I'll leave this ad war garbage up to the carriers. What I do care about is the problems that AT&T has in New York. While AT&T may be deploying the 7.2 3G virtually everywhere, I don't believe that New York isn't one of them. Seriously AT&T, this is the #1 market in the country.
What's going to happen is either Apple will be forced to dump its demands or they'll have to face having their phone on a terribly backwards network next year compared to Verizon's LTE network that should be in over 50 markets by the end of 2010 when AT&T begins merely field testing 4G.
There is always chance Apple starts selling unlocked CDMA/GSM phones for $700 or so.
Then Apple gets its tax and Verizon's customers can have their blessed IP.
According to the article, Verizon's entire data network is 3G, with typical download speeds of 0.6 to 1.4 Mbit.
The article cites AT&T's 2.5G as having typical download speeds of 0.4 Mbit.
I don't see any purpose to conjuring up a 2.75G, other than trying to make this seem like an apples-to-apples comparison when it is not.
0.4 Mbit may "approach" 0.6 Mbit in speed, but by my math, 0.6 Mbit is still 50% higher -- and that is the very bottom of the "typical" range.
While Verison?s ads are good and technically truthful they are misleading. EDGE is commonly referred to as 2.75G so I see now problem with calling it that. 3GPP defined it as a 3G standard but AT&T doesn?t list it as such and still a GSM standard, not UMTS.
Verizon?s EVDO data network may cover a much larger area than AT&T?s UTMS area but I?ve been in areas where EDGE was faster than EVDO. Maybe the tower was saturated, had some issue, was too far away, or simply didn?t have the bandwidth allocated for it, but it possible that in the rural areas where AT&T doesn?t have 3G, Verizon will not have fast EVDO. The minimum doesn?t have to be 600Kbps.
I can see what AT&T objected to their ads, but Verizon has AT&T on the ropes with this one. Unfortunately for Verizon LTE will allow AT&T and T-Mobile to push even further into faster speed and more coverage with cheaper upgrades with more developed tech with lower power consumption up to a maximum of 82Mbps while still being 3G. Verizon has to go with 4G. Too bad for Sprint that they choose so poorly. It?s almost as if they are trying to self destruct.
As an iPhone owner who also has a Verizon phone (family share plan so that my wife as a physician can have access to a reliable calling network) in a major metropolitan area (L.A.), this add "feels" accurate even if not technically so. I travel every week for work up and down the west coast as well as to the east coast and invariably have coverage issues with my iPhone but not with my Verizon cheapo LG. In fact, the only place where I've experienced the "full potential" of the iPhone was while traveling in Europe (even remote, rural areas).
Would love to hear other's experiences but my gestalt is that this ad is "spot on" and that AT&T's network is measurably inferior (which is really the point of the ad, no?). I actually find the iPhone pretty useless as a phone (too many dropped calls or failure to initiate calls; I can live w/ a slow down in the data stream when web browsing but for conversations, it's a real show stopper.
In reading all the arguments on how much better the AT&T network is based on the specs I thought it interesting to see this demonstration (speed test) conducted in SoCal between iPhone/AT&T, Droid/VZW and G1/TMobile. All the phones showed full 3-G availability. If the specs were the only criteria then AT&T should win hands down each and every time.......sorry but it does not seem to be that way. Also there has been some complaints that the network test is meaningless because the phones are not the same specs. As a user I want to know how the "best" phone offered on each carrier performs on their network.
I am tired of these commercials too, I will take my AT&T 3.2Mbit connection speed over Verizon’s 1.4Mbit any day. Verizon is really going to have a bigger problem than AT&T once they start servicing all these Android phones. Their network has yet to be "tested".
It's interesting to see how AT&T has very limited 3.6 Mbps coverage, and a 7.2 Mbps coverage limited to only a couple of cities while in Europe it's EDGE for almost 98% of the population, 7.2 Mbps coverage por almost all the small cities (20.000 inhabitants and up) and 21 Mbps (HSPA+) for selected cities.
Verizon on the other hand barely has EDGE speeds and announces them as 3G speeds. Quite lame IMHO.
It's like the US is a year or two behind Europe and Asia, cellphone-wise that is.
