If only American phone technology was up to speed with the rest of the world...
??? The bulk of cellular technology is developed by US companies, and it irks me to no end when people make foolish claims like this. Since 1995, the USA has lead the world in cellular network technology and implementation. Europe was the first to have digital cellular networks in the late 80's, but they've stagnated since then.
There's no system in the world that supports 7.2Mbps. The phone itself may support a planned future protocol, but the reality of the situation is that Japan's NTT HSDPA network is the fastest at 3.5Mbps or thereabouts, and the EVDO networks in the good 'ol USA (and elsewhere) aren't far behind at ~3Mbps. I'm pretty sure the EVDO-based US 3G networks from Sprint and Verizon combine to be the largest in the world. European cell networks are mostly minor-league, 2.5G networks.
Beside this, given the bandwidth of HSDPA (and its underlying W-CDMA), there's no magic way to deliver 7.2Mbps reliably to very many individuals in an urban or suburban region. The realistic optimum is around 1Mbps, the same as you'll get with Sprint in the USA.
Unfortunately, blowing up the Megapixel Myth also takes away a convenient crutch for millions of camera shoppers. If you’re torn between two camera models, you now know that you shouldn’t use the megapixel rating as a handy one-digit comparison score.
So what replaces it? What other handy comparison grade is there?
Unfortunately, there’s no such thing. Take advice from your friends, take sample shots if you get a chance, and read the reviews at nytimes.com, cnet.com, dpreview.com and dcresource.com. What can I say? Life is rarely black and white; it’s far more often filled with shades of gray.
They have to strike a balance with size, weight, and battery life. None of the most popular smartphones have a HDD. Hopefully Apple will be able to update to 16GB by launch.
For an iPhone product with only one model upon introduction, they had to make some tough decisions, I agree. Flash was used for more battery life and better reliability considering a phone would receive a lot more abuse than an iPod. From that perspective, it's the right decision.
However, this is supposed to be the most advanced iPod ever. One of the biggest selling points of the iPod is that one can carry all the music and video you have in your pocket. Not so with the iPhone. Even I with my modest collection of music and photographs would likely need the 8 GB model. When you add in video, the memory needs will explode.
Flash is inherently limited in price/GB and size/GB when compared to HDD. It won't break a comfortable usage barrier for video until 2009, maybe, when 8 Gbyte flash chips could be available, and 32+ GB of flash can be packaged in the iPhone.
In the meanwhile, our needs for memory, certainly for a subset of people, would really be in the 100+ GB range. I see no choice but for Apple to have an HDD option. In the current 2007 iPhone lineup, it really only has enough memory to dabble in video, not store video.
How much of a difference is 3G over EDGE. I'm thinking in terms of rendering time and just the overall browsing experience? Is it like DSL is to dial-up?
[QUOTE=THT;1040462In the meanwhile, our needs for memory, certainly for a subset of people, would really be in the 100+ GB range. I see no choice but for Apple to have an HDD option. In the current 2007 iPhone lineup, it really only has enough memory to dabble in video, not store video.[/QUOTE]
If you've acess to your data and media via iDisk do you really need all that storage space? Certainly some will but the average user probabaly doesn't. Much like the xMac, only appeals to the uber geeks.
How much of a difference is 3G over EDGE. I'm thinking in terms of rendering time and just the overall browsing experience? Is it like DSL is to dial-up?
EDGE theoretical download bandwidth is 237 kbit/s, with actual bandwidth hovering around 100 kb/s. You'll be able to download a Mbyte of data in about 1.5 minutes. So, about 2 to 2.5x as fast as 56k dial-up (if you account for the fact that you never get a 56k connection).
DSL downstream at its cheapest is 256-750 kb/s, and one can get 1.5+ Mbit/s fairly easily.
3G UMTS and HSDPA is on the order of 2 Mbit/s. Some options for more.
As for your question about rendering time and overall browsing experience. I hazard a guess that the differences between EDGE and UMTS/HSDPA will be pretty minimal with a few exceptions. You're not browsing the Internet on a personal computer. You're are browsing it on a phone with a 3.5" screen at 480x320 resolution, powered by a ~500 MHz processor. That processor isn't going to be rendering very fast. I don't think the increased bandwidth will help much in that regard. It'll help if you have to download tens of MB of data everyday to your phone.
