When breaking down regional results tied to a specific carrier, AT&T of the U.S. reportedly tied for third with Telstra, Telia and Softbank, with users of those networks reporting average download speeds of roughly 990 Kbps.*European T-Mobile users reported the fastest average speeds of 1,822 Kbps, while Canadian carriers Rogers and its partner Fido ranked second with an average download speed of about 1,330 Kbps.
However, Wired said that US participants account for more than 75 percent of zero-data results, presumably because those users were dropped from AT&T's 3G network during their speed tests. Among the U.S. areas that fared the worst were some major metropolitan areas, such as San Francisco, where 10 out of 30 participants reported 3G speeds that barely match that of EDGE.
The fact that European networks appear to be outperforming those in the United States is likely a result their maturity, the report added. While AT&T began rolling out its 3G network in the U.S. in 2004, some of Europe's 3G networks have been undergoing refinements since 2001.
From a Wired online article back in May 2008, "The network offers theoretical speeds of 1.4 Mbps down and 800Kbps up, which AT&T claims "will be as speedy as logging onto the high speed Internet service that many consumers enjoy at home."
"AT&T announced yesterday that it plans to roll out its High Speed Uplink Packet Access (HSUPA) in six more US markets by the end of June, completing its deployment of HSPA. Once the rollout is complete, the company says that the beefed-up 3G service will offer uplink speeds of between 500 and 800Kbps, which will complement the roughly 1.4Mbps downlink already offered through AT&T. AT&T's timing doesn't seem to be a coincidence, as it appears to coincide with the widely-expected launch of Apple's rumored 3G iPhone."
Does any one think, after reading these articles, did the AT&T upgrade before the iPhone 3G launch work as advertised or did AT&T fall below expectations and were caught with their pants down? What do you think?
Well... just wanted to say that testmyiphone isn't the best place to test speeds. It lets you test the broadband speed with a normal computer (it detects it as non-iphone) and... I have a 6 Mbps connection that actually downloads at 5.7-5.8 Mbps and doing the test there it says that my connection goes 1.9 Mbps, not even close to what it really is.
“We had a few occasional 3G signal dropping troubles at some locations especially on high-rises building streets & on our 34th floor (EDGE picked up immediately but slower internet speeds),” writes Suva. He thinks RiM have delayed introducing the Bold because they want to iron out the 3G kinks with a software patch.
The 2% was mentioned by one of the financial analysts who was trying to blame the Infineon chipset. By the way, the 2% figure was not a percentage of defective iPhones - it was a percentage of dropped calls.
Well... just wanted to say that testmyiphone isn't the best place to test speeds. It lets you test the broadband speed with a normal computer (it detects it as non-iphone) and... I have a 6 Mbps connection that actually downloads at 5.7-5.8 Mbps and doing the test there it says that my connection goes 1.9 Mbps, not even close to what it really is.
If you are in Spain and the site is hosted in the US there is plenty of room for speed and latency to affect results. I don't think that it does (or can) determine the actual throughput?and only the throughput?from the device to the hop. But you do have a point; whatever speed we are seeing is technically faster before we account for the other aspects that affect transmission speeds.
Well... I do get really good throughput with a lot of American companies, but then again... they probably have mirror-servers planted in Europe (like for example the akamai service from Apple Trailers, etc) :-/
“We had a few occasional 3G signal dropping troubles at some locations especially on high-rises building streets & on our 34th floor (EDGE picked up immediately but slower internet speeds),” writes Suva. He thinks RiM have delayed introducing the Bold because they want to iron out the 3G kinks with a software patch.
I'm looking for the Thunder come Oct. 13th. I will be testing it against the iPhone which will have v2.1 by then, and possibly v2.1.1.
I can say that the network plays a role in some of the issues, but when my iPhone struggles to keep a 3G signal and is often on EDGE right next to my friends' Samsung and Nokia phones which are on full 3G the entire time, something is definitely wrong with the my phone.
Network speeds aside, I just want my phone to get a 3G signal! I'm only on 3G 20% of the time in Austin, TX. My friends with non-iPhones are on 3G almost 100% of the time.... That's not a network issue. That's a phone issue.
Are your friends' phones also on AT&T's network? I doubt it. Doesn't Sprint push the Samsung and Nokia phone? If your friends are on a different network, then the network is most likely to blame. I cannot get a signal on Sprint at my home in So CA, but I get a full signal with AT&T.
