how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
1023 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
amungusPremium
join:2004-11-26
America Reviews:
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| oh hamburgers Ah good ol' GSM. So glad I'm not with a carrier that uses it.
I'm seriously surprised there still isn't MMS on an iPhone. Of all the things to not have... Granted, it's usually super-profitable for carriers, and should be pretty much free (maybe except for pic/video messages), but to not have it at all has to kind of suck.
Honestly can't believe iPhones are on AT&T only. Sure, some cities have faster data services, but when you're somewhere that doesn't, you might as well start looking for some wi-fi.
Here's to hoping Verizon, or somebody with CDMA (and a more consistent network) can someday get iPhones on their network.
Neat little gadgets - sadly lackluster network. Otherwise I would have probably bought one by now. Probably doesn't matter to the hardcore, I know, but seriously, if I got an iPhone, the FIRST thing I'd want it to do WELL and reliably, is be a phone, not just a call-dropping, non-battery replaceable shiny little status symbol. | | |
|
| said by amungus:Ah good ol' GSM. So glad I'm not with a carrier that uses it. I'm seriously surprised there still isn't MMS on an iPhone. Of all the things to not have... Granted, it's usually super-profitable for carriers, and should be pretty much free (maybe except for pic/video messages), but to not have it at all has to kind of suck. Honestly can't believe iPhones are on AT&T only. Sure, some cities have faster data services, but when you're somewhere that doesn't, you might as well start looking for some wi-fi. Here's to hoping Verizon, or somebody with CDMA (and a more consistent network) can someday get iPhones on their network. Neat little gadgets - sadly lackluster network. Otherwise I would have probably bought one by now. Probably doesn't matter to the hardcore, I know, but seriously, if I got an iPhone, the FIRST thing I'd want it to do WELL and reliably, is be a phone, not just a call-dropping, non-battery replaceable shiny little status symbol. Here is the problem: it's not that AT&T has a bad network. They have a very good network. But iPhone users use a lot of bandwidth. They hog the network. So if the iPhone were on Verizon, they Verizon would have the same problem and people would be blasting Verizon.
Let's blame all carriers. They push technology with glitzy ads but none of them actually work as advertised.
I say October 1st. should be "Let's all smash our iPhones, Blackberries, and Pre's day." We can rid ourselves of this problem once and forever. | |
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
1 edit | reply to amungus
I'm glad that I don't have Verizon OR the iPhone.
I use both Sprint CDMA and AT&T WCDMA (3g) with few issues in SoCal on either network.
The last time that I had Verizon Wireless, it was as bad for me (if not worse) that those with the iPhone complaining today.
Dropped calls + billing issues = very p.o.'d customer.
I'll never use Verizon Wireless again, unless the CEO comes to my house and kisses my a$$ on national TV. | |
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to dcdeadbeat5
The "if the iPhone was on Verizon, Verizon would crash" thing is a myth. CDMA + EvDO is a more spectrally efficient tech (1.25 MHz channels) than HSPA/GSM (5 MHz channels). You can put six voice channels and a full (up+down) data carrier on CDMA in 10MHz if you want. You can't do that with GSM.
Why else do you reckon that both major unlimited providers (CricKet, MetroPCS) use CDMA?
I don't hear Sprint users complaining about the network with their new Pres...ever. I don't hear Verizon peeps complaining about their phones on VZ's voice and data network...ever. It's just AT&T, and even then the 2G network is solid. It's just 3G that is still crap in many places. | |
 NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | reply to dcdeadbeat5
So then why is it that people were complaining about AT&T's lackluster network before the iPhone came out? I'm sorry to say that you've bought in to the corporate propaganda that AT&T tries to push out to everyone.
It's a sorry excuse, really. It's not like AT&T didn't know that the iPhone was coming, and that they had no idea of its potential. They've had quite a while to bring their network up to snuff-- even before the iPhone was a glimmer in Steve Jobs's eye.
I've been with AT&T for many years, and have never been truly satisfied with them. It's just that until now, I haven't been dissatisfied enough with them to want to leave. But that's changing. Corporate greed, inadequate infrastructure, and poor customer service are causing me to think about taking my 5 lines elsewhere. The sad thing is that even if I do I don't truly believe that I'm likely to have substantially different results... Oh well, at least if I move to Sprint I might be able to save a few bucks.
--
Trusting the Democrats to fix our economy and give us health care is like trusting the fox with keys to the henhouse, a brand new gas stove, and a pantry full of goodies for side dishes. In the end, all will be dead and nothing but lies will be told. | |
| reply to iansltx
said by iansltx:The "if the iPhone was on Verizon, Verizon would crash" thing is a myth. CDMA + EvDO is a more spectrally efficient tech (1.25 MHz channels) than HSPA/GSM (5 MHz channels). You can put six voice channels and a full (up+down) data carrier on CDMA in 10MHz if you want. You can't do that with GSM. Why else do you reckon that both major unlimited providers (CricKet, MetroPCS) use CDMA? I don't hear Sprint users complaining about the network with their new Pres...ever. I don't hear Verizon peeps complaining about their phones on VZ's voice and data network...ever. It's just AT&T, and even then the 2G network is solid. It's just 3G that is still crap in many places. CDMA can't do simultaneous voice and data at the same time. So really the experience with the iPhone would be less (just as it is with the PRE).
