First person to say VOIP gets to tell me how they expect me to make VOIP calls when I don't have a Wi-Fi connection. Say I'm in an accident or have an emergency. I need access to the telephony network. I have zero need for the data network.
Why? Is the iPhone suddenly the only phone where it would be nice to have simultaneous data and voice. Your logic, well, defies logic.
Now you're not even presenting an argument, just making a silly statement.
The iPhone was the biggest thing in CES, even before the announcement, so yes, there's no question that the iPhone's capabilities in this area are very important. And, we don't know if any other current CDMA phone, or any that are just coming out can do this yet. It must also be implemented in the phone. No network ability to do this means that phones on those networks don't need the capability. So, for Verizon to want to keep this secret has a number of reasons.
Even if they did, I wouldn't leave at&t. I get speeds far superior to their CDMA and close to their current LTE on the download side. Plus simultaneous voice and data is critical for me. Maybe once Apple offers an LTE based phone without an increase in costs of the plan would change my mind.
No argument. I would not change unless the service and the capabilities of the iPhone were as good or better.
No network ability to do this means that phones on those networks don't need the capability. So, for Verizon to want to keep this secret has a number of reasons.
As well as Apple. I can see this being a requirement put upon Verizon to get the iPhone, as well as an exclusivity that no competing phones with this feature will be sold for a set time frame.
My reasoning is Apple wants the user experience to be as consistence as possible across the iPhone. The only choices the user makes involved the carrier type and their associated service plans.
No, you didn't say anything could happen, in a serious way. You said:
That's the same as saying NO, it won't happen.
Do you think that Apple, which has so heavily advertised this feature ever since the iPhone first came out would so easily give it up? I think it's very important to them. And as I said, there's no reason to believe it isn't being done. Maybe it isn't, but I would find that hard to believe, as it's been possible for a while now, and Verizon's had enough time to implement it.
You're using as an excuse the fact that we haven't heard about it. That's a poor reason. I would also think that it's a competitive disadvantage for Verizon, and would give AT&T a good advertising campaign.
This feature, as I said, if mentioned, would have been a vey good indicator of the iPhone's arrival, and I doubt that either Apple or Verizon wanted that before this Tuesday. There are excellent reasons given for that, and it's been in another article here, as well as other places.
I agree. I do not believe for one second SJ would permit an iPhone to be released with less than the capabilities it now has on AT&T.
As well as Apple. I can see this being a requirement put upon Verizon to get the iPhone, as well as an exclusivity that no competing phones with this feature will be sold for a set time frame.
My reasoning is Apple wants the user experience to be as consistence as possible across the iPhone. The only choices the user makes involved the carrier type and their associated service plans.
Sure. Can you imagine what would happen if a couple of million people want to move to Verizon, and AFTER they do, find out that they can't do what they did before? Man! Verizon would be so screwed.
Look, I admit that just because I can't find a reason why this wouldn't be done that that PROVES that it will be done, but it's hard to imagine why it wouldn't.
I thought I bookmarked the article that had some good technical info about this new rule and standard that explained it, but I don't seem to know what I put it under right now. The gist of it was that it wouldn't be too difficult to implement.
Jesus Christ! It?s not your fraking product. They have a right to sell it how they wish providing they aren?t breaking any laws. You either agree it, don?t agree to it and find a way around it (which has been brought to your attention), or you move on. There are no other options so stop feeling damn entitled.
Unlike Att I wonder if they allow you to buy it outright so as not to have to pay a stupid data plan, since unlike Att cannot rationalize needing a data plan due to visual voicemail.
Sure. Can you imagine what would happen if a couple of million people want to move to Verizon, and AFTER they do, find out that they can't do what they dud before? Man! Verizon would be so screwed.
Look, I admit that just because I can't find a reason why this wouldn't be done that that PROVES that it will be done, but it's hard to imagine why it wouldn't.
I thought I bookmarked the article that had some good technical info about this new rule and standard that explained it, but I don't seem to know what I put it under right now. The gist of it was that it wouldn't be too difficult to implement.
The best info i can find involves the aforementioned QChat from Qualcomm. What else can it be but VoIP over EV-DO Rev. A?
Talk time
I know I hit on this earlier, but I wanted to make sure it?s a clear point. The iPhone 4 has ?3G? talk time of 7 hours and ?2G? talk time of 14 hours. The only devices that beat the ?3G? talk time ? to reiterate, this means you have ?3G' activated on the device even though it still uses CDMA ?2G? for voice ? are those on Verizon and Sprint. Adding VoIP over EV-DO Rev. A would mean talk time is actually over ?3G?. It might even be less efficient than the way voice and data WCDMA works, but I?d imagine equivalent battery life.
