Just for a mutual understanding, we are talking about cell phones here and not hard lines. Dropped calls, botched handovers, ghost signals, multi-path, etc... are all par for the course with cell phones. From my own experience here in Finland which is arguably one the most advance countries when it comes to cell technology has network dropouts from time to time or poor reception. No network can guarantee 100% call completion or a 100% rate. It is what it is.
"Next G, Telstra's primary 3G UMTS mobile network, built between November 2005 and September 2006, opened in October 2006. [...]
The NextG network operating on the 850MHz band was built to replace Telstra's CDMA network which operated from 1999 until April 28, 2008. The 850 MHz band was chosen over the more common 2100 MHz band as it can cover much greater geographic distances for a lower overall investment"
For the sake of clarity, do you mean that no phone gets 100% reception for 100% of the time or that the strength indicator does not indicate full strength 100% of the time? Because my Nokia's get full strength where the iPhone is down a bar or two.
Phone indicates full signal strength 100% of the time.
"Next G, Telstra's primary 3G UMTS mobile network, built between November 2005 and September 2006, opened in October 2006. [...]
The NextG network operating on the 850MHz band was built to replace Telstra's CDMA network which operated from 1999 until April 28, 2008. The 850 MHz band was chosen over the more common 2100 MHz band as it can cover much greater geographic distances for a lower overall investment"
"Can you hear me now?" I have read David Pogue and the test he did in Manhattan and more stories about the poor reception with AT&T compared to Verizon in Manhattan and on some college campuses. But, to make an accurate and realistic diagnosis of what is going on, is there a third party that actually does signal reception tests? Do they have comparisons between the major carriers?
I have had Verizon for many years and I will wait until the contract with AT&T is over and iPhone starts selling with CDMA chips! And on a side note, I am an avid Mac user and even that enthusiasm can't bring me over to AT&T if Verizon has been proven to be better for me so far. I have done quite a bit of traveling in the US on the road and it's rare that I didn't get any signal at all.
Yes its been well documented that Verizon has better network coverage than AT&T. How good or bad coverage is within any given city really is more conjecture and opinion.
Its highly unlikely the iPhone will ever use CDMA chips. You will have to wait until Verizon switches to an LTE network.
Just for a mutual understanding, we are talking about cell phones here and not hard lines. Dropped calls, botched handovers, ghost signals, multi-path, etc... are all par for the course with cell phones. From my own experience here in Finland which is arguably one the most advance countries when it comes to cell technology has network dropouts from time to time or poor reception. No network can guarantee 100% call completion or a 100% rate. It is what it is.
I think the problem here is that other phones on the same network are dropping calls a lot less often.
However, it's impossible from our perspective, with only anecdotal evidence to go on, to tell if that allegation (iPhone 3G is worse than other phones) is true.
????? Microsoft owns Office and can't use its own name? What planet are you from?
Is it not Adobe Photshop, Lotus Notes, etc, etc??
I think you missed his point.
It wasn't the use of the word Microsoft that he's got a problem with, it's calling the product "Office", when it's so different from the Windows edition of "Office".
I don't agree with that stance though. It's not hard to determine what you're going to get (or not get ) before putting your dollars down.
I think the problem here is that other phones on the same network are dropping calls a lot less often.
However, it's impossible from our perspective, with only anecdotal evidence to go on, to tell if that allegation (iPhone 3G is worse than other phones) is true.
I hear you. I am trying to remain positive but I am a bit worried that it might be a chip issue, and if so, how will Apple fix this.
"Mostly always"- in one of the largest cities in the world?
You don't come off being too deeply knowledgeable in RF wave theory and the impedence created by multiple large, dense surface areas requiring a large redundancy of tower nodes just to get a virtual map of continuous coverage.
Now if Apple could not get good 3G Coverage in Eastern WA along the i-90 corridor then you could mock till the cows come home.
If its proven defective hardware, Apple would have to replace the defective phones. Which is why Apple will be in no rush to admit a hardware problem.
While I agree that they would have to fix it, I think it would be best that a third party look into it as I really can not trust Apple to come clean about this. I just don't think they will.
While I agree that they would have to fix it, I think it would be best that a third party look into it as I really can not trust Apple to come clean about this. I just don't think they will.
Understandably Apple will look into every option to fix the problem before going to the extreme of replacing a million phones.
But if its proven hardware and Apple fixes it in newer phones, they will have no choice but to replace the older phones or risk a law suit for violating the phones warranty.
The technical side of this requires a great deal of testing and so it should. And lets not forget that the extra bandwidths that will be available in 2009 will give the cellular networks more possibilities. They also allow for a greater distance for reception from a cell tower from what I have been reading.
So it may be a longer wait for the 4G network from Verizon and I'll have to wait until 2012. I am very hopefull that by then, Verizon will have the iPhone. It also makes sense that more refinements will have taken place regarding the iPhone, technical and esthetic. I wonder what version of sofware they will be up to then...v6?
You don't come off being too deeply knowledgeable in RF wave theory and the impedence created by multiple large, dense surface areas requiring a large redundancy of tower nodes just to get a virtual map of continuous coverage.
Now if Apple could not get good 3G Coverage in Eastern WA along the i-90 corridor then you could mock till the cows come home.
You who are so knowledgeable- I happen to live in New York City and have never had a dropped call in 4 years from a CDMA Verizon phone. Mock this.
Comments
The customers on 850 are not on a 3G network [...]
They are in fact on a 3G network, see details below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telstra#Telstra_Mobile
"Next G, Telstra's primary 3G UMTS mobile network, built between November 2005 and September 2006, opened in October 2006. [...]
