jfanning disagreed with that, and while I don't get the relevance of most of the points that followed, I am still convinced that he's wrong about his basic point. The iPhone IS causing heavier usage of mobile Internet, and I don't see how that can be debated.
You can't, that is't what I was saying. And it is more than just mobile internet, it is mobile data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
You could still debate that the carriers are having no problems handling the increased 3G data traffic (the second part of macapptraining's assertion), but even that seems far-fetched to me. There seems to be ample evidence that the carriers are--in some regions--either HAVING trouble or CAUSING trouble with their Internet and 3G traffic (see also Wired's informal data rate map, and the story on recent BlackBerry 3G problems).
bolded, as that is the main point to remember, in some regions. Maybe the region they have sold the most in???
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
Maybe jfanning just needs to clarify why he objects to macapptraining's statement. Maybe he thinks the iPhone is not "ahead" in any way that affects Internet usage?
You've said things in many directions... but none of them counter to the post you were originally objecting to An interesting exercise nonetheless. Some interesting tangents sprouted off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Well it depends on what phone it is, since the iPhone doesn't support flash
Good point--for YouTube, a tethered laptop doesn't have as much data to deal with as an iPhone does. A laptop running Flash-based YouTube is streaming less data than an iPhone running the higher-quality AVC-based YouTube streams. Two different YouTube data sources! Unless of course the HTML comments are bigger than the video files
Well now that is a BS reference. Sorry, that doesn't back up your point at all. Different phones, different networks. None of them are perfect. There are plenty of iPhone 3G owners that are happy with their purchase and the phone works as advertised. There are also some that are not receiving a 3G signal, but it looks more to be a network issue, rather than hardware. AT&T was working to build up their 3G coverage, obviously it is not satisfactory in all areas. However, every iPhone 3G commercial clearly states "3G not available in all areas."
It is not, there are other phones more than capable of putting through more data than an iPhone
Even if true, it's meaningless. That something is capable of doing something proves nothing. Are such capabilities being used? How often? By how many people? The iPhone is the first to make such difference. We are talking about full blown web pages being accessed on every iPhone, not to mention it's other features that transfer data on the network. One can't help but utilized the network with the iPhone.
How much more data is being transferred on the network now when compared to what it was prior to the iPhone? That's the question.
Well now that is a BS reference. Sorry, that doesn't back up your point at all. Different phones, different networks. None of them are perfect.
I don't understand you, yes they are different phones, but different network? If you looked at the site you would see they are GSM/3G phones, which will run on the network you are using an iPhone on...
Good point--for YouTube, a tethered laptop doesn't have as much data to deal with as an iPhone does. A laptop running Flash-based YouTube is streaming less data than an iPhone running the higher-quality AVC-based YouTube streams. Two different YouTube data sources! Unless of course the HTML comments are bigger than the video files
Well YouTube is one example, personally I use it that much, I find the video quality quite poor (even the 'higher-quality' AVC ones you mention).
There are many sites that implement flash animations on them, if you go to one on your iPhone it will not load. Same with Java applications, same with alot of video formats I imagine, how does the iPhone handle WMV files?
Can u use bit torrent on your iPhone and get a connection up to 600k and keep it up for hours at a time?
I've downloaded over 8G in one month via tethering. This was before the cap was replaced, using a lowly old Samsung Blackjack.
So I guess you're saying that your lowly old Samsung Blackjack could handle 8G in one month because it was tethered to a laptop, and if it wasn't tethered to a laptop then it could not handle as much data. (less that 8G)
Again, that makes no sense to me as I can see no way the laptop can result in increased data capabilities OF THE PHONE.
Maybe Samsung has found a way for the laptop to boost the cell phones reception....
Well it depends on what phone it is, since the iPhone doesn't support flash
That is true.
If you don't use the iPhone, you have a lot of sights that you can't really get to because the browser isn't real.
But we all know you fix that problem by carrying around your big bulky laptop tethered to your phone so you can use a real browser and have enough CPU to see the flash version of youtube.....
