AT&T confirms ongoing upgrades to double 3G network speeds

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 51
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    I wish I saw 3.6Mb/s. The best I've seen with the Speedtest.net app is 1.52Mb/s, most of the time I "truck along" at about .9Mb/s.
  • Reply 22 of 51
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    This is completely untrue, the iPhone does not have the most expensive plans. $30 is AT&T's standard price for unlimited data for all of its phones, its not a special iPhone price.



    Unlimited every thing on the iPhone is $130, I have a friend who is paying $190 for unlimited everything on his Verizon Storm.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post


    I just hope AT&T doesn't raise it's iPhone pricing plans further, as they are already the most expensive plans for any phone.



  • Reply 23 of 51
    djames42djames42 Posts: 298member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by winterspan View Post


    Exactly, screw the speed upgrades.. They should be spending all their resources on expanding their 3G network and improving coverage in existing 3G areas... Verizon still blows them away in suburban and rural areas, particularly in the west.



    Since LTE is true VOIP, I suspect that even rural areas will get upgrades. Either that or all LTE-compatible phones will also need to have GSM-compatible radios. Seems to me that it would be expensive and wasteful to include a device that supports both traditional voice and voice-over-IP capabilities.
  • Reply 24 of 51
    hittrj01hittrj01 Posts: 753member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post


    Perhaps AT&T is feeling pressure by Verizon, who's lobbying Apple to allow it to carry the iPhone.



    The ten-fold increase in capacity is very interesting. I have a feeling this means the iPhone will have video chat capabilities in the next version, which would be awesome.



    I just hope AT&T doesn't raise it's iPhone pricing plans further, as they are already the most expensive plans for any phone.



    I certainly agree that AT&T (and telecom companies in general) charge way too much for their services, but last I checked, this is a capitalist country, so this stuff is fair game as long as we the consumer keep paying for it.



    Anyway, that's not my point. My point is, ignorant comments like the one above here are the ones that irk me. Yes, the iPhone has more expensive monthly charges than your typical free phone or your precious RAZR from the past. But go get a Blackberry, WinMo phone, Palm, or any other smartphone, and tell me if you monthly bill magically goes down. It won't. The iPhone costs no more or less than it's competitors. Price out an iPhone next to a Blackberry Bold and let me know if the Bold ends up costing less, then get back to me.
  • Reply 25 of 51
    macslutmacslut Posts: 514member
    This is good news, but I think some people are confused as to what this means.



    There are multiple variables that affect page loads (in order of problem severity):

    1) Connection to the tower

    2) Connection from the tower to the backbone

    3) Rendering power on the iPhone



    The problem with the connection to the tower, most often is a problem with simply connecting to the tower and maintaining a reliable connection. This is by far, AT&T's biggest problem. Not mentioned in this article is the fact that AT&T is aggressively addressing this, even with 3G. The bad news is that they're slightly reducing Edge connectivity to do this. 4G will really help them with connectivity as the spectrum they use will be much better.



    This article deals with increasing the speed that an iPhone can have when it has a reliable connection to a tower, between it and the tower.



    The next issue is the connection from the tower to the backbone. Despite having a huge ramp up in the numbers of iPhones (and others), most towers are rarely, if ever, maxing out. However, there are times when unusual activity happens and you'll find you've got a good connection to the tower, but the speed is still really slow despite it being faster at other times with the same tower. Again, AT&T is addressing this too, and for the most part it's a fairly easy fix.



    The last issue is something rarely discussed, but worth mentioning. The iPhone simply is not the fastest platform for rendering web pages. I hate saying something negative about the love of my life, but there, I did, it's out there. What it does is remarkable in terms of rendering pages the way it does and it does it incredibly efficiently, but if you tether the iPhone and load a page on Safari versus Safari Mobile, you'll see the speed difference is significant. AT&T can't do anything about this last issue, but Apple can, and will. They'll continue to make their software better and it won't be long before we see results coming out of the PA Semi acquisition that will result in more efficient hardware.



    The bottom line though is that we're still very early into this. AT&T has seen the light and is aggressively investing in infrastructure. It's almost scary to think about what the iPhone will be like in 5+ years.
  • Reply 26 of 51
    istinkistink Posts: 250member
    There u go AT&T, give Sprint a run for their money. I love it when companies step up like this. The results are better for everyone.



