Next-Generation iPhone to Have "Faster Internet Speeds"?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/20/next-generation-iphone-to-have-faster-internet-speeds/)

Silicon Alley Insider reports (http://www.businessinsider.com/next-gen-iphone-rumor-faster-internet-speeds-2009-3) on rumors from a mobile industry source saying that the next-generation iPhone will have "a significantly faster Internet connection." While no further information is given as to whether this is referring to cellular or Wi-Fi connectivity, Silicon Alley Insider lays out some possibilities based on what is known about the state of the technology.- This can't be referring to AT&T's 4G (LTE) network, because that won't be ready for a year or more.
- This might be referring to faster wifi, and not faster 3G access? (802.11n vs. its current 802.11g/b.)
- AT&T has repeatedly vowed to speed up its 3G network via updates to the network. Is it possible that the current iPhone can't support those increased speeds?
- We don't expect Apple to comment, but we've asked.Electronista provides more detail (http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/03/20/faster.3g.on.next.iphone/) on AT&T's plans for faster 3G running at 7.2 Mbps, up from the 3.6 Mbps speed of the current network.However, the most likely change is the addition of support for speed-doubled 7.2Mbps 3G given both hardware manufacturer and carrier plans. Infineon should have a new 3G chipset starting from mid-year that would support the faster speeds while also improving battery life. At the same time, AT&T has been trialing 7.2Mbps 3G since late 2008 and should roll out the speedier service this year. The provider has stressed that many of its cell towers can be upgraded solely through software rather than new equipment.

Current iPhones are limited in hardware to 3.6Mbps 3G and couldn't themselves be upgraded.Electronista also points to the possibility of a new Broadcom 802.11n chipset being used in the next-generation iPhone to bring increased Wi-Fi speeds.

Article Link: Next-Generation iPhone to Have "Faster Internet Speeds"? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/20/next-generation-iphone-to-have-faster-internet-speeds/)

[Luap]

Its got a gigabit ethernet socket on it.

[plumbingandtech]

Double 3G speed and whatever else apple adds in the iPhone 3G 2.0 this June?

Yah... I'll update.

[Airforcekid]

Now maybe we can watch live tv or stream on apps without wifi???? Browsing speed is fast enough for me now though!

[stainlessliquid]

7.2mbps*





*Exclusive to San Francisco

[plumbingandtech]

Now maybe we can watch live tv or stream on apps without wifi???? Browsing speed is fast enough for me now though!

Just thought of this, add iPhone tethering(which we know is coming in some form) to this new highspeed 3G...

nice..........

:apple::apple::apple::apple:

[Brien]

Well, if the new 3G and Broadcom chipsets make it in, along with the OLED screen from that (rather unlikely) rumor, we'd be looking at better battery life already.

I'm betting it's quite likely we'd see both draft-N and doublespeed 3G in the next hardware revision of the iPhone.

[deannnnn]

While this is great news, it still won't fix the problem of too many people using AT&T's 3G network at once in metropolitan areas.

[rlmccormick]

Well, I'll probably upgrade because I am one of those gadget types that likes to have the latest and greatest. It'll be interesting to see how much of a speed increase the average Joe will get from this updated hardware. 3G may be limited to 3+Mbps but I have never seen my speeds that high. It is a rarity for me to see over 1Mbps and my speed is usually around 500-600kbps.

[bruinsrme]

I hope there wil be a faster 3G or its replacement with the new iphone. I have messed around a couple of storms and Verizons 3G just seems faster.

[rlmccormick]

Now maybe we can watch live tv or stream on apps without wifi???? Browsing speed is fast enough for me now though!

I'd like to see You Tube clips at the WiFi resolution. They went way too far in degrading the quality when over the cell network.

[davidbrummy]

7.2mbps*





*Exclusive to San Francisco

Not where I live or work on 1st and Howard. I can generally only get Edge and I know many people who have the same experience. I also think there are so many iPhones owners in what is a small city (7 miles sq) it is killing the network.

I would like up wi-fi upgrade from g to n. I have the previous version of the Apple Extreme so would like to turn it to N 5GHz only.

[yorkshire]

Faster page rendering please.

[Hattig]

That's going to be faster than the average home broadband connection ... more expensive though. Probably worse contention than your typical DSL, but far more intermittent use that might make evening usage performance better than home usage performance.

And 802.11n seems very likely in this iteration.

Also it might not be necessarily referring to the US, but other 3G networks around the world which may be faster still.

[lazyrighteye]

Thoughts/opinions on whether original iPhone users who upgraded to 3G will be allowed to upgrade (again) to the newer iPhone in June?
And by "allowed" I mean for the price of the new phone + restarting your 2-year contract.

[Chic0]

sounds like new iPhone will be capable of HSDPA.

For those in US, this is something networks in Europe have rolled out over the last 12-18months. A number of devices over here are already capable of using this.

Be good seeing this in next iPhone for sure :cool:

[ateslik]

who cares? 32Gb please.

[marmot25]

7.2mbps*





*Exclusive to San Francisco

This is a joke, right? Tell me it's a joke.