Following an uproar on the part of disgruntled iPhone customers, French wireless carrier Orange will reportedly raise an unpublicized cap on 3G download speeds next month.
If you don't use the iPhone, you have a lot of sights that you can't really get to because the browser isn't real.
But we all know you fix that problem by carrying around your big bulky laptop tethered to your phone so you can use a real browser and have enough CPU to see the flash version of youtube.....
What do you mean by 'not real'?
What is a real browser?
And I don't have a laptop (my daughter has a Mac Book, and I didn't think it was that bulky, maybe it is). I used my N800, I can tether that to a phone, or use WiFi. It has what I would call a real browser, and it supports flash, it also has a number of other 'internet' applications available for it.
And as I have said, I don't like You Tube, there is only so many videos of a cat you can watch...
Well YouTube is one example, personally I use it that much, I find the video quality quite poor (even the 'higher-quality' AVC ones you mention).
There are many sites that implement flash animations on them, if you go to one on your iPhone it will not load. Same with Java applications, same with alot of video formats I imagine, how does the iPhone handle WMV files?
It seems like you might be hopping from excuse to excuse, looking for anything to mention that implies fault with the iPhone, rather than actually following any one argument through?
You are right, some sites use plugins the iPhone doesn't have. On the flip side, just about ANY site gives a substandard experience on any phone BUT an iPhone. And other phones have Flash Lite, which is not at all the same thing as full Flash capable of accessing Flash web sites. Full Flash is inefficient and unsuitable for mobile use, and if Adobe gets that worked out then I expect the iPhone will benefit. Meanwhile Java has real problems--it's a mobile technology worth avoiding in many ways, and not one I come across online these days much at all. But even if Java-based web sites are important, you surely are not suggesting that other phones' browsers deliver a great experience of Java-based web apps. I'm sure most don't even run. So no phone is a great browser for Flash and Java web sites currently. Some do better than others. Your combination of a phone plus an N800 (full Flash) is neat in some ways, I won't deny. I wouldn't want to give up iPhone's browser and have to lug two devices, but it's a fine option for some. You may need sites that are heavily Flash-based. In my own usage I find that rare outside of games--and I have better ways to game on iPhone.
Regardless, how does that plugin question support your thesis that the carriers are not to blame for iPhone data rates?
I want to understand your point, but it seems more and more like random trolling instead--or else looking for a reason not to wish you had an iPhone. So, by all means, run with the Java and Flash discussion if you feel moved to And don't worry about not having an iPhone--enjoy what you have, and others will enjoy their iPhones.
For any who are interested: a video comparing a couple mobile browsers including the N800 (Opera) and iPhone (Safari).
It seems like you might be hopping from excuse to excuse, looking for anything to mention that implies fault with the iPhone, rather than actually following any one argument through?
Are you implying I am being paid to write what I am writing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
You are right, some sites use plugins the iPhone doesn't have. On the flip side, just about ANY site gives a substandard experience on any phone BUT an iPhone. And other phones have Flash Lite, which is not at all the same thing as full Flash capable of accessing Flash web sites. Full Flash is inefficient and unsuitable for mobile use, and if Adobe gets that worked out then I expect the iPhone will benefit.
I am not talking about other phones. The original person said that the iPhone is placing a larger load on the network, but having to transfer more data (volume, not throughput), that is what I am talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
Regardless, how does that plugin question support your thesis that the carriers are not to blame for iPhone data rates?
I haven't been talking about data rates, I have been talking about volume, people have been twisting things
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
I want to understand your point, but it seems more and more like random trolling instead--or else looking for a reason not to wish you had an iPhone.
The point is simple, I have made it multiple times, but it appears everyone is a little slow on the uptake here.
Mobile data has been available international for a very long time, it has been used for a very long time, from a multitude of devices, to imply that the iPhone is the first device to transfer a lot of data, and thus kill networks is naive. Maybe it is because the original person who made the claim is new to mobile technology, maybe they have been limited to the nature of devices available in the US, I don't know.
I don't need to look for a reason to not have an iPhone, O2 made that decision for me.