It is interesting to see that people have no idea about "advertised" MAX theoretical speed that you can never obtain in real life.
Verizon Wireless is quoting real life average speed for their 3G network --- which is going to be a lot better than most of the hyped up advertised theoretical speeds.
EDGE's real life average speed is about 80-120 kbps. 3G UMTS average speed is about 250-300 kbps. EV-DO rev 0 average speed is about 400-800 kbps. EV-DO rev A speed is about 600-1400 kbps. The average speed for HSDPA (both 3.6 and 7.2 mbps versions) are faster than their ev-do cousins --- but not that noticeable on a phone browser.
I am tired of these commercials too, I will take my AT&T 3.2Mbit connection speed over Verizon?s 1.4Mbit any day. Verizon is really going to have a bigger problem than AT&T once they start servicing all these Android phones. Their network has yet to be "tested".
In the world of class-action lawsuits --- American carriers are always quite truthful in their 3G speed claims (unlike the rest of the world).
If you read closely to AT&T's speed claims --- average download speed 700 kbps - 1700 kbps (which is slightly faster than Verizon's 3G speed claims of 600-1400 kbps).
You are not going to see a difference in most real life situations. The iphone and the Droid has basically the same CPU setup. AT&T has a couple of hundred kbps speed advantage than Verizon. Droid has a newer webkit HTML5 browser engine than the iphone and it has a wider screen resolution --- which makes it less likely for you to scroll horizontally when browsing.
The important thing to understand in Apple's claim that the iPhone 3G is faster than the original iPhone is the "3G" part. That is what largely made the difference between the two models. Apple in no way guarantees that 3G in everyones area.
Apple is telling the truth, the iPhone 3G is at least twice as fast as the original iPhone. That statement makes no promises about 3G coverage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
Just like Verizon neglects to point out that you'll have non-3G data services outside of ATT's 3G coverage area, Apple neglected to point out that if you are on an Edge network you won't get the "twice as fast" data rate. And their ads clearly implied the "twice as fast" applied to your data connection...thus leading to upset comsumers who filed lawsuits. My original point was that everyone dismissed as morons the people filing lawsuits over the twice as fast claim (saying they should have done their research to understand the coverage areas and limitations, etc). And yet then try to argue that ATT's lawsuit somehow has more merit. It's a fairly obvious double-standard. Doesn't the consumer still have the responsibility to understand the choices they are making?
Just because they issued a press release does not mean these chip sets will be in phones next year. VZ will more than likely begin next year with 4G mobile broadband cards. Those would also need CDMA/LTE chipsets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
They wouldn't have issued a press release if it didn't have any practicality. In 2010 I'm sure you'll see phones with CDMA and LTE. LTE will first be for data only while CDMA handles voice. Eventually LTE will handle both. No it doesn't say anything about the iPhone but you doubted there being combo chipsets. We all know that Apple is very tight lipped, we're not gonna hear anything but rumors surrounding any new iPhone especially since the 3GS is only a few months old.
Just because they issued a press release does not mean these chip sets will be in phones next year. VZ will more than likely begin next year with 4G mobile broadband cards. Those would also need CDMA/LTE chipsets.
I agree.
The chipset companies are just hyping their products. The battery life is going to be the key --- which is why all the iphone and android cpu's are underclocked. When first generation of LTE chipsets come out --- the only battery that can handle it will be your laptop battery. The second wave of chipsets will be for cell phones.
It is interesting to see that people have no idea about "advertised" MAX theoretical speed that you can never obtain in real life.
Verizon Wireless is quoting real life average speed for their 3G network --- which is going to be a lot better than most of the hyped up advertised theoretical speeds.
EDGE's real life average speed is about 80-120 kbps. 3G UMTS average speed is about 250-300 kbps. EV-DO rev 0 average speed is about 400-800 kbps. EV-DO rev A speed is about 600-1400 kbps. The average speed for HSDPA (both 3.6 and 7.2 mbps versions) are faster than their ev-do cousins --- but not that noticeable on a phone browser.
What does that have to do with the US being two generations behind Europe and Asia? I'm really not following here.