The browsing experience will suck compared to your desktop/laptop. No doubt about it. You can simulate the experience by resizing your web browser window to 480x320. Only the webpage and scroll bars need to be in the 480x320 pixel frame. Then surf the Internet. And you can't use your mouse or trackpad. Then imagine it 5 times slower. That'll be pretty close.
If you want to know what it'll be like for Treo Palm users, shrink the browser to 320x320. Windows Smartphone users, 320x240. Treo Windows users, 240x240.
It's too bad there isn't an easy way to downclock your CPU to 500 MHz. Oh, and take your RAM down to 256 MB, and maybe bring back an ISA VGA video card of yesteryear. If you had an iMac G3 with 500 MHz CPU, and use a screen resolution of 320x240, that could be close.
So the primary benifit of 3G is downloading big files and streaming video/music. Flash-based websites could benifit presuming the browser can handle it. Everything else, general browsing, there's probably a slight rendering improvement due to data data being there quicker, but you've got other problems bottlenecking the system with the CPU, input methods, and the screen res.
Quote:
BTW, well said addabox in the above post. I find it amusing a lot of those engadget posters are praising Samsung for making a phone that's sticking it to Apple when in fact it's Samsung that has a primary role in the iPhone itself.
There's a lot of anti-Apple sentiment out there. The phone market is even more so, especially because it is caught in the midst of featuritis where if the number is bigger, it is better by default. Usability is pretty much an afterthought. It's going to be tough row to hoe for Apple.
If you've acess to your data and media via iDisk do you really need all that storage space? Certainly some will but the average user probabaly doesn't. Much like the xMac, only appeals to the uber geeks.
iDisk is a workaround, not a feature. It in effect, makes the iPhone harder to use. In a way, it's like SD slots. Nice to have expandable storage, but it makes the device harder to use. It's just easier if all the storage needed is available.
As for the storage space. I don't see a problem with wasted space in today's bountiful video world. My argument is predicated on storing video afterall. If it was music, I don't see much of a problem for 90% of iPhone users using it as an iPod.
all samsung did was take an old phone and slap a touch screen on it. Correct me if im wrong but doesnt apple have a patent on the multi touch interface. This may be why this phone has a slide out keyboard This is a serious draw back for this phone. Also, samsung and all other phone companies are know for their ugly hard to use interfaces. Apple's interface looks easy to use and beautiful. It may have a 5mp camera, but who really uses their phone as a good camera. The main thing i do like about this phone is the 3g, but i dont think it has wifi so you are locked into higher rates. It looks nice and has a good camera, but will be crippled by lack of multi touch, wifi, and a bad interface
I think we may see this new Samsung phone offered by either Sprint or Verizon Wireless using EVDO wireless broadband, which widely available in most major metropolitan areas in the USA.
I do think the iPhone's multi-touch input will make for the best browsing experience among PDAs and phones, marginally usable as opposed to unusable, but your expectation shouldn't be as if it is like on your computer.
EDGE theoretical download bandwidth is 237 kbit/s, with actual bandwidth hovering around 100 kb/s. You'll be able to download a Mbyte of data in about 1.5 minutes. So, about 2 to 2.5x as fast as 56k dial-up (if you account for the fact that you never get a 56k connection). . .
I hazard a guess that the differences between EDGE and UMTS/HSDPA will be pretty minimal with a few exceptions. . . .
If you send & receive email attachments on your smart phone, it makes a big difference. The EVDO services I've used blow away non-3G services for basic business usage of the smart phone, since it's not uncommon for PDFs and images to be sent. I've never tried a UTMS or HSDPA service.
This is more of iPhones competition than most other smartphones. Because most smartphones are missing some fundamental functionality of the iPhone. While the iPhone has most of the fundamental functionality of a UMPC.
Oh so you mean I can edit Office documents on the iPhone? Oh wait, I can't. The iPhone 1.0 is like the iPod 1.0...lacking so, so, so much. At least to begin with. Like a mic. And radio w/ recording. They both have infinite potential. Mostly because of their huge screens and processing power, and thus upgradeability via software. Here's to hoping 2.0 will be insanely great. It'll probably be good enough for me to not be able to resist it.
Oh so you mean I can edit Office documents on the iPhone? Oh wait, I can't.
To edit Office documents only requires the software to do so. There is no technical need for a second generation iPhone to offer this simple functionality. At this point we don't know if this type of software will be offered.