I will not be locked to a contract, and I will not pay the price they are asking for the data connection in Ireland.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
For any who are interested: a video comparing a couple mobile browsers including the N800 (Opera) and iPhone (Safari).
Mobile data has been available international for a very long time, it has been used for a very long time, from a multitude of devices, to imply that the iPhone is the first device to transfer a lot of data, and thus kill networks is naive. Maybe it is because the original person who made the claim is new to mobile technology, maybe they have been limited to the nature of devices available in the US, I don't know.
The iPhone is generating "unheard-of levels of mobile Internet usage," according to Vivek Dev, COO of Telefónica O2 Europe, the sole carrier of the device in the United Kingdom. Web browsing and e-mail are two of the primary purposes of the iPhone, and O2 customers have unlimited use under current plans. Traffic is said to be so high in fact that it is straining O2's network, and this is only expected to become worse as the company switches to flat data fees.
The iPhone is generating "unheard-of levels of mobile Internet usage," according to Vivek Dev, COO of Telefónica O2 Europe, the sole carrier of the device in the United Kingdom. Web browsing and e-mail are two of the primary purposes of the iPhone, and O2 customers have unlimited use under current plans. Traffic is said to be so high in fact that it is straining O2's network, and this is only expected to become worse as the company switches to flat data fees.
ok, that either means they have a shite network in the UK, or they haven't had a lot of data users in the past, I know plently of people on O2 in Ireland, and it isn't making a different here.
Comments
That makes even less sense.
Why would running youtube on my laptop handle different data than youtube on my phone?
Well it depends on what phone it is, since the iPhone doesn't support flash
jfanning disagreed with that, and while I don't get the relevance of most of the points that followed, I am still convinced that he's wrong about his basic point. The iPhone IS causing heavier usage of mobile Internet, and I don't see how that can be debated.
You can't, that is't what I was saying. And it is more than just mobile internet, it is mobile data.
You could still debate that the carriers are having no problems handling the increased 3G data traffic (the second part of macapptraining's assertion), but even that seems far-fetched to me. There seems to be ample evidence that the carriers are--in some regions--either HAVING trouble or CAUSING trouble with their Internet and 3G traffic (see also Wired's informal data rate map, and the story on recent BlackBerry 3G problems).
bolded, as that is the main point to remember, in some regions. Maybe the region they have sold the most in???
Maybe jfanning just needs to clarify why he objects to macapptraining's statement. Maybe he thinks the iPhone is not "ahead" in any way that affects Internet usage?
I have...
I have...
You've said things in many directions... but none of them counter to the post you were originally objecting to
Well it depends on what phone it is, since the iPhone doesn't support flash
Good point--for YouTube, a tethered laptop doesn't have as much data to deal with as an iPhone does. A laptop running Flash-based YouTube is streaming less data than an iPhone running the higher-quality AVC-based YouTube streams. Two different YouTube data sources! Unless of course the HTML comments are bigger than the video files
Well I would say all the phones that support 3G, and BT.
A couple of examples are at http://www.nokia.eu
Well now that is a BS reference. Sorry, that doesn't back up your point at all. Different phones, different networks. None of them are perfect. There are plenty of iPhone 3G owners that are happy with their purchase and the phone works as advertised. There are also some that are not receiving a 3G signal, but it looks more to be a network issue, rather than hardware. AT&T was working to build up their 3G coverage, obviously it is not satisfactory in all areas. However, every iPhone 3G commercial clearly states "3G not available in all areas."
It is not, there are other phones more than capable of putting through more data than an iPhone
Even if true, it's meaningless. That something is capable of doing something proves nothing. Are such capabilities being used? How often? By how many people? The iPhone is the first to make such difference. We are talking about full blown web pages being accessed on every iPhone, not to mention it's other features that transfer data on the network. One can't help but utilized the network with the iPhone.
How much more data is being transferred on the network now when compared to what it was prior to the iPhone? That's the question.
Well now that is a BS reference. Sorry, that doesn't back up your point at all. Different phones, different networks. None of them are perfect.