A seldom discussed, but significant in my opinion, disadvantage of the CDMA Rev A network in use by Verizon is the inability of the cellular device to access both voice and data simultaneously. AT&T's HSDPA network does not have that limitation.
Your mileage may vary on this, but I find it very useful to be able to check something on Safari or another app (Yelp, MovieFone, etc) while in a voice call with someone. I've also had occasion to send a picture by email or MMS to someone I'm on the phone with to get their opinion of a considered purchase in real time.
Maybe not a deal breaker for most, but something to consider before blindly chatting Verizon's network is "better" than AT&T's. "Better" is at best a subjective term, even if you have hard data on some aspects of the comparison, when user experience is part of the equation.
Actually as a topic, it has been beaten to death already. Most people note that EDGE which as the map notes, most people still suffer under, cannot do voice and data at the same time as well. Finally most people note they would prefer to multitask with multiple data apps and that caching can take care of some issues like with GPS.
I personally cannot imagine many people doing what you are noting because the speakerphone on every iPhone I have encountered is a worthless piece of crap that is far, far too soft to use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnb
According to the article, Verizon's entire data network is 3G, with typical download speeds of 0.6 to 1.4 Mbit.
The article cites AT&T's 2.5G as having typical download speeds of 0.4 Mbit.
I don't see any purpose to conjuring up a 2.75G, other than trying to make this seem like an apples-to-apples comparison when it is not.
0.4 Mbit may "approach" 0.6 Mbit in speed, but by my math, 0.6 Mbit is still 50% higher -- and that is the very bottom of the "typical" range.
I also don't think you will encounter any 2G iPhone user who will ever claimed to have gotten .4 Mbit data download rates to their phone. I know that when tethering my laptop with my Dare, I have easily gotten 1.5 Mbit if not higher. On my 2G iPhone the max has been about 160kbit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations
I am tired of these commercials too, I will take my AT&T 3.2Mbit connection speed over Verizon’s 1.4Mbit any day. Verizon is really going to have a bigger problem than AT&T once they start servicing all these Android phones. Their network has yet to be "tested".
Actually limiting the data rate might make it more consistent. If the data hogs cannot suck every bit of bandwidth out of the pipe, then that leaves more for everyone else. If your phone is the SUV of data, then having monthly limits (5 gigs) and reasonable but limited download speeds (1.5 Mbit) might be just the thing necessary to insure that a few data hogs don't destroy the network for everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab
It is interesting to see that people have no idea about "advertised" MAX theoretical speed that you can never obtain in real life.
Verizon Wireless is quoting real life average speed for their 3G network --- which is going to be a lot better than most of the hyped up advertised theoretical speeds.
EDGE's real life average speed is about 80-120 kbps. 3G UMTS average speed is about 250-300 kbps. EV-DO rev 0 average speed is about 400-800 kbps. EV-DO rev A speed is about 600-1400 kbps. The average speed for HSDPA (both 3.6 and 7.2 mbps versions) are faster than their ev-do cousins --- but not that noticeable on a phone browser.
I personally cannot imagine many people doing what you are noting because the speakerphone on every iPhone I have encountered is a worthless piece of crap that is far, far too soft to use.
Speakerphone on the 3G[s] is plenty loud. Granted, it won't wake the dead like the Motorola's Razr's speaker, but it's sufficient for my ears. Even so, I rarely use the speakerphone, I use the ear-buds or my car's bluetooth.
I'm sure plenty of people do what I am noting, or the topic would not have been beaten to death already, as you say, even if I happened to have missed it. ;-)
Boygenius carrier network test found AT&T to have an average download speed of 933kbps. The far majority of phones used for the test would have been UMTS.
Verizon EV-DO Rev A average was 701kbps. EV-DO Rev.0 average download speed was 548kbps
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab
EDGE's real life average speed is about 80-120 kbps. 3G UMTS average speed is about 250-300 kbps. EV-DO rev 0 average speed is about 400-800 kbps. EV-DO rev A speed is about 600-1400 kbps. The average speed for HSDPA (both 3.6 and 7.2 mbps versions) are faster than their ev-do cousins --- but not that noticeable on a phone browser.
Finally most people note they would prefer to multitask with multiple data apps and that caching can take care of some issues like with GPS.
