Lurie similarly drew attention to the necessarily exclusive multi-year contract Apple signed with the American cell service that gives iPhone customers the "luxury" of requiring a Cingular subscription. Apple, he added, also agreed to help stop the "bad guys" who would unofficially unlock the iPhone or its SIM card for use on competing networks.
It's crap like that, that's starting to make the iPhone RDF wear off on me. I don't know if I'm as interested as I used to be.
Yup, we should expect hacks to get unlocked grey exports around the world. Well, not grey, but essentially the unlocked iPhone black market shipping to Europe, Australia, Asia, etc. etc.
The June/July 2007 model though should take a few months to crack, and by the time the unlocked phones are out and about they'll be available globally around the start of 2008.
Yeah until cingular forces apple to make black market ones not interface with itunes or something, everytime you connect your ipod it shows your serial and everything, it's probably not impossible to have it note when the connected phone is unregistered.
And black market ones won't have a warranty anyways, usually I wouldn't care but that makes me weary when it comes to iphone.
Slightly off the subject, but if AT&T is going to rebrand Cingular, why didn't they take advantage of the Stevenote by announcing the transition a few days earlier?
And why don't the American Idol site and Cingular's own site say anything about it?
The voice mail function requires that the network it's being retreived from work with the feature. It's not strictly an Apple product, nor could it be.
That's exactly my point, but doesn't answer my question. Of course the visual-voice-mail requires a change in how Cingular handles voicemail, as well as a specific implementation on the iPhone.
The point is that the new method of handling voicemail may be Apple-only. I hope, instead, that the visual-voice-mail is just receiving multimedia-messages (each of which contains the voicemail). I wondered years ago why the phone companies didn't do this - EVERY phone that handles MMS could handle this form of voicemail.
So my question... my wondering... was Cingular does this.
That's exactly my point, but doesn't answer my question. Of course the visual-voice-mail requires a change in how Cingular handles voicemail, as well as a specific implementation on the iPhone.
The point is that the new method of handling voicemail may be Apple-only. I hope, instead, that the visual-voice-mail is just receiving multimedia-messages (each of which contains the voicemail). I wondered years ago why the phone companies didn't do this - EVERY phone that handles MMS could handle this form of voicemail.
So my question... my wondering... was Cingular does this.
Cingular had to rewrite their software. Whatever code they wrote belongs to them.
Does this mean that Apple doesn't own the concept? Maybe.
But someone else on another site said that a concept similar to this has already been done. Is it equivelant? I don't know. This is something we might be reading more about in the near future once things settle down.
Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE) or Enhanced GPRS (EGPRS), is a digital mobile phone technology that allows for increased data transmission rate and improved data transmission reliability. It is generally classified as a 2.75G network technology. EDGE has been introduced into GSM networks around the world since 2003, initially in North America.
EDGE/EGPRS is implemented as a bolt-on enhancement to 2G and 2.5G GSM and GPRS networks, making it easier for existing GSM carriers to upgrade to it... Whether EDGE is 2G or 3G depends on implementation. While Class 3 and below EDGE devices clearly are not 3G, class 4 and above devices perform at a higher bandwidth than other technologies conventionally considered as 3G (such as 1xRTT). Because of the variability, EDGE is generally classified as 2.75G network technology.
Regardless of what wikipedia maintains, most folks just consider technologies like EDGE and 1xRTT to be 2.5G, i.e. cellular technologies that allow data speeds somewhere around or only moderately above dial-up speed. From PhoneScoop.com:
Although many EDGE phones and devices are theoretically capable of up to 236 Kbps, most EDGE networks are only configured to allow up to 135 Kbps, to conserve spectrum resources. Real-world data rates are usually lower than the maximum.
Cingular themselves also claim speeds for EDGE much slower than the theoretical maximum, on their own site:
The Cingular EDGE network is available in more than 13,000 cities and towns and in areas along 40,000 miles of highways. It provides average data speeds between 75-135Kbps.
