Even ATT, who still has a fairly modest (though improving) 3G network by world standards, claims 600 to 1.4 Mbps real-world for their 3G network, versus 75 to 135 kbps for their own EDGE network. This is from their own website. If you're in a very good area, you might get up to 180-200 kbps from ATT's EDGE, still nowhere near their 3G speeds.
People who think 3G is only "slightly" faster than EDGE are probably looking at comparos of certain non-Apple 3G smartphones using slow minibrowsers and slow cpus. Versus some of those, yes, the EDGE iPhone, running the much better Safari mobile browser, and having a faster cpu, can almost keep up. But... what happens when the iPhone has Safari and a fast cpu AND 3G?
A 3G iPhone should positively FLY on the 'net, compared to both the EDGE iPhone and many competing 3G smartphones. That's why ppl are so excited.
Could it be that the national agreements to tie the current iPhone to a specific carrier, do not apply to a new model ? Have we seen the legal agreements ? Given AT&T supposedly made a big investment in rolling out better EDGE service (sic!) for the iPhone, the existing deal may be specific to a GSM-only device. Apple may have a loophole for a 3G iPhone, and I would be very surprised if both Apple and AT&T did not have some kind of exit clause if the original iPhone deal suited neither party had it been a flop.
Call me suspicious, but with O2 Ireland now providing the iPhone without the much hyped Visual Voicemail, and the >20% unlocked iPhones out there, Apple must be thinking something different (pun intended) this time around with a 3G model. With the SDK now released and faster data links, could a 3rd party could offer features like visual voicemail or even better unified communications offerings.
I don't understand as to why Apple would keep both the 2g iPhone and the 3g when it comes out instead of replacing them, 3g is much better quality. 3G technologies enable network operators to offer users a wider range of more advanced services while achieving greater network capacity through improved spectral efficiency. Services include wide-area wireless voice telephony and broadband wireless data, all in a mobile environment. Typically, they provide service at 5-10 Mb per second. It would also open up features on the iPhone such as video chatting, and what not--possibly more networkign features. The 2g is up to get replaced with a 3g, prices should stay the same, even though I have a feeling for a newer model coming in at a $100 more being a 32Gb iPhone rather than an 16GB one, and having both, like the iPod touch.
Could it be that the national agreements to tie the current iPhone to a specific carrier, do not apply to a new model ? Have we seen the legal agreements ? Given AT&T supposedly made a big investment in rolling out better EDGE service (sic!) for the iPhone, the existing deal may be specific to a GSM-only device. Apple may have a loophole for a 3G iPhone, and I would be very surprised if both Apple and AT&T did not have some kind of exit clause if the original iPhone deal suited neither party had it been a flop.
Call me suspicious, but with O2 Ireland now providing the iPhone without the much hyped Visual Voicemail, and the >20% unlocked iPhones out there, Apple must be thinking something different (pun intended) this time around with a 3G model. With the SDK now released and faster data links, could a 3rd party could offer features like visual voicemail or even better unified communications offerings.
Just a thought.
Smudgeer
Well, it wouldn't make any sense to lock yourself to a multi-year exclusive agreement to a specific phone model when mobile phones goes out of style in 1 year. Also --- it was the European carriers that specifically enlarged their EDGE networks for the European iphone, not AT&T. European carriers HAD to deploy 3G networks by a certain date by their 3G licenses --- therefore they didn't deploy EDGE in the first place. AT&T never had such restrictions so they upgraded from GPRS to EDGE and then from EDGE to 3G.
It wouldn't make sense if Apple makes a pink version of iphone --- calls it a different model and be able to sell it to a second carrier that is not AT&T.
Considering that the SDK doesn't allow you to do anything on core systems (i.e. no running in the background) --- how could 3rd party even offer something like visual voicemail or unified communications offerings.