The bay area has the worst 3G coverage.

[bagelche]

I would be psyched it it incorporated N for the wifi.

[bbydon]

But "N" wifi isn't any faster for the internet than "G".
Isn't the internet slower than "G"?

[yorkshire]

who cares? 32Gb please.

I think this is quite likely for June. But not before.

[lazyrighteye]

sounds like new iPhone will be capable of HSDPA.

Is HSDPA+ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSPA%2B) happening yet (or is that part of LTE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution))?
Said to top out at 42 Mbit/s downlink.

[dextermorgan]

I might actually buy one if it has wireless n.

[8CoreWhore]

ATT will get much faster... both phones will get faster.. the iPhone 3G will go to 3.6Mbps and the next iPhone will go faster. 3.6Mbps is several times faster than now.. that would be GREAT! 802.11n is not only faster (file transfers in home network)... it supports much longer distances... longer distances are needed so you can connect from the street... higher speeds from Wifi is not needed for internet as the internet connection is slower than 802.11b/g or n anyway. The recent Apple Extreme Base Stations will run on 802.11g if the current iPhones are also connected and n will not be used for you Macs. If you're not using wifi on your phone at the moment at home, turn that off so your AEBS can revert to n for your Macs.

[Beric]

Wireless N doesn't do downloads any faster than Wireless G. It's the device-to-device traffic that's faster. The only thing Wireless N would do is make it so the iPhone could work on N-only networks, which would be a bonus.

[starnyc]

Latency is a huge bottleneck on both the device end and the carrier end. With a chipset and technology that fixed this, Web browsing would be much much faster even at lowers speeds over the existing network. latency decreased on the device end would actually speed up the carrier network as a whole, dropping greatly the number of concurrent open server threads.

[G4scott]

AT&T's plans for faster 3G running at 7.2 Mbps, up from the 3.6 Mbps speed of the current network.

3.6? Really? Five bars of 3G service right here, and I can only seem to get 2.0 Mbps (which is actually the fastest 3G I've ever seen in Austin...) At my apartment, I hardly get any service (in the middle of the city!)

AT&T needs to work on coverage first, then their user capacity, then can they work on jacking up the speed for everyone. There's no point in having 7.2 Mbps speed if only 4 people can actually connect at that speed at any given time.

[plumbingandtech]

3.6? Really? Five bars of 3G service right here, and I can only seem to get 2.0 Mbps (which is actually the fastest 3G I've ever seen in Austin...) At my apartment, I hardly get any service (in the middle of the city!)

AT&T needs to work on coverage first, then their user capacity, then can they work on jacking up the speed for everyone. There's no point in having 7.2 Mbps speed if only 4 people can actually connect at that speed at any given time.

they can do both, especially if the report regarding a large part of this speed upgrade is software based.

d I can only seem to get 2.0 Mbps

So if you get that now. Double it. Should make _most_ folks happy...

[SpinThis!]

Faster page rendering please.
yeh exactly... N doesn't really solve anything here without a faster processor to actually handle that data. The only thing for N here is wireless range might improve a bit.

It's a bit like gigabit ethernet—unless you have a really tuned system, the difference isn't that much over fast ethernet. A fatter pipe doesn't necessarily mean faster speeds—anyone with a really fast connection will tell you it depends on the other end of the pipe too (the sending server).

[njl]

While this is great news, it still won't fix the problem of too many people using AT&T's 3G network at once in metropolitan areas.

good point, supposedly, this has happened in austin at SxSW..

[derryquinn]

sounds like new iPhone will be capable of HSDPA.

For those in US, this is something networks in Europe have rolled out over the last 12-18months. A number of devices over here are already capable of using this.

Be good seeing this in next iPhone for sure :cool:

12-18 months? BAHAHAHAHA we've had it waaaaay longer than that!:D:D

[Chic0]

Is HSDPA+ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSPA%2B) happening yet (or is that part of LTE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution))?
Said to top out at 42 Mbit/s downlink.

hmmm...no idea is HSDPA+ has been rolled out yet, but this definately sounds like standard HSDPA

"High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) is a 3G (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3G) (third generation) mobile telephony (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_telephony) communications protocol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_protocol) in the High-Speed Packet Access (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Speed_Packet_Access) (HSPA) family, which allows networks based on Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System) (UMTS) to have higher data transfer speeds and capacity. Current HSDPA deployments support down-link speeds of 1.8, 3.6, 7.2 and 14.4 Mbit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megabit)/s. "

[awulf]

Telstra's 3G (NextG) network in Australia already supports 21Mbps, and apparently upping it to 42Mbps this year. It covers 99% of Australia's population but costs an arm and a leg to use.

[=MuLti-CeLL=]

Cool, guess my submission made it through, first time 'submit'ter' here. :D

Yea, I'll take mah cookie now, kthanx. :p

[Chic0]

12-18 months? BAHAHAHAHA we've had it waaaaay linger than that!:D:D

I was just guessing though :p

[diazhill]

http://www.your.rogers.com/business/custservice/coverage/info.asp#Page_3

[Michael73]

June / July can't come soon enough...