The difference comes when comparing over Verizon phones to the iPhone. Some will wonder why everything on the iPhone is longer except ?3G? talk time. I doubt that will be a deal breaker, but I thought it should get mentioned.
The best info i can find involves the aforementioned QChat from Qualcomm. What else can it be but VoIP over EV-DO Rev. A?
Talk time
I know I hit on this earlier, but I wanted to make sure it?s a clear point. The iPhone 4 has ?3G? talk time of 7 hours and ?2G? talk time of 14 hours. The only devices that beat the ?3G? talk time ? to reiterate, this means you have ?3G' activated on the device even though it still uses CDMA ?2G? for voice ? are those on Verizon and Sprint. Adding VoIP over EV-DO Rev. A would mean talk time is actually over ?3G?. It might even be less efficient than the way voice and data WCDMA works, but I?d imagine equivalent battery life.
The difference comes when comparing over Verizon phones to the iPhone. Some will wonder why everything on the iPhone is longer except ?3G? talk time. I doubt that will be a deal breaker, but I thought it should get mentioned.
You know, every detail is important. But will most people notice the time? Possibly we will get better call quality, though I've not complained about mine. It is true that voice over GSM is worse than over CDMA.
You know, every detail is important. But will most people notice the time? Possibly we will get better call quality, though I've not complained about mine. It is true that voice over GSM is worse than over CDMA.
From what I?ve read the voice algorithm over UMTS and CDMA are both on par. It?s the GSM that is really poor. However, I?ve read there are several voice algorithms and/or quality levels that can be sued depending on need so it?s possible CDMA could still be better than UMTS.
I wonder how this is affected with VoIP over EV-DO and if millions of iPhones doing real time voice with QoS over EV-DO will affect the network load significantly.
From what I?ve read the voice algorithm over UMTS and CDMA are both on par. It?s the GSM that is really poor. However, I?ve read there are several voice algorithms and/or quality levels that can be sued depending on need so it?s possible CDMA could still be better than UMTS.
I wonder how this is affected with VoIP over EV-DO and if millions of iPhones doing real time voice with QoS over EV-DO will affect the network load significantly.
VOIP has been getting better, but it still, at least to me, can sound echo-y at times. You do need a GOOD broadband connection. I've found that over WiFi, it's usually fine, except for some times when the internet's having problems, but that it's usually worse over most 3G connections.
VOIP has been getting better, but it still, at least to me, can sound echo-y at times. You do need a GOOD broadband connection. I've found that over WiFi, it's usually fine, except for some times when the internet's having problems, but that it's usually worse over most 3G connections.
Hmm.. crazy thought…
Maybe Apple created it.
Maybe they took the voice and initiation protocols used in FaceTime to make this happen over Verizon’s 3G network.
Maybe that is why FaceTime was first created, with the video and marketing name later be attributed.
Maybe that one reason why Jobs said FaceTime over the carrier’s network wouldn’t come until 2011.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Damn soli those are landline amounts. I use my phone a lot and never go past 3GB.
Mine is a landline once it gets to the other side of their towers.
I expected lower prices at Verizon....after all you are getting less:
-slower speed
-no concurrent data and voice access (I can't use my GPS while I talk!)
-no international coverage
-no rollover minutes
-no free visual voicemail
-no free wifi
On that last point...you might want to check your facts because I believe you are wrong (Hint: you are wrong). Haven't you been corrected on this in the past?
Given that Austria is the size of the average Texan's BBQ, it is not that expensive for a phone company to cover it. How much does your phone company charge you to include France, Germany, Spain, Holland, Portugal etc.?
Let's just hope that this is all wrong and there will be some price/service competition if this actually does happen.
I suspect at first they will have a hard time just filing orders for people who don't need any extra incentives. Hopefully with time there will be some competition between ATT & Verizon once the low hanging fruit has be harvested.
Comments
how about just getting an iPod Touch..
Can't make calls with an iPod touch.
First person to say VOIP gets to tell me how they expect me to make VOIP calls when I don't have a Wi-Fi connection. Say I'm in an accident or have an emergency. I need access to the telephony network. I have zero need for the data network.
Why? Is the iPhone suddenly the only phone where it would be nice to have simultaneous data and voice. Your logic, well, defies logic.
Now you're not even presenting an argument, just making a silly statement.
