AT&T says 3G network to be completed by June

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 42
    ktappektappe Posts: 808member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by json View Post


    Interesting.... in Sweden we already have 7.2 mbit HSDPA systems in place (not covering the entire country though mind you) and 1.4 mbit HSUPA.

    Congratulations to you guys in the US getting mobile broadband!



    Many Europeans continue to not realize just how big the U.S. is. The time it takes to drive across your country would get you 1/10th of the way across the U.S. To blanket the whole country with cell towers is a daunting, if not impossible task. (And, in many cases, unnecessary, as much of the land is inhabited by wheat and the occasional prairie dog.) True, our cell infrastructure (and cost of service) lags South Korea, Japan, and Scandinavia, but let's be fair, this is a big continent. I'm no fan of AT&T but am pretty impressed they got 3G out this fast.
  • Reply 22 of 42
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by l008com View Post


    I would hardly call 800k/1.4m "as speedy as logging onto the high speed Internet service that many consumers enjoy at home" but then again how much do you need to surf the web, on your phone :-)



    Depending on what service you buy, it could be the same bitrate. DSL generally starts at 768kbps down. However, the latency is said to be higher with mobile internet, and phones are usually a lot slower than computers of the same age.
  • Reply 23 of 42
    8corewhore8corewhore Posts: 833member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by json View Post


    Interesting.... in Sweden we already have 7.2 mbit HSDPA systems in place (not covering the entire country though mind you) and 1.4 mbit HSUPA.



    But do we have one (or more) operator(s) for the iPhone??

    NO!!!

    None of the nordic countries have.... are some of us losing our patience??

    YES!!!



    Ok, enough whining from me for now.



    Congratulations to you guys in the US getting mobile broadband!



    ---

    We've had mobile broadband for years in major markets, including through ATT/Cingular, but this news is regarding ATT's finishing its expansion into more markets.
  • Reply 24 of 42
    jsonjson Posts: 54member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ktappe View Post


    Many Europeans continue to not realize just how big the U.S. is. The time it takes to drive across your country would get you 1/10th of the way across the U.S. To blanket the whole country with cell towers is a daunting, if not impossible task. (And, in many cases, unnecessary, as much of the land is inhabited by wheat and the occasional prairie dog.) True, our cell infrastructure (and cost of service) lags South Korea, Japan, and Scandinavia, but let's be fair, this is a big continent. I'm no fan of AT&T but am pretty impressed they got 3G out this fast.



    Yes the US is huge by any standards, and definately so compared to Sweden (Sweden is apparently about the size of California according to wikipedia).



    On the other hand New York for instance seems to have a larger population than the whole of Sweden but should be easier to cover....



    But if I'm not mistaken AT&T have not had the GSM/UMTS 3G technology in their network for that long, have they? (didn't they use to have the AMPS and TDMA system just a few years back?)

    So taking that into consideration it seems they have had a very fast deployment of first GSM and then UMTS 3G.
  • Reply 25 of 42
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by json View Post


    Yes the US is huge by any standards, and definately so compared to Sweden (Sweden is apparently about the size of California according to wikipedia).



    On the other hand New York for instance seems to have a larger population than the whole of Sweden but should be easier to cover....



    But if I'm not mistaken AT&T have not had the GSM/UMTS 3G technology in their network for that long, have they? (didn't they use to have the AMPS and TDMA system just a few years back?)

    So taking that into consideration it seems they have had a very fast deployment of first GSM and then UMTS 3G.



    I tend to use the CIA World Factbook for that info. If I remember correctly, the US has a per capita of 30 per sq km, while Sweden has 300].





    edit: Boy was I off. I may have been thinking of the Netherlands.



    Sweden

    Land Area: 410,934 sq km

    Popualtion:9,045,389 (July 2008 est.)

    = 22





    US and A

    Land Area: 9,161,923 sq km

    Population: 303,824,646 (July 2008 est.)

    = 33
  • Reply 26 of 42
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,422member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RidleyGriff View Post


    Could AT&T's race to upgrade the upload speed of their network have anything to do with the new iPhone having some certain feature that would be expected to make heavy use of uploading data?



    Something like, say, video chatting perhaps?



    ?video ichat
  • Reply 27 of 42
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,274member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by json View Post


    Yes the US is huge by any standards, and definately so compared to Sweden (Sweden is apparently about the size of California according to wikipedia).



