×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

3G iPhone on the Way?

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the still-waiting dept.

191

mooseman93 wrote to point out Forbes is suggesting that if you haven't purchased an iPhone yet, you may want to wait just a little bit longer. Supposedly the next generation of iPhone will offer some substantial upgrades, including 3G capabilities. "To be sure, a 3G iPhone likely won't pop up over the next several weeks. The Unofficial Apple Weblog reported this week that Apple is hiring a television production firm in preparation for a high-profile late February announcement. That event, however, will likely detail the widely anticipated release of a software developer's kit for Apple's iPhone and iPod Touch. But the wait can't drag on much longer. AT&T is building out its high-speed wireless network as quickly as it can, announcing Wednesday that it will expand its 3G wireless broadband service to more than 80 additional cities by the end of the year for a total of roughly 350 markets."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Too Much Frosty Piss (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358656)

Miller High Life keeps me awake too late.

soem people still don't understand (4, Insightful)

alxtoth (914920) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358674)

You have a choice: you buy a product NOW, or you read the news: oh, there is a quad-GPU graphics card scheduled in 6 months. By the time it's ready, you read again: there is another one with 64 GPU's ready in one year. So, if your choice is to never be happy, don't blame it on tech.

Re:soem people still don't understand (5, Informative)

AdamReyher (862525) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358692)

There's a lot larger of a difference between a 3G iPhone and one that isn't than, say, between an 8800GT or 8800GTS. If this is, indeed, coming out, it would definitely be a good idea to hold off for a bit.

soem people still don't understand-inflation. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358836)

GUSH!! As the economy loses it's support with the deflation of all the fanboys...er, wallets!

Oo,ooo,,ooo,o,o,,ooo I'm as happy as a little girl (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358844)



Oo,ooo,,ooo,o,o,,ooo I'm as happy as a little girl

Apple! Oo,,,o,o,o,o,o,oo

Re:soem people still don't understand (1)

cgraeff (1098129) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359910)

Sorry, accidentally moded you down. I'm posting this to undo the moderation (a smart way to undo moderation even exist?).

Re:soem people still don't understand (0, Offtopic)

alxtoth (914920) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358776)

Can't believe, I had a first post !!!!

Re:soem people still don't understand (1)

phillips321 (955784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359358)

probably because you decided you didn't have enough time to http://rtfa.co.uk/ [rtfa.co.uk]

Re:soem people still don't understand (1)

Columcille (88542) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359796)

I don't get it... Link says, "the fact that you followed it proves the point" - wouldn't it tend to prove the opposite? The user has expressed a willingness to examine off-site information rather than to confine his stay to slashdot... sounds like an individual that might be willing to RTFA.

Re:soem people still don't understand (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358798)

So what you are saying is that I should wait 5 years for the 1099511627776 core GPU graphic card? But what about the 17592186044416 GPU graphics card that is going to come out 6 months later? There is only one way to solve this problem. The universe has about 10^80 atoms so logically if every atom could be a GPU then we should wait about 33 years. Hopefully there will be a couple of atoms left over for the monitor and game media. But the framerate should be awesome!

2G version first please (1)

crispi (131688) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358988)

Whilst Apple seems to be gearing up for the Next Big Thing, it would be good to get the existing iPhone in Australia, UK, etc...

Or are Apple going to simultaneously release in all regions.

Here's hoping it will be HSDPA compatible....

Re:2G version first please (1)

jacksonj04 (800021) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359308)

Given the iPhone is already available in those regions, and that Apple tends towards simultaneous releases (the 16gb version was simultaneous) then it would in fact make more sense to *wait* in the UK and Europe, since we have the biggest 3G infrastructure. In the USA you may as well just bite the bullet as you won't be able to take full advantage of 3G infrastructure for several months at least, unlike in the UK where we're well into the 90% coverage on most networks.

The chances are, much as the original iPhone is 'one model fits all quad band' that Apple will do the best they can to make it cross-tech compatible. Much of the 3G infrastructure is based on the same underlying tech so it shouldn't be that difficult, with the possible exception of Japan. Failing that, the EDGE will still be compatible across all iPhone markets so a region-specific 3G version which degrades to EDGE on foreign networks won't be too much of a problem (Save for data costs).

The Fine Print (1)

William Robinson (875390) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359026)

Or....

It could be taken other way, that current generation iPhones will be cheaper, and that is definitely good news for people like me with somewhat shallow pockets.

Re:The Fine Print (1)

Moofie (22272) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359852)

Don't bet on it. Historically, Apple has kept similar price points and updated capabilities. Of course, that's not always true, but it holds more often than not.

Re:soem people still don't understand (4, Insightful)

eebra82 (907996) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359122)

You have a choice: you buy a product NOW, or you read the news: oh, there is a quad-GPU graphics card scheduled in 6 months. By the time it's ready, you read again: there is another one with 64 GPU's ready in one year. So, if your choice is to never be happy, don't blame it on tech.
You're missing the point. iPhone over EDGE is a premature product, because the phone is meant to serve as both mobile phone and internet browser. You won't get that benefit before you reach 3G speeds.

You are obviously correct that hardware is under constant development, but put my point above to consideration and add the really expensive hardware you must plunge out cash for, suddenly some advice does come in handy.

Re:soem people still don't understand (4, Informative)

Realistic_Dragon (655151) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359310)

You're missing the point. iPhone over EDGE is a premature product, because the phone is meant to serve as both mobile phone and internet browser. You won't get that benefit before you reach 3G speeds.

Over here in the UK, where 3G coverage is really very good, a 3G plan can *replace* wired network connections. Speeds of 180kB/s are pretty common, and the bandwidth limits are pretty high too. (Enough for me, and I'm connected for about 14 hours a day.)

This just isn't the case with EDGE, so you end up having to pay for both a mobile plan and DSL/Cable/whatever which makes it much more costly. Being able to tether a handset to your laptop wherever you go, avoid high wifi charges*, and probably get a speed jump over your existing 1mbit DSL for the same price makes 3G really attractive.

*In the UK even hotels charge for WiFi.