The other countries work well because they generally have one network, not many trying to fight for airspace. Sprint, AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, etc...too much interference going on in the U.S.
Where do I begin - your 3rd link nowhere mentions 2%.
2.0.2 on 8/18/08 was supposed to fix this and it's apparently failed according to this article.
The update in Sept is to fix App crashes and stability- not 3G issues. Why should that Dude not be upset and blame Apple instead of AT&T if Apple has admitted the software was the problem prior to the 18th? That's a negative bias on his part?
I participated... it's VERY unscientific. It doesn't survey dropped calls or ANY call quality issues - ONLY download and upload speeds. It doesn't account for people who are moving - walking or driving, etc, etc. Personally, my own issues are related to being indoors and/or covering the bottom third of the phone with my hand. If I'm outside and I don't cover the bottom, the service is fine. I can get strong signal outside, walk inside and it'll drop to EDGE (some places, not most). The Wired survey doesn't even ask people what time of day the test was done.
Time of day, walking vs driving, indoors vs outdoors...none of that matters if you have a large enough sample size. Their test is adequate to give an overall measure of performance.
The 2% was mentioned by one of the financial analysts who was trying to blame the Infineon chipset. By the way, the 2% figure was not a percentage of defective iPhones - it was a percentage of dropped calls.
Thank you for clarifying- that makes much more sense than what the other guy wrote.
I participated... it's VERY unscientific. It doesn't survey dropped calls or ANY call quality issues - ONLY download and upload speeds. It doesn't account for people who are moving - walking or driving, etc, etc. Personally, my own issues are related to being indoors and/or covering the bottom third of the phone with my hand. If I'm outside and I don't cover the bottom, the service is fine. I can get strong signal outside, walk inside and it'll drop to EDGE (some places, not most). The Wired survey doesn't even ask people what time of day the test was done.
You are very unscientific.
This study was intended to only test upload and download speeds.
The 2% was mentioned by one of the financial analysts who was trying to blame the Infineon chipset. By the way, the 2% figure was not a percentage of defective iPhones - it was a percentage of dropped calls.
The letter on Macrumors from Steve Jobs specifically stated their were bugs that effected 2% of phones, and an update was coming soon.
The main problem I have is stability of the signal with the iPhone. It fluctuates quite a bit more than the other devices.
That's exactly what my problem is, if you've read any of my comments on this.
This article actually points out good reasons why it should fluctuate in metropolitan areas, at least here in the US, where the system is newer. If a 3G unit is overloaded, the signal can suddenly drop to Edge. When one or more calls finish, it could pop back to 3G.
AT&T did say that they are continuing to add towers, even where there is coverage. They also said that they are increasing the power on their towers. I have no idea how long that will take.
When it works well, the speeds are close enough to the Tv ads so that it doesn't really matter.
But when it's bad, it's real bad.
Mostly, as of late, where I live, it's gotten much better.
But today I was in my daughter's school working on auditions for one of the plays they do, and in the basement, I did get a working 3G signal, where someone with Verison didn't.
Where do I begin - your 3rd link nowhere mentions 2%.
2.0.2 on 8/18/08 was supposed to fix this and it's apparently failed according to this article.
The update in Sept is to fix App crashes and stability- not 3G issues. Why should that Dude not be upset and blame Apple instead of AT&T if Apple has admitted the software was the problem prior to the 18th? That's a negative bias on his part?
We don't really know what 2.0.2 did or did not fix because Apple has never specifically said what the problem is or what is required to fix it.
We don't really know what 2.1 will fix. I'm sure Apple will use every update to deal with as many bugs as possible.
Are you saying Apple didn't admit there was a problem with the phone? You sure you are not here with a bias for Apple?
As nagromme said, this could be a dual issue.
1. A small percentage of phones with some unspecified reception problems.
2. Network problems as Wired is reporting.
If some people have the ill functioning phones, AND are in areas where the network isn't up to par, they would be having real problems.
But it's very possible that people with just one of those problems aren't having a serious problem, just minor annoyances.
It could be very possible that the low sensitivity of some phones would be a constant, but that the network overloads on the 3G system would be erratic.
Unless something in the phone is actually defective (always possible of course), the sensitivity should be pretty much constant. I can see the 3G tower dropping in and out as load varies up to, and beyond, design specs.