I personally cannot imagine many people doing what you are noting because the speakerphone on every iPhone I have encountered is a worthless piece of crap that is far, far too soft to use.
Phone sales have not reflected any importance of multitasking. Multitasking itself has not helped sell any phones.
The speaker on the original iPhone was not very good. But I've blown other phones away with the speaker on the 3G.
Quote:
Actually limiting the data rate might make it more consistent. If the data hogs cannot suck every bit of bandwidth out of the pipe, then that leaves more for everyone else. If your phone is the SUV of data, then having monthly limits (5 gigs) and reasonable but limited download speeds (1.5 Mbit) might be just the thing necessary to insure that a few data hogs don't destroy the network for everyone.
Or use Verizon's tactic and have mediocre phones that don't entice people to want to use very much data in the first place. You don't have to worry about data hogs.
Comparing EDGE to EVDO Rev. 0 (and completely disregarding the fact that most of VZW's network is Rev. A now).
Ignoring the widely reported issues with QoS on ATTM's 3g network that prevent people from either getting anywhere near its reported peak speeds OR even maintaining a consistent usable connection in many places (which I personally can confirm from my own experience using my N95 on ATTM's network here in PHL).
Then there's the article, which consists of a series of logical and technical contortions more impressive than anything I've ever seen in a circus sideshow.
This is my first time here; I followed a link to this article from a phone forum's ATTM subforum (where there are, as one might expect of people who are honest appraisers and not fanboys, a lot of ATTM users frankly cheering VZW for calling ATTM out, in the hope that maybe FINALLY ATTM will be spurred to actually improve its network quality and coverage area). But I'll probably be back; if this article and comment thread are any indication, this is probably a good place to visit from time to time for a laugh or two.
Speakerphone on the 3G[s] is plenty loud. Granted, it won't wake the dead like the Motorola's Razr's speaker, but it's sufficient for my ears. Even so, I rarely use the speakerphone, I use the ear-buds or my car's bluetooth.
I'm sure plenty of people do what I am noting, or the topic would not have been beaten to death already, as you say, even if I happened to have missed it. ;-)
The speakerphone on all iPhones are weak and as you noted, people have their own coping mechanism for it. I do as you do and wear earbuds.
However the importance of doing both doesn't really matter for most people. It is simply the fanboy talking point du jour because it is the one thing that the Droid cannot do. Multitasking is now suddenly very important, but only in the exact context that the iPhone can do it and of course no other.
Be a guy like me who wants to answer a SMS without quitting his browser and the answer is "Oh sorry, no one wants to do that and what about battery life, and...."
Meanwhile "everyone know" that what we really want to do is look up the review on the pizza place while ordering the pizza on the phone.
Both points are valid but if they are going to cost sales in one instance, they will in the other as well and I know that I spend a lot more time trying to multitask data rather than voice and data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Phone sales have not reflected any importance of multitasking. Multitasking itself has not helped sell any phones.
Speak for yourself. Many iPhone users are clamoring for multitasking. I've jailbroken so I can have multitasking with apps like Pandora or just to make the messaging app load quickly because quitting everything to answer an SMS sucks.
Quote:
The speaker on the original iPhone was not very good. But I've blown other phones away with the speaker on the 3G.
Again speak for yourself because I read plenty of accounts about the iPhone still not being a very good phone. It is a good enough phone but by no means does the phone portion match the excellence of browswer/built in iPod/etc.
My friend put his Droid on speaker and it was a legitimately great speaker phone. It could be heard over annoying child in background. It could be heard over fan cooling the room and other types of background noise. I've done the "speaker mod" to my 2G which helps the speaker volume by opening the protective plastic covering. Again there are plenty of iPhones out there but the speakerphone is just weak. The poster above notes it may not be his Razr but still works. That shows how low the bar is for iPhone users with regard to speaker. Most have just found a way to cope with it (as have I.)
Quote:
Or use Verizon's tactic and have mediocre phones that don't entice people to want to use very much data in the first place. You don't have to worry about data hogs.