Re:soem people still don't understand (1)

LaughingCoder (914424) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359582)

a 3G plan can *replace* wired network connections. Speeds of 180kB/s are pretty common,
Huh? I get 750KBps (that's 6Mbps) sustained and 1500KBps burst over my $50/month cable modem. I can't imagine cutting my speed by a factor of 4 (or more), and paying more, with bandwidth caps on top of all that! No, I'll keep my wired connection, thanks.

Re:soem people still don't understand (2, Interesting)

Troed (102527) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359598)

... and in Sweden we have HSPA mobile broadband - that's 7.2/1.4Mbit.

Oh, yes. The cost.

$25/month.

Re:soem people still don't understand (1)

ZorinLynx (31751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359956)

In my experience, the 3G network where I live (South Florida) is utter shite compared to Sprint and Verizon's EVDO RevA networks.

EVDO cards almost feel like local Internet connections, and are fast as hell. With my laptop I can fire up Google Earth and use it almost as well as I can on a DSL or cable modem. File transfers are fast, and coverage (in a moving vehicle) is excellent. This is on both Sprint and Verizon, though I go with Sprint because they don't whine about transfer limits.

Meanwhile, AT&T's 3G network is slow as hell and unreliable. It drops to EDGE frequently, which is even slower.

EDGE/3G was clearly the wrong technology choice, at least for here. I don't know if 3G coverage and performance is better elsewhere in the world, but in my stomping grounds, CDMA/EVDO rules the pack. It's why I don't have an iPhone, really.

Re:soem people still don't understand (1)

jbailey999 (146222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360044)

no, it really is no different. This is being sent from an iPhone without 3g because I needed a phone with these kinds of capabilities now. That the phone does exactly what apple said it would makes it a fully mature product (as opposed to, say, releases of Microsoft software that require service packs to get you functionality that was in the betas)

There are only a few times when it's worth waiting for tech, and that's at the usual consumer release times - back to school, Christmas, macworld, etc. Otherwise you have what you have. Move along.

You don't own an iPhone I take it. (3, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360570)

You're missing the point. iPhone over EDGE is a premature product, because the phone is meant to serve as both mobile phone and internet browser. You won't get that benefit before you reach 3G speeds.

That's odd, because I seem to be using maps, browsing the web, and checking in for flights online just fine today and I have been ever since I bought the phone at launch. Both over WiFi and Edge. A few million other people seem to agree with this assessment.

Yes 3G will make some of those things faster, but Google Maps is already plenty good as it is on Edge. Hardly missing any kind of benefit thanks.

Will I upgrade to the 3G phone when it comes out? Probably not, I'll wait a year or two for further improvements. 3G is not as required as some would like to believe, even if you buy the device for constant network connectivity.

Bad Analogy (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359176)

A better analogy would be someone who is stuck in the stone age on dialup and wants to have broadband. You aren't seriously suggesting that people buy the iPhone now and then buy another in a few months?

4G phones on the way too (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359922)

Yep, iphones will be 4G so don't buy one now, wait till they are even better.

EDGE is (mostly) fine, but AT&T coverage is sp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22359946)

I've been quite content with EDGE. The primary places I use the iPhone (work, home, cafe, even the auto repair shop) have WiFi. "On the road" I use Maps and Mail, and EDGE is sufficient.

Without a doubt, 3G will open the door to new applications - video in particular. But here in New Hampshire, AT&T coverage is spotty at best. I'd rather see AT&T invest in improving basic coverage before expanding their 3G network.

Anyway, it's my understanding that the current iPhone was announced 6 months in advance because the FCC required public filings 6 months in advance. Does anyone know if these FCC filings apply to a second gen handset as well?

Won't we see Apple pre-announce the 3G iPhone by 6 months?

Advertisements. (0, Troll)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358694)

More Apple advertising?... could you keep me informed about the SATA drives that Dell is offering too?

The iPhone invention/launch was news-worthy because it was a new "innovative" product, its network transfering speed and/or type is a service feature, something you'l find out when you go to buy an iPhone.

Generally... (2, Insightful)

Xenex (97062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358894)

Advertisements don't tell you to wait.

Teaser trailers (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359240)

Advertisements don't tell you to wait.
Not even the teaser for a film [wikipedia.org] ?

Consuming. (1)

Xenex (97062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359340)

Teasers trailers don't stop people 'buying' current films, in theory...

Re:Advertisements. (3, Insightful)

AndGodSed (968378) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359078)

I thought this was news for nerds, Iphone = nerd newsworthy, a 3G Iphone = Definitely nerd newsworthy, 3G Iphone in many markets where geeks have been waiting for them to arrive PLUS that the 2g one might be available cheaper therefore allowing gadget freaks all over to get one? Nerd Newsworthy.

this is speculation not news (4, Insightful)

EjectButton (618561) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358710)

What is with all of these articles (particularly Apple articles) that have absolutely zero substance? I read the summary and the article, this looks more like guerrilla marketing in the form of speculation piled on rumor piled on speculation via anonymous tip. I'm not trying to flame here but sites like Engadget, Gizmodo, and Digg are completely flooded with this crap and it's sad to see it seeping into Slashdot as well.

It's as though any headline ending in a question mark has a better than 50% chance of being an advertisement or a troll/flamebait piece.

this is desperation not news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358766)

"It's as though any headline ending in a question mark has a better than 50% chance of being an advertisement or a troll/flamebait piece."

Geeks get laid this coming week?

Re:this is speculation not news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358800)

Surely you've heard Jon Stewart's explanation of the use of question marks? .wmv [crooksandliars.com] and .mov [crooksandliars.com] formats.

Re:this is speculation not news (3, Informative)

nbert (785663) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358804)

The question mark isn't even necessary: AT&T's CEO said in November that a 3G iPhone is coming in 2008. [engadget.com]

Makes me wish for a job at Forbes though - I could predict such great things like Vista SP1 coming in march ;)

Re:this is speculation not news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358876)

I am pretty sure you have no clue about computers. When Apple introduces a product, its a major announcement to the industry and a major innovation. For example, before the iPod, the only way to have music on a small device was a Sony Walkman.