The iPhone was the biggest thing in CES, even before the announcement, so yes, there's no question that the iPhone's capabilities in this area are very important. And, we don't know if any other current CDMA phone, or any that are just coming out can do this yet. It must also be implemented in the phone. No network ability to do this means that phones on those networks don't need the capability. So, for Verizon to want to keep this secret has a number of reasons.
Even if they did, I wouldn't leave at&t. I get speeds far superior to their CDMA and close to their current LTE on the download side. Plus simultaneous voice and data is critical for me. Maybe once Apple offers an LTE based phone without an increase in costs of the plan would change my mind.
No argument. I would not change unless the service and the capabilities of the iPhone were as good or better.
No network ability to do this means that phones on those networks don't need the capability. So, for Verizon to want to keep this secret has a number of reasons.
As well as Apple. I can see this being a requirement put upon Verizon to get the iPhone, as well as an exclusivity that no competing phones with this feature will be sold for a set time frame.
My reasoning is Apple wants the user experience to be as consistence as possible across the iPhone. The only choices the user makes involved the carrier type and their associated service plans.
No, you didn't say anything could happen, in a serious way. You said:
That's the same as saying NO, it won't happen.
Do you think that Apple, which has so heavily advertised this feature ever since the iPhone first came out would so easily give it up? I think it's very important to them. And as I said, there's no reason to believe it isn't being done. Maybe it isn't, but I would find that hard to believe, as it's been possible for a while now, and Verizon's had enough time to implement it.
You're using as an excuse the fact that we haven't heard about it. That's a poor reason. I would also think that it's a competitive disadvantage for Verizon, and would give AT&T a good advertising campaign.
This feature, as I said, if mentioned, would have been a vey good indicator of the iPhone's arrival, and I doubt that either Apple or Verizon wanted that before this Tuesday. There are excellent reasons given for that, and it's been in another article here, as well as other places.
I agree. I do not believe for one second SJ would permit an iPhone to be released with less than the capabilities it now has on AT&T.
As well as Apple. I can see this being a requirement put upon Verizon to get the iPhone, as well as an exclusivity that no competing phones with this feature will be sold for a set time frame.
My reasoning is Apple wants the user experience to be as consistence as possible across the iPhone. The only choices the user makes involved the carrier type and their associated service plans.
Sure. Can you imagine what would happen if a couple of million people want to move to Verizon, and AFTER they do, find out that they can't do what they did before? Man! Verizon would be so screwed.
Look, I admit that just because I can't find a reason why this wouldn't be done that that PROVES that it will be done, but it's hard to imagine why it wouldn't.
I thought I bookmarked the article that had some good technical info about this new rule and standard that explained it, but I don't seem to know what I put it under right now. The gist of it was that it wouldn't be too difficult to implement.
Jesus Christ! It?s not your fraking product. They have a right to sell it how they wish providing they aren?t breaking any laws. You either agree it, don?t agree to it and find a way around it (which has been brought to your attention), or you move on. There are no other options so stop feeling damn entitled.
Unlike Att I wonder if they allow you to buy it outright so as not to have to pay a stupid data plan, since unlike Att cannot rationalize needing a data plan due to visual voicemail.
Probably not.
Sure. Can you imagine what would happen if a couple of million people want to move to Verizon, and AFTER they do, find out that they can't do what they dud before? Man! Verizon would be so screwed.
Look, I admit that just because I can't find a reason why this wouldn't be done that that PROVES that it will be done, but it's hard to imagine why it wouldn't.
I thought I bookmarked the article that had some good technical info about this new rule and standard that explained it, but I don't seem to know what I put it under right now. The gist of it was that it wouldn't be too difficult to implement.
The best info i can find involves the aforementioned QChat from Qualcomm. What else can it be but VoIP over EV-DO Rev. A?
Talk time
I know I hit on this earlier, but I wanted to make sure it?s a clear point. The iPhone 4 has ?3G? talk time of 7 hours and ?2G? talk time of 14 hours. The only devices that beat the ?3G? talk time ? to reiterate, this means you have ?3G' activated on the device even though it still uses CDMA ?2G? for voice ? are those on Verizon and Sprint. Adding VoIP over EV-DO Rev. A would mean talk time is actually over ?3G?. It might even be less efficient than the way voice and data WCDMA works, but I?d imagine equivalent battery life.
The difference comes when comparing over Verizon phones to the iPhone. Some will wonder why everything on the iPhone is longer except ?3G? talk time. I doubt that will be a deal breaker, but I thought it should get mentioned.