My wife's 2 year agreement (we're on a family plan) with t-mobile just expired last week and I've been able to upgrade for a long time.

All I have to do is hold on for about another 90 - 120 days...

In the interim, I can get my :apple: fix with a new 15" MBP I'm planning on getting in the next couple of weeks ;)

[moviebrain]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

HSUPA in addition to HSDPA?

[dmo580]

I find it funny that a lot of people don't jump and discuss about the network, but I guess this isn't HoFo and a consumer end forum.

AT&T has actively deployed 3.6 HSDPA already and 7.2 is TESTING. So it really doesn't matter that your iPhone gets 7.2 HSDPA but no one even gets speedtests of 3.6mbps yet, so ehh.

[diamond.g]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

HSUPA in addition to HSDPA?

Usually called HSPA... ;)



As the U stands for uplink and the d stands for downlink

[derryquinn]

I was just guessing though :p

Well, to be fair, it was a good guess...

I always feel sorry for americans when they're getting excited over 3G phones, and compaining of only getting EDGE speeds in certain areas...

Ahh the good 'ole days of 2001 :D

[Anonymous Freak]

Electronista also points to the possibility of a new Broadcom 802.11n chipset being used in the next-generation iPhone to bring increased Wi-Fi speeds.

Other than for the raw 'compatibility' factor with 802.11n, and dual-band operation, there is no reason for it. My iPhone never even scores above 802.11b-capable speeds even when I'm connected to an 802.11g network with available bandwidth over 20 MB/s.

[moviebrain]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

@diamond.g
I know, but since they already support HSDPA I thought I'd specifically point out the Uplink portion 

[calvy]

802.11n is not going to increase your internet speeds when your broadband connection maxes out at 10Meg anyway. 802.11b is enough for most everyone. And you really don't have much of a need for fast network speeds at home unless you go against Apple's will and jailbreak.

[statler]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

@diamond.g
I know, but since they already support HSDPA I thought I'd specifically point out the Uplink portion 

Yes - it will have HSUPA and then some kind of new video feature to take advantage of the uplink speeds, maybe a second camera (on the front) and mobile video chat. Good luck getting a connection at SXSW next year.

[guzhogi]

I'm betting it's quite likely we'd see both draft-N and doublespeed 3G in the next hardware revision of the iPhone.

If they add draft-n wireless, I hope it's compatible w/ more draft-n access points. Last summer, I helped overhaul my school district's wireless network. We installed Cisco access points that has both 2.4 GHz & 5 GHz antennas & is dual band (like the new Airport Extreme Base Stations) so we can use b/g & n at the same time. Unfortunately, Cisco's draft-n APs isn't compatible w/ the district's MacBooks, or so says the district's Network guy. Hopefully, Cisco and/or Apple will release a fix. Wireless network in the district leaves much to be desired (but we have several dozen 4-6 year old iBooks running in each school so that may be part of the problem).

[kornyboy]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

I don't think that this will be enough for me to update from my current iPhone. It would be nice to see 802.11n on the phone though but that will really only make a difference if Apple brings about syncing via a wireless network.

[jdee2wheels]

Yeah, not really impressed. Unless the page rendering speeds up it won't matter much. I was surprised how fast my edge connection was when I tethered it to a computer (jailbroken phone), but the iphone renders web pages so slowly it doesn't matter how fast your connect is at this point, though I guess for downloads it would help a bit.

[JMac213]

The gen 2 iPhone is very slow to browse with, even when on wifi. 802.11b/g is infinitely faster than anybody's dsl so bringing it to 802.11n isn't going to make any difference. what they are referring to is a probably a much needed software upgrade.

btw - "the nations fastest 3g network" seems to be just faster than a modem.

[davidbrummy]

Wireless N doesn't do downloads any faster than Wireless G. It's the device-to-device traffic that's faster. The only thing Wireless N would do is make it so the iPhone could work on N-only networks, which would be a bonus.

My understanding of the old Airport Extreme's is that is you allow and use g traffic everything is downgraded so transfers from my server to my Apple TV will be a g speed. Hence will the new Airport Extremes dual band.

Althought $179 for a a dual band router is probably a better deal :)

[kbshog]

7.2mbps*


*Exclusive to San Francisco

I was given a upgraded (PC) a month ago for work with built in broadband running AT&T. I put in my sim card and it runds at 7.2mbps. It's different hardware but on the same AT&T 3G network and its a huge difference. I am in the Washington DC suburbs.

[dongmin]

From the Electronista (http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/05/31/infineon.xmm.6180.3g.chip/):

In peak conditions, the chipset can not only download at up to 7.2Mbps but upload much more quickly than older HSDPA hardware -- up to 2.9Mbps, Infineon claims.

Such improved upstream speed is often regarded as necessary for more advanced two-way Internet features on cellphones, including video calling and sending photos or videos directly to the web. Infineon also notes that the general application processing of the new chipset supports image processing for up to a 5-megapixel camera and the ability to encode or decode VGA (640x480) video in real time.