Have yet to hear anyone around my friend's cell phone shoppe utter the term "2.75G". And if they did, we'd probably laugh. 8)
(oh, in case anyone's wondering, real-world 1xRTT data speeds are around 60-80 Kbps).
Regardless of what wikipedia maintains, most folks just consider technologies like EDGE and 1xRTT to be 2.5G, i.e. cellphone technologies that allow data speeds somewhere around or only moderately above dial-up speed.
Have yet to hear anyone around my friend's cell phone shoppe utter the term "2.75G". And if they did, we'd probably laugh. 8)
Lack of knowledge isn't understanding.
If the features are there in some versions, then it's up to you to know what they are before buying, and crying afterwards.
If the features are there in some versions, then it's up to you to know what they are before buying, and crying afterwards.
Well, duh. But let's not mistake EDGE to be something it isn't. It isn't really that fast, and it sure isn't 3G, though I've heard the term 'fake 3G' used in reference to it a fair amount. \
Beyond that, I'm not really sure what you're on about?
Cingular had to rewrite their software. Whatever code they wrote belongs to them.
Of course they had to rewrite their voicemail system. And whatever they wrote is there's.
As a side note - my VoIP voicemail has 2 options on it. I can call in and listen to each message one after another, or each voicemail is simply emailed to me separately. It's great - I can just listen to my voicemails in whatever order I want, right in there with my email.0
Apple comes up with lots of innovative ideas. "visual voicemail" is not one of them... though I AM surprised the phone companies haven't bothered, I can only assume that no-one has forced them to evolve. I hope that Cingular and Apple are using existing mobile technologies for their voicemail (ie: a voicemail is sent using MMS, an existing mobile phone technology) rather than a brand new one. It will be much easier for GSM networks around the world to send MMS voice messages than to construct a proprietary Apple product.
Well, duh. But let's not mistake EDGE to be something it isn't. It isn't really that fast, and it sure isn't 3G, though I've heard the term 'fake 3G' used in reference to it a fair amount. \
Beyond that, I'm not really sure what you're on about?
.
I'm on about your making a fuss about the numerical standards. What I'm saying simply is that your friends customers who don't understand them, and your lack of interest in thinking that people shouldn't bother because it's too complex, isn't a good reason for people not to try.
Yes, there are confusing numbers associated with this, but it's like software updates, you have to keep track of what is what. Not only does each company offer different speeds, but they upgrade their systems, and increase that speed. They then often call it something else entirely.
If you don't watch out, and end up with something you aren't happy with, that's your own fault.
I'm using the general "you" here. I'm not talking about you, since you do understand, as far as I can tell.
Of course they had to rewrite their voicemail system. And whatever they wrote is there's.
As a side note - my VoIP voicemail has 2 options on it. I can call in and listen to each message one after another, or each voicemail is simply emailed to me separately. It's great - I can just listen to my voicemails in whatever order I want, right in there with my email.0
Apple comes up with lots of innovative ideas. "visual voicemail" is not one of them... though I AM surprised the phone companies haven't bothered, I can only assume that no-one has forced them to evolve. I hope that Cingular and Apple are using existing mobile technologies for their voicemail (ie: a voicemail is sent using MMS, an existing mobile phone technology) rather than a brand new one. It will be much easier for GSM networks around the world to send MMS voice messages than to construct a proprietary Apple product.
Visual Voicemail is quite a bit simpler to use. You don't have to request any options at all, just select the one you want. It doesn't have to be used through email which seems to me to be more confusing, as it appears, from what you say, to be mixed in with those emails, even if it is flagged. Why would I want to have to go to email to listen to my messages? To totally different communications concepts.
I'm on about your making a fuss about the numerical standards. What I'm saying simply is that your friends customers who don't understand them, and your lack of interest in thinking that people shouldn't bother because it's too complex, isn't a good reason for people not to try.
Yes, there are confusing numbers associated with this, but it's like software updates, you have to keep track of what is what. Not only does each company offer different speeds, but they upgrade their systems, and increase that speed. They then often call it something else entirely.