    On the other hand New York for instance seems to have a larger population than the whole of Sweden but should be easier to cover....



    But if I'm not mistaken AT&T have not had the GSM/UMTS 3G technology in their network for that long, have they? (didn't they use to have the AMPS and TDMA system just a few years back?)

    So taking that into consideration it seems they have had a very fast deployment of first GSM and then UMTS 3G.



    Yes, it;s tough to cover the entire US.



    For many decades, the phone companies were required to bring service to any individual, if they wanted it. Even if that meant that the company paid $50,000 to bring a line to a single farmhouse. But, we all paid a fee for the companies to do that service.



    When cell came along, if wasn't felt to be a necessity, so no comparible fees were extended for that purpose. same with broadband.



    The estimates are that it will cost Verison over $100 billion, and possibly $200 billion, to cover the entire US with fiber to the home, and that doesn't include the isolated small pockets.



    Putting up tens of thousands of towers also costs tens of billions, as does the cost of upgrading all of those transmitters, etc.



    Even in an old city such as New Youk, which covers a large area, with rivers in between, is difficult to cover, what with the skyscrapers limiting the line of sight of these towers.



    In towns in Europe, where there aren't many buildings over a couple of dozen floors, fewer towers work well enough. But, here, there are towers every few blocks. Getting the right of way is causing problems of its own.
  • Reply 28 of 42
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,274member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I tend to use the CIA World Factbook for that info. If I remember correctly, the US has a per capita of 30 per sq km, while Sweden has 300].





    edit: Boy was I off. I may have been thinking of the Netherlands.



    Sweden

    Land Area: 410,934 sq km

    Popualtion:9,045,389 (July 2008 est.)

    = 22





    US and A

    Land Area: 9,161,923 sq km

    Population: 303,824,646 (July 2008 est.)

    = 33



    You have to look at WHERE these people are. The density itself doesn't say much.



    Look at Australia, for example. A very large country, with a small population. Density is very low. But most people live in a very small part of the territory.



    Look to the Scandinavian countries, where like some other countries, much of the area is uninhabitable.
  • Reply 29 of 42
    merdheadmerdhead Posts: 587member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ktappe View Post


    Many Europeans continue to not realize just how big the U.S. is. The time it takes to drive across your country would get you 1/10th of the way across the U.S. To blanket the whole country with cell towers is a daunting, if not impossible task. (And, in many cases, unnecessary, as much of the land is inhabited by wheat and the occasional prairie dog.) True, our cell infrastructure (and cost of service) lags South Korea, Japan, and Scandinavia, but let's be fair, this is a big continent. I'm no fan of AT&T but am pretty impressed they got 3G out this fast.



    It all depends on where people live. Australia, for instance, is about the same size as the continental US, with a population of about 20M, but 90% of its population live in the large coastal cities. When a phone company says it covers 90% of the population, it means that its got a few cell towers in the major cities. The US population is more dispersed. Sweden may also have greater concentration in the cities.



    Also, this announcement is truly yawn-worthy. So they have rolled out HSPA in the few places where they have 3G. That's hardly "completing the 3G network", which suggests that 3G is everywhere on the network.



    AI is really bad at reporting even the simplest news stories. Can anyone suggest a better Apple news site?
  • Reply 30 of 42
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    You have to look at WHERE these people are. The density itself doesn't say much.



    Look at Australia, for example. A very large country, with a small population. Density is very low. But most people live in a very small part of the territory.



    Look to the Scandinavian countries, where like some other countries, much of the area is uninhabitable.



    Excellent point.
  • Reply 31 of 42
    merdheadmerdhead Posts: 587member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Excellent point.



    Melgross is stealing my thoughts.
  • Reply 32 of 42
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by merdhead View Post


    Melgross is stealing my thoughts.



    I was thinking of the Netherlands which, unlike the scandinavian countries, has a much wider population spread and higher percentage of inhabitable land. I thought it was around 300 last time I checked, but that too is wrong.



    Netherlands

    Land Area: 33,883 sq km

    Population: 16,645,313 (July 2008 est.)

    = 591 people per sq km
  • Reply 33 of 42
    regreg Posts: 832member
    Well AT&T still has 10 more miles straight line distance before it gets to where I live with 3G. At least where I work is now covered. That does not mean that I will go out and buy a new 3G iPhone when my current iPhone works. Maybe in a couple of years there will be some new improvement that I will just have to have. Also we do a lot of camping and hiking and AT&T has terrible coverage on the Appalachian trail. All they have to do to make me happy is improve coverage in western Va, WV, western MD and southwest PA.
  • Reply 34 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post




    US and A

    Land Area: 9,161,923 sq km

    Population: 303,824,646 (July 2008 est.)