The chipset is also much more efficient than past models, the company says. The XMM 6180 platform reduces the number of chips needed from three to two and halves the number of components needed; this not only shrinks the size of the hardware by 40 percent but reduces the power draw. Power use in standby mode drops by as much as 30 percent, giving any phone using the technology more useful lifetime thanks to more of a charge kept between calls.

So this new chipset will not only allow faster downloads/uploads in general, but also make video conferencing possible and reduce power.

Sounds like iPhone 3 might be a worthwhile upgrade.

[aduzik]

It seems pretty ineffective to put 802.11n or faster 7.2 Mbps 3G chipsets in the iPhone. If Apple is really interested in improving the Internet performance of the iPhone, they'll work on the rendering speed of the browser, adding more memory and a faster processor to the device so that applications that use networking services can take full advantage of the existing pipes.

[pounce]

don't any of you guys have N networks at your homes? i have a time capsule and want to switch it to N, but i would like my phone to work on the network for a variety of reasons including having the "remote" application work right between the iphone and my macbook pro. so for me it's a compatibility issue and not a speed issue in wanting to see N on the iphone.

[lostngone]

I am still waiting for 3G in my area...

AT&T still saying its only 3 months till we get it. Unfortunately, they have been saying that for over 9 months.

[sal]

who cares? 32Gb please.

I'd buy it, even if they just repackaged the 3G iphone with 3.0 software and call it a day....as long as the capacity is increased to 32gb that is.

[sjoerdsmink]

Maybe it was misunderstood, and Apple integrates it's new (faster) Safari browser into the iPhone 3.0 software.

[andiwm2003]

well, i hope they release a new iphone in june. with fast tethering i might upgrade if it's a subsidized $200 deal.

[StuffOfInterest]

I always feel sorry for americans when they're getting excited over 3G phones, and compaining of only getting EDGE speeds in certain areas...

Ahh the good 'ole days of 2001 :D

Unfortunately, it just comes with living in such a spread out country. The population density in the US is a lot lower than Europe, so it takes more equipment to cover the entire country. This means that the carrier is going to try to leverage the installed technology as long as possible before performing system wide upgrades.

[moniker]

It has to be 7.2 Mbps 3G as that is pretty much standard among its competitors nowadays. Also it's just a software upgrade for even semi-modern Ericsson base stations. For that matter, Ericsson released the 14.4. Mbps base station upgrade kit some time ago...

[koh-kun]

I sure hope it's faster 3G speeds because some of the Docomo phones in Japan made my iPhone look sluggish in comparison.

Though, I'd choose usability over faster internet speeds any day. The phones there are so restrictive when it comes to DRM and stuff; and more importantly they're not very mac-friendly.

Don't wanna sound like a fanboy but I hope Apple keeps to pave the way for mobile phones–then we'll have other companies making better phones to compete for my hard-earned money lol.

[libertyforall]

So why is Apple not building iPhones that can be upgraded solely through software rather than new equipment -- STOP THE PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE!

[lostngone]

So why is Apple not building iPhones that can be upgraded solely through software rather than new equipment -- STOP THE PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE!


??? Huh?

I really hope this is a troll!

[The General]

It would be cool if they changed MobileSafari to work more like Opera Mini or Skyfire, where the rendering happens on a server up in the cloud, much faster and much more useful. With services like that, we wouldn't need Flash plugins that way. :D

[Jimmy James]

Apple could make this claim simply by adding draft-N and I'm guessing that's going to be the improvement.

802.11n is not going to increase your internet speeds when your broadband connection maxes out at 10Meg anyway. 802.11b is enough for most everyone. And you really don't have much of a need for fast network speeds at home unless you go against Apple's will and jailbreak.

My broadband maxes out at 20 Mbps and is only $10 more than a basic plan.

Unfortunately, it just comes with living in such a spread out country. The population density in the US is a lot lower than Europe, so it takes more equipment to cover the entire country. This means that the carrier is going to try to leverage the installed technology as long as possible before performing system wide upgrades.

I find it humorous how wireless providers in the US made bold claims about their data service, only for it to be revealed how immature their hardware was by the release of a single device.

So why is Apple not building iPhones that can be upgraded solely through software rather than new equipment -- STOP THE PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE!

I didn't want the hardware advancements to stop with the 2G and I don't want them to stop with the 3G. A number of people in this thread have already mentioned that the raw processing power could be a bottle neck in rendering web pages [among other things]. Give us more, Apple.

[Furrybeagle]

Is HSDPA+ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSPA%2B) happening yet (or is that part of LTE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution))?
Said to top out at 42 Mbit/s downlink.

42 Mbit/s won't do anything when I still have 1 bar at my house :'(.

So why is Apple not building iPhones that can be upgraded solely through software rather than new equipment -- STOP THE PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE!

What are you talking about? Did you not notice that little event on Tuesday about this little thing called iPhone OS 3.0?