If you don't watch out, and end up with something you aren't happy with, that's your own fault.
I'm using the general "you" here. I'm not talking about you, since you do understand, as far as I can tell.
I think you misunderstood. Basically, the backstory on this in the cellular world is that many people try to mislead the public on how advanced their technology is by trying to sell it as a higher 'G' than it really is.
For example, you'll occasionally run across someone who insists that 1xRTT or EDGE is a '3G' technology- usually a cell phone salesman trying to sell a phone that uses said technology. But really, 3G to most people means "broadband data speeds", and neither 1xRTT or EDGE truly provides that under real-world conditions. They're really '2.5G', though one can fuss and argue and use technicalities to say otherwise. But, as the Brits would say, that's just a bunch of bollocks.
Sorry to make a 'fuss' about it, but its something that my friend runs into every day, and I think its important that such technologies aren't misleadingly labelled. Far from thinking the common man shouldn't bother trying to understand the differences, I think they should be informed of them, which is what I did. Happy now, Melsy?
I think you misunderstood. Basically, the backstory on this in the cellular world is that many people try to mislead the public on how advanced their technology is by trying to sell it as a higher 'G' than it really is.
For example, you'll occasionally run across someone who insists that 1xRTT or EDGE is a '3G' technology- usually a cell phone salesman trying to sell a phone that uses said technology. But really, 3G to most people means "broadband data speeds", and neither 1xRTT or EDGE truly provides that under real-world conditions. They're really '2.5G', though one can fuss and argue and use technicalities to say otherwise. But, as the Brits would say, that's just a bunch of bollocks.
Sorry to make a 'fuss' about it, but its something that my friend runs into every day, and I think its important that such technologies aren't misleadingly labelled. Far from thinking the common man shouldn't bother trying to understand the differences, I think they should be informed of them, which is what I did. Happy now, Melsy?
.
Well, Bilbo, not really. The numbers, other than the official ones, which don't tell us much either, are generally just a way of giving people an idea as to how close the product is to the next higher, or lower, standard, as far as both speed, and feature set goes. It can help to have people understand, if something can be said to be, say, 50% or 75% between the old standard and the new one. So that would translate to 2.50 or 2.75.
It's not entirely accurate, but it gives people an idea.
I see this used in articles about the field all of the time. It's the way we think. It works best for people who don't understand, or don't want to understand, the actual technical specs.
You are apparently one of those who thinks everyone is out to deceive. I'm not.
Well, Bilbo, not really. The numbers, other than the official ones, which don't tell us much either, are generally just a way of giving people an idea as to how close the product is to the next higher, or lower, standard, as far as both speed, and feature set goes. It can help to have people understand, if something can be said to be, say, 50% or 75% between the old standard and the new one. So that would translate to 2.50 or 2.75.
It's not entirely accurate, but it gives people an idea.
I see this used in articles about the field all of the time. It's the way we think. It works best for people who don't understand, or don't want to understand, the actual technical specs.
You are apparently one of those who thinks everyone is out to deceive. I'm not.
Sorry Mel, but the reality on the cell store floor is different than you're apparently aware of. Its not an overstatement to say these guys are in the same class as used car salesmen, and my friend would sadly agree.
I don't know which 'numbers' you are complaining about. All I know is that in cell phone stores, if you tell 90% of folks that such-and-such technology gives data speeds of 75 to 135 Kbps, they'll go "Ohh..." and only pretend to know what you're talking about. But if you give them the '2.5G is around dial-up speed' and '3G is broadband speed' model, they get that. 8)
EDGE isn't even really '2.75G', not in the real world. '2.75G' implies near-broadband speeds, and real-world EDGE is nowhere near broadband. Perhaps you begin to see what I'm getting at.
Oh, and my name is more a parody of LOTR than a serious name. It refers to the practice in online games of 'tea-bagging' an opponent. One of my online handles is "Scroto T. Baggins". You'll get it if you're a gamer.