    I can't even imagine getting speeds like that wirelessly anywhere. That's nuts.
  • Reply 27 of 51
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by djames42 View Post


    Since LTE is true VOIP, I suspect that even rural areas will get upgrades. Either that or all LTE-compatible phones will also need to have GSM-compatible radios. Seems to me that it would be expensive and wasteful to include a device that supports both traditional voice and voice-over-IP capabilities.



    UMTS/HSDPA support voice and data but GSM remains. The newer technologies have smaller cell sizes and the base stations cost more money. Even in small countries with excellent 3G coverage like the UK, phone manufacturers wouldn't dare release a phone without GSM compatibility.



    Even when Verizon rolls out LTE, their phones will be contain a CDMA modem for a long time to come. I'd predict something in the region of 10 years, if not longer.
  • Reply 28 of 51
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    No one should have the expectation of a phone or any hand held device to render software as quickly as a full computer system.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macslut View Post


    The last issue is something rarely discussed, but worth mentioning. The iPhone simply is not the fastest platform for rendering web pages. I hate saying something negative about the love of my life, but there, I did, it's out there. What it does is remarkable in terms of rendering pages the way it does and it does it incredibly efficiently, but if you tether the iPhone and load a page on Safari versus Safari Mobile, you'll see the speed difference is significant. AT&T can't do anything about this last issue, but Apple can, and will.



  • Reply 29 of 51
    dappledapple Posts: 44member
    If the next iPhone is going to offer HSPA speeds of 7.2 mbps, with a theoretical upside of 14.4 mbps, and A.T.&T. is making it clear that they have no intention of offering 14.4 mbps speeds because they prefer to roll out HSPA+ (21 mbps speeds) as their final protocol before their rollout of 4G (LTE), then is it safe to assume that, at the earliest, A.T.&T. HSPA+ will be available in June 2010?



    Otherwise, why would consumers opt for doubling their potential downstream speed (and potential functionality improvements to the iPhone) this June rather than for quadrupling their potential downstream speeds in December or January?
  • Reply 30 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post


    I certainly agree that AT&T (and telecom companies in general) charge way too much for their services, but last I checked, this is a capitalist country, so this stuff is fair game as long as we the consumer keep paying for it.



    Anyway, that's not my point. My point is, ignorant comments like the one above here are the ones that irk me. Yes, the iPhone has more expensive monthly charges than your typical free phone or your precious RAZR from the past. But go get a Blackberry, WinMo phone, Palm, or any other smartphone, and tell me if you monthly bill magically goes down. It won't. The iPhone costs no more or less than it's competitors. Price out an iPhone next to a Blackberry Bold and let me know if the Bold ends up costing less, then get back to me.



    That was a classy reply. Seems to be the norm here.



    FYI, I own an iPhone and love it. Don't get your panties into a knot over some comment about a phone company's fees.
  • Reply 31 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    No one should have the expectation of a phone or any hand held device to render software as quickly as a full computer system.



    Why not? It is a computer, just smaller. The iPhone OS doesn't have to do nearly as much as OSX, so, there's no reason it can't be a bit faster than it is now. Native apps, such as Calendar and SMS, take a bit too long to load right now on the 3G iPhone. I'm hoping that the 3.0 firmware can improve responsiveness of apps like Safari and Contacts.
  • Reply 32 of 51
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    The same reason a notebook will never have the same processing power of a workstation. You cannot have it all, there must be some sacrifice to be small and portable.



    Processing is the major part of it. Even though transistors are shrinking you can still fit millions more of them on a larger die. A tiny ARM processor will never have the ability of a larger desktop processor. The electronic information has to be moved from the radio to memory to processing. A tiny hand held device is not capable of having the through put and latency of a full computer.



    Then there is heat and power. More processing power and faster through put generates more heat. A hand held device is limited to the amount of heat it can generate. Computers have cases and fans designed to dissipate a greater amount of heat.



    A computer is permanently attached to an unlimited power source, there is less concern for the amount of power a computer needs to draw to accomplish its task. A handheld device has to be infinitely more conservative and frugal with its power usage. People already complain about battery life.



    Web sites designed specifically for mobile devices do load much faster than web sites designed for general computers. Mobile web sites use less graphics and pictures, with larger fonts that are simpler to render.







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post


    Why not? It is a computer, just smaller. The iPhone OS doesn't have to do nearly as much as OSX, so, there's no reason it can't be a bit faster than it is now. Native apps, such as Calendar and SMS, take a bit too long to load right now on the 3G iPhone. I'm hoping that the 3.0 firmware can improve responsiveness of apps like Safari and Contacts.