I don't understand you, yes they are different phones, but different network? If you looked at the site you would see they are GSM/3G phones, which will run on the network you are using an iPhone on...
How much more data is being transferred on the network now when compared to what it was prior to the iPhone? That's the question.
Which network? There are quite a few outside the USA
Good point--for YouTube, a tethered laptop doesn't have as much data to deal with as an iPhone does. A laptop running Flash-based YouTube is streaming less data than an iPhone running the higher-quality AVC-based YouTube streams. Two different YouTube data sources! Unless of course the HTML comments are bigger than the video files
Well YouTube is one example, personally I use it that much, I find the video quality quite poor (even the 'higher-quality' AVC ones you mention).
There are many sites that implement flash animations on them, if you go to one on your iPhone it will not load. Same with Java applications, same with alot of video formats I imagine, how does the iPhone handle WMV files?
Can u use bit torrent on your iPhone and get a connection up to 600k and keep it up for hours at a time?
I've downloaded over 8G in one month via tethering. This was before the cap was replaced, using a lowly old Samsung Blackjack.
So I guess you're saying that your lowly old Samsung Blackjack could handle 8G in one month because it was tethered to a laptop, and if it wasn't tethered to a laptop then it could not handle as much data. (less that 8G)
Again, that makes no sense to me as I can see no way the laptop can result in increased data capabilities OF THE PHONE.
Maybe Samsung has found a way for the laptop to boost the cell phones reception....
Well it depends on what phone it is, since the iPhone doesn't support flash
That is true.
If you don't use the iPhone, you have a lot of sights that you can't really get to because the browser isn't real.
But we all know you fix that problem by carrying around your big bulky laptop tethered to your phone so you can use a real browser and have enough CPU to see the flash version of youtube.....
Following an uproar on the part of disgruntled iPhone customers, French wireless carrier Orange will reportedly raise an unpublicized cap on 3G download speeds next month.
Getting better. 1743kbps this morning on 3G.
Again, that makes no sense to me as I can see no way the laptop can result in increased data capabilities OF THE PHONE.
You are confusing things, it has nothing to do with speed, it is the amount of data being transfered
That is true.
If you don't use the iPhone, you have a lot of sights that you can't really get to because the browser isn't real.
But we all know you fix that problem by carrying around your big bulky laptop tethered to your phone so you can use a real browser and have enough CPU to see the flash version of youtube.....
What do you mean by 'not real'?
What is a real browser?
And I don't have a laptop (my daughter has a Mac Book, and I didn't think it was that bulky, maybe it is). I used my N800, I can tether that to a phone, or use WiFi. It has what I would call a real browser, and it supports flash, it also has a number of other 'internet' applications available for it.
And as I have said, I don't like You Tube, there is only so many videos of a cat you can watch...
Well YouTube is one example, personally I use it that much, I find the video quality quite poor (even the 'higher-quality' AVC ones you mention).
There are many sites that implement flash animations on them, if you go to one on your iPhone it will not load. Same with Java applications, same with alot of video formats I imagine, how does the iPhone handle WMV files?
It seems like you might be hopping from excuse to excuse, looking for anything to mention that implies fault with the iPhone, rather than actually following any one argument through?
You are right, some sites use plugins the iPhone doesn't have. On the flip side, just about ANY site gives a substandard experience on any phone BUT an iPhone. And other phones have Flash Lite, which is not at all the same thing as full Flash capable of accessing Flash web sites. Full Flash is inefficient and unsuitable for mobile use, and if Adobe gets that worked out then I expect the iPhone will benefit. Meanwhile Java has real problems--it's a mobile technology worth avoiding in many ways, and not one I come across online these days much at all. But even if Java-based web sites are important, you surely are not suggesting that other phones' browsers deliver a great experience of Java-based web apps. I'm sure most don't even run. So no phone is a great browser for Flash and Java web sites currently. Some do better than others. Your combination of a phone plus an N800 (full Flash) is neat in some ways, I won't deny. I wouldn't want to give up iPhone's browser and have to lug two devices, but it's a fine option for some. You may need sites that are heavily Flash-based. In my own usage I find that rare outside of games--and I have better ways to game on iPhone.
