3G iPhone could arrive overseas by early 2008
Even though its vanguard cellphone isn't yet out the door, Apple is allegedly preparing a quick follow-up model with 3G wireless installed.
After threatening to drop a large-scale cellular service contract based on concerns that it would lock itself out of a trade-up to the iPhone, a Swedish firm has received assurances from its liaison at the provider that the coveted gadget would arrive as soon as September -- and, startlingly, that a version of the handset with 3G (third-generation) wireless Internet access would be in the provider's hands as soon as January of 2008. The contact at the carrier was especially confident, sources said.
If true, the new model would signal a revision to the iPhone just seven months after its slated June 2007 launch. It would be an even quicker response for European customers, who were originally told not to expect the Apple candybar phone in any form until late this year.
Apple hasn't been especially shy in beating the drums for its long-term 3G plans, as Apple chief executive Steve Jobs himself mentioned 3G in his Macworld keynote and later had his story backed by Cingular (now AT&T) distribution chief Glenn Lurie.
Most cellular-based Internet access in the world today, including the AT&T EDGE network which the iPhone will first use, is considered second-generation (2G). Few would mistake 2G-level wireless for a truly fast connection. Downloads typically crest at a few hundred kilobits per second even under ideal conditions; uploads are regularly far worse, frequently hovering around just above dial-up access.
3G ultimately amounts to the addition of extra channels on a cellphone network to boost those anemic speeds, particularly in terms of uploads. Where downstream access rarely exceeds 800Kbps on present 3G networks, upstream levels are a much healthier 400Kbps. The technology smoothes out wrinkles in mobile Internet access that make some tasks impractical or even impossible on 2G networks, such as uploading large photos in e-mail attachments or video messaging.
Apple's choice of cellphone networks would obligate it to use a particular form of 3G known as High-Speed Download Packet Access (HSDPA). At first, this would seem to be something of a misstep: the standard has barely lifted off the ground in the Cupertino-based company's home turf. Only a handful of US cities currently offer AT&T's particular brand of 3G to subscribers.
Attendees at January's Macworld Expo marvel over an iPhone prototype on display.
The situation was discouraging enough that Apple reportedly left out the technology in its inaugural phone due to the limited amount of HSDPA coverage in the country.
Thankfully, HSDPA also happens to represent Apple's best shot at selling the iPhone beyond American borders. In Europe, cheaper data rates and widespread 3G networks encourage Internet access from smartphones to the extent that many cellphone giants lavish more attention on their phone lineups for that continent than anywhere else. Nokia's range toppers, for example, are often badged as "multimedia computers" rather than cellphones.
It remains to be seen whether or not Apple will add any features to the Euro-friendly version. Most 3G cellphones outside of North America ship with front-facing cameras for video calls, but those phones released in the US (such as AT&T's BlackJack) have typically gone without added features beyond the extra speed.
After threatening to drop a large-scale cellular service contract based on concerns that it would lock itself out of a trade-up to the iPhone, a Swedish firm has received assurances from its liaison at the provider that the coveted gadget would arrive as soon as September -- and, startlingly, that a version of the handset with 3G (third-generation) wireless Internet access would be in the provider's hands as soon as January of 2008. The contact at the carrier was especially confident, sources said.
If true, the new model would signal a revision to the iPhone just seven months after its slated June 2007 launch. It would be an even quicker response for European customers, who were originally told not to expect the Apple candybar phone in any form until late this year.
Apple hasn't been especially shy in beating the drums for its long-term 3G plans, as Apple chief executive Steve Jobs himself mentioned 3G in his Macworld keynote and later had his story backed by Cingular (now AT&T) distribution chief Glenn Lurie.
Most cellular-based Internet access in the world today, including the AT&T EDGE network which the iPhone will first use, is considered second-generation (2G). Few would mistake 2G-level wireless for a truly fast connection. Downloads typically crest at a few hundred kilobits per second even under ideal conditions; uploads are regularly far worse, frequently hovering around just above dial-up access.
3G ultimately amounts to the addition of extra channels on a cellphone network to boost those anemic speeds, particularly in terms of uploads. Where downstream access rarely exceeds 800Kbps on present 3G networks, upstream levels are a much healthier 400Kbps. The technology smoothes out wrinkles in mobile Internet access that make some tasks impractical or even impossible on 2G networks, such as uploading large photos in e-mail attachments or video messaging.
