 | | well it still looks cool and i bet you look real cool using it.
function is overrated. | |
|
 |  Mactronel Camino RealPremium join:2001-12-16 CM94sv | Re: well it still looks cool It does look cool. But is it really useful? I would really be disappointed after spending that kind of cash. V2.0 has to do better... -- If only the Verizon CSRs worked this well.  | |
|
 |  Time4aNAPPremium join:2007-04-09 Des Plaines, IL | If any girl says that, she's just being polite.  | |
|
 |  | | I haven't see anyone using one. Only seeing them use it as portable video player. For a $600 portable video player, it's quiet expensive. | |
|
 |  MysticGogetaThe Robot DevilPremium join:2005-03-14 League City, TX | It would be like that one commercial of sprints mobile broadband vs AT&T there would be buzzards flying around you when you finally loaded a page lol -- Team Discovery-Join the fight | |
|
 93254336Weapons Of MasturbationPremium join:2001-10-20 kudos:1 | Pokey is as pokey does For a real thrill in "molasses ballet," try viewing a https page from a bank, etc. on it.
- Dan -- "That which does not kill us makes us stranger."
| |
|
 tekmunkiTekmunkiPremium join:2001-12-06 Lake City, FL | Question... I was running this speedtest on Sprints network for comparison...
I get 396k (on evdo)...
but the latency reports back 1000ms 1000ms 0ms 0ms 1000ms... Mind you, this is directly using the phone browser.
I usually average around 100-150ms ping on my cell tethered to my PC. Anyone know why this speedtest reports back latency like this? -- TekMunki "There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't."
www.tekmunki.com | |
|
 |  gdmPremium,MVM join:2001-06-15 Mchenry, IL kudos:3 | Re: Question... I get 661kbps on att 3G network. The latency is the same as what you are getting. either 0ms or 1000ms. | |
|
 |  |  | | Re: Question... Due to a wait state in the way the network handles requests. | |
|
 |  |  en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA | Tethered ZX-20 on AT&T 3G over bluetooth
Latency:313ms 312ms 344ms 1125ms 313ms 296ms 329ms 328ms 297ms 328ms
Speed: 499kbps
Latency is a bit high... but then again, I'm on the other side of the country
$ tracert i.dslr.net
Tracing route to i.dslr.net [209.123.109.176] over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 149 ms 130 ms 151 ms 172.26.248.2 2 149 ms 156 ms 152 ms 172.26.248.2 3
$ ping i.dslr.net PING i.dslr.net (209.123.109.177): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 209.123.109.177: icmp_seq=0 ttl=46 time=218 ms 64 bytes from 209.123.109.177: icmp_seq=1 ttl=46 time=203 ms 64 bytes from 209.123.109.177: icmp_seq=2 ttl=46 time=218 ms
----i.dslr.net PING Statistics---- | |
|
 |  |  |  justinAustralian join:1999-05-28 New York, NY kudos:7 | Re: Question... yep that looks about right. Latency for icmp ping at 200ms would mean higher latency to completely fetch a null file. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA | Re: Question... Most definately. | |
|
 |  |  | | on my att 8525 on 3G i have seen as high as 900kbps down, 290kbps up, and about 100ms avg ping time.
but on average i would say it is more like: 770 down, 260 up, 130ms ping | |
|
 |  | | happens with sprint from handsets, especially if you're in a building or moving. I have the same issue with my 700wx, except when attached to an external antenna which is outside my office. | |
|
 |  justinAustralian join:1999-05-28 New York, NY kudos:7 Host: IPv6 Business Connectiv.. Console/Handheld g.. Home/Office setup .. Photos of Broadban..
| said by tekmunki:but the latency reports back 1000ms 1000ms 0ms 0ms 1000ms... Mind you, this is directly using the phone browser. That browser (some phone browsers) are unable to do sub-second timings so you either get a full second, or zero seconds. Sorry. I should be able recalculate an average latency from 10 latencies like that, though, so all is not lost. | |
|
 |  |  tekmunkiTekmunkiPremium join:2001-12-06 Lake City, FL | Re: Question... said by justin:said by tekmunki:but the latency reports back 1000ms 1000ms 0ms 0ms 1000ms... Mind you, this is directly using the phone browser. That browser (some phone browsers) are unable to do sub-second timings so you either get a full second, or zero seconds. Sorry. I should be able recalculate an average latency from 10 latencies like that, though, so all is not lost. That makes sense. Thanks. I was using IE/WM5 on a Moto Q. Using tethering and a Vista PC, I get around 200-250ms. -- TekMunki "There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't."
www.tekmunki.com | |
|
 |  Time4aNAPPremium join:2007-04-09 Des Plaines, IL | Latency with TCP can be very different from latency with ICMP. That's my guess.