I am glad to see Apple announcements, as Apple is the only company innovating at all these days. For example, where would we be without the GUI, operating systems immune to hacking, MP3 players, and even the personal computer.

I am glad to see Apple announcements. It boosts stock price so I can buy a real BMW next time I hit the car dealership.

Re:this is speculation not news (1)

magnusrex1280 (1075361) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359568)

You realize, of course, that A) OSX isn't immune to hacking, and B) it has less trouble with viruses (virii for you literate types) because Windows is targeted so much more by virus writers and people digging for vulnerabilities.

Yes, Windows is also riddled with holes which makes it an easy target, but OSX isn't invulnerable.

Re:this is speculation not news (1)

Random Destruction (866027) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360034)

you fell for it man. that was clearly a joke.

iPhone in Japan (1)

shoemilk (1008173) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358714)

When the iPhone was first announced here, they said that it'd be here about a year later. As 3G is pretty much the standard (soon to be replaced) the timing of this doesn't really surprise me. However, if it's Japanese functionality doesn't improve over the iPod Touch's, it's not going to make much of a dent, I don't think.

Re:iPhone in Japan (1)

zIRtrON (48344) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359036)

Have you got any links to some of the hot japanese handsets?

Re:iPhone in Japan (2, Informative)

imasu (1008081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359098)

Check out softbank and docomo's web pages. My "free" handset from Softbank has a 320x240 display, two 2-megapixel cameras, bluetooth (duh), and is of course 3G with a nice high speed data connection. The current gen of phones, before you even have to pay extra, have "PC-style" (stupid marketing term) image capable web browsers, QC-code readers, kanji dictionaries, and do on. Then come the phones you pay extra for, which get super awesome pretty fast. [nttdocomo.com] (Link is for a phone series with a TV tuner, DVR, 3" 16x9 VGA+ display, GPS (and sweet-ass moving map app), 4Mbit data rate, etc).

Docomo is offering FOMA, a 4-7Mbit data service, which pretty much renders wireless hotspots superfluous, since you can buy PC-card FOMA modems that work with your docomo data plan at lots of places, even convenience stores I think.

That said, Apple is missing out on a major market here; the iPhone would sell like crazy.

Re:iPhone in Japan (1)

CptNerd (455084) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359420)

A lot of people don't realize that 3G is not necessarily 3G, since Japan is the only one that does 3G protocol over a frequency no other country uses. I got suckered by this when I bought my LG 3G phone at Cingular (later AT&T) and was assured that it would work in Japan. I found out that no US 3G phone will work in Japan, and I believe it's illegal to do so, due to the frequencies used. Likewise, I'm pretty sure you can't use a Japanese-legal phone in the US due to that frequency not being open for use here. Until Apple offers a really international iPhone, I'm holding off buying one. I can always rent one when I got to Japan.

Re:iPhone in Japan (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22359586)

Take a look at http://www.worldtimezone.com/gsm.html, [worldtimezone.com] then tell me: who's the oddball. Japan is special because there's no GSM coverage (their second generation network is PDC, which exists only in Japan), but their 3G network is the same kind you'd find everywhere else in the world, except in the US.

This is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358784)

A 3G iPhone isn't coming out soon. They just released double storage capacity. If 3G was coming soon, they'd hold on for a couple weeks. There's no reason to add an extra SKU for a few months. No one would want a crippled version if the same phone with 3G was available. The alternative is to confuse the customer by forcing them to choose between 3G or extra capacity, and most people would probably put 2+2 together and decide to wait until they could have both in the next one to come out. Sure, 3G iPhones probably will exist some day, but not for at least 6 months or more.

Asinine (1)

NMerriam (15122) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358838)

We're supposed to trust this entirely unfounded speculation, when they use logic like this?

"Apple is hiring a television production firm in preparation for a high-profile late February announcement. That event, however, will likely detail the widely anticipated release of a software developer's kit for Apple's iPhone and iPod Touch."


Why in the world would Apple prepare a high-profile media announcement for an SDK? That's just about the LEAST Apple-ish move anyone familiar with them could imagine! Consumers don't give a crap about SDKs. Even if they had major 3rd party software to launch with the SDK release, I can't think of a time Apple has ever made a big deal on TV about a specific piece of software. Forbes needs a reality check on their crystal ball.

It's far more likely that the "Get a Mac" commercial campaign is changing, as rumors have been circulating for a few weeks.

Re:Asinine (1)

jaysones (138378) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360260)

I don't think that was clear. Apple hires these people to shoot their webcasts. They didn't mean it was going to be on TV. Apple does this for almost all of their announcements. But yeah, I think they are going to make a big deal about 3rd party software & the SDK.

Wow... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358846)

3Gs for an iPhone? Now THAT is an expensive phone!

Apple SHOULD go 3G (2, Informative)

snuf23 (182335) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358864)

Whatever the validity, Apple should release a 3G iPhone soon. AT&T's 3G network works great. I get 700kbps on a Samsung Blackjack. It would be nice to have a phone with a decent browser to use on the network. 3G beats the crap out of Edge and there is no cost difference in the data plan (at least for a black jack).

Re:Apple SHOULD go 3G (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22359228)

700kbps? It's a strange definition of "good".
I live in Italy and 3G connections are up to 7,2Mbps.
Yes, Mbps.
OTOH, you definitely can't use it for everything else than work or just web browsing and e-mail, because the companies will charge you in blood liters per kB once you cross the "2 GB per month" limit.

good in the USA I should say (1)

snuf23 (182335) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359378)

It's a definition of "good" based on what is available in my local market in the USA. Over here you are lucky to be able to get 7Mbps over cable let alone wireless. I consider 700kbps "good" compared to Edge which was giving me about 200kbps at maximum. Edge being the maximum you will get on an iPhone.
Although I fail to see how much use 7Mbps would be with a restrictive transfer limit. You can get an unlimited plan over here.