I cannot believe an investment analyst would think that 3G would be such a huge deal that millions more phones would be sold on that feature alone. EDGE isn't THAT slow (try using 1xRTT on an old Sprint phone -- THAT is slow!) 3G isn't exactly fiber optic speed. It's not even WiFi speed. Not even CABLE MODEM speed! Sheesh. This smells way more of stock hype than anything.
I don't know what kind of cable modem you're using, but here in Munich Germany, I get 7.2mbit/s with a 3G card in my laptop.
I'm sorry, 3G is miles and miles ahead of EDGE in regards to its capability. Whether they have a crappy implementation in America is beside the point.
I can tell you, people in Europe have been waiting for this. Buying a phone in Europe with no 3G is like buying a phone with a black and white screen. If you know what you're talking about at all, you just don't do it.
Maybe you need to look further than your own back yard before you start telling everyone that it's not a big deal.
Is 3G faster? Yes, but only slightly more so. But because everyone -- esp. outside the US -- has bought into the hype and because that's how many non-US phones are being sold these days, it's here to stay, unfortunately.
I'd like to make it clear that when we're talking about a 3G iPhone, what we really mean is an HSDPA enabled iPhone. So yes, 3G is FAR faster than EDGE. We're talking about speeds of 1.8mbps, 3.6mpbs and 7.2mbps etc etc. This is *exactly* what the iPhone needs for a device that is touted as an internet gateway.
I think 3G will be faster, but I agree with many here that it's not necessarily such a blow out as some of the theoretical bandwidth numbers imply. Basically, 3G does have much faster bandwidth numbers, but you also have to take into account latency, error rates, and CPU load. Edge may well have an advantage in all of these categories, and that helps to narrow the big bandwidth lead that 3G has. See here.
Look at it this way. Edge might consume less power, but you are also actively using the device for longer while you wait for the data to trickle through. With 3G and HSDPA you're done and dusted much quicker and have to device asleep and back in your pocket much sooner, and the whole experience has been more pleasing because it's quick and efficient.
boygeniusreport did a test with edge, vs 3g, vs wifi.
basically the phones all outputted about the same. it's not the speed that bottlenecks the data, it's the phones processor speed. the only real time you will notice is when tethering your phone to your computer, which we know is a no-no with the iphone data plan.
I cannot believe an investment analyst would think that 3G would be such a huge deal that millions more phones would be sold on that feature alone.
3G alone will allow Apple to be considered a serious phone maker in Japan, China and India. There are probably close to 1 million iPhones there now but when the markets are open, and with a 3G phone, I think Apple could sell as many iPhones in one quarter as it did for the whole of 2007.
3G alone will allow Apple to be considered a serious phone maker in Japan, China and India. There are probably close to 1 million iPhones there now but when the markets are open, and with a 3G phone, I think Apple could sell as many iPhones in one quarter as it did for the whole of 2007.
I think 3G is just a nice buzz word and warm feeling people experience. On a phone, 3G is just not faster than what we have now on the iPhone to warrant flood gates opening.
Now, saying that Apple was going to let Verizon in on the fun, now that would unleash chaos. I would beat Apple couldn't keep up with demand for 6 months.
The only two factors that will continue to hamper wide and deep adoption of the iPhone are:
a) the price
b) at&t
10 million phones shows that Apple does not intend of have wide and deep adoption.
Quote:
AT&T, the leading GSM carrier still has nowhere near the 3G/UMTS coverage that Verizon has with it's 3G/EVDO service, which obviously blows since the iPhone is tied to AT&T.
The other part of know is that the iPhone on EDGE gets twice the use of both Verizon and Sprint EVDO combined.
Quote:
I can tell you, people in Europe have been waiting for this. Buying a phone in Europe with no 3G is like buying a phone with a black and white screen. If you know what you're talking about at all, you just don't do it.
This is not reflected in mobile data marketshare and real world usage.
Mobile Safari holds number two behind Nokia in mobile browser marketshare. Even though Nokia sells about 6 times as many phones as the iPhone has sold.
O2 UK reports the iPhone is generating "unheard of mobile data use". Data traffic so high that it strains O2's network.