We've seen this happen years ago when AT&T went to the new digital switching systems. The old systems failed gracefully, getting slower and slower until they stopped. But digital systems have a hard stop. They work well until their limit is reached, then poof. The only way to prevent that is to up the capacity.
It's like planning a highway. By the time it's built, the capacity is already too small.
From a Wired online article back in May 2008, "The network offers theoretical speeds of 1.4 Mbps down and 800Kbps up, which AT&T claims "will be as speedy as logging onto the high speed Internet service that many consumers enjoy at home."
"AT&T announced yesterday that it plans to roll out its High Speed Uplink Packet Access (HSUPA) in six more US markets by the end of June, completing its deployment of HSPA. Once the rollout is complete, the company says that the beefed-up 3G service will offer uplink speeds of between 500 and 800Kbps, which will complement the roughly 1.4Mbps downlink already offered through AT&T. AT&T's timing doesn't seem to be a coincidence, as it appears to coincide with the widely-expected launch of Apple's rumored 3G iPhone."
Does any one think, after reading these articles, did the AT&T upgrade before the iPhone 3G launch work as advertised or did AT&T fall below expectations and were caught with their pants down? What do you think?
I think that they underestimated the demand for the phone, just as Apple is wont to do, and have too little capacity yet.
I also feel sure that this will be rectified. It's an expensive proposition, but it will get done.
wonder how much Apple paid these clowns to say this..?
1/ Apple have already said there is a problem with 3g on the iPhone.
2/ I can have 2 different handsets on the same network, 5 yards apart. The iPhone will have no service and the other one will have 3 or 4 bars.!!
How stupid do they think we are?
reception overall, regardless of protocol used is substandard on iPhone in my experience.
Apple... head in the sand much??
If you had the least bit of awareness of telecom infrastructure you'd realize where the problems lay. AT&T has leveraged the Apple iPhone to buttress their crap service with a very cool and quite useful tool. Your grousing is just more techno-ignorance parading around as opinion.
I'm sorry but I have to QFT my own post in another thread. QFT !!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
.. At some point Apple has to play ball with the network providers. But has this partnership been beneficial? What are the challenges? Quite a few, as we have seen, though no doubt for both sides lots of sales and cash and interest. Don't get me wrong, the iPhone 3G and the network service has so much goodness and potential. But also, there are pitfalls, such as the 3G class action, complaints, and so on.
Apple's success is built on the simplicity of OS X and OS X-like Windows apps. Hardware is designed to look good, work well, and run OS X smoothly. The iPhone would not be possible without their intelligent "OS X mobile" deployment (forgive the incorrect terminology).
The iTunes Store would not be the top online digital download service if iTunes and Quicktime for Mac (part of OS X) and Windows (OS X-like for Windows) wasn't as easy and effective as it is.
Apple would certainly like to have much more control over the quality and service expectation, and ease of use of the mobile network. It can do this three ways:
1. Accept "fate" and just take a huge shaft up the a** as needed for cash/ service from the mobile network providers, as is the current case.
2. Work closely with mobile network providers to get things smoother. Certainly Apple is doing this, but mostly in the USA. I mean, we know what happened in the UK, it was number 1 above.
3. MVNO. There. I've said it.
What if Apple's "4th Leg" becomes them being some sort of network provider? Not DSL, Not WiFi, but say 3.5G or 4G or 5G?
With an MVNO the global rollout will be difficult initially but it might very well guarantee a much smoother Apple Mobile Products launches.
For example, Apple is selling the iPhone 3G everywhere in the world. Then in 2009, it obviously *has* to sell mobile products around the world.
It has tried to leverage the existing mobile providers. This is like hiring the local militia or mercenaries when invading a country. In the long run, is this effective?
Apple laying the groundwork globally as an MVNO is like building forward bases when invading a country. There is a foundation to work on more under control by Apple themselves.
Remember the MVNO model has huge popularity and success around the world, and the best part is that you're not exactly going in yourself to license the spectrum in a country.
Of course though, at the end of the day, the business and cash strategy of which part of 1, 2, and 3 I listed above, is what Apple wants to do. The options are there, and we'll see what choices they make.
...AT&T has leveraged the Apple iPhone to buttress their crap service with a very cool and quite useful tool. Your grousing is just more techno-ignorance parading around as opinion.
Brilliant point. We can also replace AT&T with similar crappy network providers around the world, I leave it to those in other countries to tell us which ones.