Sorry Mel, but the reality on the cell store floor is different than you're apparently aware of. Its not an overstatement to say these guys are in the same class as used car salesmen, 'truthiness'-wise (to quote GW Bush), and my friend would sadly agree.
I don't know which 'numbers' you are complaining about. All I know is that in cell phone stores, if you tell 90% of folks that such-and-such technology gives data speeds of 75 to 135 Kbps, they'll go "Ohh..." and only pretend to know what you're talking about. But if you give them the '2.5G is dial-up speed' and '3G is broadband speed' model, they get that. 8)
EDGE isn't even really '2.75G', not in the real world. '2.75G' implies near-broadband speeds, and real-world EDGE is nowhere near broadband. Perhaps you begin to see what I'm getting at.
Oh, and my name is more a parody of LOTR than a serious name. It refers to the practice in online games of 'tea-bagging' an opponent. One of my online handles is "Scroto T. Baggins". You'll get it if you're a gamer.
.
From this post, I can see that we're not really THAT far apart in what we are saying. You're emphising one aspect, and I'm emphising the other.
We both agree that the tech specs aren't useful for most people, and the 2.5 etc is.
EDGE is better than you're giving it credit for, but presently, Cingular, er, AT&T's implemintation is not. It's on the l9wer end of what they can do with it. Perhaps, when the iPhone is actually available they will have worked to upgrade their speeds.
No, I'm not much of a gamer these days. Baggins still comes from Tolkien though.
Visual Voicemail is quite a bit simpler to use. You don't have to request any options at all, just select the one you want. It doesn't have to be used through email which seems to me to be more confusing, as it appears, from what you say, to be mixed in with those emails, even if it is flagged. Why would I want to have to go to email to listen to my messages? To totally different communications concepts.
First (to get it out of the way), the VoIP had 2 options when I set it up, not every time I go to use it (though really... having 2 ways of doing one thing is pretty fundamental to ease of use).
Apart from that, all you're saying is that you don't want your voicemails mixed in with your emails. Sounds fine to me. If a mobile network provider sends them as MMSes they'll appear as MMSes (not email)...
Anyway... interface discussions aside (though I like them) I'm just hoping Apple uses as much existing technology as possible so that networks around the world can offer Apple services easily.
First (to get it out of the way), the VoIP had 2 options when I set it up, not every time I go to use it (though really... having 2 ways of doing one thing is pretty fundamental to ease of use).
Apart from that, all you're saying is that you don't want your voicemails mixed in with your emails. Sounds fine to me. If a mobile network provider sends them as MMSes they'll appear as MMSes (not email)...
Anyway... interface discussions aside (though I like them) I'm just hoping Apple uses as much existing technology as possible so that networks around the world can offer Apple services easily.
I garee that it would only take one set-up. But, you know how people are. How many read the manual? Not many. Most won't even realise that they CAN set it up that way, esp. if they're coming from a different place where it can't be done. Apple's is easier. Just poke it and see what happens.
I would hope that the other networks around the world would somehow be able to use this tech as well. I'm fairly sure that it will be done.
From this post, I can see that we're not really THAT far apart in what we are saying. You're emphising one aspect, and I'm emphising the other.
We both agree that the tech specs aren't useful for most people, and the 2.5 etc is.
EDGE is better than you're giving it credit for, but presently, Cingular, er, AT&T's implemintation is not. It's on the l9wer end of what they can do with it. Perhaps, when the iPhone is actually available they will have worked to upgrade their speeds.
No, I'm not much of a gamer these days. Baggins still comes from Tolkien though.
Glad we agree. I would not hold my breath for EDGE to get much better though... all the major carriers are in the process of replacing it with 3G. Improved EDGE may eventually matter out in the boondocks, where it may not be cost-effective to deploy 3G, but probably not anywhere else.
Baggins does come from Tolkein, but trust me, tea bagging is something you'll find in no Tolkein book anywhere, not even in the appendices.
