Ahh, so they are really selling a bill of goods on that whole 4G malarky.
There is nothing wrong with that marketing. They aren?t saying it?s the ITU?s definition of ?4G? so it?s a moot point. Unless the FCC steps in and says you can only refer to your network based on the ITU defined standards they aren?t breaking any laws. Who really knows the ITU standards anyway?
There is nothing wrong with that marketing. They aren?t saying it?s the ITU?s definition of ?4G? so it?s a moot point. Unless the FCC steps in and says you can only refer to your network based on the ITU defined standards they aren?t breaking any laws. Who really knows the ITU standards anyway?
It renders any distinction between 3G and 4G pointless. If T-Mob calls HSPA+ 4G, there really is no such thing as 3G or 4G. It becomes a meaningless tag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
There is nothing wrong with that marketing. They aren’t saying it’s the ITU’s definition of ‘4G’ so it’s a moot point. Unless the FCC steps in and says you can only refer to your network based on the ITU defined standards they aren’t breaking any laws. Who really knows the ITU standards anyway?
Now we know that LTE is probably off the table for iPhone 5, I think what we will see is a significant processor speed or memory improvement instead and I think that it will be more than welcome. The iPad struggles quite a bit with it's slow processor and limited memory, the iPhone would too if it had any productivity apps that actually taxed the thing.
I'd like to see a dual or four core chip and twice the memory for starters. For the iPad it's almost essential, but it would be nice for the iPhone as well and I don't see it getting in anyone's way.
It's a little strange that a "productivity app" would tax the iPhone more than games. Writing documents should not tax the specs, but games should and have been doing very well on the limited resources of both the iPhone and iPad. I'd welcome more speed and memory, but they are fairly capable as is. The only time resources are an issue for me is when hitting the back button in Safari - it always has to reload the page, which is very slow.
It renders any distinction between 3G and 4G pointless. If T-Mob calls HSPA+ 4G, there really is no such thing as 3G or 4G. It becomes a meaningless tag.
It always has been unless qualified. The number plus ?G? designation to refer to generation is meaningless on its own. From Verizon?s PoV they had CDMA as ?2G?, CDMA2000/EV-DO as ?3G?, and now LTE, which is there biggest network change ever, they are calling ?4G?. I see nothing wrong with them calling their 4th generation of major network overhauls 4G just as I see nothing wrong with people referring to the most recent iPod Nano as the 6G model. Sure, it?s harder to confuse meaning with the Nano, but that?s why these need to be qualified and understood so we don?t confuse them.
Furthermore, we?ve dealt with Verizon calling their EV-DO 1x ?3G? when the speeds could easily have been slower than AT&T?s EDGE ?2G?. I?d love for the designation to be based on a minimum and up and down throughput rate, but that?s simply not going to happen without government oversight, and since it only appeals to a few people I doubt will ever happen.
Not sure the distinction is pointless, but it's a lot like 4 guys living in tract homes in a middle class neighborhood all claiming to have the best house when, to everyone else, they are all pretty much the same. In my opinion, Verizon has a bigger lot, more upgrades and now new appliances so it gets more looks and chosen more often.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
It renders any distinction between 3G and 4G pointless. If T-Mob calls HSPA+ 4G, there really is no such thing as 3G or 4G. It becomes a meaningless tag.
I don't have any problem with Verizon's branding. I can see EVDO being its 3rd generation network as well as LTE being their 4th generation network.
No one else in the entire world but T-Mob is calling HSPA+ 4G. Its purely marketing spin.
What will T-Mob label LTE when everyone else is calling it 4G? It unnecessarily complicates things and confuses people.
Actually I disagree that it only effects a few people. It effects everyone who is shopping in the mobile phone market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
It always has been unless qualified. The number plus ‘G’ designation to refer to generation is meaningless on its own. From Verizon’s PoV they had CDMA as ‘2G’, CDMA2000/EV-DO as ‘3G’, and now LTE, which is there biggest network change ever, they are calling ‘4G’. I see nothing wrong with them calling their 4th generation of major network overhauls 4G
What is the standard download/upload rates that ITU considers "true" 4G LTE (or Wimax) networks?
I'm now getting between 3 and 4 Mbps download and .5 to 1.3 upload Mbps rates on ATT around the area (on my iP4) (a significant increase from last week, by the way). How does this compare with ITU 4G standards (not so-called carrier 4G specs as they exist today)?
What is the standard download/upload rates that ITU considers "true" 4G LTE (or Wimax) networks?