But there is some hope for those of you that hate AT&T. If (and I really doubt this) Verizon were to get the iPhone, they would launch it on LTE, not CDMA.
There is no way that Apple wants to build and test variants of the iPhone on different radios. That's not profitable. Right now one phone design works worldwide (except for China which needs no Wifi).
Sorry Verizon people, stop saying "The iPhone is coming to Verizon". By the time it does, the iPhone will be old technology and no one will want it, just like the Razr.
Verizon had their chance and lost. | |
| reply to NOVA_Guy
said by NOVA_Guy:So then why is it that people were complaining about AT&T's lackluster network before the iPhone came out? I'm sorry to say that you've bought in to the corporate propaganda that AT&T tries to push out to everyone. It's a sorry excuse, really. It's not like AT&T didn't know that the iPhone was coming, and that they had no idea of its potential. They've had quite a while to bring their network up to snuff-- even before the iPhone was a glimmer in Steve Jobs's eye. I've been with AT&T for many years, and have never been truly satisfied with them. It's just that until now, I haven't been dissatisfied enough with them to want to leave. But that's changing. Corporate greed, inadequate infrastructure, and poor customer service are causing me to think about taking my 5 lines elsewhere. The sad thing is that even if I do I don't truly believe that I'm likely to have substantially different results... Oh well, at least if I move to Sprint I might be able to save a few bucks. I work in IT so I didn't buy into any propaganda. I have real world experience with all of the networks. And guess what, they all work about the same.
Do these people that claim the network sucks actually own an iPhone? Or do they just like complaining. | |
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to dcdeadbeat5
The iPhone is two years old and isn't "old hat" yet. The iPod is much older and people still think it's cool. Your logic fails there.
Additionally, there are PLENTY of manufacturers who are profitable and make their devices for different technologies. heard of HTC? Samsung?
Lastly, voice + data simultaneously, while nice, isn't a make-or-break deal and I'd rather be able to do one or the other than to have neither due to network congestion. Plus, the next CDMA spec (if CDMA sticks around in the face of WiMAX and LTE, which I think it will) has the provision for simultaneous voice and data. | |
| said by iansltx:The iPhone is two years old and isn't "old hat" yet. The iPod is much older and people still think it's cool. Your logic fails there. Additionally, there are PLENTY of manufacturers who are profitable and make their devices for different technologies. heard of HTC? Samsung? Lastly, voice + data simultaneously, while nice, isn't a make-or-break deal and I'd rather be able to do one or the other than to have neither due to network congestion. Plus, the next CDMA spec (if CDMA sticks around in the face of WiMAX and LTE, which I think it will) has the provision for simultaneous voice and data. I love how CDMA fanboys go the the theoretical "next" CDMA when approached with limitations of simultaneous voice and data. It is very practical. I have my iPhone tethered and I can say, make a phone call. Can't do that on Verizon.
There is no need for logic. Just a simple review of the inadequate capabilities of CDMA (and not the theoretical next gen that no one is adopting).
And any technology that is approaching a year old is old.
Personally even though I have an iPhone I cheer for the PRE.
But like I sad earlier. Let's all smash our phones and be free of the telco tyrannies. | |
amungusPremium
join:2004-11-26
America Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to dcdeadbeat5
I've used an iPhone, but do not own one.
Personally just not a fan of GSM networks for phone calls as it's based on TDMA.
T-Mobile also uses GSM, which I also do not care for when it comes to phone calls.
Perhaps it's better in some areas, but CDMA for phone calls still seems to be far more reliable overall.
What's funny is that in AT&T "3G" areas, the data is actually served via a variant of CDMA
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_···s_System
In some cases there are also "blends" of both TDMA/CDMA
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD-CDMA
...Speaking only from personal experience, I just happen to think that TDMA sucks badly for voice, and since GSM is based on this, it's not surprising to see the same randomly dropped calls...
Again, in some places, it's probably "better" but I still think it just doesn't work as reliably. Call me a "fanboy" or whatever you wish, I'm just voicing my own opinion and don't have a stake in things either way.
I also agree w/Ian that simultaneous voice/data doesn't make/break a deal for me either.
Hopefully a good standard will eventually take hold and prove to be the best for every carrier, and there will be reliable wireless service for both voice and data, no matter who you sign up with. Oh, and it'd be nice to add any phone to any carrier too...
...One can dream... | |
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to dcdeadbeat5
The "next" CDMA isn't theoretical. It's very practical. It just wont be rolled out for another year..
Also, some people don't need the newest greatest bestest thing out there. My first-gen iphone works just fine...it's not worth several hundred dollars to upgrade to the next gen. That said, I'll probably be getting a new phone in a few months on Sprint. My iMac (late 2007) will get an upgrade to Snow Leopard when that comes in the mail from Amazon. It's been a solid computer and I haven't had any need to upgrade it. My HTC Mogul lived out two years on-contract before I got the Touch Pro...
