Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
@jetRink: yeah but to be dumb enough to buy a 80's style monochromatic e-ink device is just retarded when there's at least 10 tablets out or coming out this month and within the next 2 months that will be perfect suited for use as an ereader but with COLOR screens, touch screens, larger capacity, internet browsing, multimedia viewing, software packages and app's and tons more! So who's "stupid" now!
@Littell: I'm not convinced I need a tablet, since I have a laptop, but I have an ebook reader since it's much easier on the eyes than using my laptop. And battery life wise, the ebook reader can't be beat. Did you call people stupid for buying a single function MP3 player in 2003 since they can just carry around a laptop?
@thechansen: Exactly, I want a book reader. I'm not interested in color, touch, multimedia, or apps if it means I need to sacrifice price, screen quality, battery life or the ease of use that comes with a purpose built device.
@jetRink: I will concede that the Pixel Qi is promising, and could bridge the gap. But battery tech being how it is I would rather have the eink how it currently is, charge it once and get through 6 books. I don't see battery advances getting made that would make a multifunction tablet my main ereader.
@Arken: Don't knock the Post until you've tried it. I use their website and its some of the most comical journalism I've ever read. Its nice to take a break from the constant financial beat of the WSJ or the offputting arrogance of the NYT every now and then.
A Sony spokesperson explained the decision; "We feel like the market is splitting in two directions - those who read literature and want to stay informed of the latest in world news, and those that don't. Rather than compete for the high end as those other ebook devices do, we're staking our claim to the ignorant, illiterate and uneducated market. Look for more exclusive content partnerships in the future from Americas Funniest Home Video and LoLCats."
Good for the five people who own a Sony reader and the three of them who read the Journal. Not a huge fan of Sony in the reader market when there's the Nook and the Kindle, especially since e-books still have a long way to go. And Newscorp. let's just say I more than dislike them.
@sshafer86: sony's e-reader is cheaper (ironic a sony product cheaper in its market) and it accepts more open formats. Why would you want to buy a device that locks you in, can delete your purchases at the company's whim, and only became popular because Oprah endorsed it?
Oh and Sony's reader has access to Google Books, giving sony's customers alot more of a selection; weird the largest book seller has less selection of books than its competitor.
Oh and the nook? Won't be popular until version 2.0, and the color screen/input device sucks down too much battery.
@Bs Baldwin: Also the color screen has horrible scrolling, the model I tried rubber banded backwards leaving me glad I have a Sony. I was considered the Kindle after being disappointed with the nook, but when you get down to it for reading novels, they are the same. The kindle just has the search, the note input and the ability to buy books anywhere. I graduated college a few years ago so I don't need to search or take notes and I often have a backlog of books so buying new ones can be done when I'm at my computer. Books aren't like MP3s where you can impulse buy an album, they require a few hours to enjoy and you don't normally mix reading two or more books at once.
The DROID takeover has just begun...and the update scheduled for the 11th..fixes that small camera issue. Come on over ATT customers...you know you want to.
@jokool89: if i can get every app and every function i already have on my iphone, then i'll consider moving; but i am married to my iphone apps -- can't just give them up. but i do hate AT&T.
@Spartanical: You pretty much CAN get every iPhone app on Android, now. At least the good ones now.
Android has about 1/10th the apps of iPhone, which sounds tiny, but when you consider how many repeat apps, BS apps, and 'lite' apps there are on the iPhone, the difference isn't as staggering.
But, yea, I can imagine if you already paid to use some apps on one particular platform, it would be difficult to move on. They don't say "Till death do us part" for nothing.
@squishyalt: Also interesting that their capital expenditures actually went down this year vs. last year by about $3 billion. Not promising for purposes of enhancing their network.
I'm in Buffalo, NY, and have gleefully flawless AT&T service for miles in any direction, including rural.
Why on earth would NYC or SF be worse than this economically depressed area? In NYC the return per cell tower/antenna has got to far outstrip whatever they might get in this area of minimal service plans...
In light of absolutely costly marketing embarassments, why wouldn't they blitzkrieg NYC and SF with network and antenna updates?