Comments
Lurie similarly drew attention to the necessarily exclusive multi-year contract Apple signed with the American cell service that gives iPhone customers the "luxury" of requiring a Cingular subscription. Apple, he added, also agreed to help stop the "bad guys" who would unofficially unlock the iPhone or its SIM card for use on competing networks.
It's crap like that, that's starting to make the iPhone RDF wear off on me. I don't know if I'm as interested as I used to be.
Yup, we should expect hacks to get unlocked grey exports around the world. Well, not grey, but essentially the unlocked iPhone black market shipping to Europe, Australia, Asia, etc. etc.
The June/July 2007 model though should take a few months to crack, and by the time the unlocked phones are out and about they'll be available globally around the start of 2008.
Yeah until cingular forces apple to make black market ones not interface with itunes or something, everytime you connect your ipod it shows your serial and everything, it's probably not impossible to have it note when the connected phone is unregistered.
And black market ones won't have a warranty anyways, usually I wouldn't care but that makes me weary when it comes to iphone.
And why don't the American Idol site and Cingular's own site say anything about it?
Seems like wasted opportunities.
The voice mail function requires that the network it's being retreived from work with the feature. It's not strictly an Apple product, nor could it be.
That's exactly my point, but doesn't answer my question. Of course the visual-voice-mail requires a change in how Cingular handles voicemail, as well as a specific implementation on the iPhone.
The point is that the new method of handling voicemail may be Apple-only. I hope, instead, that the visual-voice-mail is just receiving multimedia-messages (each of which contains the voicemail). I wondered years ago why the phone companies didn't do this - EVERY phone that handles MMS could handle this form of voicemail.
So my question... my wondering... was Cingular does this.
10 million units is his target for calendar year 2008. He didn't give a target for 2007.
That's exactly my point, but doesn't answer my question. Of course the visual-voice-mail requires a change in how Cingular handles voicemail, as well as a specific implementation on the iPhone.
The point is that the new method of handling voicemail may be Apple-only. I hope, instead, that the visual-voice-mail is just receiving multimedia-messages (each of which contains the voicemail). I wondered years ago why the phone companies didn't do this - EVERY phone that handles MMS could handle this form of voicemail.
So my question... my wondering... was Cingular does this.
Cingular had to rewrite their software. Whatever code they wrote belongs to them.
Does this mean that Apple doesn't own the concept? Maybe.
But someone else on another site said that a concept similar to this has already been done. Is it equivelant? I don't know. This is something we might be reading more about in the near future once things settle down.
Yeah, it is worthwhile refreshing ourselves about EDGE (from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhance..._GSM_Evolution)
Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE) or Enhanced GPRS (EGPRS), is a digital mobile phone technology that allows for increased data transmission rate and improved data transmission reliability. It is generally classified as a 2.75G network technology. EDGE has been introduced into GSM networks around the world since 2003, initially in North America.
EDGE/EGPRS is implemented as a bolt-on enhancement to 2G and 2.5G GSM and GPRS networks, making it easier for existing GSM carriers to upgrade to it... Whether EDGE is 2G or 3G depends on implementation. While Class 3 and below EDGE devices clearly are not 3G, class 4 and above devices perform at a higher bandwidth than other technologies conventionally considered as 3G (such as 1xRTT). Because of the variability, EDGE is generally classified as 2.75G network technology.
Regardless of what wikipedia maintains, most folks just consider technologies like EDGE and 1xRTT to be 2.5G, i.e. cellular technologies that allow data speeds somewhere around or only moderately above dial-up speed. From PhoneScoop.com:
Although many EDGE phones and devices are theoretically capable of up to 236 Kbps, most EDGE networks are only configured to allow up to 135 Kbps, to conserve spectrum resources. Real-world data rates are usually lower than the maximum.
Cingular themselves also claim speeds for EDGE much slower than the theoretical maximum, on their own site:
The Cingular EDGE network is available in more than 13,000 cities and towns and in areas along 40,000 miles of highways. It provides average data speeds between 75-135Kbps.