Re:Apple SHOULD go 3G (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22359386)

AT&T's 3G network works great. I get 700kbps on a Samsung Blackjack. It would be nice to have a phone with a decent browser to use on the network. 3G beats the crap out of Edge and there is no cost difference in the data plan (at least for a black jack).
So Opera Mini [operamini.com] is not a decent browser on a Samsung Blackjack? Sure, Opera Mini doesn't have multitouch and the Blackjack doesn't have that huge fabulous screen, but Opera Mini has had cool mobile features like landscape mode, zoom, fit-to-width, virtual mouse, and power scrolling shortcuts.

I'm not trying to downplay the greatness of iPhone/Safari, but I think Opera brought great web browsing to mobile phones before Apple did.

Re:Apple SHOULD go 3G (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359606)

There's also a slew of Nokia phones that have a quite nice browser - N95 for one (or several, since it has several models now).

If you feel like you have to spend a load of cash on a phone, then there's even one with a nice qwerty keyboard (E90 - I have one myself and it's very nice).

Re:Apple SHOULD go 3G (3, Interesting)

anothy (83176) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359756)

3G beats the crap out of Edge
this is totally non-sensical; it's like saying "Hybrids beat the crap out of a Prius". EDGE is 3G. IMT-2000 sets the definition for 3G overall, and the 3GPP and 3GPP2 (stupidest organization name ever) do it for GSM and CDMA technologies respectively. both of those organizations recognize that they're working within the IMT-2000 framework, as defined by the ITU (the telecom standards people).

the market use of these terms has changed over time. five years ago, nobody questioned that EDGE was 3G. the marketing hype was that once 3G (by which everyone meant EDGE) was ubiquitous, it would change everything. well, we got EDGE, and very little changed. so they kept the same marketing message - once we get 3G, everything will change - and just obliterated and precise meaning of what 3G was.

EDGE is explicitly a 3G technology. the speeds found in real-world applications are dependent on far more things than the underlying technology used. one can run EDGE slower than RTT (a clearly 2G technology) if you allocate few enough cells, or faster than EVDO if you allocate enough. if what you really mean is that we want HSDPA, please just say that. if what you really mean is that you want >300Kbps, say that.

exactly (0)

n3tcat (664243) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358880)

This is exactly why I never adopt 1st Gen technology.

Only now 3G in US? (1, Insightful)

protomala (551662) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358896)

The news for me is that the 3G network isn't already all over United States. Here in there city I live (Porto Alegre) in Brazil there is already a 3G network on 800Mhz and another in 1.2Ghz is expected to start this year, so I was expecting US would be already much more advanced.
This and the e-voting makes me wonder if those news about US being beaten technology by other countries isn't only for Japan/Asia/Europe, seems like in many areas even in-development countries are starting to be better.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (4, Interesting)

jrothwell97 (968062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358968)

A great point: over in Great Britain 3G has been working (very quickly) for several years now, whilst O2 have only just started rolling out EDGE for the iPhone (mainly). When I tried using an iPhone in an O2 shop a few months ago, it was painfully slow under EDGE (but fine under Wi-Fi).

Re:Only now 3G in US? (2, Interesting)

kenok (812929) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358982)

Asia also has 3G capabilities already for the last few years as well.

If Apple would release it in Asia, Jobs would be often saying "boom!" with each sale.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359826)

not all of asia. China doesn't have it yet (should be in bj in time for the olympics), and wifi on phones isn't allowed...(not entirely sure why, since laptops are ok)

Re:Only now 3G in US? (2, Interesting)

ocbwilg (259828) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359544)

Yes, but you guys actually have competition and choice in the mobile space. You can go buy whatever phone you like, then go to a carrier, buy a SIM card and be up and running. If you don't like the service you can switch to another carrier.

Here in the US you get to choose between 4-5 major carriers. However, most of them use different signalling technologies that make their phones incompatible with most of the other carriers. Because of this you can't just buy a phone somewhere and hook up with a carrier. Instead you have to get the phone from the carrier, and it's usually locked to their network. They do give you the phone "for free" if you sign a 2-year contract for their service. Obviously the phone isn't free, it's subsidized by the contract fees. If you terminate the contract early you're charged a several hundred dollar penalty. Of course once you've completed the terms of the contract you still usually can't take the phone to another carrier, so if you want to switch the whole process starts over again.

So while consumers do have a choice between multiple carriers, the carriers all design their services in ways that make it next to impossible to switch service if you are dissatisfied. This lowers the amount of competition, which means that the carriers don't have to spend as much money building out/improving their network or adding new features to bring in new customers. Let's face it, if you want mobile service in the US it's like choosing between three shit sandwiches. You don't want any of them, but you still have to choose.

That's one of the reasons that AT&T has suddenly started doing so well in the US market. Because they were the exclusive US carrier of the iPhone they actually had something different that people wanted, so millions of people switched to their service. But even that works to tie consumers to AT&T, because even if you can unlock the iPhone the only other US carrier that supports that signalling technology (GSM?) is T-Mobile, and they don't have anywhere near the market penetration or coverage area that the other big carriers do.

Incidentally, the same sorts of entrenched interests that make the US lag so far behind the rest of the developed world in the mobile communications space are responsible for making the US lag so far behind the rest of the world in other communications formats, like broadband Internet access.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (2, Interesting)

jrothwell97 (968062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359652)

Let's face it, if you want mobile service in the US it's like choosing between three shit sandwiches.

I like that. I'm going to use it to break the ice at parties in future. Thank you.

While the UK mobile system is far better than the US system, it still has its flaws. For example, some providers have the habit of 'locking' a phone to its provider, and demanding an unlocking fee to unlock it. If you want to transfer your number from an old to a new SIM, you have to phone both providers and go through rather intrusive security checks.

For example, last month I switched providers from Tesco Mobile to 3, and wanted to transfer my mobile number over. I had to phone Tesco Mobile, tell them my postcode, the location, amount and date of the last top-up, and then tell them who I was moving to, why I was moving to them, and why I wasn't moving to Tesco's own Extra tariff before the lady on the other end of the phone would give me the PAC code.