Comments
When breaking down regional results tied to a specific carrier, AT&T of the U.S. reportedly tied for third with Telstra, Telia and Softbank, with users of those networks reporting average download speeds of roughly 990 Kbps.*European T-Mobile users reported the fastest average speeds of 1,822 Kbps, while Canadian carriers Rogers and its partner Fido ranked second with an average download speed of about 1,330 Kbps.
However, Wired said that US participants account for more than 75 percent of zero-data results, presumably because those users were dropped from AT&T's 3G network during their speed tests. Among the U.S. areas that fared the worst were some major metropolitan areas, such as San Francisco, where 10 out of 30 participants reported 3G speeds that barely match that of EDGE.
The fact that European networks appear to be outperforming those in the United States is likely a result their maturity, the report added. While AT&T began rolling out its 3G network in the U.S. in 2004, some of Europe's 3G networks have been undergoing refinements since 2001.
From a Wired online article back in May 2008, "The network offers theoretical speeds of 1.4 Mbps down and 800Kbps up, which AT&T claims "will be as speedy as logging onto the high speed Internet service that many consumers enjoy at home."
http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/0...nfirms-hi.html
and
From ARS Technica back in May 2008...
"AT&T announced yesterday that it plans to roll out its High Speed Uplink Packet Access (HSUPA) in six more US markets by the end of June, completing its deployment of HSPA. Once the rollout is complete, the company says that the beefed-up 3G service will offer uplink speeds of between 500 and 800Kbps, which will complement the roughly 1.4Mbps downlink already offered through AT&T. AT&T's timing doesn't seem to be a coincidence, as it appears to coincide with the widely-expected launch of Apple's rumored 3G iPhone."
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...k-upgrade.html
Does any one think, after reading these articles, did the AT&T upgrade before the iPhone 3G launch work as advertised or did AT&T fall below expectations and were caught with their pants down? What do you think?
“We had a few occasional 3G signal dropping troubles at some locations especially on high-rises building streets & on our 34th floor (EDGE picked up immediately but slower internet speeds),” writes Suva. He thinks RiM have delayed introducing the Bold because they want to iron out the 3G kinks with a software patch.
Where is 2% mentioned in this thread?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...3g_issues.html
The 2% was mentioned by one of the financial analysts who was trying to blame the Infineon chipset. By the way, the 2% figure was not a percentage of defective iPhones - it was a percentage of dropped calls.
Well... just wanted to say that testmyiphone isn't the best place to test speeds. It lets you test the broadband speed with a normal computer (it detects it as non-iphone) and... I have a 6 Mbps connection that actually downloads at 5.7-5.8 Mbps and doing the test there it says that my connection goes 1.9 Mbps, not even close to what it really is.
If you are in Spain and the site is hosted in the US there is plenty of room for speed and latency to affect results. I don't think that it does (or can) determine the actual throughput?and only the throughput?from the device to the hop. But you do have a point; whatever speed we are seeing is technically faster before we account for the other aspects that affect transmission speeds.
Blackberry Bold
“We had a few occasional 3G signal dropping troubles at some locations especially on high-rises building streets & on our 34th floor (EDGE picked up immediately but slower internet speeds),” writes Suva. He thinks RiM have delayed introducing the Bold because they want to iron out the 3G kinks with a software patch.
I'm looking for the Thunder come Oct. 13th. I will be testing it against the iPhone which will have v2.1 by then, and possibly v2.1.1.
I can say that the network plays a role in some of the issues, but when my iPhone struggles to keep a 3G signal and is often on EDGE right next to my friends' Samsung and Nokia phones which are on full 3G the entire time, something is definitely wrong with the my phone.
Network speeds aside, I just want my phone to get a 3G signal! I'm only on 3G 20% of the time in Austin, TX. My friends with non-iPhones are on 3G almost 100% of the time.... That's not a network issue. That's a phone issue.
Are your friends' phones also on AT&T's network? I doubt it. Doesn't Sprint push the Samsung and Nokia phone? If your friends are on a different network, then the network is most likely to blame. I cannot get a signal on Sprint at my home in So CA, but I get a full signal with AT&T.
The other countries work well because they generally have one network, not many trying to fight for airspace. Sprint, AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, etc...too much interference going on in the U.S.
Here you go...
From Businessweek Online
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...813_430402.htm
From a purported response from Steve Jobs to an e-mail sent to him about 3G issues...
http://www.macrumors.com/2008/08/18/...ware-fix-soon/
and from AppleInsider themselves...