I mean... as long as they don't do it by stealing our towers.
@geolemon: I seem to recall that one of the problems with 3G in particular is that it has a harder time penetrating walls. You live in a bleak frozen trundra with no buildings, ergo, one cell tower can cover miles and miles and miles, while a cell tower in NYC might get a block or two. Even with higher population density, the increased noise from the city makes the towers less effective.
Which doesn't excuse AT&T for not blanketing the city with enough receptors to make it worthwhile, incidentally.
"The users are the problem" hints at quite the paradigm, doesn't it? Namely, that users exist for the benefit of the system. Personally I think systems exist for the benefit of their users, and a system that doesn't is of little use.
@BlueToast: Unfortunately, government's a very bad counterexample. The sole purpose of any government is to codify direction for collective effort that can provide infrastructure, rights, and other similar support that goes beyond what an individual can achieve working on their own. Why would any collection of people decide to create an organizing body that doesn't work in their interest, and instead exists to serve it's own interest? That's self-destructive madness.
You'd have an easier time making your agument in the realm of private business, where it's considered legitimate for collective entities to be established for the benefit of few to the possible detriment of many. And you'd be right that it's considered legitimate, and I don't dispute that. As a user, what I dispute is the usefulness of a system that exists to serve it's owner first and it's users second.
@Killjoy: I wasn't being serious. That's what the second paragraphs about.
However, I disagree with your statement "The sole purpose of any government is to codify direction for collective effort that can provide infrastructure, rights, and other similar support that goes beyond what an individual can achieve working on their own."
The sole(only) purpose of government is to protect the RIGHTS of the people.
Not to protect the people. Not to ensure the peoples wealth. Not to do anything other than ensure our rights.
Governments tend to do a lot more, and sometimes, do the opposite (taking away the right to marry?WTF???).
@BlueToast: We're talking at cross-purposes. The sole *stated* purpose for government, as stated *by* governments, may well be embodied in your phrase. What I'm talking about is more macro - the reasoning behind any group of individuals choosing to adopt a governmental model in the first place. If choice was involved at all... but now we're getting too far afield.
I resubmit that a system designed to serve it's owner before it's users is, by definition, not a system worth using.
@Killjoy: "What I'm talking about is more macro - the reasoning behind any group of individuals choosing to adopt a governmental model in the first place. If choice was involved at alll..."
This is exactly what I am referring to.
"I resubmit that a system designed to serve it's owner before it's users is, by definition, not a system worth using"
Theoretically, the users, and the owners, are the same people.
@BlueToast: "Theoretically, the users, and the owners, are the same people."
It's a great concept! Just imagine a world where a concept that fundamental is applied across the board... that's what I love about science fiction, all those wondrous what-ifs.
My 3G has had software fritzes recently, such that Apple generously offered me a new 3GS, for only the low, low, subsidized price, if only I'd sign a new 2-year contract with AT&T. No way in hell I took that offer. My contract is up on July 18; I'm counting down the days until I can ditch those assholes and switch back to Verizon.
It's a pity as I adore the phone itself, but I'm sick as all hell of worrying about calls dropping, data service cuts, etc.; when I was on Verizon I always thought it sucked b/c of the limited phone selection, but the past 18 months have taught me and a couple million other people that it's the network that really counts. When Cingular ran those "fewest dropped calls" ads a couple years back, I remember thinking that I'd never experienced a dropped call in my life, and wondered if it was really a problem. Ironically, now that I'm with AT&T nee Cingular, it's a constant of my existence.
I think AT&T is going to have a mass exodus next year, and hope they go broke because of it. But as a 27-year fan of Apple, I only hope they have a backup plan when they start to lose all of that business.
"Can you hear me now? . . . What's that? Oh, I'm the verizon guy? . . . Hello, hello, AT&T? Are you there? I think they're call was just dropped. Guess they can't hear me now."
@not_a_virus.exe.vbs: It's probably relevant to remember that it took large mergers for Verizon to become as large as it is. Buying Alltel was key in vaulting Verizon into a commanding lead in the coverage battle.