(For those on the other side of the pond, over here Tesco is like Wal-Mart in its relative size, popularity and rubbishness. I only had the SIM because it was given to me someone else a few years ago.)

If the US's market is a choice between shit sandwiches, then the UK's market is like choosing between a pleasant, lightly toasted, warm bread-and-butter sandwich, or a sandwich made of cardboard and artificial margarine. The problem is that they're all hidden within opaque sealed boxes, á la Deal or No Deal.

There are contracts in the UK, but the cancellation fee is usually quite modest (around £30-50, which is equivalent at the present exchange rate to ~$60-100).

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

missing_myself (857407) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360332)

I have 3 skype phone prepaid in UK

1. Phone includes microSD + media player
2. Free streaming of news of select channels
3. Skype is free (if you topup 10 GBP everymonth)
4. Internet for only 5 GBP (112kbps)

Re:Only now 3G in US? (4, Insightful)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 6 years ago | (#22358972)

The news for me is that the 3G network isn't already all over United States. Here in there city I live (Porto Alegre) in Brazil there is already a 3G network on 800Mhz and another in 1.2Ghz is expected to start this year, so I was expecting US would be already much more advanced.
This and the e-voting makes me wonder if those news about US being beaten technology by other countries isn't only for Japan/Asia/Europe, seems like in many areas even in-development countries are starting to be better.


It's really a question of cost - I'm pretty sure if you look at actual 3G coverage in Brazil (or Europe for that matter) you'd find a number of areas that lack 3G - but the concentration of population is such that say 80% of the population have it even with the holes. I'd further guess that if you hit Brasilia, then move along the coast (Rio, San Paulo, Belem, etc) with 3.5 you'd get most of Brazil's population of cell phone users who'd want 3G.

In the US, the population density is such that partial coverage by 3G will also get a significant percentage of users so they rollout has been focused there. Given the cost of new antennas, negotiating new leases on towers, ensuring there aren't interference problems it makes sense to go where you get the highest potential return and build out the rest as funds allow. Yes, that means the poor user in The Middle of Nowhere, Iowa will not have 3G for a while; simply because the cost of servicing that user is too high.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22359076)

I don't know about that. I go to a lot of places in the UK that are in the middle of nowhere, but I can still get 3G signal.

The UK cell network is still pretty new, most of the towers were put up in the last 10 years, so the majority are 3G.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

MojoStan (776183) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359456)

I don't know about that. I go to a lot of places in the UK that are in the middle of nowhere, but I can still get 3G signal.
The United States (9,826,630 km^2) is 40x the size of the United Kingdom (244,820 km^2). The population of the UK (246/km^2) is 8x more dense than the US (31/km^2).

I'm not saying that's a good excuse for the US's poor 3G coverage, but I think "middle of nowhere" has a different meaning the US.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359808)

I lived in North Yorkshire (middle of nowhere) and I wasn't even able to get a regular voice signal at my house (on top of one of the highest hills in the area, no trees), let alone a 3G one!

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

evanspw (872471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359248)

Nah. I was looking at some numbers the other day comparing tower numbers in Asia, Europe, and Nth America. About 1 in 5 towers in Asia is 3G, nearly one in two in Europe, but only 1 in 6 in Nth America. (total tower numbers are roughly, 1.1M, 600k, 235k, respectively, incidently). The problems in Nth America are historical, to do with the weird shit business models that have operated there since early days in mobile phones (seems to be obsessed with lock in). Large parts of the US have the same population density as Europe and Asia, but far fewer 3G towers.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359332)

Part of the problem with the US cellphone market is the way that the market is carved up geographically. No carriers are able obtain enough spectrum to service anywhere near the entire US landmass (unlike Australia where the 4 carriers that exist can service anywhere they want to (and can get permission to install equipment). This issue is further compounded by the fact that many places such as subways, office towers and others that need extra custom installed gear to get service end up doing exclusive deals with one carrier (which means that if you want e.g. cell service on the Washington metro, you need to be with a certain carrier)

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359462)

Nah. I was looking at some numbers the other day comparing tower numbers in Asia, Europe, and Nth America. About 1 in 5 towers in Asia is 3G, nearly one in two in Europe, but only 1 in 6 in Nth America. (total tower numbers are roughly, 1.1M, 600k, 235k, respectively, incidently). The problems in Nth America are historical, to do with the weird shit business models that have operated there since early days in mobile phones (seems to be obsessed with lock in). Large parts of the US have the same population density as Europe and Asia, but far fewer 3G towers..

While I agree a lot of forces are in play, including lockin and other historical issues; raw tower percentages are not a good indicator for several reasons:

Nearly half of the continental US has a population density of less than 10/sm; virtually none of western Europe has that low of a population density except for interior regions of the nordic countries. Yet, much of the sparsely populated areas in the US have GSM coverage (and hence towers); where in Europe most of the towers are in denser populated areas and therefore probably have enough users to warrant adding 3G and getting the revenue.

If all you did was divide towers with 3g by total towers then the towers in areas of very low density would skew the numbers since Europe has very little similar demographics; a more interesting comparison would be 3G coverage in areas of similar density. I do believe the US will lag there as well; at least for UTSM.

In addition, unless you exclude towers that are not GSM the numbers will also skew (although probably not much).

Which brings up a second point - we have two competing systems - GSM and CDMA; so areas without 3G may have EVDO high speed coverage. (while I'm willing to bet that is small and probably 90% of the coverage overlaps).

AIR, it's much less prevalent to get free Europe wide roaming; whereas in the US I can roam virtually anywhere without additional cost; so European carriers may find it profitable to build out more infrastructure to capture more roaming fees, including those for data.

In the end, I do agree that historical reasons are behind our build out; and much of that was driven by economics.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (2, Informative)

xaxa (988988) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359454)

There are some coverage maps here [coveragemaps.com] . The world map has a big yellow 3G blob over Europe, but not the USA. The detailed European map shows almost universal GSM coverage (even in middle-of-nowhere places) and 3G isn't limited to cities. (The detailed USA map is a couple of years old, so it's difficult to compare directly.)