Personally I don't get why so much attention is paid to latency. I know that it's a big deal for gamers. Are 95% of all Internet users there just for games?
Any IP latency pales in comparison to the latency caused by the multiple DNS lookups that have become the norm on most popular websites. Everything else that I care about can be buffered. | |
|
 |  |  justinAustralian join:1999-05-28 New York, NY kudos:7 Host: IPv6 Business Connectiv.. Console/Handheld g.. Home/Office setup .. Photos of Broadban..
2 edits | Re: Question... here is why. To "complete" loading a page, even a well designed one like news.yahoo.com, there are too many requests to do all in parallel (on default configured browsers) and some requests wait, or are caused by, the completed loading of previous requests.
Anything with terrible latency multiplies perceived loading time many times as the serial nature of some of the request blocks involves waiting for the turnaround multiple times.
The DNS issue is different and IMO less important, if you use a site you've previously used, it is probably cached (unless the site uses a variety of different and annoying ad services which always seem to involve new DNS lookups).
Anyone based overseas using US sites immediately recognizes how annoying a high latency connection becomes, and that involes usually no more than a 250ms turnaround. If a wireless network tends to offer 500ms or more latency then you are standing the equivalent of 24,000 miles away from the site. This can be annoying if you're actually standing on a san francisco street, trying to load news.yahoo.com. | |
|
 TopmounterSent By Grocery Clerks join:2001-02-20 Evergreen, CO 1 edit | Finally... Latency has always been my biggest gripe about EDGE.
Depending upon what city I'm in, I get 128Kbps to 256Kbps "speed" with EDGE on my Nokia E50, but it's the latency of the EDGE network that hampers the web browsing experience.
I'd like to compare the tracert to a particular website between EDGE and my traditional Internet connection. | |
|
 |
 |  justinAustralian join:1999-05-28 New York, NY kudos:7 Host: IPv6 Business Connectiv.. Console/Handheld g.. Home/Office setup .. Photos of Broadban..
| Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad... said by djrobx:The behavior you describe (~60kbps, 500ms latency) is almost exactly what I used to see from my older EDGE capable phones. I'm told this is because they were not class 10 EDGE, but my HTC 3125 that performed poorly claimed to support class 10. Does anyone know if iphone is Edge class 10 capable, and confrmed as operating at 240kbit ? | |
|
 |  | | You must have something there. My Blackjack is the same thing. I get on average about 200k on edge.
Closer to 1000k when on the 3g network.
I haven't (and probably won't) run this speedtest they are talking of.
Edge isn't so bad on my blackjack...there definitely is some latency going on though. -- "There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots" | |
|
 |  |  gdmPremium,MVM join:2001-06-15 Mchenry, IL kudos:3 | Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad... I agree my BJ works pretty good in Edge areas. I will test it later tonight. To me ATT's EDGE works better then Sprints or Verizon non EVDO areas. | |
|
 |  |  |  | | Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad... my att 8525 on EDGE gets about 175 down, and 80 up but with avergae ping times of 500-600ms...8( | |
|
 |  |  |  huntml join:2002-01-23 Mullica Hill, NJ | True. But there's A LOT more EDGE only area on ATT's map than there is 1XRTT on Sprint's and VZ's maps. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  gdmPremium,MVM join:2001-06-15 Mchenry, IL kudos:3 | Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad... True but I do go to places that are rural and when I had verizon it worked for crap. With ATT I at least get email and I can surf the web mainly for scores and weather. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  huntml join:2002-01-23 Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad... It's like everything else, whatever works for you.
I live in metro PHL, and Sprint (my carrier) and ATTW both have 3g deployed in this area, and actually ATT is on average a bit faster. So if it was only about speed in my home market (and I didn't mind paying a bit more for speed, being capped, and not being able to stream stuff to my phone, etc....), ATTW wouldn't be a bad choice for me.