2006 called and want their talking points back. Verizon has a very nice selection of features and smartphones and it is improving further still. That doesn't mean the end of the iPhone or anything of that nature but take the blinders off because at this stage, their selection of phones OUTSIDE of the iPhone is better than most other carriers. I use my iPhone with Tmobile. Tmobile doesn't have a compelling phone to make me desire to take on a contract. I already know three Droid owners and see plenty of LG EnV______ phones all over the place (EnV2-3, Touch, etc.) Aside from sliding keyboard phones, what exactly does AT&T offer that is so awesome?
Comments
I'll leave this ad war garbage up to the carriers. What I do care about is the problems that AT&T has in New York. While AT&T may be deploying the 7.2 3G virtually everywhere, I don't believe that New York isn't one of them. Seriously AT&T, this is the #1 market in the country.
I'm sure that Goldman Saks and Citi got their coverage before anyone else! http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/...112_606442.htm
Verizon is comparing their 3G+2.75G vs AT&T's 3.5G.
Verizon should compare their 3G+2.75G vs AT&T's 3.5G+2.75G.
THAT'S what's unfair.
I don't know how to dumb it down anymore.
According to the article, Verizon's entire data network is 3G, with typical download speeds of 0.6 to 1.4 Mbit.
The article cites AT&T's 2.5G as having typical download speeds of 0.4 Mbit.
I don't see any purpose to conjuring up a 2.75G, other than trying to make this seem like an apples-to-apples comparison when it is not.
0.4 Mbit may "approach" 0.6 Mbit in speed, but by my math, 0.6 Mbit is still 50% higher -- and that is the very bottom of the "typical" range.
What's going to happen is either Apple will be forced to dump its demands or they'll have to face having their phone on a terribly backwards network next year compared to Verizon's LTE network that should be in over 50 markets by the end of 2010 when AT&T begins merely field testing 4G.
There is always chance Apple starts selling unlocked CDMA/GSM phones for $700 or so.
Then Apple gets its tax and Verizon's customers can have their blessed IP.
According to the article, Verizon's entire data network is 3G, with typical download speeds of 0.6 to 1.4 Mbit.
The article cites AT&T's 2.5G as having typical download speeds of 0.4 Mbit.
I don't see any purpose to conjuring up a 2.75G, other than trying to make this seem like an apples-to-apples comparison when it is not.
0.4 Mbit may "approach" 0.6 Mbit in speed, but by my math, 0.6 Mbit is still 50% higher -- and that is the very bottom of the "typical" range.
While Verison?s ads are good and technically truthful they are misleading. EDGE is commonly referred to as 2.75G so I see now problem with calling it that. 3GPP defined it as a 3G standard but AT&T doesn?t list it as such and still a GSM standard, not UMTS.
Verizon?s EVDO data network may cover a much larger area than AT&T?s UTMS area but I?ve been in areas where EDGE was faster than EVDO. Maybe the tower was saturated, had some issue, was too far away, or simply didn?t have the bandwidth allocated for it, but it possible that in the rural areas where AT&T doesn?t have 3G, Verizon will not have fast EVDO. The minimum doesn?t have to be 600Kbps.
I can see what AT&T objected to their ads, but Verizon has AT&T on the ropes with this one. Unfortunately for Verizon LTE will allow AT&T and T-Mobile to push even further into faster speed and more coverage with cheaper upgrades with more developed tech with lower power consumption up to a maximum of 82Mbps while still being 3G. Verizon has to go with 4G. Too bad for Sprint that they choose so poorly. It?s almost as if they are trying to self destruct.
Would love to hear other's experiences but my gestalt is that this ad is "spot on" and that AT&T's network is measurably inferior (which is really the point of the ad, no?). I actually find the iPhone pretty useless as a phone (too many dropped calls or failure to initiate calls; I can live w/ a slow down in the data stream when web browsing but for conversations, it's a real show stopper.
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2009/1...rk-speed-test/
It's interesting to see how AT&T has very limited 3.6 Mbps coverage, and a 7.2 Mbps coverage limited to only a couple of cities while in Europe it's EDGE for almost 98% of the population, 7.2 Mbps coverage por almost all the small cities (20.000 inhabitants and up) and 21 Mbps (HSPA+) for selected cities.
Verizon on the other hand barely has EDGE speeds and announces them as 3G speeds. Quite lame IMHO.