Carriers don't *want* 3G (1)

eddieboston (716958) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359538)

It's also a matter of motivation. Most US cell phone users are locked into two-year contracts by now. This limits the pace of change-over from carrier to carrier, limiting the forces of the free-market economy, limiting competition, limiting carriers' motivation to offer better service. Why spend millions and millions of dollars to upgrade a network if your customers are locked in anyway?

Bob Sullivan's book Gotcha Capitalism [amazon.com] makes some good points about this, as well as about how we almost never pay the advertised price for service.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

Snorklefish (639711) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359194)

I often hear people talking with surprise or frustration about the lack of 3g service or super-broadband speeds to the home. The answer is simple economics- lack of consumer demand. With cellular, most people just don't see the need. (Think of all the people still using dial-up!) Until the iPhone, the idea of watching video or surfing the net was a thoroughly uncomfortable experience. My phone is 3G but I chucked the data package after two months. Of course Slashdot is filled with early adopters and folks who demand more, but by my reckoning, very few people care. Since the general public doesn't care, there's little reason to expand the high-speed cellular network. In the developing world, the economics are different. You're not replacing an old system, you're building a system from scratch. When you build a system from scratch it's logical to skip 2G and go straight to 3G

The iPhone has probably changed the balance in the U.S. The general public has a strong reason to wish for 3G. I'll chuck my 3g phone in an instant for a 3g iPhone. Then I'll complain about the lack of 4G.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359300)

Actually ATT only even has sporadic 2G coverage in the US. They play games with their roaming agreements to keep their costs down and the end result is they've got, by a substantial margin, the worst coverage in the United States. (Other carriers have similar coverage but allow free roaming to other networks.)

ATT should be fixing their already nearly useless network before upgrading it. There's not a good excuse why you could lose ATT signals along any interstate highway in the US, or why there could be large parts of big cities like Boston or San Francisco with no coverage.

I've been debating paying the cancellation charge and cracking the phone to be able to use T-Mobile's GSM network -- using the Field Test app on the iPhone, its clear that there is nearly universal T-Mobile coverage everywhere I've been.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

jrothwell97 (968062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359464)

Actually ATT only even has sporadic 2G coverage in the US. They play games with their roaming agreements to keep their costs down and the end result is they've got, by a substantial margin, the worst coverage in the United States. (Other carriers have similar coverage but allow free roaming to other networks.)

ATT should be fixing their already nearly useless network before upgrading it. There's not a good excuse why you could lose ATT signals along any interstate highway in the US, or why there could be large parts of big cities like Boston or San Francisco with no coverage.
Remember, though, that in comparison to other countries the USA is simply massive. We have trouble (sometimes) receiving even 2G signals in rural areas. However, in a massive country like the USA, I would expect coverage to be more patchy.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359482)

I don't know where in the US you live, but in case you haven't been there before, both downtown San Francisco and downtown Boston are fairly urban locations.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

jrothwell97 (968062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359594)

I don't know where in the US you live

I don't. I live in the Thames Valley in the UK.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359890)

Ironically my iPhone would probably work fine there.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22360214)

I wouldn't bet on it. EDGE coverage is not that great i Europe in general, it was skipped in favor of UMTS (and now HSDPA aka 3.5G). You'd probably be better off with a Nokia N95, which has HSDPA 3.5Mbps capability.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22359428)

Canada is also surprisingly "low-tech" when it comes to mobile phones.

It's hard to understand, that the mobile phones don't work in Toronto's subway system, while even countries, like Hungary - which used to be famously underdeveloped in phone infrastructure just a decade ago - have managed to provide seamless service for quite sometime.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (1)

vbraga (228124) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359590)

(I'm Brazilian too).

Ok, now get out of Porto Alegre (a major Brazilian city, with a nice industrial and services sectors) and go, let's say, to Mato Grosso (well, think of it as Montana, or someplace like that). See? No 3G.

US is a big country. One should not expect a uniform quality of service over continental dimensions. It doesn't even make sense.

In this light, I don't know people keep this comparison with Japan or European countries because it doesn't even make sense. Compare England to California, it makes more sense. Japan, with a very high density population, being compared with the whole US is *fscking* ridiculous!

And doesn't even start with the e-voting non sense. Brazilians love it. They say "look, the Americans can't do what we've been doing for years!". Oh, come on, do you trust the closed source, Windows-based, e-voting machines you use? I hope you're not an IT professional. Go to Unisys site and see if you can look our audit the source code. You can't. Do you trust the Electoral Justice to audit it? Do you think they're really worth your blind trust? Do you think they have the human resources to do it in a fully secure way? I don't think so. It's not that simple.

And that's, one more time, why this comparisons between the US and smaller countries doesn't make sense. It's difficult to run a country so wide and with very and deep differences between it's member states. Compare a small country with a somewhat similar member state you're going to see US is *not* lacking behind.

Re:Only now 3G in US? (2, Informative)

anothy (83176) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359838)

in large part that's because the term "3G" has been diluted in common use. the US has nearly-ubiquitous EVDO and EDGE coverage; both of these are 3G technologies as defined by the ITU in IMT-2000. both the 3GPP and 3GPP2 recognize IMT-2000 as the definition of 3G that they're working in. five years ago, nobody questioned that EDGE was 3G; now, the marketing focus on how ubiquitous 3G would change everything has just stuck around (since very little changed with 3G's arrival), pushing 3G perpetually into the future.

what people seem to mean when they talking about 3G's "pending" arrival is that data rates will increase. this has nothing to do with the underlying technology, really; with EDGE, for example, it's simply a matter of how many channels the operators would like to dedicate to data traffic.

Or don't wait and... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358950)

Buy a phone when you need one instead of waiting for something you don't need. It's sad that people fall over themselves and their checkbooks to buy the crippled and locked down toy that the iPhone is.

FUCK SCIENTOLOGY!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22358984)

FUCK SCIENTOLOGY!!!!

Me OT level 9 speaking down on the 300,000k cost for the courses to become OT level 7.