As AmphetamineCrown pointed out AT&T has invested heavily in the last two years in expanding and making better their coverage. If there was another provider interested in being bought out you can bet AT&T would be all over it.
Actually AT&T measures a dropped call as a call that the network drops. If a call drops due to poor reception, weak signal or network congestion it will not be tracked as a dropped call.
Also with wcdma as more calls and data fill up open ports the nature of the technlogy actually shortens it's range radius from the tower so depending on load on the 3g spectrum the signal will be weaker until More ports open for voice and data then the range will open out further.
By incentives, he doesn't mean charge more money. He probably means the phone will start giving you little electric shocks or something beyond a certain bandwidth.
UPS uses the highway system more than the rest of us, should they pay more in highway taxes? Or is that simply a necessary public utility that we should all contribute too (well, I'd be happy to only make the obscenely wealthy pay for it, but that's just me).
@Kevin Newman: In short, yes. The issue we have here isn't with charging more for more usage. We accept this kind of model for electricity, natural gas, gasoline and water usage. The issue is with being offered an "unlimited" plan, and then the companies going back on that. Unfortunately, it would be a PR nightmare to say "We're no longer offering an unlimited plan", but that's the hole they dug themselves.
To say nothing of the difference between water and electricity usage and bandwidth. Suffice to say, they may not exactly be comparable.
@Canoehead: You also forget that the internet isn't a finite source, you can always have more of it. They have 2 options: 1, Expand their data capacity / 2. Not expand and just charge people more money for every bit of data they process.
While their CS is, well, the suck I stuck with Sprint because, while supposedly outdated, their network just works.
Thank god for Google for actually putting some effort into a mobile phone platform. I have a feeling with the pace they are going with the OS releases and the market that Android will probably ring the death bell for Windows Mobile. Microsoft doesnt own the marketplace like they do on computers so they were mistaken to think they can just sit on a crappy, old OS.
@archercc: Windows Mobile is too ingrained in the corporate and commercial markets to die. It might disappear from the consumer market but it's going to be a long time before there's anything that can replace it completely.
@archercc: sorry mate..but RIM is really only super popular in the US. Winmo and symbian are more popular in the rest of the world, just look at the amount of Winmo phones that get released in parts other than the US. in the US it is dropping from consumers, but internationally many companies are switching to Winmo FROM RIM to help cut costs.
@charles.plush: I approve this comment simply for the "sorry mate...". That and also the fact that I think he's actually making a good point regarding international Winmo usage.
@archercc: It's not Exchange that will keep WinMo alive, it's the sheer number of super-niche uses it's been adapted to, the sort of things that were developed out of a specific need which was not met on any platform, now it's met on WinMo nobody's going to bother with another platform. The market for handheld devices with built in parking ticket printers is fairly limited and since all of the software used has been written for WinMo, nobody is going to release a device running Android, not because it's technically impossible but because no one would buy them since there would be no software, and until there's hardware nobody's going to write the software.
If you want an idea of how big MS is in the commercial space, go to an Apple store. Those little handheld card scanners they carry around... those are running a version of Windows Mobile. You have to assume that Apple would have gone with anyone other than Microsoft if there was anyone other than Microsoft... there wasn't and still isn't.
Can someone tell me whether data consumption rates on a givennetwork (or tower) affect call quality and/or drop rates?
Basically, are these two separate issues?
I read somewhere (probably Giz) about the question of whether bandwidth hogs really exist or are a fabrication of the carriers to justify a move to a new pricing model. Has AT&T given any data to back up the statement that 3% of smartphone users push 40% of data? Is this a lie, a damn lie, or a statistic?
@ndonahue: That issue Giz wrote about really pertained to wired usage, as in wireless, there are a limited number of slots per cell tower for a connection to occur. If someone is downloading a large file, then that slot is allocated to them until their session ends.
Slots available on a cell tower are truly limited.
Basically, the easiest way you can test this is simply go to a sporting event and try to make a call or send a message. You will often get call or message failures.