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...september.html
Where do I begin - your 3rd link nowhere mentions 2%.
2.0.2 on 8/18/08 was supposed to fix this and it's apparently failed according to this article.
The update in Sept is to fix App crashes and stability- not 3G issues. Why should that Dude not be upset and blame Apple instead of AT&T if Apple has admitted the software was the problem prior to the 18th? That's a negative bias on his part?
I participated... it's VERY unscientific. It doesn't survey dropped calls or ANY call quality issues - ONLY download and upload speeds. It doesn't account for people who are moving - walking or driving, etc, etc. Personally, my own issues are related to being indoors and/or covering the bottom third of the phone with my hand. If I'm outside and I don't cover the bottom, the service is fine. I can get strong signal outside, walk inside and it'll drop to EDGE (some places, not most). The Wired survey doesn't even ask people what time of day the test was done.
Time of day, walking vs driving, indoors vs outdoors...none of that matters if you have a large enough sample size. Their test is adequate to give an overall measure of performance.
The 2% was mentioned by one of the financial analysts who was trying to blame the Infineon chipset. By the way, the 2% figure was not a percentage of defective iPhones - it was a percentage of dropped calls.
Thank you for clarifying- that makes much more sense than what the other guy wrote.
I participated... it's VERY unscientific. It doesn't survey dropped calls or ANY call quality issues - ONLY download and upload speeds. It doesn't account for people who are moving - walking or driving, etc, etc. Personally, my own issues are related to being indoors and/or covering the bottom third of the phone with my hand. If I'm outside and I don't cover the bottom, the service is fine. I can get strong signal outside, walk inside and it'll drop to EDGE (some places, not most). The Wired survey doesn't even ask people what time of day the test was done.
You are very unscientific.
This study was intended to only test upload and download speeds.
The 2% was mentioned by one of the financial analysts who was trying to blame the Infineon chipset. By the way, the 2% figure was not a percentage of defective iPhones - it was a percentage of dropped calls.
The letter on Macrumors from Steve Jobs specifically stated their were bugs that effected 2% of phones, and an update was coming soon.
The main problem I have is stability of the signal with the iPhone. It fluctuates quite a bit more than the other devices.
That's exactly what my problem is, if you've read any of my comments on this.
This article actually points out good reasons why it should fluctuate in metropolitan areas, at least here in the US, where the system is newer. If a 3G unit is overloaded, the signal can suddenly drop to Edge. When one or more calls finish, it could pop back to 3G.
AT&T did say that they are continuing to add towers, even where there is coverage. They also said that they are increasing the power on their towers. I have no idea how long that will take.
When it works well, the speeds are close enough to the Tv ads so that it doesn't really matter.
But when it's bad, it's real bad.
Mostly, as of late, where I live, it's gotten much better.
But today I was in my daughter's school working on auditions for one of the plays they do, and in the basement, I did get a working 3G signal, where someone with Verison didn't.
It's just a matter of exactly where a tower is.
Where do I begin - your 3rd link nowhere mentions 2%.
2.0.2 on 8/18/08 was supposed to fix this and it's apparently failed according to this article.
The update in Sept is to fix App crashes and stability- not 3G issues. Why should that Dude not be upset and blame Apple instead of AT&T if Apple has admitted the software was the problem prior to the 18th? That's a negative bias on his part?
We don't really know what 2.0.2 did or did not fix because Apple has never specifically said what the problem is or what is required to fix it.
We don't really know what 2.1 will fix. I'm sure Apple will use every update to deal with as many bugs as possible.
Are you saying Apple didn't admit there was a problem with the phone? You sure you are not here with a bias for Apple?
As nagromme said, this could be a dual issue.
1. A small percentage of phones with some unspecified reception problems.
2. Network problems as Wired is reporting.
If some people have the ill functioning phones, AND are in areas where the network isn't up to par, they would be having real problems.
But it's very possible that people with just one of those problems aren't having a serious problem, just minor annoyances.
It could be very possible that the low sensitivity of some phones would be a constant, but that the network overloads on the 3G system would be erratic.
Unless something in the phone is actually defective (always possible of course), the sensitivity should be pretty much constant. I can see the 3G tower dropping in and out as load varies up to, and beyond, design specs.