Have yet to hear anyone around my friend's cell phone shoppe utter the term "2.75G". And if they did, we'd probably laugh. 8)
(oh, in case anyone's wondering, real-world 1xRTT data speeds are around 60-80 Kbps).
.
Regardless of what wikipedia maintains, most folks just consider technologies like EDGE and 1xRTT to be 2.5G, i.e. cellphone technologies that allow data speeds somewhere around or only moderately above dial-up speed.
Have yet to hear anyone around my friend's cell phone shoppe utter the term "2.75G". And if they did, we'd probably laugh. 8)
Lack of knowledge isn't understanding.
If the features are there in some versions, then it's up to you to know what they are before buying, and crying afterwards.
Lack of knowledge isn't understanding.
If the features are there in some versions, then it's up to you to know what they are before buying, and crying afterwards.
Well, duh. But let's not mistake EDGE to be something it isn't. It isn't really that fast, and it sure isn't 3G, though I've heard the term 'fake 3G' used in reference to it a fair amount.
Beyond that, I'm not really sure what you're on about?
.
Cingular had to rewrite their software. Whatever code they wrote belongs to them.
Of course they had to rewrite their voicemail system. And whatever they wrote is there's.
As a side note - my VoIP voicemail has 2 options on it. I can call in and listen to each message one after another, or each voicemail is simply emailed to me separately. It's great - I can just listen to my voicemails in whatever order I want, right in there with my email.0
Apple comes up with lots of innovative ideas. "visual voicemail" is not one of them... though I AM surprised the phone companies haven't bothered, I can only assume that no-one has forced them to evolve. I hope that Cingular and Apple are using existing mobile technologies for their voicemail (ie: a voicemail is sent using MMS, an existing mobile phone technology) rather than a brand new one. It will be much easier for GSM networks around the world to send MMS voice messages than to construct a proprietary Apple product.
Well, duh. But let's not mistake EDGE to be something it isn't. It isn't really that fast, and it sure isn't 3G, though I've heard the term 'fake 3G' used in reference to it a fair amount.
Beyond that, I'm not really sure what you're on about?
.
I'm on about your making a fuss about the numerical standards. What I'm saying simply is that your friends customers who don't understand them, and your lack of interest in thinking that people shouldn't bother because it's too complex, isn't a good reason for people not to try.
Yes, there are confusing numbers associated with this, but it's like software updates, you have to keep track of what is what. Not only does each company offer different speeds, but they upgrade their systems, and increase that speed. They then often call it something else entirely.
If you don't watch out, and end up with something you aren't happy with, that's your own fault.
I'm using the general "you" here. I'm not talking about you, since you do understand, as far as I can tell.
Of course they had to rewrite their voicemail system. And whatever they wrote is there's.
As a side note - my VoIP voicemail has 2 options on it. I can call in and listen to each message one after another, or each voicemail is simply emailed to me separately. It's great - I can just listen to my voicemails in whatever order I want, right in there with my email.0
Apple comes up with lots of innovative ideas. "visual voicemail" is not one of them... though I AM surprised the phone companies haven't bothered, I can only assume that no-one has forced them to evolve. I hope that Cingular and Apple are using existing mobile technologies for their voicemail (ie: a voicemail is sent using MMS, an existing mobile phone technology) rather than a brand new one. It will be much easier for GSM networks around the world to send MMS voice messages than to construct a proprietary Apple product.
Visual Voicemail is quite a bit simpler to use. You don't have to request any options at all, just select the one you want. It doesn't have to be used through email which seems to me to be more confusing, as it appears, from what you say, to be mixed in with those emails, even if it is flagged. Why would I want to have to go to email to listen to my messages? To totally different communications concepts.
I'm on about your making a fuss about the numerical standards. What I'm saying simply is that your friends customers who don't understand them, and your lack of interest in thinking that people shouldn't bother because it's too complex, isn't a good reason for people not to try.
Yes, there are confusing numbers associated with this, but it's like software updates, you have to keep track of what is what. Not only does each company offer different speeds, but they upgrade their systems, and increase that speed. They then often call it something else entirely.
