What like Steves demo, comparing a Nokia loading a flash animation, to the iPhone not loading it?
The keynote speech s a marketing platform so the testing can be weighted in Apple's favour so they should use a site that best represents the speed of the iPhone on popular website. Nokia, Motorola, et cetera do the exact same thing. However, in this case should we expect a Nokia phone phone that has Flash to have its flash turned on as this does affect the speed at which a page can be rendered? I think so.
I would also like to see the speed differences on pages that do not have Flash, but that isn't Apple's responsibility to test every site type. In the end you'll still find that that the iPhone's Safari is still faster than the S60's Webkit-based browser. This is because Safari uses a newer WebKit build that is more efficient (especially with JS) and uses a a faster processor. (This may not apply to the N96)
edit: Strike that, it does apply tot eh N96 which apparently has a 264Mha CPU and using Symbian OS 9.3 which was released in mid 2006.
I just went to http://i.dslr.net/tinyspeedtest.html to test out my speed using various methods. What I like about the site is that it lists today's and all time stats for the various connection type. Note: this is just for iPhone users and one can fudge the stats by choosing an incorrect connection type but it does give some information as what one may expect.
Tests were done in on the first floor of a 4 story hotel about 20 feet from the closest exterior wall while being held in my hand. All tests were completed 3x to get the mean average.
My Stats:
EDGE ..210kbps
HSDPA 1173kbps
Stats:.. .All Time . . . . .Today
GPRS .. 40kbps/1535ms . .32kbps/1941ms
EDGE . 143kbps/873ms . .144kbps/836ms
3G .. .724kbps/446ms . .723kbps/435ms
WiFi .2443kbps/163ms . 2289kbps/164ms]
. . . . .(speed/latency)
That is an average of 5x faster.
I just ran a test from my iPhone on 3G, it gave me a resulting speed of 1.01 Mbps downloading a 768K document in 6.2 seconds.
Ran it again to make sure, it did 1 MB in 9.4 seconds this time, 894 Kbps....(still 4 times faster than EDGE)
Uh, gee, I don't know... perhaps when it is YOUR version of the "truth".
Based on what facts or study? Using what test format? What was determined to be the baseline for all similar devices tested?
I could go on and on, but I think (or at least hope) that you get my point.
Better yet, show me one post in this forum where you have had so much as one complete post that was positive in nature with regards to any Apple product or service? And please, don't just post a series of links to Fox News or MSNBC. If you have some tests that were conducted in a controlled environment, then bring it on. Say, a technical journal?
I can only post about MY experiences with the iPhone 3g and comparison handsets and if I was being really honest I would be much 'abrasive'
the 3g performance is woeful... to the point that it is unuseable 99% of the time.
Positive about Apple....well tbh there is very little to be positive about at the moment.
3g
mobileme
I think you'll find that I described the first iPhone as a much better product.
don't need to apologise for APple..if they made better products I wouldn't be having the bad experiences.
The keynote speech s a marketing platform so the testing can be weighted in Apple's favour so they should use a site that best represents the speed of the iPhone on popular website. Nokia, Motorola, et cetera do the exact same thing. However, in this case should we expect a Nokia phone phone that has Flash to have its flash turned on as this does affect the speed at which a page can be rendered? I think so.
I'm not sure what you are getting at here
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I would also like to see the speed differences on pages that do not have Flash, but that isn't Apple's responsibility to test every site type. In the end you'll still find that that the iPhone's Safari is still faster than the S60's Webkit-based browser. This is because Safari uses a newer WebKit build that is more efficient (especially with JS) and uses a a faster processor. (This may not apply to the N96)
Well as I'm sure you know, there is a number of factors in the speed of displaying a page, like the network speed downloading the page, plus the browser.
So maybe tethering both devices to a notebook and performing some tests could help determining the network speed of both devices.
But, that's right, you can't tether the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
edit: Strike that, it does apply tot eh N96 which apparently has a 264Mha CPU and using Symbian OS 9.3 which was released in mid 2006.
No, the N96 runs OS 9.3 FP2 which was released this year.
I'm saying that from a marketing standpoint all companies try to make their product look good while technically not lying. I then went on to say that Apple using a site that has Flash should be acceptable as Flash is well known resource hog and is very common for ads so the speed difference there is relevant when viewing pages.
Quote:
Well as I'm sure you know, there is a number of factors in the speed of displaying a page, like the network speed downloading the page, plus the browser.