But when I go visit family in rural VA I can still get 3g while my sister gets very slow EDGE (like dialup speed).
ATTW won't even show their 3g coverage on their national map: you have to zoom in to like street level before they'll show it! | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA | Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad... just enter the state (no city, zip or street) after it shows the state, click on 3g. -- Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
 |  |  justinAustralian join:1999-05-28 New York, NY kudos:7 | Yeah actually I looked at the dump of our older mobile speed test, and iPhones are logging between 48kbit and 175kbit max over EDGE (I ignored all the wifi connected examples), but with even worse recorded latencies. Interesting. | |
|
 |  |  |  Bink63Tweet THISPremium join:2002-10-06 Everywhere Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...I can't get this to run on my Sprint CrackBerry 8830.
I click the start button and get no activity and the ????? remain between the latency and speed labels.
Regards,
Randy -- Go Sox, and take Grossman with you!!!! »www.uspctechs.com | |
|
 |  |  |  |  justinAustralian join:1999-05-28 New York, NY kudos:7 | Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad... yeah blackberrys suck for anything like this. All the web pages pass via a proxy server in canada, and the blackberry browser is broken with almost no javascript capability at all. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  See 8 replies to this post |
 |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 | I like the results of the tinyspeed test on my Comcast HSI connection: Latency: 24ms 21ms 30ms 27ms 20ms 28ms 25ms 21ms 23ms 21ms
Speed: 27744kbps | |
|
 |  en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA | My Samsung ZX-20 is rated as as Class 10 EDGE device... best I've receieved through tethering was ~146kbps ... of course, I've only tried it a couple times, as 3G is finally deployed here. -- Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
 |  | | I just ran that "Small Speed Test" on my HTC MDA on the T-Mobile Edge network and I got 173 kbps but crazy latency of 958ms.. with up to 1231ms at times. -- "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them." -- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four.
| |
|
 1 edit | Edge What's the surprise? Edge is slower. | |
|
 | | Chance for Treo or Blackberry Well to me this all seems like a bust for the iphone. The hype created sold the initial phones. I think either Treo or Bberry can go for the kill in the smartphone war. All someone needs to come up with is a small well-built phone, with qwerty, REAL wifi, 2+ megapixel camera/video, gps, 1gb memory, and tons of 3rd party applications. Release to all carriers and the fight will have been won for good. | |
|
 |  exocet_cmYou delete it, I'll find itPremium join:2003-03-23 New Orleans, LA kudos:2 | Re: Chance for Treo or Blackberry This is why I am keeping my Crackberry. | |
|
 |  | | i have been wondering about memory in smart phones for a while. i have an 8525 and i love it but it only has about 50mb of useable space on it. with the small size and cheap cost of memory these days i just cant understand why they dont put a couple gig of memory in these smartphones today. | |
|
 |  |  | | Re: Chance for Treo or Blackberry said by bignate:i have been wondering about memory in smart phones for a while. i have an 8525 and i love it but it only has about 50mb of useable space on it. with the small size and cheap cost of memory these days i just cant understand why they dont put a couple gig of memory in these smartphones today. Luckily for me I have the Treo 650 and I can just slap in a 1gb sd card and load itup with games, music, etc. | |
|
 | | iphone test Well I just ran it twice here on my iphone. Got 5/5 bars on the signal strength in downtown Columbia, SC.
1st Test: Latency: 3457,264,178,219,644,6062,471,2600,1177,297
Speed: 350kbps
Second Test Latency: 1391,596,627,595,539,617,625,709,577,617
Speed: 108kbps
I don't know why the first test showed such a higher speed. I'm definitely not connected to wi-fi or anything. | |
|
 |  justinAustralian join:1999-05-28 New York, NY kudos:7 | Re: iphone test The first test had awful latencies, perhaps some of the 10 parallel test transfers failed leading to an optimistic speed. | |
|
 |  en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA | 3G does a bit better Latency:427ms 190ms 180ms 250ms 180ms 180ms 242ms 177ms 206ms 174ms
Speed: 680kbps -- Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
 jgkoltPremium join:2004-02-21 Lakewood, OH | iPhone version 2 We knew there would be huge hype for this iPhone, that was a given. They are leaving it open to have the iPhone version 2 to make up all that they are lackign now. As a consumer i hate this since they release a product that they know will be outdated when they sell it. Now on thier side the more phones they sell the less expensive the r and d will be so they can bump up to the next version with little cost and sell it with large profits. thats how i see it. -- www.LakeSemaJ.com | |
|
 |  Titus PulloI came, I saw, I slept join:2004-06-26 kudos:1 Reviews:
·Embarq Now Centu..