Oh, you were talking about the cell chips in the phones? I hate to break it to you, but you can't just say "let's make a phone that can be upgraded through software instead of hardware" and then have it magically happen. The reason the first iPhone was EDGE and not 3G is because they just didn't have energy efficient 3G chips to use. It's not like everyone has stockpiles of super efficient 4G chips just sitting around that they don't want you to use yet....

[audioteknika]

hehe.. I wonder how much this 3G ver2 will drain the battery..

They should do a buyout on a battery company and stop wasting their time with unnecessary gimmick like HSPDA 7.2.. Which will be replaced in 2-3 years with 4G..

[ibosie]

sounds like new iPhone will be capable of HSDPA.

For those in US, this is something networks in Europe have rolled out over the last 12-18months. A number of devices over here are already capable of using this.

Be good seeing this in next iPhone for sure :cool:

I wonder if it will support HSUPA. On O2 Mobile Broadband which is essentially the same service as the iPhone 3G I'm getting 1.5Mbps upload speeds.

[tbealmear]

Unfortunately, it just comes with living in such a spread out country. The population density in the US is a lot lower than Europe, so it takes more equipment to cover the entire country. This means that the carrier is going to try to leverage the installed technology as long as possible before performing system wide upgrades.

Well said. It does suck living somewhere so big like the US. Makes rolling out technology like this very expensive. Then it always goes to the popular areas first like LA and New York. What I would give to be able to live in a small country sometimes ;)

[ipoppy]

Double 3G speed and whatever else apple adds in the iPhone 3G 2.0 this June?

Yah... I'll update.

Its funny how people call iPhones those days; no wonder that everyone is so confused:
-iPhone 3G 2.0?
-iPhone 4G?
-iPhone 2G
-iPhone AV
-original iPhone
...and bla bla. Even on eBay they call iPhone 3G as third generation!!! I don't have to explain what 3G means and etc because we all know this stuff very well. Its just sad that its hasn't been clarified yet what is what.:confused:

[Branskins]

I understand the posters frustration with the fact that Apple can only upgrade the phone with a hardware revision instead of a software update. The other night when 3.0 was announced, a podcast I listen to praised apple for distancing itself from other phone makers by showing that it can support its phone through software rather than hardware updates (unlike some phone makers who release a new phone every month!)

I will be pretty dissapointed if Apple announces any new drastic updates in its hardware revision this year (if one happens) because it might make them look like all of the other phone makers. The iPhone hardware is amazing, and as apple showed with the 3.0 preview, they can still do a heck of a lot with the current hardware.

So I really hope Apple waits on this one and shows that its 3.0 software can stand on its own without new hardware. This would send a strong message to all of those manufacturers who create phones and then immediately work on the next revision without supporting its previous hardware: the software is more important than you think.

I remember when I originally tries to buy the iPhone, someone tried to sell me another touchscreen phone saying that it was comparable. But the first thing that popped into my mind was that I KNEW Apple would support their phone way more than Samsung or whoever it was would. 3.0 is a testament to this fact.

Sorry for possibly derailing, but I feel some frustration with this "announcement" as it kind of makes what apple has built so far look weak because it goes against this importance of software updates and makes them look like every other phone manufacturer. I really hope they wait this one out and do a hardware revision with LTE when it is ready

[wheezy]

Whoa! The rumors on this new iPhone are making it pretty darn impressive... hopefully the 2.5G (long live iPhone 1!) will be replaced by this.

[NRose8989]

So it's pretty known that 802.11n does nothing for internet use.

But 802.11n drastically improves wireless transfer rates over locals networks

So what if:

802.11n == wireless sync of wifi?

assuming they have 802.11n chips that have extremely low power draw or even like the Zune and be able to do this when connect to a power source.

[fjfjfjfj]

When is ATT going to upgrade the service they currently offer in NY? I recently took a trip to San Francisco and was immediately faced with the reality that my iPhone 3G service in New York City is very different from what I was experiencing in San Francisco. The constant pinwheel, the missed calls that go straight to voicemail. And why doesn't ATT work in the train tunnels between NY and NJ? My Verizon phone for work has worked through the tunnels flawlessly for years. How can ATT not have addressed these issues when they have had YEARS to upgrade?

I would love to see an upgrade but I fear us city dwellers will never realize the enhanced speed as we can't even experience 3G as it was designed.

grrrrr.

[viccles]

Hopefully it will be around August that a new iphone is released. That way I can pay a reasonable price to cancel my current plan. Please please please more battery life!

[wickedawesome31]

I hope the new phone is released at WWDC '09. Is that too much to ask for with the release of Snow Leopard as well? Would they release them at the same event? What do you guys think?

[viccles]

I hope the new phone is released at WWDC '09. Is that too much to ask for with the release of Snow Leopard as well? Would they release them at the same event? What do you guys think?

I apologise if this has been asked but what month is the WWDC 09 is it July?

[quigleybc]

Will it be "Ludicrous speed?"

or even "Plaid?"

:rolleyes::D

[guzhogi]

Will it be "Ludicrous speed?"

or even "Plaid?"