CPU speed
CPU usage by other processes
RAM amount
RAM usage
Browser engine
Plugins
Connection speed
Connection type (latency)
Quote:
So maybe tethering both devices to a notebook and performing some tests could help determining the network speed of both devices. But, that's right, you can't tether the iPhone.
You can tether it just fine, you're just not allowed to by the contract you signed per your ISP. But that is neither here nor there. The iPhone uses tethering via WiFi, not a USB cable so there is more latency from Wifi than USB and the processors efforting.
Quote:
No, the N96 runs OS 9.3 FP2 which was released this year.
Wiki didn't list that. Do you have a date or any info as to which WebKit build it has? I'd like to see how old it is.
RiM's BB Thunder, due out in 7 weeks, will reported have a 624MHz ARM11 processor. I wonder if it will be under-clocked like the iPhone.
I thought I had read somewhere on CNet that it would be somewhere in the mid 400 range. Then it just comes down to the RAM and browser (let's just assume same network, same connection since the network isn't really the point of the argument) and I'd bet my lunch (half a box of pasta ) that Apple's Safari renders pages much quicker than BB's implementation on the Thunder.
You can tether it just fine, you're just not allowed to by the contract you signed per your ISP. But that is neither here nor there. The iPhone uses tethering via WiFi, not a USB cable so there is more latency from Wifi than USB and the processors efforting.
A third party app that Apple has pulled does not mean it can tether.
Also it may not be allowed with your contract, it doesn't mean it isn't available on everyones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Wiki didn't list that. Do you have a date or any info as to which WebKit build it has? I'd like to see how old it is.
I thought I had read somewhere on CNet that it would be somewhere in the mid 400 range. Then it just comes down to the RAM and browser (let's just assume same network, same connection since the network isn't really the point of the argument) and I'd bet my lunch (half a box of pasta ) that Apple's Safari renders pages much quicker than BB's implementation on the Thunder.
The Thunder should have at least the same amount of RAM as the iPhone and the browser is reportedly going to be based on WebKit but we'll have to see the User Agent data to see what build is listed.
The phone will be released to Verizon first. If they have a faster network than AT&T the page rendering could very well be faster. I'm planning on buying one when it comes it out. If I'm not as happy with it as my iPhone 3G I'll just return it within the 30 days for a refund.
A third party app that Apple has pulled does not mean it can tether.
A simple jailbreak will also allow tethering, as well as running apps in the background, so if you want to test the speed of tethering between models you can.
The Thunder should have at least the same amount of RAM as the iPhone and the browser is reportedly going to be based on WebKit but we'll have to see the User Agent data to see what build is listed.
The phone will be released to Verizon first. If they have a faster network than AT&T the page rendering could very well be faster. I'm planning on buying one when it comes it out. If I'm not as happy with it as my iPhone 3G I'll just return it within the 30 days for a refund.
I think the limiting factor in that is going to be BB's experience with a webkit based browser (Do they have any? I'm really not sure). Apple's been working on their WebKit browser for quite a while so they've ironed out a lot of bugs.
I wouldn't go back to Verizon if you paid me - ok well if you gave me 10 million like Jerry Seinfeld I might be swayed
Outside of the US the tethering will start popping up soon I'm sure - I just don't expect it to make it back to the US App store without it being made by AT&T and then charging an arm and a leg for it.
A simple jailbreak will also allow tethering, as well as running apps in the background, so if you want to test the speed of tethering between models you can.
Well goes down well when you want to take your phone in for repair
Outside of the US the tethering will start popping up soon I'm sure - I just don't expect it to make it back to the US App store without it being made by AT&T and then charging an arm and a leg for it.
I pay AT&T a seperate $60/month for AirCard access to their 3G network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Well goes down well when you want to take your phone in for repair
I have no idea what that means.
You said you couldn't compare the cellular network speeds using the same browser on a personal computer by tethering because tethering wasn't available. I told you if you want to test it it can be done.
If you comment about repair is about being 'redlighted' for bringing a jailbroken iPhone in for repair that argument makes no sense. Besides the fact that sending a phone in for repairs in rare, you can easily remove the jailbreak.
