iPhone 4S new 14.4 Mbps HSDPA 4G speeds won't help Americans

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 101
    ikolikol Posts: 369member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    And yet people were clamoring for LTE. How foolish they all are.



    The telecoms need shut down. Have the BBB do it, I don't care. If we ever want this country to be competitive again, we need to have higher standards and an iron fist on forced carrier hardware upgrades.



    This reminds me of when the Concord was built yet wasn't allowed to fly over the United States because of standards and regulations.
  • Reply 22 of 101
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,678member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Stay tuned.



    Oh, iWill. But while it looked imminent, it now seems relegated to a future release. Oh well.
  • Reply 23 of 101
    mumbo jumbomumbo jumbo Posts: 1,633member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    Yeah. It wouldn't have anything at all to do with the current anti-business liberal administration. What a crazy thought.



    Please explain to me then how it is that in Evil Socialist Europe we have grown up, regulated, standardized and invested communications networks (especially in Bolshevik Sweden and Stalinist Denmark) and in unregulated, ?corporations are people too? America, you don?t.



    Thanks.
  • Reply 24 of 101
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eightzero View Post


    I'm all out of meh for today's "event." I am an AAPL fanboi. Dig their stuff. Really like my iMac, iPad, iPods, and iPhones. Use them all regularly. They are great value, and just. work.



    Sadly, that means I have high expectations. And I suppose that's unfair. I really like APPL stuff, but there was nothing here for me. iMessage won't work with my iMac where I rather need it. The nano "upgrade" really isn't. I really don't see a reason to get an iP4S over my iP4. I'm really not a gamer, the speed thing isn't an issue, nor do I travel the world. The location thingy seems OK, but Glympse does what I need.



    I guess the biggest disappointment was the nano and iMessage. Those could have rocked me.



    What the? Dude, you smell like a paid shrill or salmon. Why? This thread has nothing about what you posted. Apple fanboy you aint'. Good try tho.



    Um, there is only two hundred new features in iOS 5. Maybe you should go buy a 4G Droid and literally watch your battery life vaporize. Poof.



    "My Biggest Disappointment was iMessage" LOL!!!! Epic Fail. Exactly what would have "rocked" you "fanboy"?



    Seems like you've been outed. LOL
  • Reply 25 of 101
    estyleestyle Posts: 201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shen View Post


    You did notice the economy collapsed under the last guy, right? That his "hands off" approach gave us rolling blackouts, oil spills, and wallstreets rape and pillage mentality?



    Or does your memory reboot each election cycle?



    apparently yours does...



    look up oil spill during 1992-2000

    wall street collapse

    energy crisis

    blackouts



    all during 1992-2000...as well



    quit the bitching about political parties

    WE put them in there and the type we put in is the type the other side will match us with

    Quick-tongued short-sighted beholden politicians LEFT & RIGHT



    go make a positive difference or find something interesting and true to complain about
  • Reply 26 of 101
    macinthe408macinthe408 Posts: 1,050member
    "Allowing us to take over T-Mobile will benefit all customers in the long run, and provide them the services they desire and deserve," said AT&T representative Chuck T. Fuckface.
  • Reply 27 of 101
    ojalaojala Posts: 18member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Until that happens, however, a primary feature of the new iPhone 4S model will only really be useful to users in Europe, Asia and other locations with completed, fully functional high speed mobile data networks.



    Which is good because Apple sells more iPhones outside of the US than in the US. Despite the sales figures the iPhone has been quite US-centric (and continues to be so).
  • Reply 28 of 101
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zindako View Post


    The rest of the world is leaving the U.S. Behind because of corporate greed and policy. Overcharge for service that is mediocre at best, while no percentage of the profits go towards build out of modern radio networks.



    Nonsense. Corporations in Europe have the same self-interest as corporations in the US. The problem is insufficient competition. US regulators allow mergers that shouldn't be allowed and create barriers to new entrants (in addition to the natural barriers, which are already very high).
  • Reply 29 of 101
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eightzero View Post


    Oh, iWill. But while it looked imminent, it now seems relegated to a future release. Oh well.



    iMessage'll be in a 10.x.x update, and I'd bet before the end of the year, providing no issues.
  • Reply 30 of 101
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,460member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    Yeah. It wouldn't have anything at all to do with the current anti-business liberal administration. What a crazy thought.



    Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that every carrier is adopting a different wireless technology in order to try and differentiate themselves from their competitors and lock customers in?
  • Reply 31 of 101
    estyleestyle Posts: 201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    Please explain to me then how it is that in Evil Socialist Europe we have grown up, regulated, standardized and invested communications networks (especially in Bolshevik Sweden and Stalinist Denmark) and in unregulated, ?corporations are people too? America, you don?t.



    Thanks.



    That would be for a couple of reasons

    1) We have two parties that fiscally are ideologically the same

    Left "We need to spend a lot on THIS"

    Right "We need to spend a lot on THAT"



    2) we pay your defense bills (I am not being snide, but the US does pay an overwhelming share of NATO costs and UN costs, especially compared to most European countries)



    3) We provide the consumer economy-of-scale for your corporations

    If your companies never had commercial transactions in the US economy they probably weren't the ones providing the revenue your country used for its programs



    4) Finally and really the most important

    It is different managing a the DC Metro (approx. population of Sweden or Denmark) area compared to an area the size and population equal to all of Europe (including the eastern half.
  • Reply 32 of 101
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,614member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    Yeah. It wouldn't have anything at all to do with the current anti-business liberal administration. What a crazy thought.