Quote:
Now, saying that Apple was going to let Verizon in on the fun, now that would unleash chaos. I would beat Apple couldn't keep up with demand for 6 months.
I agree for the people who like Verizon it would be better. But AT&T is actually growing faster.
Quote:
A 3G iPhone should positively FLY on the 'net, compared to both the EDGE iPhone and many competing 3G smartphones. That's why ppl are so excited.
I agree this will be the case with the next iPhone. But would not have necessarily provided a better experience last year.
Mobile Safari holds number two behind Nokia in mobile browser marketshare. Even though Nokia sells about 6 times as many phones as the iPhone has sold.
I guess you're talking about specific Nokia phones. Overall Nokia phones outsell iPhone 1 to 100.
I guess you're talking about specific Nokia phones. Overall Nokia phones outsell iPhone 1 to 100.
The discussion was about mobile browser usage, not phone ownership. Most of those Nokia phones have nothing to do with browser usage--and the ones that do have browsers are often clunky and underutilized. People may use the browser on some Nokia models but it is often a difficult and annoying experience. On the other hand, the iPhone, by most accounts, stimulates and invites internet usage.
The discussion was about mobile browser usage, not phone ownership. Most of those Nokia phones have nothing to do with browser usage--and the ones that do have browsers are often clunky and underutilized. People may use the browser on some Nokia models but it is often a difficult and annoying experience. On the other hand, the iPhone, by most accounts, stimulates and invites internet usage.
I own both the iPhone and N95, both of which are in the same price range. I'd give away my iPhone any day over the N95. There really isn't anything in the iPhone that my Nokia can't do,
but tons of things in the N95 that the iPhone doesn't have. For starters, slow 2.5G connection doesn't really "stimulate and invite internet usage".
I own both the iPhone and N95, both of which are in the same price range. I'd give away my iPhone any day over the N95. There really isn't anything in the iPhone that my Nokia can't do,
but tons of things in the N95 that the iPhone doesn't have. For starters, slow 2.5G connection doesn't really "stimulate and invite internet usage".
You got me there--I don't own either.
That is why I had to couch my post with "by most accounts" and "most Nokia phones." I certainly cannot compare models I do not own!
Still, hasn't there been a raft of reports showing that the iPhone's browser usage is disproportionately high for its installed base? Why would that be if it is not making people want to use it more than other phones?
Again, I don't really have a dog in this fight, so I have to go by what others say...
Comments
This analyst mis-spoke, that's all.
Or was miss-quoted...
Or was miss-quoted...
And all this time, I thought Kasper was a guy......
And all this time, I thought Kasper was a guy......
I tried it with one "s" and got the dreaded red line.
It didn't look right with "ss" but at least I didn't have that line rebuking me.
(Sorry K)
Is 3G faster? Yes, but only slightly more so.
Gosh, no.
Even ATT, who still has a fairly modest (though improving) 3G network by world standards, claims 600 to 1.4 Mbps real-world for their 3G network, versus 75 to 135 kbps for their own EDGE network. This is from their own website. If you're in a very good area, you might get up to 180-200 kbps from ATT's EDGE, still nowhere near their 3G speeds.
People who think 3G is only "slightly" faster than EDGE are probably looking at comparos of certain non-Apple 3G smartphones using slow minibrowsers and slow cpus. Versus some of those, yes, the EDGE iPhone, running the much better Safari mobile browser, and having a faster cpu, can almost keep up. But... what happens when the iPhone has Safari and a fast cpu AND 3G?
A 3G iPhone should positively FLY on the 'net, compared to both the EDGE iPhone and many competing 3G smartphones. That's why ppl are so excited.
.
Could it be that the national agreements to tie the current iPhone to a specific carrier, do not apply to a new model ? Have we seen the legal agreements ? Given AT&T supposedly made a big investment in rolling out better EDGE service (sic!) for the iPhone, the existing deal may be specific to a GSM-only device. Apple may have a loophole for a 3G iPhone, and I would be very surprised if both Apple and AT&T did not have some kind of exit clause if the original iPhone deal suited neither party had it been a flop.