That's impressive - you're missing both an arm and a leg and still can comment so quickly! You must be a crazy fast single hand typer
It's the typical rate in the US for a soft 5GB/unlimited limit. I always far exceed 5GB in the 4 or 5 days that I use it. I use my iPhone daily and don't recall every exceeding 5GB. I don't think the price is outrageous when I pay for $60/month for cabled internet, too. Cure it's faster, but it's also cheaper to run and maintain. Not allowing tethering, while annoying, also makes sense as you are paying less money for the data service. I average about 6x as much data on my Mac with AT&T than I do with the iPhone but I only pay 2x as much.
Hypothetically, if AT&T were required by law to allow tethering for all phones with data packages they would just jack up the price of the data portion to compensate.
geez. This lady has issues. It's not like it's the end of the world. They did field tests that proved that. She must be in an area where the 3G is substandard (connectionwise) I don't think that apple should have this happen to them they don't deserve it.
I pay AT&T a seperate $60/month for AirCard access to their 3G network.
I have no idea what that means.
You said you couldn't compare the cellular network speeds using the same browser on a personal computer by tethering because tethering wasn't available. I told you if you want to test it it can be done.
If you comment about repair is about being 'redlighted' for bringing a jailbroken iPhone in for repair that argument makes no sense. Besides the fact that sending a phone in for repairs in rare, you can easily remove the jailbreak.
It means actually what it reads, it is bad that you have to perform a hack to be able to install a program, to give you sort of tethering. It is not standard DUN.
Sending phones in for repair is not rare, if you haven't needed to do it at some point, doesn't meant that no body else has.
At the end of the day, Apple promised a lot, but underdelivered. People will say they are new comers to the industry, but if that is the case, don't trash talk the competitors like they did, because they end up looking like arses, to which they have done.
Hypothetically, if AT&T were required by law to allow tethering for all phones with data packages they would just jack up the price of the data portion to compensate.
Remember there is a world outside the USA. Remember Apple said they were going to break the way network providers, and manufactures worked, they dropped and did what AT&T wanted within seconds, and have stuffed up the rest of the work in the process.
Comments
Which Nokia?
Do you know of one that has something better than the 620MHz processor in the iPhone? The fastest I could find using google was ARM11 369 MHz.
What like Steves demo, comparing a Nokia loading a flash animation, to the iPhone not loading it?
The keynote speech s a marketing platform so the testing can be weighted in Apple's favour so they should use a site that best represents the speed of the iPhone on popular website. Nokia, Motorola, et cetera do the exact same thing. However, in this case should we expect a Nokia phone phone that has Flash to have its flash turned on as this does affect the speed at which a page can be rendered? I think so.
I would also like to see the speed differences on pages that do not have Flash, but that isn't Apple's responsibility to test every site type. In the end you'll still find that that the iPhone's Safari is still faster than the S60's Webkit-based browser. This is because Safari uses a newer WebKit build that is more efficient (especially with JS) and uses a a faster processor. (This may not apply to the N96)
edit: Strike that, it does apply tot eh N96 which apparently has a 264Mha CPU and using Symbian OS 9.3 which was released in mid 2006.
I just went to http://i.dslr.net/tinyspeedtest.html to test out my speed using various methods. What I like about the site is that it lists today's and all time stats for the various connection type. Note: this is just for iPhone users and one can fudge the stats by choosing an incorrect connection type but it does give some information as what one may expect.
Tests were done in on the first floor of a 4 story hotel about 20 feet from the closest exterior wall while being held in my hand. All tests were completed 3x to get the mean average.
My Stats:
EDGE ..210kbps
HSDPA 1173kbps
Stats:.. .All Time . . . . .Today
GPRS .. 40kbps/1535ms . .32kbps/1941ms
EDGE . 143kbps/873ms . .144kbps/836ms
3G .. .724kbps/446ms . .723kbps/435ms
WiFi .2443kbps/163ms . 2289kbps/164ms]
. . . . .(speed/latency)
I just ran a test from my iPhone on 3G, it gave me a resulting speed of 1.01 Mbps downloading a 768K document in 6.2 seconds.
Ran it again to make sure, it did 1 MB in 9.4 seconds this time, 894 Kbps....(still 4 times faster than EDGE)
Uh, gee, I don't know... perhaps when it is YOUR version of the "truth".
Based on what facts or study? Using what test format? What was determined to be the baseline for all similar devices tested?
I could go on and on, but I think (or at least hope) that you get my point.