  • Reply 33 of 51
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,422member
    what speed?

    so they say3.6, 7.2, 14 21 what's this

    the best i have EVER gotten was 1.4 (columbus oh) as good as my home cable speed

    so what's the fastest any of you have gotten??

    what they say is not what we get, so big deal right???
  • Reply 34 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    The same reason a notebook will never have the same processing power of a workstation. You cannot have it all, there must be some sacrifice to be small and portable.



    I completely agree. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a mobile OS, which has a small footprint and should be more nimble, to be speedy and fast. Perhaps it has more to do with the processing power inside the device than the OS alone. I sure hope Apple can improve responsiveness just a little in the 3.0 firmware update.
  • Reply 35 of 51
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    i think this is somewhat a matter of perception. When you first get the iPhone it feels fast and responsive. Once you get used to it, it feels like it can take forever to execute. The same thing happens with desktop software. But of course their is always more room for optimization.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post


    I completely agree. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a mobile OS, which has a small footprint and should be more nimble, to be speedy and fast. Perhaps it has more to do with the processing power inside the device than the OS alone. I sure hope Apple can improve responsiveness just a little in the 3.0 firmware update.



  • Reply 36 of 51
    3G service here in downtown Chicago has tanked the past couple of months. The data connection is pretty much useless, showing 3G on iPhone taskbar, but immediately switching to Edge when you open the browser or any app. Then you are lucky if you get any data to download with the Edge icon turning to a dot in some instances. I have been calling every month to get a credit on my account. Phone service is pretty shoddy too with many incoming calls going directly to voicemail and showing up 20-30mins later. If things don't improve soon, I'll be going with another service and getting an ipod touch.
  • Reply 37 of 51
    monstrositymonstrosity Posts: 2,234member
    Well I live in the middle of nowhere in england, our nearest neighbor is a mile away, and today I noticed for the first time I can get 3G.



    Splendid
  • Reply 38 of 51
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,605member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by winterspan View Post


    Exactly, screw the speed upgrades.. They should be spending all their resources on expanding their 3G network and improving coverage in existing 3G areas... Verizon still blows them away in suburban and rural areas, particularly in the west.



    I am in the east and have to have a verizon phone for those areas at&t doesn't hit. I think at&t sucks east and west now.
  • Reply 39 of 51
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,114member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aplnub View Post


    I am in the east and have to have a verizon phone for those areas at&t doesn't hit. I think at&t sucks east and west now.



    We did fairly well with 3G across I-80 in January from Chicago to Scranton, PA. In a few weeks we're driving from Chicago to Dallas and we'll see how well we can do continuous downloads of content from Pandora and AOL Radio. We run a car power adaptor so the battery is not an issue. The audio is fed through a stereo cord from the headphone jack to an AUX input for the car sound system. The car system is equipped with Bluetooth, so phone calls will mute the audio and activate the handsfree feature. It ought to be interesting when we get off the Interstate in rural Oklahoma. I might be lucky to get EDGE out there, let alone 3G.



    https://www.wireless.att.com/olam/lo...e?goto=welcome



    And click "Coverage Viewer"
  • Reply 40 of 51
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nimbusthegreat View Post


    They are by far the worst carrier I've ever had. There have been so many times that I've dropped calls and had complete outages that I stopped counting. Every time I call in they have me go swap out my iPhone with another one (I'm on #3 now and probably headed to #4 very soon) and I still have the same issues with dropped calls.



    I've been told repeatedly that if I want more reliable service I should switch to Edge. I'm sorry, I pay plenty for my 3G service and it should be available to me. Oh, and BTW, I live 3 blocks from downtown Dallas TX so it's not like I'm off in a "fringe" area.



    I will be so happy when Apple finally leaves AT&T for good. As I've said for a while now they need to change their slogan to "AT&T", no bars in more places!" With AT&T as the carrier I describe my iPhone as being "the best phone I've ever owned at everything but being a phone."



    What is it with one, two, or three post commentators who appear to be propaganda plants? Living 3 blocks from Downtown Dallas means nothing if there isn't a triangulation system dispersed throughout that city center. Dallas has a lot of line-of-sight issues and interference zones galore.



    Living in Seattle has the same problems with Qwest and Verizon, not to mention T-Mobile.



    None of these companies can proclaim Nation-wide clear access. It's not a lan line.
Sign In or Register to comment.