[...] So with the definition of 4G being far more ambiguous than 3G ever was, I don't see Apple calling the 6th iPhone "iPhone 4G". [...]
Amen brother. Just so we're clear, let's all remember that LTE is still just "evolved 3G." LTE and WiMax are "4G technologies" in the same sense that the wheel is an "automotive technology." Just building blocks. Precursors to the final product.
The ITU will determine the final 4G spec, and here's what they have to say about LTE and WiMax:
Quote:
As the most advanced technologies currently defined for global wireless mobile broadband communications, IMT-Advanced is considered as ?4G?, although it is recognized that this term, while undefined, may also be applied to the forerunners of these technologies, LTE and WiMax, and to other evolved 3G technologies providing a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed.
The LTE Advanced spec is supposedly a relatively simple update to LTE, and LTE Advanced just might be chosen as the "real 4G" spec. We'll know some time next year.
Remember that the ITU has already given their blessing for calling LTE and WiMAX '4G', as noted by your quoted text. Not that it really matters because no governing body I'm aware of requires carrier and handset vendors to use ITU definitions for marketing their products or services. If AT&T wants to call HSPA+ their '4G' network they well within their rights to do so.
I have an iPhone 4, and it drops back to edge every couple of minutes of use, 4G is not a widely deployed spectrum across all U.S. carriers. I don't see the need to stress it's importance at this point.
The vast majority of people do not live in areas with marginal coverage. We're not in Kansas anymore.
I think we're rounding the corner in terms of these 'compromises' that Cook mentioned. The upcoming Droid Razr is only 7.1mm and has LTE. If Motorola can do it, no reason Apple can't, especially 8 months or so from now.
To say that the RAZR is only 7.1m thick is like saying the MacBook Air is 0.2" thin. In other words, that's ignoring the thickest part of the slab which, in Motorola's case, is the hunchback camera.
"4G. It makes the internet a bunch faster, like when you use Google Maps and stuff."
"Yeah - Get me that!"
"Sorry. It won't be available where you live for five more years. And when you get it, you'll have to pay more (unless you're on Verizon) and you'll reach your bandwidth cap faster."
Frankly, until there is some compelling reason to have even faster web access, I'm just not convinced I need to pay extra to the phone companies for LTE speed. I get emails fast enough - and I'm only using the browser or web accessed apps at times when I'm moving between home and destination.
I'm all for faster speeds, but I'd rather have greater connectivity, or more consistent connectivity, first.
Look for the day when LTE modems replace DSL and cable modems in the home. The carriers/providers would like nothing else but to eliminate the physical wires (twisted pair and coax) going to the home, eliminating the cost of maintenance and the workforce needed to provide that maintenance. There's already talk about AT&T uverse going wireless in the future. Stick a vrad box in a neighborhood with an antenna on top of it and transmit the uverse signal to the homes. Remember LTE stands for Long Term Evolution. Even the current theoretical speeds of 4G LTE is enough for high definition video. In five years the sky could be the limit in terms of wireless bandwidth.
Capping my home Internet to 2GB a month! That's hilarious!
And where, exactly, will you go if this happens? Simple economics. No physical wires means no "last mile" infrastructure build costs, no maintenance costs, no labor costs. Let's just say I work in the industry and can tell you that gigabit Ethernet is being deployed at a blinding pace to every cell tower out there. There are already Fujitsu 400 gigabit transmission systems operating in the central office where I spend my eight hours a day, along with 40 gigabit routers made by Juniper Networks. It's coming, my friend, and it will be sooner rather than later.
Yeah, but the fact that carrier stores and all the employees that man them are deceitful arm-twisting salesmen who don't know right from wrong and will lie through their teeth to get a sale is something that the manufacturer shouldn't really worry about.
They have very little control over that stuff outside of bribing the players to promote their phone and Apple (uniquely in fact) is AFAIK the only cell phone manufacturer that has already sworn off such payola.
It puts them in a tough spot in that outside of their own retail stores, the iPhone is rarely promoted (or even visible sometimes), but it's a moral issue. Personally, I applaud them for refusing to stoop to the kind of bribery and sweetheart deals that the other manufacturers use.
The iPhone sells on it's actual merits, but mostly to informed customers. It's literally the "smart choice." If someone is so stupid as to take the word of one of those sharpie sale men in the cell phone store over the facts, then they can't be helped.
I don't know about now, but back when we had the computer stores (1978-1989) Apple offered SPIFFS -- as did many other manufacturers.