:rolleyes::D

Hopefully, Dark Helmet. Yay Spaceballs!

[chewbaccacabra]

Offering different speeds supports the rumors we have heard of different data plan pricing tiers. I'll take EDGE speed for $20 or $50 for tethering + the new fancy speedy 3G. I know, wishful thinking on my part for that last price.

[iMule]

Damn, great... so they're reeling us in to fork out another $200 dollars for speed upgrade. Double my 3G speed? Please don't tell me Apple didn't know about this.

[ilfn143]

hope it doesn't jump from 5 bars to 0 bar twice as fast.

[manu chao]

Open links as new tabs in the background. That is how I operate on the computer, once I get to the tab it has had enough time to load and render. Essentially, I want the iPhone to load and render stuff in the background while I read another page.

[iMule]

If it is only a speed change that is in the new model, I can deal with keeping my 3G. If not, I'll have to buy the new one, because I roll like that :D.

[Quu]

yeh exactly... N doesn't really solve anything here without a faster processor to actually handle that data. The only thing for N here is wireless range might improve a bit.

It's a bit like gigabit ethernet—unless you have a really tuned system, the difference isn't that much over fast ethernet. A fatter pipe doesn't necessarily mean faster speeds—anyone with a really fast connection will tell you it depends on the other end of the pipe too (the sending server).

I agree with you on 802.11n in the iPhone because the iPhone does need a faster Processor to utilise the speed it already has (Safari Rendering and such).

But I don't agree on Gigabit ethernet. Even a single drive external NAS for £60 will go over 10/100 Ethernet. Remember that 100Mb/ps ethernet is 12.5MB/ps a single hard disk today in the 320-1TB region (which are common) will hit 70MB/ps read and 60MB/ps Write. With the more expensive drives like 1TB Seagates and Samsungs hitting 90MB/ps read. 1000Mb Ethernet is only 125MB/ps which means it is needed in Home networks (but not for Internet access, yet).

I personally have a home NAS that I built for £500 that hits 500MB/ps (MB not Mb) I max out the 125MB/ps of 1000 Ethernet pretty much every time I write to that NAS. But I'm not usually transferring files that take more then 30 Seconds so I've not rectified the situation. My point is even in an affordable area the 1Gb link is right now needed in a lot of usage scenarios especially when the next speed down is a miniscule 100. Maybe if it was 500 it'd be a different kettle of fish.

[Marc4]

Its funny how people call iPhones those days; no wonder that everyone is so confused:
-iPhone 3G 2.0?
-iPhone 4G?
-iPhone 2G
-iPhone AV
-original iPhone
...and bla bla. Even on eBay they call iPhone 3G as third generation!!! I don't have to explain what 3G means and etc because we all know this stuff very well. Its just sad that its hasn't been clarified yet what is what.:confused:

The new iPhone that comes out on Memorial Day will be called "iPhone 3G^2" as in 3G-square, hehe :D

Seriously though, the planned update is 7.2 Mbps and shooting for end of May - this is straight from an insider at Infineon.
They could also be updating the WiFi to draft N, but since it's a Broadcom chip I don't have that info.

-Marc

[vvebsta]

I'm telling you guys the next iphone will have 4G capability...while the service might not be up yet, I'd bet money the next iphone will support it.

http://joywire.com/Old%20Stuff/4g.jpg

[macFanDave]

If my iPhone 3G only ran nearly as fast as I have already been promised, I'd be very happy. Often, this thing runs no faster than my old 2G iPhone did on the EDGE network. Usually I look at lawsuits with a certain sense of disgust, but I can sympathize with those of us disappointed by the lack of delivery on the advertised performance of 3G. It seems like it is all AT&T's fault and I don't understand how Apple gets swept up as a co-defendant. They ought to be co-plaintiffs!

[tiguk]

What we won't see in the next iPhone:

7.6Mbps HSUPA
802.11n Wifi
32GB
Front facing camera / iChat
OLED screen
Faster processor


All have been rumoured, but it's just too good to be all true, and we know we always hype it up too much and end up being a little let down when the announcement finally arrives.

I think I'd settle for any two from that list.

[Dagless]

I wonder if they'll be tapping into that faster 3G (or is it even 4G) network that O2 has? Guess we can expect 802n at least.

[kiranmk2]

I was thinking about this earlier today. I think the majority of smartphone swill be going to 7.2 Mbps/HSUPA (most are there already in the EU) and 11n as broadcom have a single chip solution.

In the UK, all the networks are upto 3.6 Mbps and most are rolling out 7.2 Mbps as we speak. Certainly T-mobile said they would be at 14.4 Mbps by next year.