Oh so you mean I can edit Office documents on the iPhone? Oh wait, I can't. The iPhone 1.0 is like the iPod 1.0...lacking so, so, so much. At least to begin with. Like a mic. And radio w/ recording. They both have infinite potential. Mostly because of their huge screens and processing power, and thus upgradeability via software. Here's to hoping 2.0 will be insanely great. It'll probably be good enough for me to not be able to resist it.
Yes you will. SInce it has a really decent web browser - Safari- just go to docs.google.com. Support for safari has already been announced.
Comments
If only American phone technology was up to speed with the rest of the world...
??? The bulk of cellular technology is developed by US companies, and it irks me to no end when people make foolish claims like this. Since 1995, the USA has lead the world in cellular network technology and implementation. Europe was the first to have digital cellular networks in the late 80's, but they've stagnated since then.
There's no system in the world that supports 7.2Mbps. The phone itself may support a planned future protocol, but the reality of the situation is that Japan's NTT HSDPA network is the fastest at 3.5Mbps or thereabouts, and the EVDO networks in the good 'ol USA (and elsewhere) aren't far behind at ~3Mbps. I'm pretty sure the EVDO-based US 3G networks from Sprint and Verizon combine to be the largest in the world. European cell networks are mostly minor-league, 2.5G networks.
Beside this, given the bandwidth of HSDPA (and its underlying W-CDMA), there's no magic way to deliver 7.2Mbps reliably to very many individuals in an urban or suburban region. The realistic optimum is around 1Mbps, the same as you'll get with Sprint in the USA.
Unfortunately, blowing up the Megapixel Myth also takes away a convenient crutch for millions of camera shoppers. If you’re torn between two camera models, you now know that you shouldn’t use the megapixel rating as a handy one-digit comparison score.
So what replaces it? What other handy comparison grade is there?
Unfortunately, there’s no such thing. Take advice from your friends, take sample shots if you get a chance, and read the reviews at nytimes.com, cnet.com, dpreview.com and dcresource.com. What can I say? Life is rarely black and white; it’s far more often filled with shades of gray.
They have to strike a balance with size, weight, and battery life. None of the most popular smartphones have a HDD. Hopefully Apple will be able to update to 16GB by launch.
For an iPhone product with only one model upon introduction, they had to make some tough decisions, I agree. Flash was used for more battery life and better reliability considering a phone would receive a lot more abuse than an iPod. From that perspective, it's the right decision.
However, this is supposed to be the most advanced iPod ever. One of the biggest selling points of the iPod is that one can carry all the music and video you have in your pocket. Not so with the iPhone. Even I with my modest collection of music and photographs would likely need the 8 GB model. When you add in video, the memory needs will explode.
Flash is inherently limited in price/GB and size/GB when compared to HDD. It won't break a comfortable usage barrier for video until 2009, maybe, when 8 Gbyte flash chips could be available, and 32+ GB of flash can be packaged in the iPhone.
In the meanwhile, our needs for memory, certainly for a subset of people, would really be in the 100+ GB range. I see no choice but for Apple to have an HDD option. In the current 2007 iPhone lineup, it really only has enough memory to dabble in video, not store video.
How much of a difference is 3G over EDGE. I'm thinking in terms of rendering time and just the overall browsing experience? Is it like DSL is to dial-up?
This post didn't go well...
If you've acess to your data and media via iDisk do you really need all that storage space? Certainly some will but the average user probabaly doesn't. Much like the xMac, only appeals to the uber geeks.
How much of a difference is 3G over EDGE. I'm thinking in terms of rendering time and just the overall browsing experience? Is it like DSL is to dial-up?
EDGE theoretical download bandwidth is 237 kbit/s, with actual bandwidth hovering around 100 kb/s. You'll be able to download a Mbyte of data in about 1.5 minutes. So, about 2 to 2.5x as fast as 56k dial-up (if you account for the fact that you never get a 56k connection).
DSL downstream at its cheapest is 256-750 kb/s, and one can get 1.5+ Mbit/s fairly easily.
3G UMTS and HSDPA is on the order of 2 Mbit/s. Some options for more.
As for your question about rendering time and overall browsing experience. I hazard a guess that the differences between EDGE and UMTS/HSDPA will be pretty minimal with a few exceptions. You're not browsing the Internet on a personal computer. You're are browsing it on a phone with a 3.5" screen at 480x320 resolution, powered by a ~500 MHz processor. That processor isn't going to be rendering very fast. I don't think the increased bandwidth will help much in that regard. It'll help if you have to download tens of MB of data everyday to your phone.