Management were able to control the use of SPIFFS by deciding which were allowed (which products management wanted to sell) and pooling any payments among all the stores' employees (including accounting, phone, counter, training/checkout, service, delivery... everybody).
Our employees were salaried with overtime/comptime and no commissions.
Our goal was to treat every customer as a customer of Computer Plus -- regardless of who initially served/sold to him.
This avoided any of that: "Oh, I can't help her, she's Larry's customer"... they were all "Computer Plus'" customers.
It worked out quite well as we had a lot of new reference/recommendation sales and repeat customers.
My point, If a retailer cares to -- it can control how the customer is treated, what is being sold and how it is being sold... and stand behind their sales.
It is interesting that Best Buy, for one, does not pay commissions...
And where, exactly, will you go if this happens? Simple economics. No physical wires means no "last mile" infrastructure build costs, no maintenance costs, no labor costs. Let's just say I work in the industry and can tell you that gigabit Ethernet is being deployed at a blinding pace to every cell tower out there. There are already Fujitsu 400 gigabit transmission systems operating in the central office where I spend my eight hours a day, along with 40 gigabit routers made by Juniper Networks. It's coming, my friend, and it will be sooner rather than later.
I think we're decades off from that being common place. Just look at how long cellphones were around before they started replacing land lines.
And that's a simple exchange since you can only be on one phone at a time and you get plenty of minutes from your mobile network operator, or extra minutes if you fold the savings from a landline into your cellphone bill.
But data is different. Customers tend to have multiple devices they want connected, sometimes at the same time. They also need ever increasing amounts of data. Not just from lifestyle changes but from the internet itself pushing more data just to render a single website.
Consumers may even place less phone calls than they use to because of the internet. I know I sure have.
LTE might be the first that can feasibly replace cable and DSL for many customers in terms of speeds, but without a much higher data cap it's not going to be enough for a home of computers and internet capable devices. 5GB caps aren't going to cut it for a family of four with 1 desktop, 2 notebooks, 2 iPads, 4 smartphones, and a game console or two.
2012 is the first year that LTE has even made sense for Apple. We'll know more by CES 2012 if we see svelte smartphones with LTE and reports of decent battery life.
So, uh… why does the industry think it can cap us, throttle us, and overcharge us for trash networks?
Because it's all about the money. Carriers are already capping "home internet" but at much higher levels. The same will apply when DSL and cable modems become obsolete. You'll get your 10-20 Mbps wireless "home" connection with a cap. I'm not a network engineer, just a union craft puke who cleans and connects fiber optic jumpers all day long and I can clearly see what's coming down the pike with LTE and/or successor technologies.
I think it will be iPhone 5. If they make it iPhone 6 the average person on the street is going to ask what happened to iPhone 5? Why did they skip a number?
Here on AI, we have been following each and every release since the original but the average customer isn't focused on the details so much. They see a 4 right now and would be surprised if the next phone was called 6.
Right now we are at iPhone 4.2. The next version will probably be iPhone 5.
I used to have a sig that went something like this:
"The 1G iPhone is 2G, 2G is actually 2.5G; the 2G iPhone is 3G and 2.5G -- there is no 2G..."
Maybe it's time to give a little thought to a new sig -- to help clarify things... but, sigh, sigs are limited to 240 characters.
HSDPA compatible for theoretical download speeds of up to 14.4Mbps. That has led U.S. carrier AT&T to advertise that the iPhone 4S has 4G-like speeds on its GSM network.
Speedtest, on an iPhone 4S moments ago: 0.7Mbps down/0.03Mbps up. 4G speeds my foot. If AT&T can get us consistent 3G speeds (3Mbps down), I'll be perfectly happy.
Improve your bandwidth in NYC, AT&T! Four years of abysmal failure is long enough.
Comments
[...] So with the definition of 4G being far more ambiguous than 3G ever was, I don't see Apple calling the 6th iPhone "iPhone 4G". [...]
Amen brother. Just so we're clear, let's all remember that LTE is still just "evolved 3G." LTE and WiMax are "4G technologies" in the same sense that the wheel is an "automotive technology." Just building blocks. Precursors to the final product.
The ITU will determine the final 4G spec, and here's what they have to say about LTE and WiMax:
As the most advanced technologies currently defined for global wireless mobile broadband communications, IMT-Advanced is considered as ?4G?, although it is recognized that this term, while undefined, may also be applied to the forerunners of these technologies, LTE and WiMax, and to other evolved 3G technologies providing a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed.