Call me suspicious, but with O2 Ireland now providing the iPhone without the much hyped Visual Voicemail, and the >20% unlocked iPhones out there, Apple must be thinking something different (pun intended) this time around with a 3G model. With the SDK now released and faster data links, could a 3rd party could offer features like visual voicemail or even better unified communications offerings.
Just a thought.
Smudgeer
Have I missed something ?
Could it be that the national agreements to tie the current iPhone to a specific carrier, do not apply to a new model ? Have we seen the legal agreements ? Given AT&T supposedly made a big investment in rolling out better EDGE service (sic!) for the iPhone, the existing deal may be specific to a GSM-only device. Apple may have a loophole for a 3G iPhone, and I would be very surprised if both Apple and AT&T did not have some kind of exit clause if the original iPhone deal suited neither party had it been a flop.
Call me suspicious, but with O2 Ireland now providing the iPhone without the much hyped Visual Voicemail, and the >20% unlocked iPhones out there, Apple must be thinking something different (pun intended) this time around with a 3G model. With the SDK now released and faster data links, could a 3rd party could offer features like visual voicemail or even better unified communications offerings.
Just a thought.
Smudgeer
Well, it wouldn't make any sense to lock yourself to a multi-year exclusive agreement to a specific phone model when mobile phones goes out of style in 1 year. Also --- it was the European carriers that specifically enlarged their EDGE networks for the European iphone, not AT&T. European carriers HAD to deploy 3G networks by a certain date by their 3G licenses --- therefore they didn't deploy EDGE in the first place. AT&T never had such restrictions so they upgraded from GPRS to EDGE and then from EDGE to 3G.
It wouldn't make sense if Apple makes a pink version of iphone --- calls it a different model and be able to sell it to a second carrier that is not AT&T.
Considering that the SDK doesn't allow you to do anything on core systems (i.e. no running in the background) --- how could 3rd party even offer something like visual voicemail or unified communications offerings.
I cannot believe an investment analyst would think that 3G would be such a huge deal that millions more phones would be sold on that feature alone. EDGE isn't THAT slow (try using 1xRTT on an old Sprint phone -- THAT is slow!) 3G isn't exactly fiber optic speed. It's not even WiFi speed. Not even CABLE MODEM speed! Sheesh. This smells way more of stock hype than anything.
I don't know what kind of cable modem you're using, but here in Munich Germany, I get 7.2mbit/s with a 3G card in my laptop.
I'm sorry, 3G is miles and miles ahead of EDGE in regards to its capability. Whether they have a crappy implementation in America is beside the point.
I can tell you, people in Europe have been waiting for this. Buying a phone in Europe with no 3G is like buying a phone with a black and white screen. If you know what you're talking about at all, you just don't do it.
Maybe you need to look further than your own back yard before you start telling everyone that it's not a big deal.
Is 3G faster? Yes, but only slightly more so. But because everyone -- esp. outside the US -- has bought into the hype and because that's how many non-US phones are being sold these days, it's here to stay, unfortunately.
I'd like to make it clear that when we're talking about a 3G iPhone, what we really mean is an HSDPA enabled iPhone. So yes, 3G is FAR faster than EDGE. We're talking about speeds of 1.8mbps, 3.6mpbs and 7.2mbps etc etc. This is *exactly* what the iPhone needs for a device that is touted as an internet gateway.
basically the phones all outputted about the same. it's not the speed that bottlenecks the data, it's the phones processor speed. the only real time you will notice is when tethering your phone to your computer, which we know is a no-no with the iphone data plan.
I cannot believe an investment analyst would think that 3G would be such a huge deal that millions more phones would be sold on that feature alone.
3G alone will allow Apple to be considered a serious phone maker in Japan, China and India. There are probably close to 1 million iPhones there now but when the markets are open, and with a 3G phone, I think Apple could sell as many iPhones in one quarter as it did for the whole of 2007.