| Re: iPhone version 2 said by jgkolt:We knew there would be huge hype for this iPhone, that was a given. They are leaving it open to have the iPhone version 2 to make up all that they are lackign now. The margin on this thing, if you're to believe the scuttlebutt, is a stockholders dream now. Hype was key, because ver. 2 won't have it (unless it flies out of Jobby Jobs arse during a keynote). They'll leverage some sort of convergence and add the oh-so-obviously missing features of ver 1. Toss in the old more storage trick (and gouging you for it with ridiculous markups on flash memory), and it'll be stockholders day part 2. I'll stick with a standard cell and my Macs. -- The woman from 1984 put down her hammer for an iMac®, iPod® & iPhone® | |
|
 |  |  Need BB join:2001-12-21 Rochester, NY | Re: iPhone version 2 Verizon Wireless EVDO Rev. A:
Latency: 200ms120ms121ms120ms110ms120ms130ms120ms120ms140ms Speed: 1922kbps -- AWD Turbo Power | |
|
 | | No Flash or Java? ...and the battery is soldered in.
What the hell are people paying for? | |
|
 |  FiLPremium join:2005-08-16 Silver Spring, MD | Re: No Flash or Java? The look...
People just like having button-less pieces of crap up against their faces.
The Linux based phone looks REAL good; if it drops, I'm buying it off the break. Thats a phone people could actually USE, and look kinda cool while at it...:) | |
|
 |  |
 | | 3g My new RAZR pulls down 3g most of the time. Sites load nearly as fast as they would on my pc. Occasionally it connects through EDGE and uh.. yea... | |
|
 mrvoice join:2001-02-22 Northridge, CA | IPHONE & Slow Network For me to switch. They better get the new Iphone 2.0 hardware to support 3G. Second, offer other carriers in addition to AT&T (Cingular is the Worst)
Make Iphone work with Sprint's EVDO Network and you've got a deal.
Broadband speed with Verizon with also be cool. But none of this GSM phone garbage.
It's a nice toy, but too pricey and low performance. I'll keep my $39.99/mo free incoming minutes 24/7 from sprint Thank You very much. | |
|
 |  en102Canadian, eh? join:2001-01-26 Valencia, CA | Re: IPHONE & Slow Network Yuck... Sprint has the worst coverage in So-Cal. I'd be roaming on Verizon Wireless all the time.
Personally I'd take AT&T's 3G over EVDO..
I'll keep my $50 for 2 lines with 750 minutes + rollover (2600+ 2800 'bonus' rollover).
I'll admit.. I'd take Sprint over Verizon Wireless though (too much bad history in Northridge for me). -- Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
 |  |  DPainPremium join:2004-02-19 | Re: IPHONE & Slow Network Lil off topic :P but here is a speed test with my brand spanking new mogul from sprint.. cant wait for evdo revision A | |
|
 |  |  |  Need BB join:2001-12-21 Rochester, NY 1 edit | Re: IPHONE & Slow Network REV A is super. My pings are usually between 80-150ms which is good enough for VOIP and gaming.
»/linequality/nil/2244946
-- AWD Turbo Power | |
|
 |  |  |  |  DPainPremium join:2004-02-19 1 edit | Re: IPHONE & Slow Network Rgr..I haven't tried to tether it yet and test my pings in game.. but it's something to consider... if I do get decent speeds and latencies once rev A comes out will cancel my backup dsl line which is basically costing me same as sprint's cheapest data plan 15.00 | |
|
 RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03 join:2000-05-11 | More HSDPA results for you Here's another AT&T 3G data point for you:
Latency: 240ms 230ms 241ms 250ms 250ms 261ms 240ms 230ms 261ms 250ms
Speed: 660kbps
This is with my LG CU500V tethered to my laptop and only one "bar" signal. -- Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
 |
 |
|