Here's the full statement from the ITU: http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/p...s/2010/48.aspx
The LTE Advanced spec is supposedly a relatively simple update to LTE, and LTE Advanced just might be chosen as the "real 4G" spec. We'll know some time next year.
The term "4G" isn't even defined yet.
Remember that the ITU has already given their blessing for calling LTE and WiMAX '4G', as noted by your quoted text. Not that it really matters because no governing body I'm aware of requires carrier and handset vendors to use ITU definitions for marketing their products or services. If AT&T wants to call HSPA+ their '4G' network they well within their rights to do so.
people agree even though they have no idea what 4G or any other term means.
They know that with 4G, the Internet will work faster. People are not dolts.
I have an iPhone 4, and it drops back to edge every couple of minutes of use, 4G is not a widely deployed spectrum across all U.S. carriers. I don't see the need to stress it's importance at this point.
The vast majority of people do not live in areas with marginal coverage. We're not in Kansas anymore.
"Do you mind that your 4S doesn't have 4G?"
"Four what?!"
"4G. It makes the internet a bunch faster, like when you use Google Maps and stuff."
"Yeah - Get me that!"
I think we're rounding the corner in terms of these 'compromises' that Cook mentioned. The upcoming Droid Razr is only 7.1mm and has LTE. If Motorola can do it, no reason Apple can't, especially 8 months or so from now.
To say that the RAZR is only 7.1m thick is like saying the MacBook Air is 0.2" thin. In other words, that's ignoring the thickest part of the slab which, in Motorola's case, is the hunchback camera.
How much of the world will have LTE next year?
They've got it where I live.
That's probably why I always see new Android phones everywhere, and hardly ever see anybody with an iPhone.
"4G. It makes the internet a bunch faster, like when you use Google Maps and stuff."
"Yeah - Get me that!"
"Sorry. It won't be available where you live for five more years. And when you get it, you'll have to pay more (unless you're on Verizon) and you'll reach your bandwidth cap faster."
"So why should I care about it?"
"You shouldn't."
Frankly, until there is some compelling reason to have even faster web access, I'm just not convinced I need to pay extra to the phone companies for LTE speed. I get emails fast enough - and I'm only using the browser or web accessed apps at times when I'm moving between home and destination.
I'm all for faster speeds, but I'd rather have greater connectivity, or more consistent connectivity, first.
Look for the day when LTE modems replace DSL and cable modems in the home. The carriers/providers would like nothing else but to eliminate the physical wires (twisted pair and coax) going to the home, eliminating the cost of maintenance and the workforce needed to provide that maintenance. There's already talk about AT&T uverse going wireless in the future. Stick a vrad box in a neighborhood with an antenna on top of it and transmit the uverse signal to the homes. Remember LTE stands for Long Term Evolution. Even the current theoretical speeds of 4G LTE is enough for high definition video. In five years the sky could be the limit in terms of wireless bandwidth.
Look for the day when LTE modems replace DSL and cable modems in the home.
HA HAH AH AH A HAHA H AH AH A HA HAHAHA
Capping my home Internet to 2GB a month! That's hilarious!
Exactly what Apple was thinking with the 4S.
Conversation with my Wife:
"Do you mind that your 4S doesn't have 4G?"
"Four what?!"
...does that mean that the guys who have phones with marginal performance will be trying to locate the 4G spot?
HA HAH AH AH A HAHA H AH AH A HA HAHAHA
Capping my home Internet to 2GB a month! That's hilarious!
And where, exactly, will you go if this happens? Simple economics. No physical wires means no "last mile" infrastructure build costs, no maintenance costs, no labor costs. Let's just say I work in the industry and can tell you that gigabit Ethernet is being deployed at a blinding pace to every cell tower out there. There are already Fujitsu 400 gigabit transmission systems operating in the central office where I spend my eight hours a day, along with 40 gigabit routers made by Juniper Networks. It's coming, my friend, and it will be sooner rather than later.
And where, exactly, will you go if this happens?
I'll just not have Internet. Simple.
no "last mile" infrastructure build costs, no maintenance costs, no labor costs.
?gigabit Ethernet is being deployed? There are already 400 gigabit transmission systems operating? ?along with 40 gigabit routers?
So, uh? why does the industry think it can cap us, throttle us, and overcharge us for trash networks?
Seriously, why are these articles even here?
Yeah, but the fact that carrier stores and all the employees that man them are deceitful arm-twisting salesmen who don't know right from wrong and will lie through their teeth to get a sale is something that the manufacturer shouldn't really worry about.
They have very little control over that stuff outside of bribing the players to promote their phone and Apple (uniquely in fact) is AFAIK the only cell phone manufacturer that has already sworn off such payola.