Regardless, how does that plugin question support your thesis that the carriers are not to blame for iPhone data rates?
I want to understand your point, but it seems more and more like random trolling instead--or else looking for a reason not to wish you had an iPhone. So, by all means, run with the Java and Flash discussion if you feel moved to
For any who are interested: a video comparing a couple mobile browsers including the N800 (Opera) and iPhone (Safari).
http://www.atmasphere.net/wp/archive...a-n95-and-n800
Both do a good job in their own ways.
It seems like you might be hopping from excuse to excuse, looking for anything to mention that implies fault with the iPhone, rather than actually following any one argument through?
Are you implying I am being paid to write what I am writing?
You are right, some sites use plugins the iPhone doesn't have. On the flip side, just about ANY site gives a substandard experience on any phone BUT an iPhone. And other phones have Flash Lite, which is not at all the same thing as full Flash capable of accessing Flash web sites. Full Flash is inefficient and unsuitable for mobile use, and if Adobe gets that worked out then I expect the iPhone will benefit.
I am not talking about other phones. The original person said that the iPhone is placing a larger load on the network, but having to transfer more data (volume, not throughput), that is what I am talking about.
Regardless, how does that plugin question support your thesis that the carriers are not to blame for iPhone data rates?
I haven't been talking about data rates, I have been talking about volume, people have been twisting things
I want to understand your point, but it seems more and more like random trolling instead--or else looking for a reason not to wish you had an iPhone.
The point is simple, I have made it multiple times, but it appears everyone is a little slow on the uptake here.
Mobile data has been available international for a very long time, it has been used for a very long time, from a multitude of devices, to imply that the iPhone is the first device to transfer a lot of data, and thus kill networks is naive. Maybe it is because the original person who made the claim is new to mobile technology, maybe they have been limited to the nature of devices available in the US, I don't know.
I don't need to look for a reason to not have an iPhone, O2 made that decision for me.
I will not be locked to a contract, and I will not pay the price they are asking for the data connection in Ireland.
For any who are interested: a video comparing a couple mobile browsers including the N800 (Opera) and iPhone (Safari).
http://www.atmasphere.net/wp/archive...a-n95-and-n800
Both do a good job in their own ways.
The video is over a year old, all three devices have had firmware updates since then, and I believe the Nokia ones have made them better devices.
Which network? There are quite a few outside the USA
Any that has the iPhone on it's network.
Mobile data has been available international for a very long time, it has been used for a very long time, from a multitude of devices, to imply that the iPhone is the first device to transfer a lot of data, and thus kill networks is naive. Maybe it is because the original person who made the claim is new to mobile technology, maybe they have been limited to the nature of devices available in the US, I don't know.
The iPhone is generating "unheard-of levels of mobile Internet usage," according to Vivek Dev, COO of Telefónica O2 Europe, the sole carrier of the device in the United Kingdom. Web browsing and e-mail are two of the primary purposes of the iPhone, and O2 customers have unlimited use under current plans. Traffic is said to be so high in fact that it is straining O2's network, and this is only expected to become worse as the company switches to flat data fees.
Any that has the iPhone on it's network.
And the documentation to back that up is where???
The iPhone is generating "unheard-of levels of mobile Internet usage," according to Vivek Dev, COO of Telefónica O2 Europe, the sole carrier of the device in the United Kingdom. Web browsing and e-mail are two of the primary purposes of the iPhone, and O2 customers have unlimited use under current plans. Traffic is said to be so high in fact that it is straining O2's network, and this is only expected to become worse as the company switches to flat data fees.
ok, that either means they have a shite network in the UK, or they haven't had a lot of data users in the past, I know plently of people on O2 in Ireland, and it isn't making a different here.
Obviously, but if that one is not currently available, which of the alternatives
(which might be currently possible) would users prefer?
there is no other alternatives