    = 33



    You're not counting the prarie dogs and wheat. Do I detect a whif of elitism?
  • Reply 35 of 42
    kendokakendoka Posts: 110member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Look to the Scandinavian countries, where like some other countries, much of the area is uninhabitable.



    "uninhabitable" sounds a bit harsh - like Tjernobyl, Russia...

    Here in Scandinavia 3G covers city regions - but, as in other countries, the sparsely populated areas rely on older protocols.



    I, too, wait for the next gen iPhone - but for me (living in the Northern Wastelands) 3G is irrelevant; I'm waiting for an unJailbreaked iPhone, with Swedish upper ASCII keyboard (åäöÅÄÖ) and sold through an official Swedish carrier.
  • Reply 36 of 42
    mimicmimic Posts: 72member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I tend to use the CIA World Factbook for that info. If I remember correctly, the US has a per capita of 30 per sq km, while Sweden has 300].




    thanks for the link!!
  • Reply 37 of 42
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,274member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kendoka View Post


    "uninhabitable" sounds a bit harsh - like Tjernobyl, Russia...

    Here in Scandinavia 3G covers city regions - but, as in other countries, the sparsely populated areas rely on older protocols.



    I, too, wait for the next gen iPhone - but for me (living in the Northern Wastelands) 3G is irrelevant; I'm waiting for an unJailbreaked iPhone, with Swedish upper ASCII keyboard (åäöÅÄÖ) and sold through an official Swedish carrier.



    Sorry, I didn't mean to sound so harsh. But, I hope people know what I meant.
  • Reply 38 of 42
    pg4gpg4g Posts: 383member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kendoka View Post


    "uninhabitable" sounds a bit harsh - like Tjernobyl, Russia...

    Here in Scandinavia 3G covers city regions - but, as in other countries, the sparsely populated areas rely on older protocols.



    I, too, wait for the next gen iPhone - but for me (living in the Northern Wastelands) 3G is irrelevant; I'm waiting for an unJailbreaked iPhone, with Swedish upper ASCII keyboard (åäöÅÄÖ) and sold through an official Swedish carrier.



    It actually has it in the phone already. When typing, hold down a letter and you get all the variant options.
  • Reply 39 of 42
    jsonjson Posts: 54member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PG4G View Post


    It actually has it in the phone already. When typing, hold down a letter and you get all the variant options.



    Yes they are there, but we want "real keys" for these three letters. Holding down and wait takes too long and these letters are quite, or even very, frequently used.



    There are "hacks" to get them on the keyboard, but..... well..... a hack is a hack....



    It is also possible to let the dictionary handle them as "corrections", but that is not 100% either (impossible to distinguish between for instance words such as "har", "hår" and "här").



    And yes, Apple should be made aware of this and let some Swedes try it out!



    Some OT about population, yes Sweden is a bit like Australia (not the weather though). Most people, somewhere between 80 and 85%, live in the southern third (or 40%) of the country and along the coastline, in towns and cities.

    However it is possible to live just about anywhere (except maybe the mountain tops) so good geographical coverage for mobile telephony is really useful.



    In a city you can always use a lot of WIFI hotspots if you want mobile broadband, but out in the country that is not the case of course. And installing wired telephony and broadband is also difficult and much more expensive than mobile (in general).



    Most homes, I think it is over 99%, have wired telefphone even if it is situated "in the middle of nowhere". But wired broadband, such as ADSL, is not possible for many of them. But mobile broadband is (or at least would be with a few more base stations).
  • Reply 40 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by l008com View Post


    I would hardly call 800k/1.4m "as speedy as logging onto the high speed Internet service that many consumers enjoy at home" but then again how much do you need to surf the web, on your phone :-)



    Don't need so much on the phone, but if it can be bridged to your desktop/laptop you can use tons of bandwidth. I use my V3xx (connected via USB) in place of Comcast HSI when it is degraded or down (which has happened a lot over the past six months). The latency is higher but it's better than dealing with bursts of dropped packets.



    Anyone know if iPhone can be bridged this way? The 3G iPhone will certainly be on my shopping list if it can do that.
Sign In or Register to comment.