Okay geeks of Gizmodo, help me understand: The problem with AT&T (as reported by AT&T) is that there are way too many iPhones using way too much bandwidth causing amazing slowdowns on their network. Will a faster 3G network actually help this problem in any way when the issue is the number of users? Sure, once half of the iPhone customers jump ship to Verizon next year things should improve (and test Verizon's "It's the network"), but until then, isn't the faster speed something that few people will truly notice except at 3 a.m. when all of those blasted iPhones are recharging?
@Monty: If you really belief that the iPhone is making a dent into AT&T network let me ask you this, When has AT&T service been great, when? AT&T has been dropping calls since i can remember and their data network has always suck, matter fact when the iPhone was release was the only time they decided to do something about it. The iPhone makes little to no affect to the AT&T network, their network is screw up by nature, but it's getting better quick.
@appletoad: Compared to AT&T, Verizon is heaven. I could give you the dozen experiences I have had with AT&T that prove my point (one where they tried to rip us off by tens of thousands of dollars), but in my opinion they have to be one of the worst corporate entities out there.
That said, if we assume AT&T's claims that it is the number of iPhone users crippling their network (I am not arguing that is correct), then does speeding up their network actually help that claimed problem in any way? I gather we do not know the answer to this, but I suppose we will find out.
@snitch: I really needed to bold the "as reported by AT&T". Trust me, I don't believe anything AT&T says, but my question is - if what they are claiming is true, does speeding up their network help at all? I think the answer to that question is "no", but was hoping a geek smarter than me would have a better answer than my guess.
@Adam Frucci: Then what's with all the nonsense I've been reading on lots of different tech sites that say it's mainly software updates that would require little or no hardware modifications? I could swear Gizmodo is one of them.
Your new iPhone 3GS is fast if you look to the past? Where else would you look to compare to? Thats like saying in 1900 that the Automobile is fast compared to the horse, but who the hell cares because the airplane will be way faster so it is already out of date, screw the car.
@Bon5ai: Wouldn't you normally compare to the present, not the past? WiMax is already rolled out in some cities.
By your logic we shouldn't compare the iPhone 3GS and the Pre, despite them launching in a similar window, we should only compare them to older devices. That makes no sense.
@wagedomain: The term "the past" in this article is directly referencing yesterday as the past, as in the immediate past, not 1 or 5 or 10 years ago.
If you want to get all technical the Pre is in the past, as it was released in the past comapred to the present, which is today, which is when the iPhone 3GS was released.
So by your logic, we can create totally subjective "windows" to compare with? Alright then, well I select my present as the window in which electricity has been in use. Who knew the present could span more than 100 years.
@Bon5ai: well, in john's defense -- you're an idiot.
he is trying to emphasize the point the new iPhone is not impressive when looking at download speeds. the fact that the actually speeds don't reach the advertised speeds make them, more or less, "out of date." not even considering the fact at&t is late to the party with their half ass 3g
So this means that when all my friends are raving about how fast the internet on their new iphone's are, I have had faster internet on my HTC Touch on the sprint network for over a year?
I wonder where EVDO Rev.0 stacks up...If my old Sanyo VM4500 from 2004 is technically quicker than their shiny new iphones I will be one very smug child. Ah, back in 2004 when tethering was free with the $10/month unlimited data plan..
What is it that our Asian brothers are doing with their connection that we are jealous we can not do? Let's assume that we could have a gigabit connection, and let's also assume that everyone has devices with a gigabit port (most devices are still at 10/100), and let's assume that devices with a gigabit port can actually run at that speed (most studies have shown it maxes out far below the 1000 speed for various component reasons) -- what is out there today that would make that useful?
I am blessed with a 50 meg connection and while it is handy to download items five times faster than on a cable modem, I still can not point to anything available on the internet that I could not do on either connection. Yes, if you are still using a dial-up modem than you are definitely in a world of hurt. But, I dare say that anything over 3 megs is a "good enough" connection today.
Besides, we are America and we have done a great job holding back these tubes to our median speed. So, let them have their multi-gig connections -- they just won't matter much until they share them with us.
I had Comcast before I switched and visited bandwidth speed tests regularly, and I can guarantee you that when I switched to FiOS my sustained speed increased over five times. I recognize that cable companies have had to crank up their advertised speed these days, so I can not speak to the current state of the amazing cable modem "burst speed" (which, if we wanted to get into a geeky conversation, is not technically comparable to FiOS speeds) - but, I also understand that they are metering connections, too. So, I think saying it is five times faster than cable is actually being pretty generous.
Ah, I love our country and its prevailing logic behind standards and metrics: Don't like our ranking? Lower the bar. Still doesn't work? Change the recording method. STILL doesn't work? Fuck you, we're America.