[ipoppy]

I'm telling you guys the next iphone will have 4G capability...while the service might not be up yet, I'd bet money the next iphone will support it.

http://joywire.com/Old%20Stuff/4g.jpg

No, it will not have 4G. Its way too early for iPhone to have even suitable chip for 4G; besides there is no definition of 4G yet so how the hell apple knows what 4G will be? Taken from Wikipedia:

"There is no formal definition for what 4G is[dated info]; however, there are certain objectives that are projected for 4G. These objectives include: that 4G will be a fully IP-based integrated system. 4G will be capable of providing between 100 Mbit/s and 1 Gbit/s speeds both indoors and outdoors, with premium quality and high security. [1]
Many companies[specify] have taken self-serving definitions and distortions[neutrality disputed]about 4G to suggest they have 4G already in existence today[verification needed], such as several early trials and launches of WiMAX. Other companies have made prototype systems calling those 4G. While it is possible that some currently demonstrated technologies may become part of 4G, until the 4G standard or standards have been defined[dated info], it is impossible[citation needed] for any company currently to provide with any certainty[opinion needs balancing] wireless solutions that could be called 4G cellular networks that would conform to the eventual international standards for 4G. These confusing statements around "existing" 4G have served to confuse investors and analysts about the wireless industry"


The same story is with Blue-ray player; they still waiting to implement it in their hardware but that is totally different subject all together. Blue-ray is already finished and Apple running away from optical drive wherever they can===>MacBook Air

[Nermal]

A couple of people have already mentioned this but I'm hoping for Evolved HSPA (HSPA+) support. That'll get the fastest speed out of the best network here.

[nagromme]

Yes--compare a desktop Mac to an iPhone on the same WiFi network (both set to G) and you can tell that processor speed and/or graphics rendering power is a big factor. A faster processor alone could be enough to speed up the browsing experience. A move to N does seem likely too though.

[DELLsFan]

If they can improve speeds on the hardware already in use on the 2G and 3G iPhones, then /applause.

If not, then /rude ... since my 3G is only a month old. :o

:apple:

[FastLaneJB]

I haven't read the whole thread but the first 1.5 pages worth and no one so far in that actually realised the iPhone already supports up to 7.2Mbit HSDPA.

So if it's to get faster, I suspect they mean HSUPA is added for faster uploads.

Here's a speed test I did around the time of the iPhone 3G came out on O2 in the UK. We've had 7.2Mbit for a while (Long before the iPhone 3G came out).

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3093/2783921613_858864cba5_o.jpg

It needs a faster CPU to get faster Internet.

[cameronjpu]

Having more RAM would make the internet (Safari) much faster.

[ipoppy]

What we won't see in the next iPhone:

7.6Mbps HSUPA
802.11n Wifi
32GB
Front facing camera / iChat
OLED screen
Faster processor


All have been rumoured, but it's just too good to be all true, and we know we always hype it up too much and end up being a little let down when the announcement finally arrives.

I think I'd settle for any two from that list.

I would argue about :
- iChat with camera;
Surely new iPhone will have video recording because of few facts (look few stories back) and official from apple about youtube account personalization. What do you need that for? Of course...record and upload. From there you one step to have iChat. Front camera?... patent already sent by apple and they will do it behind screen. Unless they won't do it because they will simply run out of good features for next iPhone after this one.;)

- Faster processor
They need that for smooth video recording and its natural progression

- 32 gig
Hmm...not sure about this one because i think 16 gb its enough for me personally and any increase of that flash memory cost fortune. If apple wants keep iPhone considerably cheaep, then yes, forget about 32gb, which is still expensive to implement yet. Also I have found very interesting comment about this:

"...Um one teeny tiny problem that may or may not apply. I am not sure of the speed at which flash memory is increasing it's capacity, however from what I have understood it is proably not going faster than moore's law and therefore flash memory cannot keep doubling every year for forever so that may be looking a bit too far into the future.":eek:

:apple::apple::apple:

[diemos]

that's great news I just want my background apps damn screen 480x800 screen. Is anyone with me?

[Lucbert]

Wireless Lan N would not make the internet faster because it's the processor that is limiting the speeds right now, not the WiFi.
7.2 3G could make a difference thought and should have been included in the first place since it's already available on some european networks.

[ViRGE]

I will be pretty dissapointed if Apple announces any new drastic updates in its hardware revision this year (if one happens) because it might make them look like all of the other phone makers.I'd expect to be disappointed then. A new processor is definitely in the cards (either the iPod Touch's, or something newer) and a new GPU is a shoe-in too. If they add HSUPA support then you'd be looking at a new modem, and the power consumption on some of the latest Draft-N WiFi chips is low enough that they could do a drop-in replacement and at least get 2.4ghz N going (5ghz may be an issue due to antenna factors).

Everyone knew that the 3G was a half-upgrade; only the modem was replaced. 2 years (thank you Mr. Moore) is a reasonable amount of time to expect an update on everything else.

[Chupa Chupa]

I'm pretty sure if the next iPhone does have "n" Wi-Fi it won't be to increase Internet speed. That would be overkill. But what if it was for wireless iTunes syncing. That would be pretty slick.

[Michael CM1]

If anybody thinks 802.11n will speed up "the Internet" on a cell phone, I'd looooooove to know what service they have that has a Net connection faster than 54Mbps. Otherwise, it's bunk.