    Really? How is the current administration anti-business? Because they'd like some of the Fortune 500 companies with enormous profits to actually pay some Federal corporate taxes? Because they're so far unwilling to give a tax holiday to corporations who want to bring foreign profits back to the U.S. because the last time an administration did that, it didn't create any jobs? Because they actually want to enforce some regulations for clean air and water so that we don't all die of cancer?



    Tell me one policy change that conservatives would implement that would cause companies like AT&T to build out their systems faster.



    We had eight years of George Bush. When he left office, the DJIA was at 8776. As bad as it is again today, it's 2000 points higher. So you think big business loved the conservative policies of George Bush even though their stocks tanked?



    Or do you believe the lie that personal income taxes are higher today? Federal taxes are the lowest they've been in 30 years. During the Nixon administration, the highest marginal rate was 70%. During Reagan it was 50%. Today, it's 35%.



    Or do you believe that the "liberals" raised the capital gains tax? They should have, but they didn't. The long-term rate remains at 15% until December of 2012. I think it's fair that billionaire investors pay a much lower rate than everyone else, don't you?



    And I've got news for you: if you look at his actions, Obama is no liberal. He ran as a liberal, but he's acted as what used to be considered a conservative, before the Republican Party moved so far to the right at the urging of the Tea Party as to be in crazyland.
  • Reply 33 of 101
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,482member
    Why is this turning into a government discussion? Should we nationalize all of them?
  • Reply 34 of 101
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ChristophB View Post


    Why is this turning into a government discussion? Should we nationalize all of them?



    Really. I've deleted the political posts, cutting this thread in half. If any of you people can't make a post without bandwagoning for or against some branch of politics, please go to Political Outsider exclusively, or some other forum site.
  • Reply 35 of 101
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post


    You're wrong and I can tell you this from experience.



    When the New Zealand government owned the telecommunications industry New Zealand had the BEST telecommunications system in the world because the government had the foresight to get in bed with telecom manufacturers. As a result New Zealand was pushed as a testbed nation because it was large enough to provide valid results but small enough to roll back if it went pear shaped.



    Then, largely due to the National government bankrupting this nation in an effort to become more American capitalist, Labour decided to sell off a number of state owned assets one of which was Telecom.



    As a result of this New Zealand has ended up with a 3rd world telecommunications system that is only now coming back on track.



    Why is it coming back on track? Because of government regulations forcing Telecom to open up and split in much the same way the government split AT&T Bell. As a result of this we are finally starting to get better data rates and plans, better pricing on our calling, and better customer service even.



    This had not happened when telecom was left to do what it wanted and it crippled our country.



    You NEED government intervention more than you know. Your capitalist ideologies are screwing you over but you all seem to be too blind to see this.





    NZ does not have a 3rd world Telecom system, it is much better than 3rd world. Labour was the one that allowed Telecom to become a monopoly, they were the ones that made the laws around the sale, not sure why you are trying to blame National for this.



    The old post office was over weight government department, it needed to be trimmed down, maybe Telecom took it too far.



    And as for government intervention, remember the NZ Government forced Telecom to sell their GSM licence and use CDMA, that set NZ back years for mobile technology, intervention isn't always the best option.
  • Reply 36 of 101
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,482member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post


    "Allowing us to take over T-Mobile will benefit all customers in the long run, and provide them the services they desire and deserve," said AT&T representative Chuck T. Fuckface.



    I don't understand how this relates. There is no iPhone in the US that uses the frequencies for which tmobile US is licensed. Blame Apple and tmobile, not AT&T. Yelling at them to roll out LTE faster then getting pissed that they aren't rolling out HSPA+ at the speeds you want faster makes sense?



    Why all the venom directed at the one company that is closest to the rest of the globe with GSM? If Sprint and Verizon hadn't bet wrong for 3G and Sprint wrong for their initial 4G, perhaps there would be real competition TODAY with the same protocols. Until that can happen the market will remain splintered.
  • Reply 37 of 101
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    iMessage'll be in a 10.x.x update, and I'd bet before the end of the year, providing no issues.



    Why do you insist on being an Apple apologist in every single post? Are you trying to be the unofficial Apple customer service representative of AI even though you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about 90% of the time?
  • Reply 38 of 101
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,482member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    NZ does not have a 3rd world Telecom system, it is much better than 3rd world. Labour was the one that allowed Telecom to become a monopoly, they were the ones that made the laws around the sale, not sure why you are trying to blame National for this.



    The old post office was over weight government department, it needed to be trimmed down, maybe Telecom took it too far.



    And as for government intervention, remember the NZ Government forced Telecom to sell their GSM licence and use CDMA, that set NZ back years for mobile technology, intervention isn't always the best option.



    With all due respect, I don't think comparing NZ to the 270 million sq miles and 150+ million mobile phone subscribers is apples to apples (pardon the puns).
  • Reply 39 of 101
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,482member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Why do you insist on being an Apple apologist in every single post? Are you trying to be the unofficial Apple customer service representative of AI even though you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about 90% of the time?



    I thought he's been pretty spot on. Oh, that means I'm wrong at least 90% then. Sh!t!!
  • Reply 40 of 101
    I don't get this article.



    AT&T's network does suck in a lot of places, but right now at work, the Speedtest app on my iphone shows 3-4Mb/s down and 1.5Mb/s up. AT&T already has rolled out 14.4Mb/s speeds to towers, but the problem is their backhaul (the link between the tower and AT&T's network). In the few places where AT&T has upgraded the backhaul and the network links aren't too crowded, good speeds are possible. I don't think I'll double my throughput but 5-6Mb/s doesn't seem unlikely if I can get a strong signal and a unloaded tower.
Sign In or Register to comment.