Isn't South Korea's population density greater than the United State's? It is obviously less populous, but without looking it up, I'm going to guess that it is more pop. dense.
@Michael Kim: A higher proportion of the land in South Korea and Japan are covered by cities compared to the US. I suspect that if we counted only the urban areas of the US, the rankings would be different.
I am a TW customer and during a recent call to their custserv for something else, they mentioned a new (and, of course, more expensive) service that offers more bandwidth. Might this just be a way of pushing its customers to a new service?
(Of course it is, I was being nice and offering them the benefit of the doubt.)
@Curves: Was it the 15mb down instead of the 10? They've offered that for a few months.. I went with it, saw a little bit of a change. Was probably worth the $5/mo (now $10).
Regardless, for their sake, keep this crap out of Ohio.
Do we have official numbers on what your average geek will use for bandwidth in a given month, and what sucks up the bulk of that bandwidth? Forty gigs of data is a lot of data, and I hate to be a pain in the butt, however I am not certain watching NetFlix streaming alone could use that much. That said, I am happy to eat these words -- I just need a more geek-proof answer on how that 40 gigs would break-out in real world use.
On an unrelated note, are there any cable modem providers that are not hated? Just curious.
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
That said, if we assume AT&T's claims that it is the number of iPhone users crippling their network (I am not arguing that is correct), then does speeding up their network actually help that claimed problem in any way? I gather we do not know the answer to this, but I suppose we will find out.
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
I should mention that I'm running an HTC Kaiser with a cooked MinMo 6.5, and probably a nonstandard radio. But, 12.5 Mbps over AT&T all the same.
06/19/09
06/19/09
Opera 9.5. Then again, it says 'H' where it used to say '3G', so I may just be too dumb to realize that the 3G speeds discussed might not apply.
06/19/09
06/19/09
Your new iPhone 3GS is fast if you look to the past? Where else would you look to compare to? Thats like saying in 1900 that the Automobile is fast compared to the horse, but who the hell cares because the airplane will be way faster so it is already out of date, screw the car.
I swear to god writers here are on drugs.
06/19/09
By your logic we shouldn't compare the iPhone 3GS and the Pre, despite them launching in a similar window, we should only compare them to older devices. That makes no sense.
06/19/09
If you want to get all technical the Pre is in the past, as it was released in the past comapred to the present, which is today, which is when the iPhone 3GS was released.
So by your logic, we can create totally subjective "windows" to compare with? Alright then, well I select my present as the window in which electricity has been in use. Who knew the present could span more than 100 years.
06/19/09
he is trying to emphasize the point the new iPhone is not impressive when looking at download speeds. the fact that the actually speeds don't reach the advertised speeds make them, more or less, "out of date." not even considering the fact at&t is late to the party with their half ass 3g
06/19/09
I wonder where EVDO Rev.0 stacks up...If my old Sanyo VM4500 from 2004 is technically quicker than their shiny new iphones I will be one very smug child. Ah, back in 2004 when tethering was free with the $10/month unlimited data plan..
06/19/09
oops, i meant my 4500 was my first phone i tethered, my sammy a900 was the first one that i tethered with r.0
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
Or maybe there was a good time involved, but not enough lubricant. No idea.
02/23/09
I am blessed with a 50 meg connection and while it is handy to download items five times faster than on a cable modem, I still can not point to anything available on the internet that I could not do on either connection. Yes, if you are still using a dial-up modem than you are definitely in a world of hurt. But, I dare say that anything over 3 megs is a "good enough" connection today.
Besides, we are America and we have done a great job holding back these tubes to our median speed. So, let them have their multi-gig connections -- they just won't matter much until they share them with us.
02/23/09
So 1.1627906976744186046511627906977x cable, sure; 5x not so much.
02/23/09
Why thank you - they have been threatening to deport me, so I have been practicing.
@bpapa9013:
I had Comcast before I switched and visited bandwidth speed tests regularly, and I can guarantee you that when I switched to FiOS my sustained speed increased over five times. I recognize that cable companies have had to crank up their advertised speed these days, so I can not speak to the current state of the amazing cable modem "burst speed" (which, if we wanted to get into a geeky conversation, is not technically comparable to FiOS speeds) - but, I also understand that they are metering connections, too. So, I think saying it is five times faster than cable is actually being pretty generous.
02/23/09
02/23/09
02/23/09
02/23/09
02/05/09
02/05/09
As long as I don't get capped, Jimmy Dolan can churn out all the douchebag white-boy blues he wants.
02/05/09
(Of course it is, I was being nice and offering them the benefit of the doubt.)
02/05/09
Regardless, for their sake, keep this crap out of Ohio.
02/05/09
02/05/09
02/05/09
On an unrelated note, are there any cable modem providers that are not hated? Just curious.
02/05/09