consumer friendly as they were on 3G (unlimited) data. Those days are long gone.
In the future I am looking so forward to VoLTE and seeing what the carriers plan on doing then since all of the devices traffic will be essentially data packets we will all be screwed.
I have used it and it is a better customer (consumer) experience. We travel between homes in South GA (a farming area) & Northern-Middle GA (a lake area). I don't know why Verizon did not turn it on first in the Lake Sinclair - Lake Oconee area, but they did not do it. Having it in 1 place and not the other, I can say I miss it. It is much faster. Do I care about e-mail arriving a few seconds later on my iPhone or iPad, not really - Unless I happen to be using them. If they are on my desk as they are now, I do not care. If I am looking at them, I care about waiting. The length of time it takes for the web page to pop up on my iPhone is frustrating - and it is so, so, small ! The 4G LTE iPad is blazingly fast compared to the 3G turtle iPhone, but only when I am in a 4G LTE area - the 4G LTE experience is pleasant. Who does it benefit the most ? The consumer or the cell phone company, I have not researched this. But it must benefit the cell phone company a lot. More data, faster to the customer, the customer likes it, and they can handle more customers (or at least I think they might). Our cable pipe (bandwidth) at in the lake area is about 2% full or 98% empty. They can handle future expansion - but it may not come in my lifetime due to the present economic development collapse in our country.
When I was in Brazil many years ago, I was surprised to see people in Malls with so many cell phones and very few public phones - they were in Phone Stores. If you did not have a cell phone, you went into a Phone Store and paid to use a land line phone. I bet today it is not that way. The Brazilians leap frogged ahead then with cell phones, because they could not afford to wire the country with land lines.
If I could get 4G LTE or faster technology delivered to me at all times, I would probably turn off my cable TV, internet, and other forms of communication and use wireless provided it was reasonable. I want 4G LTE in my laptop (and Wi-FI). If you add up the cost of communications for a home owner and compare it to many, many years ago, it is much more than it used to be. We don't need this much cost, but we need state of the art communications - that costs money. Do I want to live in another country where the person somewhere above said it costs $10 / 10G Byte, I don't know. Right now we are captive where are.
3G is not good enough for me. 4G LTE is great if you can get it and if you only have it in some places, it can be very frustrating. But, bring on 4G LTE and lets see what happens ! But not higher costs ! After all the providers are going to benefit as much as we benefit.
lol, i bet 47% of "US consumers" have no idea what LTE is.. its really a shame. the only reason i diddnt get another 4S when mine got lost is cause all i wanted was LTE and had to sell out to HTC for a few months till iphone 5.
are data concerns still a real concern? i still have unlimited data for some reason even though i have an htc one x, but i was granfathered in on att by my old 3g iphone.
Broadly, consumers don't understand technology or what they think they 'need' until they use it first. I think this is a poorly worded poll, but I'm sure people would and have said the same about broadband internet, HD TVs and mulitcore computers.
You don't need a quad core, 2,623Ghz CPU to check email. Nor do you need the latest mega performance graphics card. And you certainly don't need 10,000 channels on your cable subscription.
Most say that they don't need it because they've never experienced it. 4G coverage for the majors like Verizon and AT&T sucks as a whole across the country. Even a major city like Miami still does not have the coverage. Perhaps if people have used it on a regular basis, they would have a benchmark for which to compare.
On a phone, LTE is overkill. On laptops, tablets it's desirable.
The biggest issue is network providers not providing adequate 3G performance. I.e. capacity issues on existing networks.
Additionally LTE is also a standards nightmare... look at the iPad sold to Australia. At least 3G is a standard that is compatible around most of the world.
Broadly, consumers don't understand technology or what they think they 'need' until they use it first. I think this is a poorly worded poll, but I'm sure people would and have said the same about broadband internet, HD TVs and mulitcore computers.
I surely would have said I don't need LTE. The poll doesn't allow for "I want LTE if it's power efficient enough to..." or "I want LTE if it's in the iPhone..." The former speaks to the usability and the latter speaks to the preferred the handset. I can imagine the type of person that would buy based on specs along but they aren't people whose judgment I trust.
Fun how 3G have gone from 384Kbit to over 40Mbit today in just 12 years. We will see the same with LTE. I love technology
It's interesting that we call all that '3G' when it's clearly many generations of development of improvement on the spec and HW. When we up the speed of Ethernet and USB we note it but we don't do for something that has such a wide expanse. And 3GPP '3G' hasn't stopped. We have '4G' networks that are slower than '3G' networks, but customers don't analyze that stuff. They don't what the underlying air interface is; they should only care about what the speed means to them.