It puts them in a tough spot in that outside of their own retail stores, the iPhone is rarely promoted (or even visible sometimes), but it's a moral issue. Personally, I applaud them for refusing to stoop to the kind of bribery and sweetheart deals that the other manufacturers use.
The iPhone sells on it's actual merits, but mostly to informed customers. It's literally the "smart choice." If someone is so stupid as to take the word of one of those sharpie sale men in the cell phone store over the facts, then they can't be helped.
I don't know about now, but back when we had the computer stores (1978-1989) Apple offered SPIFFS -- as did many other manufacturers.
Management were able to control the use of SPIFFS by deciding which were allowed (which products management wanted to sell) and pooling any payments among all the stores' employees (including accounting, phone, counter, training/checkout, service, delivery... everybody).
Our employees were salaried with overtime/comptime and no commissions.
Our goal was to treat every customer as a customer of Computer Plus -- regardless of who initially served/sold to him.
This avoided any of that: "Oh, I can't help her, she's Larry's customer"... they were all "Computer Plus'" customers.
It worked out quite well as we had a lot of new reference/recommendation sales and repeat customers.
My point, If a retailer cares to -- it can control how the customer is treated, what is being sold and how it is being sold... and stand behind their sales.
It is interesting that Best Buy, for one, does not pay commissions...
And where, exactly, will you go if this happens? Simple economics. No physical wires means no "last mile" infrastructure build costs, no maintenance costs, no labor costs. Let's just say I work in the industry and can tell you that gigabit Ethernet is being deployed at a blinding pace to every cell tower out there. There are already Fujitsu 400 gigabit transmission systems operating in the central office where I spend my eight hours a day, along with 40 gigabit routers made by Juniper Networks. It's coming, my friend, and it will be sooner rather than later.
I think we're decades off from that being common place. Just look at how long cellphones were around before they started replacing land lines.
And that's a simple exchange since you can only be on one phone at a time and you get plenty of minutes from your mobile network operator, or extra minutes if you fold the savings from a landline into your cellphone bill.
But data is different. Customers tend to have multiple devices they want connected, sometimes at the same time. They also need ever increasing amounts of data. Not just from lifestyle changes but from the internet itself pushing more data just to render a single website.
Consumers may even place less phone calls than they use to because of the internet. I know I sure have.
LTE might be the first that can feasibly replace cable and DSL for many customers in terms of speeds, but without a much higher data cap it's not going to be enough for a home of computers and internet capable devices. 5GB caps aren't going to cut it for a family of four with 1 desktop, 2 notebooks, 2 iPads, 4 smartphones, and a game console or two.
Just like the 4S was supposed to.
Seriously, why are these articles even here?
2012 is the first year that LTE has even made sense for Apple. We'll know more by CES 2012 if we see svelte smartphones with LTE and reports of decent battery life.
I'll just not have Internet. Simple.
Yeah, right.
So, uh… why does the industry think it can cap us, throttle us, and overcharge us for trash networks?
Because it's all about the money. Carriers are already capping "home internet" but at much higher levels. The same will apply when DSL and cable modems become obsolete. You'll get your 10-20 Mbps wireless "home" connection with a cap. I'm not a network engineer, just a union craft puke who cleans and connects fiber optic jumpers all day long and I can clearly see what's coming down the pike with LTE and/or successor technologies.
I think it will be iPhone 5. If they make it iPhone 6 the average person on the street is going to ask what happened to iPhone 5? Why did they skip a number?
Here on AI, we have been following each and every release since the original but the average customer isn't focused on the details so much. They see a 4 right now and would be surprised if the next phone was called 6.
Right now we are at iPhone 4.2. The next version will probably be iPhone 5.
I used to have a sig that went something like this:
"The 1G iPhone is 2G, 2G is actually 2.5G; the 2G iPhone is 3G and 2.5G -- there is no 2G..."
Maybe it's time to give a little thought to a new sig -- to help clarify things... but, sigh, sigs are limited to 240 characters.
HSDPA compatible for theoretical download speeds of up to 14.4Mbps. That has led U.S. carrier AT&T to advertise that the iPhone 4S has 4G-like speeds on its GSM network.
Speedtest, on an iPhone 4S moments ago: 0.7Mbps down/0.03Mbps up. 4G speeds my foot. If AT&T can get us consistent 3G speeds (3Mbps down), I'll be perfectly happy.
Improve your bandwidth in NYC, AT&T! Four years of abysmal failure is long enough.