We've seen this happen years ago when AT&T went to the new digital switching systems. The old systems failed gracefully, getting slower and slower until they stopped. But digital systems have a hard stop. They work well until their limit is reached, then poof. The only way to prevent that is to up the capacity.
It's like planning a highway. By the time it's built, the capacity is already too small.
From a Wired online article back in May 2008, "The network offers theoretical speeds of 1.4 Mbps down and 800Kbps up, which AT&T claims "will be as speedy as logging onto the high speed Internet service that many consumers enjoy at home."
http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/0...nfirms-hi.html
and
From ARS Technica back in May 2008...
"AT&T announced yesterday that it plans to roll out its High Speed Uplink Packet Access (HSUPA) in six more US markets by the end of June, completing its deployment of HSPA. Once the rollout is complete, the company says that the beefed-up 3G service will offer uplink speeds of between 500 and 800Kbps, which will complement the roughly 1.4Mbps downlink already offered through AT&T. AT&T's timing doesn't seem to be a coincidence, as it appears to coincide with the widely-expected launch of Apple's rumored 3G iPhone."
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...k-upgrade.html
Does any one think, after reading these articles, did the AT&T upgrade before the iPhone 3G launch work as advertised or did AT&T fall below expectations and were caught with their pants down? What do you think?
I think that they underestimated the demand for the phone, just as Apple is wont to do, and have too little capacity yet.
I also feel sure that this will be rectified. It's an expensive proposition, but it will get done.
Bullsh!t
wonder how much Apple paid these clowns to say this..?
1/ Apple have already said there is a problem with 3g on the iPhone.
2/ I can have 2 different handsets on the same network, 5 yards apart. The iPhone will have no service and the other one will have 3 or 4 bars.!!
How stupid do they think we are?
reception overall, regardless of protocol used is substandard on iPhone in my experience.
Apple... head in the sand much??
If you had the least bit of awareness of telecom infrastructure you'd realize where the problems lay. AT&T has leveraged the Apple iPhone to buttress their crap service with a very cool and quite useful tool. Your grousing is just more techno-ignorance parading around as opinion.
.. At some point Apple has to play ball with the network providers. But has this partnership been beneficial? What are the challenges? Quite a few, as we have seen, though no doubt for both sides lots of sales and cash and interest. Don't get me wrong, the iPhone 3G and the network service has so much goodness and potential. But also, there are pitfalls, such as the 3G class action, complaints, and so on.
Apple's success is built on the simplicity of OS X and OS X-like Windows apps. Hardware is designed to look good, work well, and run OS X smoothly. The iPhone would not be possible without their intelligent "OS X mobile" deployment (forgive the incorrect terminology).
The iTunes Store would not be the top online digital download service if iTunes and Quicktime for Mac (part of OS X) and Windows (OS X-like for Windows) wasn't as easy and effective as it is.
Apple would certainly like to have much more control over the quality and service expectation, and ease of use of the mobile network. It can do this three ways:
1. Accept "fate" and just take a huge shaft up the a** as needed for cash/ service from the mobile network providers, as is the current case.
2. Work closely with mobile network providers to get things smoother. Certainly Apple is doing this, but mostly in the USA. I mean, we know what happened in the UK, it was number 1 above.
3. MVNO. There. I've said it.
What if Apple's "4th Leg" becomes them being some sort of network provider? Not DSL, Not WiFi, but say 3.5G or 4G or 5G?
With an MVNO the global rollout will be difficult initially but it might very well guarantee a much smoother Apple Mobile Products launches.
For example, Apple is selling the iPhone 3G everywhere in the world. Then in 2009, it obviously *has* to sell mobile products around the world.
It has tried to leverage the existing mobile providers. This is like hiring the local militia or mercenaries when invading a country. In the long run, is this effective?
Apple laying the groundwork globally as an MVNO is like building forward bases when invading a country. There is a foundation to work on more under control by Apple themselves.
Remember the MVNO model has huge popularity and success around the world, and the best part is that you're not exactly going in yourself to license the spectrum in a country.
Of course though, at the end of the day, the business and cash strategy of which part of 1, 2, and 3 I listed above, is what Apple wants to do. The options are there, and we'll see what choices they make.
...AT&T has leveraged the Apple iPhone to buttress their crap service with a very cool and quite useful tool. Your grousing is just more techno-ignorance parading around as opinion.
Brilliant point. We can also replace AT&T with similar crappy network providers around the world, I leave it to those in other countries to tell us which ones.