What I propose is a scale that follows a general Optical Carrier transmission rates. OC-1 starts at 51.84 Mb/s. and any OC-x value will be that number multiplied by 51.84. With cellular data rates I suggest something eve simpler, using a base 10 Mb/s scale that is rounded. That would mean 72Mb/s LTE capability between both your device and the tower would show up next to your signal strength not as LTE but as x7 or x7.2. This is scalable and works for today as well as 20 years from now.
I still feel cheated by Apple. Bought the 4G iPad only to find out that LTE does not work in my country.
Interesting. On the morning that the Retina iPad was announced, I knew within an hour or so if 4G/LTE was going to be usable here in Australia. But I personally know at least one person who didn't bother to check, bought it and then complained about it.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147
I don't need LTE. I don't stream anything. I don't need to get my email 2 seconds faster nor do I need a webpage to load a few seconds faster.
If it even was seconds. Its less then that!
A webpage is usually about 1 meg. If you got real world 40Mbit 3G it takes 0.2 seconds to load the page. With 80Mbit LTE it takes 0.4 sec.
Tech nerds that love to have long spec list with WAP,GPRS,LTE,HSPA+,BT4-EDR,AMOLED,803.11AC,5.5inch,Android 4.11 build 6969 and so on...
Ordinary people care about the experience. No one buys a car just because one car have better tech specs. Computer nerds needs to understand that the computer world is the same.
Mostly Fandroid and PC users. "you get much more hardware for the same price as Apple. You are stupid buying Apple. You have to be a soccer mom"
True that 3g speed probably is good enough for most users. The problem is, 90% of the places I go (all well populated towns and cities in the Philadelphia area) have awful 3g speed on ATT. I know they can support it. Oddly, there are few spots right in the middle of Center City Philadelphia that oddly get very fast 3g speed for me. Then step a few miles away and smartphones are useless.
So... I want 4g speed... not for HD video or streaming vid phone calls... but simply so that I can check emails, web pages and facebook without having to wait 90 seconds for each page to load.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy
Why is this news? If they don't want it, turn it off? For those that have experienced it, it's not and day for a mobile device browsing experience. I suspect many in this poll haven't used LTE or have no understanding of what it is compared to what they have now, or if most consumers are even aware of what they have now. Most tech heads will understand the benefits. Most 'users' will not notice or just don't care.
Maybe its propaganda put out by a major carrier (or carriers) who isn't fully ready to support LTE... and with consumers knowing this they fear a mass exodus of consumers when the 5 comes out.
Here is the script you will be hearing all across the non-LTE areas of the country:
"We wont have LTE in your area until 2013... but truthfully 47% of consumers say they don't need LTE... and the 53% are the heavy users downloading video... you're probably not a heavy video user, right? and truthfully all carriers have a cap on downloads so you get that fast video and then by the second week you are over your data plan. Kind of funny isnt it? So you really don't need LTE today"
[INDENT]I don't need no steenkeen' LTE[/INDENT]
Apparently they wanted the result to be taken a little more seriously.
Consumers want services and products, not technologies. New services and products will rely on LTE. Only then will consumers need LTE.
I'm sure 47% of consumers didn't feel the need for broadband before YouTube, Hulu, etc. came along.
I'd want to see the exact questionnaire and its wording before trying to draw any conclusions at all.
I don't really feel the need to have it on my phone either. 3G is adequate for me. I only use Safari mobile for brief things and most of the time I'm on a WiFi network anyways. I mostly use my iPhone for email, texting, calling, and certain apps which don't use a lot of bandwidth.
To me, I see 4G is a nice to have...not a need to have. I'm not going to complain if all of a sudden I start getting 4G, but I'm not going to go buy all new hardware just to get it either. I don't feel its necessary.
Another day, another stupid analyst survey. The carriers have done a great job of mucking up with 4G, let alone the difference between 4G LTE vs 4G (HSDPA/HSUPA) and that neither was the spec for 4G anyways. So its not surprising customers don't think they need it. If you are on CDMA then yes you really do want LTE, but you don't want the new data plans that are no where near as consumer friendly as they were on 3G (unlimited) data. Those days are long gone.
In the future I am looking so forward to VoLTE and seeing what the carriers plan on doing then since all of the devices traffic will be essentially data packets we will all be screwed.