Better yet, show me one post in this forum where you have had so much as one complete post that was positive in nature with regards to any Apple product or service? And please, don't just post a series of links to Fox News or MSNBC. If you have some tests that were conducted in a controlled environment, then bring it on. Say, a technical journal?
I can only post about MY experiences with the iPhone 3g and comparison handsets and if I was being really honest I would be much 'abrasive'
the 3g performance is woeful... to the point that it is unuseable 99% of the time.
Positive about Apple....well tbh there is very little to be positive about at the moment.
3g
mobileme
I think you'll find that I described the first iPhone as a much better product.
don't need to apologise for APple..if they made better products I wouldn't be having the bad experiences.
Do you know of one that has something better than the 620MHz processor in the iPhone? The fastest I could find using google was ARM11 369 MHz.
I don't know, I don't waste my time seeing what the CPU speed of all the phones are.
But there are other factors to loading a page fast, a fast CPU is only one part thing
The keynote speech s a marketing platform so the testing can be weighted in Apple's favour so they should use a site that best represents the speed of the iPhone on popular website. Nokia, Motorola, et cetera do the exact same thing. However, in this case should we expect a Nokia phone phone that has Flash to have its flash turned on as this does affect the speed at which a page can be rendered? I think so.
I'm not sure what you are getting at here
I would also like to see the speed differences on pages that do not have Flash, but that isn't Apple's responsibility to test every site type. In the end you'll still find that that the iPhone's Safari is still faster than the S60's Webkit-based browser. This is because Safari uses a newer WebKit build that is more efficient (especially with JS) and uses a a faster processor. (This may not apply to the N96)
Well as I'm sure you know, there is a number of factors in the speed of displaying a page, like the network speed downloading the page, plus the browser.
So maybe tethering both devices to a notebook and performing some tests could help determining the network speed of both devices.
But, that's right, you can't tether the iPhone.
edit: Strike that, it does apply tot eh N96 which apparently has a 264Mha CPU and using Symbian OS 9.3 which was released in mid 2006.
No, the N96 runs OS 9.3 FP2 which was released this year.
I'm not sure what you are getting at here
I'm saying that from a marketing standpoint all companies try to make their product look good while technically not lying. I then went on to say that Apple using a site that has Flash should be acceptable as Flash is well known resource hog and is very common for ads so the speed difference there is relevant when viewing pages.
Well as I'm sure you know, there is a number of factors in the speed of displaying a page, like the network speed downloading the page, plus the browser.
So maybe tethering both devices to a notebook and performing some tests could help determining the network speed of both devices. But, that's right, you can't tether the iPhone.
You can tether it just fine, you're just not allowed to by the contract you signed per your ISP. But that is neither here nor there. The iPhone uses tethering via WiFi, not a USB cable so there is more latency from Wifi than USB and the processors efforting.
No, the N96 runs OS 9.3 FP2 which was released this year.
Wiki didn't list that. Do you have a date or any info as to which WebKit build it has? I'd like to see how old it is.
Do you know of one that has something better than the 620MHz processor in the iPhone? The fastest I could find using google was ARM11 369 MHz.
RiM's BB Thunder, due out in 7 weeks, will reported have a 624MHz ARM11 processor. I wonder if it will be under-clocked like the iPhone.
RiM's BB Thunder, due out in 7 weeks, will reported have a 624MHz ARM11 processor. I wonder if it will be under-clocked like the iPhone.
I thought I had read somewhere on CNet that it would be somewhere in the mid 400 range. Then it just comes down to the RAM and browser (let's just assume same network, same connection since the network isn't really the point of the argument) and I'd bet my lunch (half a box of pasta
You can tether it just fine, you're just not allowed to by the contract you signed per your ISP. But that is neither here nor there. The iPhone uses tethering via WiFi, not a USB cable so there is more latency from Wifi than USB and the processors efforting.
A third party app that Apple has pulled does not mean it can tether.
Also it may not be allowed with your contract, it doesn't mean it isn't available on everyones.
Wiki didn't list that. Do you have a date or any info as to which WebKit build it has? I'd like to see how old it is.
I guess one of these pages will have it
http://www.s60.com/life/thisiss60/s6...ures/webrowser
http://opensource.nokia.com/projects/S60browser/
http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/S60Webkit
http://opensource.nokia.com/projects...owser-faq.html
I thought I had read somewhere on CNet that it would be somewhere in the mid 400 range. Then it just comes down to the RAM and browser (let's just assume same network, same connection since the network isn't really the point of the argument) and I'd bet my lunch (half a box of pasta
The Thunder should have at least the same amount of RAM as the iPhone and the browser is reportedly going to be based on WebKit but we'll have to see the User Agent data to see what build is listed.