It's like the US is a year or two behind Europe and Asia, cellphone-wise that is.
It is interesting to see that people have no idea about "advertised" MAX theoretical speed that you can never obtain in real life.
Verizon Wireless is quoting real life average speed for their 3G network --- which is going to be a lot better than most of the hyped up advertised theoretical speeds.
EDGE's real life average speed is about 80-120 kbps. 3G UMTS average speed is about 250-300 kbps. EV-DO rev 0 average speed is about 400-800 kbps. EV-DO rev A speed is about 600-1400 kbps. The average speed for HSDPA (both 3.6 and 7.2 mbps versions) are faster than their ev-do cousins --- but not that noticeable on a phone browser.
I am tired of these commercials too, I will take my AT&T 3.2Mbit connection speed over Verizon?s 1.4Mbit any day. Verizon is really going to have a bigger problem than AT&T once they start servicing all these Android phones. Their network has yet to be "tested".
In the world of class-action lawsuits --- American carriers are always quite truthful in their 3G speed claims (unlike the rest of the world).
If you read closely to AT&T's speed claims --- average download speed 700 kbps - 1700 kbps (which is slightly faster than Verizon's 3G speed claims of 600-1400 kbps).
http://www.wireless.att.com/business...ss/network.jsp
You are not going to see a difference in most real life situations. The iphone and the Droid has basically the same CPU setup. AT&T has a couple of hundred kbps speed advantage than Verizon. Droid has a newer webkit HTML5 browser engine than the iphone and it has a wider screen resolution --- which makes it less likely for you to scroll horizontally when browsing.
Apple is telling the truth, the iPhone 3G is at least twice as fast as the original iPhone. That statement makes no promises about 3G coverage.
Just like Verizon neglects to point out that you'll have non-3G data services outside of ATT's 3G coverage area, Apple neglected to point out that if you are on an Edge network you won't get the "twice as fast" data rate. And their ads clearly implied the "twice as fast" applied to your data connection...thus leading to upset comsumers who filed lawsuits. My original point was that everyone dismissed as morons the people filing lawsuits over the twice as fast claim (saying they should have done their research to understand the coverage areas and limitations, etc). And yet then try to argue that ATT's lawsuit somehow has more merit. It's a fairly obvious double-standard. Doesn't the consumer still have the responsibility to understand the choices they are making?
They wouldn't have issued a press release if it didn't have any practicality. In 2010 I'm sure you'll see phones with CDMA and LTE. LTE will first be for data only while CDMA handles voice. Eventually LTE will handle both. No it doesn't say anything about the iPhone but you doubted there being combo chipsets. We all know that Apple is very tight lipped, we're not gonna hear anything but rumors surrounding any new iPhone especially since the 3GS is only a few months old.
Just because they issued a press release does not mean these chip sets will be in phones next year. VZ will more than likely begin next year with 4G mobile broadband cards. Those would also need CDMA/LTE chipsets.
I agree.
The chipset companies are just hyping their products. The battery life is going to be the key --- which is why all the iphone and android cpu's are underclocked. When first generation of LTE chipsets come out --- the only battery that can handle it will be your laptop battery. The second wave of chipsets will be for cell phones.
It is interesting to see that people have no idea about "advertised" MAX theoretical speed that you can never obtain in real life.
Verizon Wireless is quoting real life average speed for their 3G network --- which is going to be a lot better than most of the hyped up advertised theoretical speeds.
EDGE's real life average speed is about 80-120 kbps. 3G UMTS average speed is about 250-300 kbps. EV-DO rev 0 average speed is about 400-800 kbps. EV-DO rev A speed is about 600-1400 kbps. The average speed for HSDPA (both 3.6 and 7.2 mbps versions) are faster than their ev-do cousins --- but not that noticeable on a phone browser.
What does that have to do with the US being two generations behind Europe and Asia? I'm really not following here.
A seldom discussed, but significant in my opinion, disadvantage of the CDMA Rev A network in use by Verizon is the inability of the cellular device to access both voice and data simultaneously. AT&T's HSDPA network does not have that limitation.