3G alone will allow Apple to be considered a serious phone maker in Japan, China and India. There are probably close to 1 million iPhones there now but when the markets are open, and with a 3G phone, I think Apple could sell as many iPhones in one quarter as it did for the whole of 2007.
I think 3G is just a nice buzz word and warm feeling people experience. On a phone, 3G is just not faster than what we have now on the iPhone to warrant flood gates opening.
Now, saying that Apple was going to let Verizon in on the fun, now that would unleash chaos. I would beat Apple couldn't keep up with demand for 6 months.
The only two factors that will continue to hamper wide and deep adoption of the iPhone are:
a) the price
b) at&t
10 million phones shows that Apple does not intend of have wide and deep adoption.
AT&T, the leading GSM carrier still has nowhere near the 3G/UMTS coverage that Verizon has with it's 3G/EVDO service, which obviously blows since the iPhone is tied to AT&T.
The other part of know is that the iPhone on EDGE gets twice the use of both Verizon and Sprint EVDO combined.
I can tell you, people in Europe have been waiting for this. Buying a phone in Europe with no 3G is like buying a phone with a black and white screen. If you know what you're talking about at all, you just don't do it.
This is not reflected in mobile data marketshare and real world usage.
Mobile Safari holds number two behind Nokia in mobile browser marketshare. Even though Nokia sells about 6 times as many phones as the iPhone has sold.
O2 UK reports the iPhone is generating "unheard of mobile data use". Data traffic so high that it strains O2's network.
Now, saying that Apple was going to let Verizon in on the fun, now that would unleash chaos. I would beat Apple couldn't keep up with demand for 6 months.
I agree for the people who like Verizon it would be better. But AT&T is actually growing faster.
A 3G iPhone should positively FLY on the 'net, compared to both the EDGE iPhone and many competing 3G smartphones. That's why ppl are so excited.
I agree this will be the case with the next iPhone. But would not have necessarily provided a better experience last year.
Mobile Safari holds number two behind Nokia in mobile browser marketshare. Even though Nokia sells about 6 times as many phones as the iPhone has sold.
I guess you're talking about specific Nokia phones. Overall Nokia phones outsell iPhone 1 to 100.
I guess you're talking about specific Nokia phones. Overall Nokia phones outsell iPhone 1 to 100.
The discussion was about mobile browser usage, not phone ownership. Most of those Nokia phones have nothing to do with browser usage--and the ones that do have browsers are often clunky and underutilized. People may use the browser on some Nokia models but it is often a difficult and annoying experience. On the other hand, the iPhone, by most accounts, stimulates and invites internet usage.
The discussion was about mobile browser usage, not phone ownership. Most of those Nokia phones have nothing to do with browser usage--and the ones that do have browsers are often clunky and underutilized. People may use the browser on some Nokia models but it is often a difficult and annoying experience. On the other hand, the iPhone, by most accounts, stimulates and invites internet usage.
I own both the iPhone and N95, both of which are in the same price range. I'd give away my iPhone any day over the N95. There really isn't anything in the iPhone that my Nokia can't do,
but tons of things in the N95 that the iPhone doesn't have. For starters, slow 2.5G connection doesn't really "stimulate and invite internet usage".
I own both the iPhone and N95, both of which are in the same price range. I'd give away my iPhone any day over the N95. There really isn't anything in the iPhone that my Nokia can't do,
but tons of things in the N95 that the iPhone doesn't have. For starters, slow 2.5G connection doesn't really "stimulate and invite internet usage".
You got me there--I don't own either.
That is why I had to couch my post with "by most accounts" and "most Nokia phones." I certainly cannot compare models I do not own!
Still, hasn't there been a raft of reports showing that the iPhone's browser usage is disproportionately high for its installed base? Why would that be if it is not making people want to use it more than other phones?
Again, I don't really have a dog in this fight, so I have to go by what others say...