The browsing experience will suck compared to your desktop/laptop. No doubt about it. You can simulate the experience by resizing your web browser window to 480x320. Only the webpage and scroll bars need to be in the 480x320 pixel frame. Then surf the Internet. And you can't use your mouse or trackpad. Then imagine it 5 times slower. That'll be pretty close.
If you want to know what it'll be like for Treo Palm users, shrink the browser to 320x320. Windows Smartphone users, 320x240. Treo Windows users, 240x240.
It's too bad there isn't an easy way to downclock your CPU to 500 MHz. Oh, and take your RAM down to 256 MB, and maybe bring back an ISA VGA video card of yesteryear. If you had an iMac G3 with 500 MHz CPU, and use a screen resolution of 320x240, that could be close.
So the primary benifit of 3G is downloading big files and streaming video/music. Flash-based websites could benifit presuming the browser can handle it. Everything else, general browsing, there's probably a slight rendering improvement due to data data being there quicker, but you've got other problems bottlenecking the system with the CPU, input methods, and the screen res.
BTW, well said addabox in the above post. I find it amusing a lot of those engadget posters are praising Samsung for making a phone that's sticking it to Apple when in fact it's Samsung that has a primary role in the iPhone itself.
There's a lot of anti-Apple sentiment out there. The phone market is even more so, especially because it is caught in the midst of featuritis where if the number is bigger, it is better by default. Usability is pretty much an afterthought. It's going to be tough row to hoe for Apple.
If you've acess to your data and media via iDisk do you really need all that storage space? Certainly some will but the average user probabaly doesn't. Much like the xMac, only appeals to the uber geeks.
iDisk is a workaround, not a feature. It in effect, makes the iPhone harder to use. In a way, it's like SD slots. Nice to have expandable storage, but it makes the device harder to use. It's just easier if all the storage needed is available.
As for the storage space. I don't see a problem with wasted space in today's bountiful video world. My argument is predicated on storing video afterall. If it was music, I don't see much of a problem for 90% of iPhone users using it as an iPod.
You da man, THT...
I do think the iPhone's multi-touch input will make for the best browsing experience among PDAs and phones, marginally usable as opposed to unusable, but your expectation shouldn't be as if it is like on your computer.
It never was. I still will enjoy it when I go to the bay area, am in class, or on the pot.
I think you've just come up with an idea for one incredibly hilarious iPhone commercial
EDGE theoretical download bandwidth is 237 kbit/s, with actual bandwidth hovering around 100 kb/s. You'll be able to download a Mbyte of data in about 1.5 minutes. So, about 2 to 2.5x as fast as 56k dial-up (if you account for the fact that you never get a 56k connection). . .
I hazard a guess that the differences between EDGE and UMTS/HSDPA will be pretty minimal with a few exceptions. . . .
If you send & receive email attachments on your smart phone, it makes a big difference. The EVDO services I've used blow away non-3G services for basic business usage of the smart phone, since it's not uncommon for PDFs and images to be sent. I've never tried a UTMS or HSDPA service.
I think you've just come up with an idea for one incredibly hilarious iPhone commercial
All at the same time? I never thought about that!
This is more of iPhones competition than most other smartphones. Because most smartphones are missing some fundamental functionality of the iPhone. While the iPhone has most of the fundamental functionality of a UMPC.
Oh so you mean I can edit Office documents on the iPhone? Oh wait, I can't. The iPhone 1.0 is like the iPod 1.0...lacking so, so, so much. At least to begin with. Like a mic. And radio w/ recording. They both have infinite potential. Mostly because of their huge screens and processing power, and thus upgradeability via software. Here's to hoping 2.0 will be insanely great. It'll probably be good enough for me to not be able to resist it.
Oh so you mean I can edit Office documents on the iPhone? Oh wait, I can't.
To edit Office documents only requires the software to do so. There is no technical need for a second generation iPhone to offer this simple functionality. At this point we don't know if this type of software will be offered.
Oh so you mean I can edit Office documents on the iPhone? Oh wait, I can't. The iPhone 1.0 is like the iPod 1.0...lacking so, so, so much. At least to begin with. Like a mic. And radio w/ recording. They both have infinite potential. Mostly because of their huge screens and processing power, and thus upgradeability via software. Here's to hoping 2.0 will be insanely great. It'll probably be good enough for me to not be able to resist it.
Yes you will. SInce it has a really decent web browser - Safari- just go to docs.google.com. Support for safari has already been announced.