Your mileage may vary on this, but I find it very useful to be able to check something on Safari or another app (Yelp, MovieFone, etc) while in a voice call with someone. I've also had occasion to send a picture by email or MMS to someone I'm on the phone with to get their opinion of a considered purchase in real time.
Maybe not a deal breaker for most, but something to consider before blindly chatting Verizon's network is "better" than AT&T's. "Better" is at best a subjective term, even if you have hard data on some aspects of the comparison, when user experience is part of the equation.
Actually as a topic, it has been beaten to death already. Most people note that EDGE which as the map notes, most people still suffer under, cannot do voice and data at the same time as well. Finally most people note they would prefer to multitask with multiple data apps and that caching can take care of some issues like with GPS.
I personally cannot imagine many people doing what you are noting because the speakerphone on every iPhone I have encountered is a worthless piece of crap that is far, far too soft to use.
According to the article, Verizon's entire data network is 3G, with typical download speeds of 0.6 to 1.4 Mbit.
The article cites AT&T's 2.5G as having typical download speeds of 0.4 Mbit.
I don't see any purpose to conjuring up a 2.75G, other than trying to make this seem like an apples-to-apples comparison when it is not.
0.4 Mbit may "approach" 0.6 Mbit in speed, but by my math, 0.6 Mbit is still 50% higher -- and that is the very bottom of the "typical" range.
I also don't think you will encounter any 2G iPhone user who will ever claimed to have gotten .4 Mbit data download rates to their phone. I know that when tethering my laptop with my Dare, I have easily gotten 1.5 Mbit if not higher. On my 2G iPhone the max has been about 160kbit.
I am tired of these commercials too, I will take my AT&T 3.2Mbit connection speed over Verizon’s 1.4Mbit any day. Verizon is really going to have a bigger problem than AT&T once they start servicing all these Android phones. Their network has yet to be "tested".
Actually limiting the data rate might make it more consistent. If the data hogs cannot suck every bit of bandwidth out of the pipe, then that leaves more for everyone else. If your phone is the SUV of data, then having monthly limits (5 gigs) and reasonable but limited download speeds (1.5 Mbit) might be just the thing necessary to insure that a few data hogs don't destroy the network for everyone.
It is interesting to see that people have no idea about "advertised" MAX theoretical speed that you can never obtain in real life.
Verizon Wireless is quoting real life average speed for their 3G network --- which is going to be a lot better than most of the hyped up advertised theoretical speeds.
EDGE's real life average speed is about 80-120 kbps. 3G UMTS average speed is about 250-300 kbps. EV-DO rev 0 average speed is about 400-800 kbps. EV-DO rev A speed is about 600-1400 kbps. The average speed for HSDPA (both 3.6 and 7.2 mbps versions) are faster than their ev-do cousins --- but not that noticeable on a phone browser.
Bingo!
I personally cannot imagine many people doing what you are noting because the speakerphone on every iPhone I have encountered is a worthless piece of crap that is far, far too soft to use.
Speakerphone on the 3G[s] is plenty loud. Granted, it won't wake the dead like the Motorola's Razr's speaker, but it's sufficient for my ears. Even so, I rarely use the speakerphone, I use the ear-buds or my car's bluetooth.
I'm sure plenty of people do what I am noting, or the topic would not have been beaten to death already, as you say, even if I happened to have missed it. ;-)
Verizon EV-DO Rev A average was 701kbps. EV-DO Rev.0 average download speed was 548kbps
EDGE's real life average speed is about 80-120 kbps. 3G UMTS average speed is about 250-300 kbps. EV-DO rev 0 average speed is about 400-800 kbps. EV-DO rev A speed is about 600-1400 kbps. The average speed for HSDPA (both 3.6 and 7.2 mbps versions) are faster than their ev-do cousins --- but not that noticeable on a phone browser.
Finally most people note they would prefer to multitask with multiple data apps and that caching can take care of some issues like with GPS.
I personally cannot imagine many people doing what you are noting because the speakerphone on every iPhone I have encountered is a worthless piece of crap that is far, far too soft to use.
Phone sales have not reflected any importance of multitasking. Multitasking itself has not helped sell any phones.
The speaker on the original iPhone was not very good. But I've blown other phones away with the speaker on the 3G.