Also, if you want to talk theoretical look at LTE. Latest and greatest...which isn't out yet. WiMAX OTOH can do speeds comparable to DOCSIS 2 cable in the eal world. Which comes to the capacity thing again; AT&T and Verizon each have 22 MHz of spectrum on the 700MHz band. Clearwire has something like 120 MHz in the 2500MHz band. That's enough for twelve non-overlapping 10MHz WiMAX channels, or about 400 Mbps of capacity with the current system. Pretty crazy huh? | |
| said by iansltx:The "next" CDMA isn't theoretical. It's very practical. It just wont be rolled out for another year.. Also, some people don't need the newest greatest bestest thing out there. My first-gen iphone works just fine...it's not worth several hundred dollars to upgrade to the next gen. That said, I'll probably be getting a new phone in a few months on Sprint. My iMac (late 2007) will get an upgrade to Snow Leopard when that comes in the mail from Amazon. It's been a solid computer and I haven't had any need to upgrade it. My HTC Mogul lived out two years on-contract before I got the Touch Pro... Also, if you want to talk theoretical look at LTE. Latest and greatest...which isn't out yet. WiMAX OTOH can do speeds comparable to DOCSIS 2 cable in the eal world. Which comes to the capacity thing again; AT&T and Verizon each have 22 MHz of spectrum on the 700MHz band. Clearwire has something like 120 MHz in the 2500MHz band. That's enough for twelve non-overlapping 10MHz WiMAX channels, or about 400 Mbps of capacity with the current system. Pretty crazy huh? But I am tethering and talking on my iPhone right now, not a year from now. So HSPA wins over CDMA in this case.
No one has signed up to use the next gen CDMA. Sprint is reselling WiMax. Verizon is switching to LTE. CDMA is a goner.
I still say any consumer technology that is more than a year old is just plain old. Consumers want the latest and greatest, subsidized, and always available (at least until the next thing is out).
So let's end this cycle and all smash our phones. | |
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
| On smashing phones, you first. Personally I like living in the 21st century. If I wanted nothing to do with a telco I'd simply discontinue service and sell my equipment...and switch majors (from Computer Science).
Also, CDMA is going to be around for a few more years, just like GSM is still around with HSPA. WiMAX is on a totally different spectrum band so why not? As such, I think CDMA probably has one more revision before it stops being updated. I'm not talking about EvDO Rev. B, but I think the tech will continue to improve until WiMAX has been overlaid 100% over CDMA areas. Which will be awhile. | |
| reply to amungus
said by amungus:I've used an iPhone, but do not own one. Personally just not a fan of GSM networks for phone calls as it's based on TDMA. T-Mobile also uses GSM, which I also do not care for when it comes to phone calls. Perhaps it's better in some areas, but CDMA for phone calls still seems to be far more reliable overall. What's funny is that in AT&T "3G" areas, the data is actually served via a variant of CDMA » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_···s_SystemIn some cases there are also "blends" of both TDMA/CDMA » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD-CDMA...Speaking only from personal experience, I just happen to think that TDMA sucks badly for voice, and since GSM is based on this, it's not surprising to see the same randomly dropped calls... Again, in some places, it's probably "better" but I still think it just doesn't work as reliably. Call me a "fanboy" or whatever you wish, I'm just voicing my own opinion and don't have a stake in things either way. I also agree w/Ian that simultaneous voice/data doesn't make/break a deal for me either. Hopefully a good standard will eventually take hold and prove to be the best for every carrier, and there will be reliable wireless service for both voice and data, no matter who you sign up with. Oh, and it'd be nice to add any phone to any carrier too... ...One can dream... This standard already exists. It is called LTE. The problem is that there is no voice component agreed upon just yet. So any company that implements it will have to use VOIP.
Also be careful about Wikipedia articles about cell phone technologies. While it is true that AT&T uses W-CDMA, that is not the same as Verizon's CDMA2000 technology. W-CDMA is better known as HSPA (or even the older UMTS).
HSPA allows for simultaneous voice and data. CDMA2000 does not.
LTE is the upgrade path for AT&T, Verizon, and just about every other cell company in the world (except Sprint which is reselling WiMax from Clear).
Once LTE is available, I would expect to see iphones on Verizon but not until then. | |
| reply to iansltx
said by iansltx:On smashing phones, you first. Personally I like living in the 21st century. If I wanted nothing to do with a telco I'd simply discontinue service and sell my equipment...and switch majors (from Computer Science). Also, CDMA is going to be around for a few more years, just like GSM is still around with HSPA. WiMAX is on a totally different spectrum band so why not? As such, I think CDMA probably has one more revision before it stops being updated. I'm not talking about EvDO Rev. B, but I think the tech will continue to improve until WiMAX has been overlaid 100% over CDMA areas. Which will be awhile. CDMA is a dead technology. Like dcdeadbeat said, no one is continuing down its path. Everyone is jumping ship to LTE. Sprint will be the only one in the future with CDMA. They sold off their WiMax to Clear and will resell it back with backwards compatibility with CDMA (dual mode radios).
LTE will have the advantage by a long shot. And by extension, so will the GSM providers like T-Mobile and ATT. | |
|