If you don't watch out, and end up with something you aren't happy with, that's your own fault.
I'm using the general "you" here. I'm not talking about you, since you do understand, as far as I can tell.
I think you misunderstood. Basically, the backstory on this in the cellular world is that many people try to mislead the public on how advanced their technology is by trying to sell it as a higher 'G' than it really is.
For example, you'll occasionally run across someone who insists that 1xRTT or EDGE is a '3G' technology- usually a cell phone salesman trying to sell a phone that uses said technology. But really, 3G to most people means "broadband data speeds", and neither 1xRTT or EDGE truly provides that under real-world conditions. They're really '2.5G', though one can fuss and argue and use technicalities to say otherwise. But, as the Brits would say, that's just a bunch of bollocks.
Sorry to make a 'fuss' about it, but its something that my friend runs into every day, and I think its important that such technologies aren't misleadingly labelled. Far from thinking the common man shouldn't bother trying to understand the differences, I think they should be informed of them, which is what I did. Happy now, Melsy?
.
I think you misunderstood. Basically, the backstory on this in the cellular world is that many people try to mislead the public on how advanced their technology is by trying to sell it as a higher 'G' than it really is.
For example, you'll occasionally run across someone who insists that 1xRTT or EDGE is a '3G' technology- usually a cell phone salesman trying to sell a phone that uses said technology. But really, 3G to most people means "broadband data speeds", and neither 1xRTT or EDGE truly provides that under real-world conditions. They're really '2.5G', though one can fuss and argue and use technicalities to say otherwise. But, as the Brits would say, that's just a bunch of bollocks.
Sorry to make a 'fuss' about it, but its something that my friend runs into every day, and I think its important that such technologies aren't misleadingly labelled. Far from thinking the common man shouldn't bother trying to understand the differences, I think they should be informed of them, which is what I did. Happy now, Melsy?
.
Well, Bilbo, not really. The numbers, other than the official ones, which don't tell us much either, are generally just a way of giving people an idea as to how close the product is to the next higher, or lower, standard, as far as both speed, and feature set goes. It can help to have people understand, if something can be said to be, say, 50% or 75% between the old standard and the new one. So that would translate to 2.50 or 2.75.
It's not entirely accurate, but it gives people an idea.
I see this used in articles about the field all of the time. It's the way we think. It works best for people who don't understand, or don't want to understand, the actual technical specs.
You are apparently one of those who thinks everyone is out to deceive. I'm not.
Well, Bilbo, not really. The numbers, other than the official ones, which don't tell us much either, are generally just a way of giving people an idea as to how close the product is to the next higher, or lower, standard, as far as both speed, and feature set goes. It can help to have people understand, if something can be said to be, say, 50% or 75% between the old standard and the new one. So that would translate to 2.50 or 2.75.
It's not entirely accurate, but it gives people an idea.
I see this used in articles about the field all of the time. It's the way we think. It works best for people who don't understand, or don't want to understand, the actual technical specs.
You are apparently one of those who thinks everyone is out to deceive. I'm not.
Sorry Mel, but the reality on the cell store floor is different than you're apparently aware of. Its not an overstatement to say these guys are in the same class as used car salesmen, and my friend would sadly agree.
I don't know which 'numbers' you are complaining about. All I know is that in cell phone stores, if you tell 90% of folks that such-and-such technology gives data speeds of 75 to 135 Kbps, they'll go "Ohh..." and only pretend to know what you're talking about. But if you give them the '2.5G is around dial-up speed' and '3G is broadband speed' model, they get that. 8)
EDGE isn't even really '2.75G', not in the real world. '2.75G' implies near-broadband speeds, and real-world EDGE is nowhere near broadband. Perhaps you begin to see what I'm getting at.
Oh, and my name is more a parody of LOTR than a serious name. It refers to the practice in online games of 'tea-bagging' an opponent. One of my online handles is "Scroto T. Baggins". You'll get it if you're a gamer.