The best info i can find involves the aforementioned QChat from Qualcomm. What else can it be but VoIP over EV-DO Rev. A?
Talk time
I know I hit on this earlier, but I wanted to make sure it?s a clear point. The iPhone 4 has ?3G? talk time of 7 hours and ?2G? talk time of 14 hours. The only devices that beat the ?3G? talk time ? to reiterate, this means you have ?3G' activated on the device even though it still uses CDMA ?2G? for voice ? are those on Verizon and Sprint. Adding VoIP over EV-DO Rev. A would mean talk time is actually over ?3G?. It might even be less efficient than the way voice and data WCDMA works, but I?d imagine equivalent battery life.
The difference comes when comparing over Verizon phones to the iPhone. Some will wonder why everything on the iPhone is longer except ?3G? talk time. I doubt that will be a deal breaker, but I thought it should get mentioned.
You know, every detail is important. But will most people notice the time? Possibly we will get better call quality, though I've not complained about mine. It is true that voice over GSM is worse than over CDMA.
You know, every detail is important. But will most people notice the time? Possibly we will get better call quality, though I've not complained about mine. It is true that voice over GSM is worse than over CDMA.
From what I?ve read the voice algorithm over UMTS and CDMA are both on par. It?s the GSM that is really poor. However, I?ve read there are several voice algorithms and/or quality levels that can be sued depending on need so it?s possible CDMA could still be better than UMTS.
I wonder how this is affected with VoIP over EV-DO and if millions of iPhones doing real time voice with QoS over EV-DO will affect the network load significantly.
From what I?ve read the voice algorithm over UMTS and CDMA are both on par. It?s the GSM that is really poor. However, I?ve read there are several voice algorithms and/or quality levels that can be sued depending on need so it?s possible CDMA could still be better than UMTS.
I wonder how this is affected with VoIP over EV-DO and if millions of iPhones doing real time voice with QoS over EV-DO will affect the network load significantly.
VOIP has been getting better, but it still, at least to me, can sound echo-y at times. You do need a GOOD broadband connection. I've found that over WiFi, it's usually fine, except for some times when the internet's having problems, but that it's usually worse over most 3G connections.
40GB to 100GB month.
Damn soli those are landline amounts. I use my phone a lot and never go past 3GB.
VOIP has been getting better, but it still, at least to me, can sound echo-y at times. You do need a GOOD broadband connection. I've found that over WiFi, it's usually fine, except for some times when the internet's having problems, but that it's usually worse over most 3G connections.
Hmm.. crazy thought…
Maybe Apple created it.
Maybe they took the voice and initiation protocols used in FaceTime to make this happen over Verizon’s 3G network.
Maybe that is why FaceTime was first created, with the video and marketing name later be attributed.
Maybe that one reason why Jobs said FaceTime over the carrier’s network wouldn’t come until 2011.
Damn soli those are landline amounts. I use my phone a lot and never go past 3GB.
Mine is a landline once it gets to the other side of their towers.
I expected lower prices at Verizon....after all you are getting less:
-slower speed
-no concurrent data and voice access (I can't use my GPS while I talk!)
-no international coverage
-no rollover minutes
-no free visual voicemail
-no free wifi
On that last point...you might want to check your facts because I believe you are wrong (Hint: you are wrong). Haven't you been corrected on this in the past?
Hmm.. crazy thought?
Maybe Apple created it.
Maybe they took the voice and initiation protocols used in FaceTime to make this happen over Verizon?s 3G network.
Maybe that is why FaceTime was first created, with the video and marketing name later be attributed.
Maybe that one reason why Jobs said FaceTime over the carrier?s network wouldn?t come until 2011.
Of course, this is all possible. I admit I didn't think of that before.
Austria: 1000 minutes + 1000 SMS = 8.8 euros a month (here).
That's less than 12 dolars a month.
Just sayin'.
Given that Austria is the size of the average Texan's BBQ, it is not that expensive for a phone company to cover it. How much does your phone company charge you to include France, Germany, Spain, Holland, Portugal etc.?
Let's just hope that this is all wrong and there will be some price/service competition if this actually does happen.
I suspect at first they will have a hard time just filing orders for people who don't need any extra incentives. Hopefully with time there will be some competition between ATT & Verizon once the low hanging fruit has be harvested.
Of course, this is all possible. I admit I didn't think of that before.
Not until I read your post did the idea pop into my head.
Not until I read your post did the idea pop into my head.
That's why these discussions are good.