Apple's choice of cellphone networks would obligate it to use a particular form of 3G known as High-Speed Download Packet Access (HSDPA). At first, this would seem to be something of a misstep: the standard has barely lifted off the ground in the Cupertino-based company's home turf. Only a handful of US cities currently offer AT&T's particular brand of 3G to subscribers.
Attendees at January's Macworld Expo marvel over an iPhone prototype on display.
The situation was discouraging enough that Apple reportedly left out the technology in its inaugural phone due to the limited amount of HSDPA coverage in the country.
Thankfully, HSDPA also happens to represent Apple's best shot at selling the iPhone beyond American borders. In Europe, cheaper data rates and widespread 3G networks encourage Internet access from smartphones to the extent that many cellphone giants lavish more attention on their phone lineups for that continent than anywhere else. Nokia's range toppers, for example, are often badged as "multimedia computers" rather than cellphones.
It remains to be seen whether or not Apple will add any features to the Euro-friendly version. Most 3G cellphones outside of North America ship with front-facing cameras for video calls, but those phones released in the US (such as AT&T's BlackJack) have typically gone without added features beyond the extra speed.
Comments
The iPhone definitely needs to be 3G, with a front facing video-cam to be a success in Europe!
Not much point in shelling out so much dosh for anything less!
But it would be great to do some sort of iChat using the iPhone - so cool!
8)
Plus Apple should upgrade the 2Mpixel camera - 3-5M is getting to be the norm now.
Any news on when the carriers will be announced for Europe?
- I don't want to re-new my contract until I know which one to go with!
Word on the street is that it will be Vodafone.
iDon't give a crap about the camera myself, anyway in a device that thin trying to cram anything over a 2Mp camera in would be a waste of time.
Not sure why it would be a waste of time
- 2M Pixels is fairly old hat these days - my 2 year-old Sharp 902 has a 2MPixel camera
- and to be honest, it's pretty crap
The Sharp 910 has a 5M camera, but sadly is only available in Asia
http://www.handcellphone.com/archive...y/sharp-910sh/
The Meizu iPhone clone has a 3M camera
http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/02/...like.handheld/
The Samsung F700 has a 5M pixel camera
http://www.electronista.com/articles...ra.smart.f700/
Now onto my real point, iDon't expect to see any non-3G iPhones in Europe at all.
So does that mean no iPhone until January 2008 or a 3G iPhone in September?
I know which I'd prefer!
Oh and Mr. Samurai.. Video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid.
Yeah? And you smell of sprouts!
Word on the street is that it will be Vodafone.
Yo man, get down with the kids on the street!
iDon't give a crap about the camera myself, anyway in a device that thin trying to cram anything over a 2Mp camera in would be a waste of time. Now onto my real point, iDon't expect to see any non-3G iPhones in Europe at all. Oh and Mr. Samurai.. Video conferencing on a mobile phone is stupid.
He didn't say video conferencing. Just iChat. (I don't know, maybe text messaging doesn't do it for him).
Not sure why it would be waste of time
- 2M Pixels is fairly old hat these days - my 2 year-old Sharp 902 has a 2MPixel camera
- and to be honest, it's pretty crap
The Sharp 910 has a 5M camera, but sadly is only available in Asia
http://www.handcellphone.com/archive...y/sharp-910sh/
The Meizu iPhone clone has a 3M camera
http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/02/...like.handheld/
Megapixels is not a measure of capture quality. Apparently the megapixel myth is stronger than the megahertz myth. Unless it is a phone strapped onto a decent camera, rather than a too-tiny sensor strapped onto a phone, a 5MP image captured from a phone is not going to be much better than a 2MP image, and it may even be lower quality.
5MP over 2MP means next to nothing. The really important parts of a camera is the lens and the A/D electronic processing. Camera phones are surly using the cheapest lens possible and there isn't much room for sophisticated electronic processing. When you increase the megapixels under those conditions all you are doing is taking a larger crappy picture, that only takes up more storage space than if you'd taken a smaller crappy picture.
That is very true. I have a Nokia 6256 cellphone myself, and while its camera is a measly 0.3 megapixels (640x480), it actually takes as good or better pictures than some of my friend's 1.3 megapixel cameras. They are quite displeased by the fact.
It isn't just about the resolution, obviously.
.