I'm now getting between 3 and 4 Mbps download and .5 to 1.3 upload Mbps rates on ATT around the area (on my iP4) (a significant increase from last week, by the way). How does this compare with ITU 4G standards (not so-called carrier 4G specs as they exist today)?
That wasn?t my point. Sure, we all want these devices to be faster and better, but a simple HW comparison should be used as proof as there are other variables to consider.
The point of using better HW isn?t easily quantified when you have different OSes on them. With Android not having GPU accelerated UI it will likely needs more RAM and CPU cycles to do the same job as the iPhone.
Could an Android tablet run on 256MB RAM as well as the iPad can? I don?t think so. I do think the iPad need more RAM and hope it gets 1GB, but that is a different issue. The iPhone 5 won?t get a quad-core ARM CPU because it?s not available. Only last week we saw dual-core Cortex-A9 processors in devices COMING OUT LATER THIS YEAR. I bet most of them ship after the iPad 2.
Here is an example of what I mean by HW specs not being a great indicator of performance when cross comparing OSes. Note that even the iPhone 3GS with a 600MHz CPU, 256MB RAM and 802.11g is besting the throughput of 1GHz CPU, 1GB RAM and 802.11n Android devices.
The saddest part of that chart, regardless of device, is how crappy N performance is, period.
This reminds me of the "MHz Myth" campaign back when Apple tried to convince the market that G5 Macs running OSX were faster than Intel PCs. Though many, including myself, supported the myth argument, at the end of the day most users don´t buy it and prefer to go only with hardware specs, unfortunately.
Course on the sunspider benchmark (arguably more CPU intensive) the N1 beats everything...
True. But even on desktops, you can typically get 22mbps on G. The diff on the g vs. n on the iphone is just ridiculous. But again, it isn't just an apple issue.
A desktop has an unlimited power supply and far more access to resources than a phone does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets
True. But even on desktops, you can typically get 22mbps on G. The diff on the g vs. n on the iphone is just ridiculous. But again, it isn't just an apple issue.
A desktop has an unlimited power supply and far more access to resources than a phone does.
How far down the troll-hole is he that you can?t see that Apple?s driver and OS are much better that the listed competition at pulling faster WiFi data rates at lower power. Does he really think that 802.11n is working the same without consideration across all systems?
Comments
Ahh, so they are really selling a bill of goods on that whole 4G malarky.
There is nothing wrong with that marketing. They aren?t saying it?s the ITU?s definition of ?4G? so it?s a moot point. Unless the FCC steps in and says you can only refer to your network based on the ITU defined standards they aren?t breaking any laws. Who really knows the ITU standards anyway?
There is nothing wrong with that marketing. They aren?t saying it?s the ITU?s definition of ?4G? so it?s a moot point. Unless the FCC steps in and says you can only refer to your network based on the ITU defined standards they aren?t breaking any laws. Who really knows the ITU standards anyway?
Last time I heard ITU had pretty high standards.
There is nothing wrong with that marketing. They aren’t saying it’s the ITU’s definition of ‘4G’ so it’s a moot point. Unless the FCC steps in and says you can only refer to your network based on the ITU defined standards they aren’t breaking any laws. Who really knows the ITU standards anyway?
Now we know that LTE is probably off the table for iPhone 5, I think what we will see is a significant processor speed or memory improvement instead and I think that it will be more than welcome. The iPad struggles quite a bit with it's slow processor and limited memory, the iPhone would too if it had any productivity apps that actually taxed the thing.
I'd like to see a dual or four core chip and twice the memory for starters. For the iPad it's almost essential, but it would be nice for the iPhone as well and I don't see it getting in anyone's way.
It's a little strange that a "productivity app" would tax the iPhone more than games. Writing documents should not tax the specs, but games should and have been doing very well on the limited resources of both the iPhone and iPad. I'd welcome more speed and memory, but they are fairly capable as is. The only time resources are an issue for me is when hitting the back button in Safari - it always has to reload the page, which is very slow.
It renders any distinction between 3G and 4G pointless. If T-Mob calls HSPA+ 4G, there really is no such thing as 3G or 4G. It becomes a meaningless tag.
It always has been unless qualified. The number plus ?G? designation to refer to generation is meaningless on its own. From Verizon?s PoV they had CDMA as ?2G?, CDMA2000/EV-DO as ?3G?, and now LTE, which is there biggest network change ever, they are calling ?4G?. I see nothing wrong with them calling their 4th generation of major network overhauls 4G just as I see nothing wrong with people referring to the most recent iPod Nano as the 6G model. Sure, it?s harder to confuse meaning with the Nano, but that?s why these need to be qualified and understood so we don?t confuse them.