@drewheyman: Right, so the solution would seem to be to add more towers. Assume that you have both the desire and the money to do so. Now you need to find locations, negotiate leases etc. Now you have to connect those towers to your main network - the "backhaul". If that network can't handle the traffic, you need to lay more cables, and nodes etc. Have fun laying cables in NY with its myriad of laws, regulations, graft-seeking public employees and congested underground spaces. I've actually found AT&Ts voice service to be OK - not great, but passable - but their data in Manhattan is often slow to the point of non-existent.
@Canoehead: Yea, and good luck finding places to put the towers. Seemingly nobody wants a tower in their neighborhood for aesthetic reasons, but yet they want good coverage. And there's even a brouhaha here in Florida over placing them in public school yards, because people think the radiation might harm the kids.
Oddly, it isn't just AT&T's favorite stat. It is pretty much consistent across the Internet. See the presentations given to the FCC here: [www.openinternet.gov]
1% use 20% of the capacity, 5% use 50%, 20% use 80% (Cable Labs). 1% create 20% of traffic, 10% create 60% (Cisco). 1% use 17%, 5% use 41%, 10% use 57% (AT&T landline).
@AmphetamineCrown: The problem is that ATT is delusional enough to think that these stats are static.
That 3% using 40% of data are called early adopters, meaning that soon everyone will be consuming just as much and those early adopters and those early adopters will have moved on to consume even more data.
That stat is just a red herring used by ATT to divert attention away from the fact that their 3G network sucks. Every day there will be more people using apps on more smartphones. Embrace the future and upgrade the networks!
@PinoSarpedon: I think the fact that the statistics cited aren't early adopter statistics kinda cuts against your point. The Cable Labs stats are for Cable Internet subs generally. The Cisco stats are Internet wide. The AT&T stats have to do with their MPLS network, not their radio network.
This, in some ways, is the essence of net neutrality. If you look at all of those presentations, you see that they all note congestion issues and the need to adopt means of addressing congestion. By and large, they all seem to advocate deep packet inspection to determine packet latency priority and honoring quality of service requirements through gateways from provider to provider. They are quite interesting. All packets are not the same.
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
Oh and Sony's reader has access to Google Books, giving sony's customers alot more of a selection; weird the largest book seller has less selection of books than its competitor.
Oh and the nook? Won't be popular until version 2.0, and the color screen/input device sucks down too much battery.
12/18/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/10/09
Android has about 1/10th the apps of iPhone, which sounds tiny, but when you consider how many repeat apps, BS apps, and 'lite' apps there are on the iPhone, the difference isn't as staggering.
But, yea, I can imagine if you already paid to use some apps on one particular platform, it would be difficult to move on. They don't say "Till death do us part" for nothing.
12/09/09
AT&T (the greedy bastards) made over $12 BILlION in NET profits last year and this year (as of Q3) they had made almost $10 BILLION in NET profits.
They have the money to fix this problem. They just don't give a fuck about their customers.
Check it out for yourself at [www.att.com] - look at the top of page 3 for the financial summary.
12/09/09
12/09/09
I'm in Buffalo, NY, and have gleefully flawless AT&T service for miles in any direction, including rural.
Why on earth would NYC or SF be worse than this economically depressed area? In NYC the return per cell tower/antenna has got to far outstrip whatever they might get in this area of minimal service plans...
In light of absolutely costly marketing embarassments, why wouldn't they blitzkrieg NYC and SF with network and antenna updates?
I mean... as long as they don't do it by stealing our towers.
12/09/09
Which doesn't excuse AT&T for not blanketing the city with enough receptors to make it worthwhile, incidentally.
12/09/09
But - if Verizon can do it...
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/10/09
Remember when it was true that the "Sole purpose of Government is to protect the rights of the People"?
Yeah, me neither.
12/11/09
You'd have an easier time making your agument in the realm of private business, where it's considered legitimate for collective entities to be established for the benefit of few to the possible detriment of many. And you'd be right that it's considered legitimate, and I don't dispute that. As a user, what I dispute is the usefulness of a system that exists to serve it's owner first and it's users second.
12/11/09
However, I disagree with your statement "The sole purpose of any government is to codify direction for collective effort that can provide infrastructure, rights, and other similar support that goes beyond what an individual can achieve working on their own."