Most cellular-based Internet access in the world today, including the AT&T EDGE network which the iPhone will first use, is considered second-generation (2G). Few would mistake 2G-level wireless for a truly fast connection. Downloads typically crest at a few hundred kilobits per second even under ideal conditions; uploads are regularly far worse, frequently hovering around just above dial-up access.
EDGE is worse than that, actually. A 'few hundred kilobits' d-load speeds are more THEORETICAL maximums with EDGE than anything... real world, you'll see download speeds that are much closer to dialup.
Cingular/ATT themselves do not claim such broadband speeds on their own website:
The Cingular EDGE network is available in more than 13,000 cities and towns and in areas along 40,000 miles of highways. It provides average data speeds between 75-135Kbps.
http://www.cingular.com/learn/why/technology/edge.jsp
So obviously, if you care about mobile web-surfing much, you'll wait for the 3G iPhone. And for Cingular/ATT to offer a LOT MORE 3G coverage than they currently do.
.
exactly!
This obsession with pixels is what is really 'old hat'. I'm surprised that there are still people who haven't grasped this basic fact:-
It's the quality of the lens and the rest of the hardware that make a good camera. In that respect things haven't changed at all since the days of 'analogue' photograpgy.
... to continue my rant:- there are a lot of relatively cheap 8 MP cameras on the market and a 5 MP Zeiss that'll knock you back $2000 or more.
By the way, are there any working prototypes even?
TenoBell,
It's the quality of the lens and the rest of the hardware that make a good camera. In that respect things haven't changed at all since the days of 'analogue' photograpgy.
Well, to be honest, I realise that, but I think that in the highly competitive world of mobile phones, it's important to hit all the right bullet points.
So, that is why they need to have good optics, good signal processing, and a better sensor.
I'm sure the iPhone will be a great success anyway, but a 2M pixel camera isn't going to look too good in 2008, given most manufacturers have moved beyond that already.
e.g.
http://europe.nokia.com/phones/n95
- and even if noone *really* needs it, it's *still* old-hat, and *still* isn't good enough to replace a $100 camera, let alone anywhere near the level of an standard 35mm analogue camera.
Also, 2M pixel really means 2M/3 Red, 2M/3 Green & 2M/3 Blue pixels (or similar)
- so the Luma (detail) resolution is really only 600K pixels, which is only slightly more than SD video (720x576 in PAL) - i.e. not that great.
btw, visit http://www.freetheiphone.com if you support this.
DB.
After threatening to drop a large-scale cellular service contract based on concerns that it would lock itself out of a trade-up to the iPhone, a Swedish firm has received assurances from its liaison at the provider that the coveted gadget would arrive as soon as September -- and, startlingly, that a version of the handset with 3G (third-generation) wireless Internet access would be in the provider's hands as soon as January of 2008. The contact at the carrier was especially confident, sources said.
Is it just me or could this paragraph difficult to read?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G
The ultimate handheld presentation remote that is a full fledged presentation tool that is a full computer having Mac OS X built-in.
3G will be fine..
btw, visit http://www.freetheiphone.com if you support this.
DB.
Oh please. Complain about something important you terribly nice person who is both handsome and intelligent.
Mod Edit: I'm getting tired of people reporting this post.
Also, 2M pixel really means 2M/3 Red, 2M/3 Green & 2M/3 Blue pixels (or similar)
- so the Luma (detail) resolution is really only 600K pixels, which is only slightly more than SD video (720x576 in PAL) - i.e. not that great.
It's not really anything like that or nearly that bad. The luma mostly comes from green, and on most of the camera sensors I've cared to look at, half of the cells are green, 1/4th are red and 1/4th are blue, but I think the algorithms interpolate the luma from ALL cells.
At least you do seem to understand that the megapixels on cameras are just to make a bullet point look good. It's a pretty sad farce. I don't mind a camera on a phone, it would be convenient, but I would never be under any confusion that it would properly replace the quality of a dedicated camera any time soon.
Well, to be honest, I realise that, but I think that in the highly competitive world of mobile phones, it's important to hit all the right bullet points.
So, that is why they need to have good optics, good signal processing, and a better sensor.
I'm sure the iPhone will be a great success anyway, but a 2M pixel camera isn't going to look too good in 2008, given most manufacturers have moved beyond that already.
You make out you get it, well in fact you don't really get it.
Click here, then click "GET EPISODE" on the highlighted episode, then listen to that episode and learn.