The phone will be released to Verizon first. If they have a faster network than AT&T the page rendering could very well be faster. I'm planning on buying one when it comes it out. If I'm not as happy with it as my iPhone 3G I'll just return it within the 30 days for a refund.
A third party app that Apple has pulled does not mean it can tether.
A simple jailbreak will also allow tethering, as well as running apps in the background, so if you want to test the speed of tethering between models you can.
The Thunder should have at least the same amount of RAM as the iPhone and the browser is reportedly going to be based on WebKit but we'll have to see the User Agent data to see what build is listed.
The phone will be released to Verizon first. If they have a faster network than AT&T the page rendering could very well be faster. I'm planning on buying one when it comes it out. If I'm not as happy with it as my iPhone 3G I'll just return it within the 30 days for a refund.
I think the limiting factor in that is going to be BB's experience with a webkit based browser (Do they have any? I'm really not sure). Apple's been working on their WebKit browser for quite a while so they've ironed out a lot of bugs.
I wouldn't go back to Verizon if you paid me - ok well if you gave me 10 million like Jerry Seinfeld I might be swayed
Outside of the US the tethering will start popping up soon I'm sure - I just don't expect it to make it back to the US App store without it being made by AT&T and then charging an arm and a leg for it.
A simple jailbreak will also allow tethering, as well as running apps in the background, so if you want to test the speed of tethering between models you can.
Well goes down well when you want to take your phone in for repair
Outside of the US the tethering will start popping up soon I'm sure - I just don't expect it to make it back to the US App store without it being made by AT&T and then charging an arm and a leg for it.
I pay AT&T a seperate $60/month for AirCard access to their 3G network.
Well goes down well when you want to take your phone in for repair
I have no idea what that means.
You said you couldn't compare the cellular network speeds using the same browser on a personal computer by tethering because tethering wasn't available. I told you if you want to test it it can be done.
If you comment about repair is about being 'redlighted' for bringing a jailbroken iPhone in for repair that argument makes no sense. Besides the fact that sending a phone in for repairs in rare, you can easily remove the jailbreak.
I pay AT&T a seperate $60/month for AirCard access to their 3G network.
That's impressive - you're missing both an arm and a leg and still can comment so quickly! You must be a crazy fast single hand typer
That's impressive - you're missing both an arm and a leg and still can comment so quickly! You must be a crazy fast single hand typer
It's the typical rate in the US for a soft 5GB/unlimited limit. I always far exceed 5GB in the 4 or 5 days that I use it. I use my iPhone daily and don't recall every exceeding 5GB. I don't think the price is outrageous when I pay for $60/month for cabled internet, too. Cure it's faster, but it's also cheaper to run and maintain. Not allowing tethering, while annoying, also makes sense as you are paying less money for the data service. I average about 6x as much data on my Mac with AT&T than I do with the iPhone but I only pay 2x as much.
Hypothetically, if AT&T were required by law to allow tethering for all phones with data packages they would just jack up the price of the data portion to compensate.
I pay AT&T a seperate $60/month for AirCard access to their 3G network.
I have no idea what that means.
You said you couldn't compare the cellular network speeds using the same browser on a personal computer by tethering because tethering wasn't available. I told you if you want to test it it can be done.
If you comment about repair is about being 'redlighted' for bringing a jailbroken iPhone in for repair that argument makes no sense. Besides the fact that sending a phone in for repairs in rare, you can easily remove the jailbreak.
It means actually what it reads, it is bad that you have to perform a hack to be able to install a program, to give you sort of tethering. It is not standard DUN.
Sending phones in for repair is not rare, if you haven't needed to do it at some point, doesn't meant that no body else has.
At the end of the day, Apple promised a lot, but underdelivered. People will say they are new comers to the industry, but if that is the case, don't trash talk the competitors like they did, because they end up looking like arses, to which they have done.
Hypothetically, if AT&T were required by law to allow tethering for all phones with data packages they would just jack up the price of the data portion to compensate.
Remember there is a world outside the USA. Remember Apple said they were going to break the way network providers, and manufactures worked, they dropped and did what AT&T wanted within seconds, and have stuffed up the rest of the work in the process.