USA != the only iPhone market (5, Insightful)

nanoakron (234907) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359146)

I am a classic Apple fanboi, and a UK resident. Often, I find these two facts in opposition with each other - particularly over the iPhone.

Apple's continued US-centricity is a ridiculous holdover for such a large company with even larger intentions. Their insistence on selling first to a US market which has always lagged behind the rest of the world in terms of mobile phone infrastructure is a case in point.

If Apple instead decided to throw their weight behind launching the iPhone that the rest of the world wants, it would force the US phone market to modernise, kicking and screaming on the way.

We already have data that iPhones exist (illegally and unlocked...) in most countries around the world, even some surprising locations. This shows what a strong global brand and product Apple has sitting ready to be unleashed. But instead, they insist on catering to the often backwards, domestic US market first.

Even worse, they have then tried to force a US-based model for phone subscription services on the rest of the world, where such practices don't exist.

I posit that the slow uptake of iPhones in Europe is due to a combination of initial outlay for the phone, high subscription rates not in keeping with the service provided, limited number of networks you can legally sign up to, and ultimately network lock-in. Each of these devices exists in the US. The do not exist in Europe for any phone other than the iPhone, and this is what the market is finding hard to swallow, even though we really love the product.

So my final message is this - Apple, get your head out of your arse and realise that there is a world outside the USA.

Re:USA != the only iPhone market (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359350)

Forget Britain, France and Germany, how about rolling it out in all the countries that DON'T have iPhones yet.

Come on apple, there are a lot of people here willing to pay 100s of dollars for an iPhone in countries like Australia (I personally know a few people who would probably at least consider if not purchase one and my circle of friends isn't exactly very big)

Re:USA != the only iPhone market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22360524)

Don't take this as a knock on you or Australia but forget you guys (for now). Apple didn't even look north to Canada for their second market after the US launch. They went to the other side of the world. How about releasing the iPhone in Canada!

Re:USA != the only iPhone market (1)

trahald_011 (1231576) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359578)

I'm in the UK too. I'm aware of 3G vs EDGE so my reasons for holding off getting an iPhone is simply no 3G. As far as I can see Apple have produced the best mobile internet device by a mile and equipped it with the equivalent of a 56K modem compared to even the crappiest ADSL or cable. Not good enough, and Wifi where I live means jumping from free hotspot to free hotspot is not very likely. I doubt if we even get EDGE here now I think of it. When the 3G version comes out I'll get one, barring any spectacular Apple/o2 restrictions somehow placed on the device. As a user of Apple's computers, all I can say is that no 3G was a big let down, so hurry up and get the new model out. For my friends they probably wouldn't care about all that. The issue is the £280 cost of the phone. I don't know anyone who would entertain the idea of paying that for a phone, regardless of features, specs or sex appeal. I'm not talking about people who couldn't afford the cost either. This for me is the number 1 reason for poor sales in the UK by a mile given the subsidised handset model of the UK mobile industry. Next up, the contract. The initial o2 deals were laughable. Not even close to being competitive. I would hope they were just taking the piss out of early adopters but it looks like they've had to back down early (due to the poor sales). I think the new revised deals are OK, no worse than what I get off o2. Still, I do know a lot of people who'd find £35 a month too steep for mobile service. Which leaves network lock in. I have to say I really don't care. I've used all the big networks except 3 and found them much the same. I doubt anyone I know would really care the iPhone was only on o2. If they wanted one, they'd sign up to o2. No big deal, maybe a little grumbling if they'd had to deal with o2 customer service in the past but not a deal breaker. I can't believe that if the iPhone was available on all UK networks, but still cost £280 plus £35 a month, Apple would have sold that many more of them. The only reason they might I can see is that exclusivity means switching from another network is a non-starter if you're a year into an 18-month deal. I agree that if it was available totally unlocked, so even the pay as you go customers could use it, then they'd sell a load more, but I still think the price puts a ceiling on sales. Most people I know on PAYG want to keep mobile phone costs as low as possible or just don't use the phone that much so spending all that on an iPhone isn't going to happen. Nor is Apple pissing all over their 'exclusive' image by letting teenage chavs everywhere get the iPhone on PAYG or £15 a month cheapo contracts. Just as with Macs, Apple don't do, and never have done, 'low-end'. It's just not their target market, for better or worse, and I'm sure they've evaluated the impact of units sold vs. brand image or whatever. Looking forward to the 3G iPhone but not holding my breath for an unlocked version anytime soon.

Re:USA != the only iPhone market (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359832)

Well if you blokes would actually buy an Apple product or two, they might have more incentive to sell products there. I really liked the Apple Store in Manchester, and they did a really good job at pointing out the strengths of Mac OS X, but the stores in Leeds and other cities were really lame (and expensive!). As far as I could tell, the three years I lived there (2004-2007), Apple computers were about as popular as NASCAR racing and American Football are in the UK.

Re:USA != the only iPhone market (2, Interesting)

GreyWolf3000 (468618) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360234)

At the same time, Apple may become the catalyst for broad 3g adoption in the US, which is good for the whole world, because cell phone companies can then develop the same phones for the North American market as they do for Asia and Europe. Of course, our 'version' of 3g may be so butchered by marketing types that all functionality is reduced to the sharing of digital photos (why is it that marketoids seem to think all we want to do with small devices is share photos?).

Re:USA != the only iPhone market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22360508)

Well no, seeing as the US government insists on granting non-standard frequencies (they did it with GSM, they're doing it again with UMTS), I don't think the US will be included in the global market for quite a while.

Forbesian Bullshit (4, Interesting)

lancejjj (924211) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359288)

Here's why Forbes pretends it knows what its talking about:
  • AT&T announced that it will expand its 3G wireless broadband service
  • Broadcom, last year began "cranking out" samples of the BCM21551 3G chipsset
  • Apple "quietly" upgraded the storage on its highest-end iPhone to 16 GB
  • Jobs "complained" about the slow pages of the nytimes.com

Here are some questions that Forbes should have asked:
  • Is the AT&T's 3G expansion really about the iPhone, or is it about AT&T advertising the fact that it wants high-value data-centric corporate accounts to come on board?
  • Does the Broadcom chipset fit Apple's need? Yes, it is designed to be a low-power 3G chipset. But does it deliver, and is it designed well enough for a product like the iPhone? Is it stable and reliable?
  • Does a memory upgrade of the iPhone merely mean that Apple thinks users will pay for more memory if offered?
  • Was Jobs complaining about EDGE, or about the busy NYTimes page? After all, he was using WIFI, and he wasn't loading the simplified NYTimes mobile page.