Furthermore, we?ve dealt with Verizon calling their EV-DO 1x ?3G? when the speeds could easily have been slower than AT&T?s EDGE ?2G?. I?d love for the designation to be based on a minimum and up and down throughput rate, but that?s simply not going to happen without government oversight, and since it only appeals to a few people I doubt will ever happen.
It renders any distinction between 3G and 4G pointless. If T-Mob calls HSPA+ 4G, there really is no such thing as 3G or 4G. It becomes a meaningless tag.
No one else in the entire world but T-Mob is calling HSPA+ 4G. Its purely marketing spin.
What will T-Mob label LTE when everyone else is calling it 4G? It unnecessarily complicates things and confuses people.
Actually I disagree that it only effects a few people. It effects everyone who is shopping in the mobile phone market.
It always has been unless qualified. The number plus ‘G’ designation to refer to generation is meaningless on its own. From Verizon’s PoV they had CDMA as ‘2G’, CDMA2000/EV-DO as ‘3G’, and now LTE, which is there biggest network change ever, they are calling ‘4G’. I see nothing wrong with them calling their 4th generation of major network overhauls 4G
What will T-Mob label LTE when everyone else is calling it 4G?
4G eLiTE?
I'm now getting between 3 and 4 Mbps download and .5 to 1.3 upload Mbps rates on ATT around the area (on my iP4) (a significant increase from last week, by the way). How does this compare with ITU 4G standards (not so-called carrier 4G specs as they exist today)?
What is the standard download/upload rates that ITU considers "true" 4G LTE (or Wimax) networks?
I'm now getting between 3 and 4 Mbps download and .5 to 1.3 upload Mbps rates on ATT around the area (on my iP4) (a significant increase from last week, by the way). How does this compare with ITU 4G standards (not so-called carrier 4G specs as they exist today)?
Currently LTE and WiMAX are not even close.
What is the standard download/upload rates that ITU considers "true" 4G LTE (or Wimax) networks?
4G eLiTE?
4Ge(nhanced)?
That wasn?t my point. Sure, we all want these devices to be faster and better, but a simple HW comparison should be used as proof as there are other variables to consider.
The point of using better HW isn?t easily quantified when you have different OSes on them. With Android not having GPU accelerated UI it will likely needs more RAM and CPU cycles to do the same job as the iPhone.
Could an Android tablet run on 256MB RAM as well as the iPad can? I don?t think so. I do think the iPad need more RAM and hope it gets 1GB, but that is a different issue. The iPhone 5 won?t get a quad-core ARM CPU because it?s not available. Only last week we saw dual-core Cortex-A9 processors in devices COMING OUT LATER THIS YEAR. I bet most of them ship after the iPad 2.
Here is an example of what I mean by HW specs not being a great indicator of performance when cross comparing OSes. Note that even the iPhone 3GS with a 600MHz CPU, 256MB RAM and 802.11g is besting the throughput of 1GHz CPU, 1GB RAM and 802.11n Android devices.
The saddest part of that chart, regardless of device, is how crappy N performance is, period.
This reminds me of the "MHz Myth" campaign back when Apple tried to convince the market that G5 Macs running OSX were faster than Intel PCs. Though many, including myself, supported the myth argument, at the end of the day most users don´t buy it and prefer to go only with hardware specs, unfortunately.
Course on the sunspider benchmark (arguably more CPU intensive) the N1 beats everything...
Yes, we know it's all about 2.2.
The saddest part of that chart, regardless of device, is how crappy N performance is, period.
Well it is on phones.
True. But even on desktops, you can typically get 22mbps on G. The diff on the g vs. n on the iphone is just ridiculous. But again, it isn't just an apple issue.
True. But even on desktops, you can typically get 22mbps on G. The diff on the g vs. n on the iphone is just ridiculous. But again, it isn't just an apple issue.
A desktop has an unlimited power supply and far more access to resources than a phone does.
How far down the troll-hole is he that you can?t see that Apple?s driver and OS are much better that the listed competition at pulling faster WiFi data rates at lower power. Does he really think that 802.11n is working the same without consideration across all systems?
A desktop has an unlimited power supply and far more access to resources than a phone does.
I doubt that is the reason. But if so then ARM has a long way to go...