The NextG network operating on the 850MHz band was built to replace Telstra's CDMA network which operated from 1999 until April 28, 2008. The 850 MHz band was chosen over the more common 2100 MHz band as it can cover much greater geographic distances for a lower overall investment"
For the sake of clarity, do you mean that no phone gets 100% reception for 100% of the time or that the strength indicator does not indicate full strength 100% of the time? Because my Nokia's get full strength where the iPhone is down a bar or two.
Phone indicates full signal strength 100% of the time.
The day Mac gets 25% market share, Windows will be history in three years.
They are in fact on a 3G network, see details below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telstra#Telstra_Mobile
"Next G, Telstra's primary 3G UMTS mobile network, built between November 2005 and September 2006, opened in October 2006. [...]
The NextG network operating on the 850MHz band was built to replace Telstra's CDMA network which operated from 1999 until April 28, 2008. The 850 MHz band was chosen over the more common 2100 MHz band as it can cover much greater geographic distances for a lower overall investment"
Nice catch. Didn't know that. Now I do.
"Can you hear me now?" I have read David Pogue and the test he did in Manhattan and more stories about the poor reception with AT&T compared to Verizon in Manhattan and on some college campuses. But, to make an accurate and realistic diagnosis of what is going on, is there a third party that actually does signal reception tests? Do they have comparisons between the major carriers?
I have had Verizon for many years and I will wait until the contract with AT&T is over and iPhone starts selling with CDMA chips!
Yes its been well documented that Verizon has better network coverage than AT&T. How good or bad coverage is within any given city really is more conjecture and opinion.
Its highly unlikely the iPhone will ever use CDMA chips. You will have to wait until Verizon switches to an LTE network.
No phone indicates full signal strength 100% of the time.
Well, yeah. That is a given. If I am in a basement, I might get some reception but not 100%.
Just for a mutual understanding, we are talking about cell phones here and not hard lines. Dropped calls, botched handovers, ghost signals, multi-path, etc... are all par for the course with cell phones. From my own experience here in Finland which is arguably one the most advance countries when it comes to cell technology has network dropouts from time to time or poor reception. No network can guarantee 100% call completion or a 100% rate. It is what it is.
I think the problem here is that other phones on the same network are dropping calls a lot less often.
However, it's impossible from our perspective, with only anecdotal evidence to go on, to tell if that allegation (iPhone 3G is worse than other phones) is true.
????? Microsoft owns Office and can't use its own name? What planet are you from?
Is it not Adobe Photshop, Lotus Notes, etc, etc??
I think you missed his point.
It wasn't the use of the word Microsoft that he's got a problem with, it's calling the product "Office", when it's so different from the Windows edition of "Office".
I don't agree with that stance though. It's not hard to determine what you're going to get (or not get
I think the problem here is that other phones on the same network are dropping calls a lot less often.
However, it's impossible from our perspective, with only anecdotal evidence to go on, to tell if that allegation (iPhone 3G is worse than other phones) is true.
I hear you. I am trying to remain positive but I am a bit worried that it might be a chip issue, and if so, how will Apple fix this.
If the iPhone issue is a quality control problem (ie a production issue), Apple should be able to get it ironed out sooner rather than later.
Great, they fix the next batch of phones but what about the ones that are in the hands of consumers now? They need reparation.
"Mostly always"- in one of the largest cities in the world?
You don't come off being too deeply knowledgeable in RF wave theory and the impedence created by multiple large, dense surface areas requiring a large redundancy of tower nodes just to get a virtual map of continuous coverage.
Now if Apple could not get good 3G Coverage in Eastern WA along the i-90 corridor then you could mock till the cows come home.
I hear you. I am trying to remain positive but I am a bit worried that it might be a chip issue, and if so, how will Apple fix this.
If its proven defective hardware, Apple would have to replace the defective phones. Which is why Apple will be in no rush to admit a hardware problem.
If its proven defective hardware, Apple would have to replace the defective phones. Which is why Apple will be in no rush to admit a hardware problem.
While I agree that they would have to fix it, I think it would be best that a third party look into it as I really can not trust Apple to come clean about this. I just don't think they will.
While I agree that they would have to fix it, I think it would be best that a third party look into it as I really can not trust Apple to come clean about this. I just don't think they will.
Understandably Apple will look into every option to fix the problem before going to the extreme of replacing a million phones.
But if its proven hardware and Apple fixes it in newer phones, they will have no choice but to replace the older phones or risk a law suit for violating the phones warranty.
Its highly unlikely the iPhone will ever use CDMA chips. You will have to wait until Verizon switches to an LTE network.
Thanks for the info. I just read this article regarding the switch over to LTE. http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/8637.html
The technical side of this requires a great deal of testing and so it should. And lets not forget that the extra bandwidths that will be available in 2009 will give the cellular networks more possibilities. They also allow for a greater distance for reception from a cell tower from what I have been reading.
So it may be a longer wait for the 4G network from Verizon and I'll have to wait until 2012. I am very hopefull that by then, Verizon will have the iPhone. It also makes sense that more refinements will have taken place regarding the iPhone, technical and esthetic. I wonder what version of sofware they will be up to then...v6?
You don't come off being too deeply knowledgeable in RF wave theory and the impedence created by multiple large, dense surface areas requiring a large redundancy of tower nodes just to get a virtual map of continuous coverage.
Now if Apple could not get good 3G Coverage in Eastern WA along the i-90 corridor then you could mock till the cows come home.
You who are so knowledgeable- I happen to live in New York City and have never had a dropped call in 4 years from a CDMA Verizon phone. Mock this.
Also hopefully by 2012 Verizon will have stopped nickel and dimeing for every service.
I guess you have to pay a premium for great service and lousy phones.
And AT&Fee is such a bargain?