I have used it and it is a better customer (consumer) experience. We travel between homes in South GA (a farming area) & Northern-Middle GA (a lake area). I don't know why Verizon did not turn it on first in the Lake Sinclair - Lake Oconee area, but they did not do it. Having it in 1 place and not the other, I can say I miss it. It is much faster. Do I care about e-mail arriving a few seconds later on my iPhone or iPad, not really - Unless I happen to be using them. If they are on my desk as they are now, I do not care. If I am looking at them, I care about waiting. The length of time it takes for the web page to pop up on my iPhone is frustrating - and it is so, so, small ! The 4G LTE iPad is blazingly fast compared to the 3G turtle iPhone, but only when I am in a 4G LTE area - the 4G LTE experience is pleasant. Who does it benefit the most ? The consumer or the cell phone company, I have not researched this. But it must benefit the cell phone company a lot. More data, faster to the customer, the customer likes it, and they can handle more customers (or at least I think they might). Our cable pipe (bandwidth) at in the lake area is about 2% full or 98% empty. They can handle future expansion - but it may not come in my lifetime due to the present economic development collapse in our country.
When I was in Brazil many years ago, I was surprised to see people in Malls with so many cell phones and very few public phones - they were in Phone Stores. If you did not have a cell phone, you went into a Phone Store and paid to use a land line phone. I bet today it is not that way. The Brazilians leap frogged ahead then with cell phones, because they could not afford to wire the country with land lines.
If I could get 4G LTE or faster technology delivered to me at all times, I would probably turn off my cable TV, internet, and other forms of communication and use wireless provided it was reasonable. I want 4G LTE in my laptop (and Wi-FI). If you add up the cost of communications for a home owner and compare it to many, many years ago, it is much more than it used to be. We don't need this much cost, but we need state of the art communications - that costs money. Do I want to live in another country where the person somewhere above said it costs $10 / 10G Byte, I don't know. Right now we are captive where are.
3G is not good enough for me. 4G LTE is great if you can get it and if you only have it in some places, it can be very frustrating. But, bring on 4G LTE and lets see what happens ! But not higher costs ! After all the providers are going to benefit as much as we benefit.
lol, i bet 47% of "US consumers" have no idea what LTE is.. its really a shame. the only reason i diddnt get another 4S when mine got lost is cause all i wanted was LTE and had to sell out to HTC for a few months till iphone 5.
if they just asked "what is better" then the data means nothing.
To one person that means "what is faster"
to another person that means "what fits in my budget better"
To another that could mean "uses less battery power so my phone lasts longer"
etc etc...
are data concerns still a real concern? i still have unlimited data for some reason even though i have an htc one x, but i was granfathered in on att by my old 3g iphone.
You don't need a quad core, 2,623Ghz CPU to check email. Nor do you need the latest mega performance graphics card. And you certainly don't need 10,000 channels on your cable subscription.
Most say that they don't need it because they've never experienced it. 4G coverage for the majors like Verizon and AT&T sucks as a whole across the country. Even a major city like Miami still does not have the coverage. Perhaps if people have used it on a regular basis, they would have a benchmark for which to compare.
I don't want/need 4g LTE because of my data plan limits.
It's like getting a hose capable delivering a gallon of water a second and only having two gallons a water a month to use.
Plus, other than map data and podcasts I don't download much data onto my phone (again, because of the monthly limits.)
On a phone, LTE is overkill. On laptops, tablets it's desirable.
The biggest issue is network providers not providing adequate 3G performance. I.e. capacity issues on existing networks.
Additionally LTE is also a standards nightmare... look at the iPad sold to Australia. At least 3G is a standard that is compatible around most of the world.
I surely would have said I don't need LTE. The poll doesn't allow for "I want LTE if it's power efficient enough to..." or "I want LTE if it's in the iPhone..." The former speaks to the usability and the latter speaks to the preferred the handset. I can imagine the type of person that would buy based on specs along but they aren't people whose judgment I trust.
It's interesting that we call all that '3G' when it's clearly many generations of development of improvement on the spec and HW. When we up the speed of Ethernet and USB we note it but we don't do for something that has such a wide expanse. And 3GPP '3G' hasn't stopped. We have '4G' networks that are slower than '3G' networks, but customers don't analyze that stuff. They don't what the underlying air interface is; they should only care about what the speed means to them.
What I propose is a scale that follows a general Optical Carrier transmission rates. OC-1 starts at 51.84 Mb/s. and any OC-x value will be that number multiplied by 51.84. With cellular data rates I suggest something eve simpler, using a base 10 Mb/s scale that is rounded. That would mean 72Mb/s LTE capability between both your device and the tower would show up next to your signal strength not as LTE but as x7 or x7.2. This is scalable and works for today as well as 20 years from now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa
I still feel cheated by Apple. Bought the 4G iPad only to find out that LTE does not work in my country.
Interesting. On the morning that the Retina iPad was announced, I knew within an hour or so if 4G/LTE was going to be usable here in Australia. But I personally know at least one person who didn't bother to check, bought it and then complained about it.