Actually limiting the data rate might make it more consistent. If the data hogs cannot suck every bit of bandwidth out of the pipe, then that leaves more for everyone else. If your phone is the SUV of data, then having monthly limits (5 gigs) and reasonable but limited download speeds (1.5 Mbit) might be just the thing necessary to insure that a few data hogs don't destroy the network for everyone.
Or use Verizon's tactic and have mediocre phones that don't entice people to want to use very much data in the first place. You don't have to worry about data hogs.
Comparing EDGE to EVDO Rev. 0 (and completely disregarding the fact that most of VZW's network is Rev. A now).
Ignoring the widely reported issues with QoS on ATTM's 3g network that prevent people from either getting anywhere near its reported peak speeds OR even maintaining a consistent usable connection in many places (which I personally can confirm from my own experience using my N95 on ATTM's network here in PHL).
Then there's the article, which consists of a series of logical and technical contortions more impressive than anything I've ever seen in a circus sideshow.
This is my first time here; I followed a link to this article from a phone forum's ATTM subforum (where there are, as one might expect of people who are honest appraisers and not fanboys, a lot of ATTM users frankly cheering VZW for calling ATTM out, in the hope that maybe FINALLY ATTM will be spurred to actually improve its network quality and coverage area). But I'll probably be back; if this article and comment thread are any indication, this is probably a good place to visit from time to time for a laugh or two.
Speakerphone on the 3G[s] is plenty loud. Granted, it won't wake the dead like the Motorola's Razr's speaker, but it's sufficient for my ears. Even so, I rarely use the speakerphone, I use the ear-buds or my car's bluetooth.
I'm sure plenty of people do what I am noting, or the topic would not have been beaten to death already, as you say, even if I happened to have missed it. ;-)
The speakerphone on all iPhones are weak and as you noted, people have their own coping mechanism for it. I do as you do and wear earbuds.
However the importance of doing both doesn't really matter for most people. It is simply the fanboy talking point du jour because it is the one thing that the Droid cannot do. Multitasking is now suddenly very important, but only in the exact context that the iPhone can do it and of course no other.
Be a guy like me who wants to answer a SMS without quitting his browser and the answer is "Oh sorry, no one wants to do that and what about battery life, and...."
Meanwhile "everyone know" that what we really want to do is look up the review on the pizza place while ordering the pizza on the phone.
Both points are valid but if they are going to cost sales in one instance, they will in the other as well and I know that I spend a lot more time trying to multitask data rather than voice and data.
Phone sales have not reflected any importance of multitasking. Multitasking itself has not helped sell any phones.
Speak for yourself. Many iPhone users are clamoring for multitasking. I've jailbroken so I can have multitasking with apps like Pandora or just to make the messaging app load quickly because quitting everything to answer an SMS sucks.
The speaker on the original iPhone was not very good. But I've blown other phones away with the speaker on the 3G.
Again speak for yourself because I read plenty of accounts about the iPhone still not being a very good phone. It is a good enough phone but by no means does the phone portion match the excellence of browswer/built in iPod/etc.
My friend put his Droid on speaker and it was a legitimately great speaker phone. It could be heard over annoying child in background. It could be heard over fan cooling the room and other types of background noise. I've done the "speaker mod" to my 2G which helps the speaker volume by opening the protective plastic covering. Again there are plenty of iPhones out there but the speakerphone is just weak. The poster above notes it may not be his Razr but still works. That shows how low the bar is for iPhone users with regard to speaker. Most have just found a way to cope with it (as have I.)
Or use Verizon's tactic and have mediocre phones that don't entice people to want to use very much data in the first place. You don't have to worry about data hogs.
2006 called and want their talking points back. Verizon has a very nice selection of features and smartphones and it is improving further still. That doesn't mean the end of the iPhone or anything of that nature but take the blinders off because at this stage, their selection of phones OUTSIDE of the iPhone is better than most other carriers. I use my iPhone with Tmobile. Tmobile doesn't have a compelling phone to make me desire to take on a contract. I already know three Droid owners and see plenty of LG EnV______ phones all over the place (EnV2-3, Touch, etc.) Aside from sliding keyboard phones, what exactly does AT&T offer that is so awesome?