The sole(only) purpose of government is to protect the RIGHTS of the people.
Not to protect the people. Not to ensure the peoples wealth. Not to do anything other than ensure our rights.
Governments tend to do a lot more, and sometimes, do the opposite (taking away the right to marry?WTF???).
12/11/09
I resubmit that a system designed to serve it's owner before it's users is, by definition, not a system worth using.
12/11/09
This is exactly what I am referring to.
"I resubmit that a system designed to serve it's owner before it's users is, by definition, not a system worth using"
Theoretically, the users, and the owners, are the same people.
We the people...
12/11/09
It's a great concept! Just imagine a world where a concept that fundamental is applied across the board... that's what I love about science fiction, all those wondrous what-ifs.
12/09/09
It's a pity as I adore the phone itself, but I'm sick as all hell of worrying about calls dropping, data service cuts, etc.; when I was on Verizon I always thought it sucked b/c of the limited phone selection, but the past 18 months have taught me and a couple million other people that it's the network that really counts. When Cingular ran those "fewest dropped calls" ads a couple years back, I remember thinking that I'd never experienced a dropped call in my life, and wondered if it was really a problem. Ironically, now that I'm with AT&T nee Cingular, it's a constant of my existence.
I think AT&T is going to have a mass exodus next year, and hope they go broke because of it. But as a 27-year fan of Apple, I only hope they have a backup plan when they start to lose all of that business.
12/09/09
Which is...? Verizon?
12/09/09
12/09/09
Weed?
12/09/09
12/09/09
As AmphetamineCrown pointed out AT&T has invested heavily in the last two years in expanding and making better their coverage. If there was another provider interested in being bought out you can bet AT&T would be all over it.
12/09/09
Also with wcdma as more calls and data fill up open ports the nature of the technlogy actually shortens it's range radius from the tower so depending on load on the 3g spectrum the signal will be weaker until More ports open for voice and data then the range will open out further.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
To say nothing of the difference between water and electricity usage and bandwidth. Suffice to say, they may not exactly be comparable.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
Thank god for Google for actually putting some effort into a mobile phone platform. I have a feeling with the pace they are going with the OS releases and the market that Android will probably ring the death bell for Windows Mobile. Microsoft doesnt own the marketplace like they do on computers so they were mistaken to think they can just sit on a crappy, old OS.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
If you want an idea of how big MS is in the commercial space, go to an Apple store. Those little handheld card scanners they carry around... those are running a version of Windows Mobile. You have to assume that Apple would have gone with anyone other than Microsoft if there was anyone other than Microsoft... there wasn't and still isn't.
12/09/09
Basically, are these two separate issues?
I read somewhere (probably Giz) about the question of whether bandwidth hogs really exist or are a fabrication of the carriers to justify a move to a new pricing model. Has AT&T given any data to back up the statement that 3% of smartphone users push 40% of data? Is this a lie, a damn lie, or a statistic?
12/09/09
Slots available on a cell tower are truly limited.
Basically, the easiest way you can test this is simply go to a sporting event and try to make a call or send a message. You will often get call or message failures.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
1% use 20% of the capacity, 5% use 50%, 20% use 80% (Cable Labs). 1% create 20% of traffic, 10% create 60% (Cisco). 1% use 17%, 5% use 41%, 10% use 57% (AT&T landline).
12/09/09
That 3% using 40% of data are called early adopters, meaning that soon everyone will be consuming just as much and those early adopters and those early adopters will have moved on to consume even more data.
That stat is just a red herring used by ATT to divert attention away from the fact that their 3G network sucks. Every day there will be more people using apps on more smartphones. Embrace the future and upgrade the networks!
12/09/09
This, in some ways, is the essence of net neutrality. If you look at all of those presentations, you see that they all note congestion issues and the need to adopt means of addressing congestion. By and large, they all seem to advocate deep packet inspection to determine packet latency priority and honoring quality of service requirements through gateways from provider to provider. They are quite interesting. All packets are not the same.
12/09/09
12/09/09