.
Sorry Mel, but the reality on the cell store floor is different than you're apparently aware of. Its not an overstatement to say these guys are in the same class as used car salesmen, 'truthiness'-wise (to quote GW Bush), and my friend would sadly agree.
I don't know which 'numbers' you are complaining about. All I know is that in cell phone stores, if you tell 90% of folks that such-and-such technology gives data speeds of 75 to 135 Kbps, they'll go "Ohh..." and only pretend to know what you're talking about. But if you give them the '2.5G is dial-up speed' and '3G is broadband speed' model, they get that. 8)
EDGE isn't even really '2.75G', not in the real world. '2.75G' implies near-broadband speeds, and real-world EDGE is nowhere near broadband. Perhaps you begin to see what I'm getting at.
Oh, and my name is more a parody of LOTR than a serious name. It refers to the practice in online games of 'tea-bagging' an opponent. One of my online handles is "Scroto T. Baggins". You'll get it if you're a gamer.
.
From this post, I can see that we're not really THAT far apart in what we are saying. You're emphising one aspect, and I'm emphising the other.
We both agree that the tech specs aren't useful for most people, and the 2.5 etc is.
EDGE is better than you're giving it credit for, but presently, Cingular, er, AT&T's implemintation is not. It's on the l9wer end of what they can do with it. Perhaps, when the iPhone is actually available they will have worked to upgrade their speeds.
No, I'm not much of a gamer these days. Baggins still comes from Tolkien though.
Visual Voicemail is quite a bit simpler to use. You don't have to request any options at all, just select the one you want. It doesn't have to be used through email which seems to me to be more confusing, as it appears, from what you say, to be mixed in with those emails, even if it is flagged. Why would I want to have to go to email to listen to my messages? To totally different communications concepts.
First (to get it out of the way), the VoIP had 2 options when I set it up, not every time I go to use it (though really... having 2 ways of doing one thing is pretty fundamental to ease of use).
Apart from that, all you're saying is that you don't want your voicemails mixed in with your emails. Sounds fine to me. If a mobile network provider sends them as MMSes they'll appear as MMSes (not email)...
Anyway... interface discussions aside (though I like them) I'm just hoping Apple uses as much existing technology as possible so that networks around the world can offer Apple services easily.
First (to get it out of the way), the VoIP had 2 options when I set it up, not every time I go to use it (though really... having 2 ways of doing one thing is pretty fundamental to ease of use).
Apart from that, all you're saying is that you don't want your voicemails mixed in with your emails. Sounds fine to me. If a mobile network provider sends them as MMSes they'll appear as MMSes (not email)...
Anyway... interface discussions aside (though I like them) I'm just hoping Apple uses as much existing technology as possible so that networks around the world can offer Apple services easily.
I garee that it would only take one set-up. But, you know how people are. How many read the manual? Not many. Most won't even realise that they CAN set it up that way, esp. if they're coming from a different place where it can't be done. Apple's is easier. Just poke it and see what happens.
I would hope that the other networks around the world would somehow be able to use this tech as well. I'm fairly sure that it will be done.
From this post, I can see that we're not really THAT far apart in what we are saying. You're emphising one aspect, and I'm emphising the other.
We both agree that the tech specs aren't useful for most people, and the 2.5 etc is.
EDGE is better than you're giving it credit for, but presently, Cingular, er, AT&T's implemintation is not. It's on the l9wer end of what they can do with it. Perhaps, when the iPhone is actually available they will have worked to upgrade their speeds.
No, I'm not much of a gamer these days. Baggins still comes from Tolkien though.
Glad we agree. I would not hold my breath for EDGE to get much better though... all the major carriers are in the process of replacing it with 3G. Improved EDGE may eventually matter out in the boondocks, where it may not be cost-effective to deploy 3G, but probably not anywhere else.
Baggins does come from Tolkein, but trust me, tea bagging is something you'll find in no Tolkein book anywhere, not even in the appendices.
.