Again, Forbes shows that journalism takes the back seat. There are plenty of great articles that could be written. Instead, we get an article that isn't even worthy of an unpopular rumor blog. Like mine.

Article is way off base (3, Insightful)

HumanEmulator (1062440) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359414)

This only point of this article seems to be don't buy an iPhone. Even the headline is designed to taunt people that already bought one.

What evidence does the article provide?

- AT&T said a new iPhone was coming in 2008. Of course this leaves 10 more months assuming that AT&T even knows what Apple is working on which previous reports have said they don't. http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireless/magazine/16-02/ff_iphone [wired.com]

- Apple recently hired a television crew for... something. According to a Mac rumors site.

- Broadcom has started sampling a new lower power 3G chip. Which is implied to be a panacea, completely ignoring that redesigning the iPhone is more complicated than popping in a new chip -- there are antennas to redesign and software that has to be rewritten just to start -- and the chip isn't even shipping yet.

- "Apple can't wait much longer." The author uses this argument several times, backing it up with AT&T's plans to roll out 3G to more cities by the end of 2008.

Hasn't it occurred to anyone that it's going to take 6 months for the FCC to test a new iPhone and no one has turned up anything to show the FCC has even started this yet?

iPhones are pretty (3, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359416)

But if I can't save or work with attachments from email or even do simple things like copy and paste, it gets pretty worthless.

If people want a reason to wait, then they should wait for the "business iPhone" that has been predicted by some previous iPhone related article that made its way here some time ago. As a Blackberry user, I have grown accustomed to certain levels of functionality that, if not duplicated, will make iPhone feel broken somehow... and I'm sure one will come out because Blackberry has been working on competition for iPhone and I can't imagine it will take long to release.

Re:iPhones are pretty (1)

Morky (577776) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360156)

I have to wait for the business iPhone, as I need more or less full Exchange support, plus my company pays for my Blackberry and phone service. As soon as they have an exchange solution, I'm jumping ship. You could actually run a remote desktop client from a 3G iPhone and it would be usable. The iPhone could potentially beat the Blackberry as a business device, but they MUST come up with something to compete with BES. Jobs has to get his head around the idea that Apple can compete in the enterprise. They just need to focus on small niches at first; iPhone Enterprise Server for Exchange, digital asset management, get AD support right (buy Thursby if need be), etc. They don't have to be Microsoft to add value to business.

Wait wait wait....the difference is.. (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359604)

It's always the same, wait for the better version etc..

But the difference here is that you're locking yourself into an 18 month contract typically. The iPhone is a bit behind the times now, in 18 months it will be way behind.

There are some things you can wait for and others you need. For instance you might decide to wait for a new model of a car, but if you don't have a car then you can't really wait.

Re:Wait wait wait....the difference is.. (1)

Indiana Joe (715695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360164)

The iPhone is a bit behind the times now, in 18 months it will be way behind.

No, the technology used in the iPhone is a bit behind the times. The iPhone user interface is so far ahead of its competition that they may take years to catch up - if they ever do.

Stupid Title (2, Insightful)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359762)

FTA: "Sorry, First Adopters--Better iPhone Is On The Way"

What am I to be sorry about? I've been using a really great phone since August. My option was to not be using a really great phone over the past seven months. Gee, Forbes really nailed this one!

KILLER APP for the iPhone ! (1)

dogscats (720965) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359788)

Isn't it totally OBVIOUS that a KILLER APP for the iPhone, one that would put it parsecs above all other cell phones is . . . . DICTATION SOFTWARE? After all, the device does have a microphone and an operating system. First, VOICE DIALING is needed, and then, after that, true dictation software, like iListen or Dragon Naturally Speaking, that would let a user dictate an outgoing Email, that could later be retrieved on a home computer, then to be filed or printed. Dr. A. N. Feldzamen 3 Arrowood Lane Ithaca, New York 14850-9793 607-257-8080 alfeld@twcny.rr.com

Re:KILLER APP for the iPhone ! (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359862)

Voice dialing is needed? I haven't used it in the 35 years or so I've been using telephones.

3G +/- (1)

phrostie (121428) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359810)

if i could pick someones brains.

if you leave a 3G region will you just switch to a lesser protocol or do you lose connection completely?
my wife has one of the original iphones(waited for the price to drop) and has really liked it.
now I'm thinking about getting another for me and i'm wondering if this new one would be useless on long trips or will it just drop down to a slower speed.

the new chipset sounds like it will extended battery life which is awesome. that was one of my complaints of the current one

Re:3G +/- (1)

Lonedar (897073) | more than 6 years ago | (#22359916)

It's seamless - just like switching between two 2G towers. The only interruption occurs if it is a video call, as the video feed cuts off and it turns into a simple voice call, but that's about it (but then again, the Iphone probably wont have video calling capabilities, so this is a mot point).

3G or 3.5G? (1)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360334)

Is it going to have 3G (just UMTS, 384kbps) or "3.5G" (HSPA, 3.6Mbps or 7.2Mbps depending on the area)?
They really should go for HSPA support, UMTS is old news, it's been common functionality in phones for years now.

3G != iPhone (2, Insightful)

fruity_pebbles (568822) | more than 6 years ago | (#22360366)

In the last year I've owned three cell phones that were all capable of 3G and all worked fine on AT&T's 3G network.

AT&T currently offers about 18 different phones that are 3G capable. While I'm sure that AT&T is looking forward to a 3G-capable iPhone, I think it's much more likely that their ongoing 3G expansion is more about supporting their current customers and current product lineup than about supporting future products.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?