It's probably some marketing thing from AT&T. I'd rather them work on even the EDGE network not crapping out on me when I go into a few dips on the road around here. I lost the feed from the basketball game a couple of times last night on the way home. It connected back in a few seconds, but it seems a little crazy that an EDGE signal would drop on a US highway in a populated area.

[ryanw]

My guess is that the internet will be significantly faster due to the extra processing capabilities of the device NOT a significant change in technology.

[Stratus Fear]

I haven't read the whole thread but the first 1.5 pages worth and no one so far in that actually realised the iPhone already supports up to 7.2Mbit HSDPA.

So if it's to get faster, I suspect they mean HSUPA is added for faster uploads.

Here's a speed test I did around the time of the iPhone 3G came out on O2 in the UK. We've had 7.2Mbit for a while (Long before the iPhone 3G came out).

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3093/2783921613_858864cba5_o.jpg

It needs a faster CPU to get faster Internet.

This is correct. The baseband hardware does indeed support it already.

http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/channel.html?channel=ff80808112ab681d0112ab6ab94205ef

[SirOmega]

There isn't anything faster than 7.2Mbps on the market now. Hell, the next gen Infineon chip wont even hit mass production until sometime in the second half of this year...

Infineon X-GOLD 618 baseband chipset (http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/channel.html?channel=db3a304319c6f18c011a3948dc76055b)

7.2Mb/s down, 2.9Mb/s up
Integrated high-end video accelerator for H.263, H.264, VC-1, WMV9
playback, recording and streaming up to D1/VGA video content
MIPI: Camera support up to 5 Mpxl, display support up to WVGA
Integrated ISP and JPEG hardware acceleration
HW security, LP-DDR1 and NAND flash support
UBS high speed OTG


The main benefit of the chipset above is that its fabbed at 65nm (instead of 90nm) so you get much lower power consumption.

[Mercury7]

"wireless N doesn't do downloads any faster than Wireless G. It's the device-to-device traffic that's faster. The only thing Wireless N would do is make it so the iPhone could work on N-only networks, which would be a bonus."

Beric....are you sure about that? I was going to say that it was time to upgrade my airport but if what you say is true then I really don't need to.

please clarify as that is the first time I ever heard that so I am skeptical

[FastLaneJB]

This is correct. The baseband hardware does indeed support it already.

http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/channel.html?channel=ff80808112ab681d0112ab6ab94205ef

I know, I've had 7.2Mbit HSDPA on my iPhone 3G since I brought it. The screenshot was posted to show that not only does it already have the hardware internally but it makes use of it perfectly fine.

Strangely even though I posted that screenshot there is a ton of posts afterwards still saying that the next model will have 7.2Mbit HSPDA like the current model doesn't already have it. If a picture doesn't help these people, I don't know what will :)

Before it can really take advantage of faster 3G it would need a faster processor. If you saw Apple's demo of 3G speeds, WiFi wasn't all that much quicker. The Palm Pre can render a page much quicker on WiFi because it has an much more recent ARM core which is vastly faster. So here is hoping that Apple bumps the next iPhone up to this level as it'll make a world of difference.

[willygee]

If it's to do with AT&T's network speed then it can't really be claimed that the iPhone will be faster. AT&T don't operate the networks in the other 78 countries that the iPhone is available in.

[Bye Bye Baby]

But there is no netweork for it yet.

My money is on November 2009 at the earliest. Not sooner.

[App1€]

I understand the posters frustration with the fact that Apple can only upgrade the phone with a hardware revision instead of a software update. The other night when 3.0 was announced, a podcast I listen to praised apple for distancing itself from other phone makers by showing that it can support its phone through software rather than hardware updates (unlike some phone makers who release a new phone every month!)

I will be pretty dissapointed if Apple announces any new drastic updates in its hardware revision this year (if one happens) because it might make them look like all of the other phone makers. The iPhone hardware is amazing, and as apple showed with the 3.0 preview, they can still do a heck of a lot with the current hardware.

So I really hope Apple waits on this one and shows that its 3.0 software can stand on its own without new hardware. This would send a strong message to all of those manufacturers who create phones and then immediately work on the next revision without supporting its previous hardware: the software is more important than you think.

I remember when I originally tries to buy the iPhone, someone tried to sell me another touchscreen phone saying that it was comparable. But the first thing that popped into my mind was that I KNEW Apple would support their phone way more than Samsung or whoever it was would. 3.0 is a testament to this fact.

Sorry for possibly derailing, but I feel some frustration with this "announcement" as it kind of makes what apple has built so far look weak because it goes against this importance of software updates and makes them look like every other phone manufacturer. I really hope they wait this one out and do a hardware revision with LTE when it is ready

Sounds like you got locked into a 3G contract and want this phone. I think Apple is accomplishing what they want, and they are still able to support the 1st gen even though they are most likely releasing a third soon.

[leandromp]

for (30 dollars!) a month, it should be a lot faster!!

[Stratus Fear]

If a picture doesn't help these people, I don't know what will :)

I posted the link in addition to your post in hopes that it would ;) I guess it won't :D

[=MuLti-CeLL=]

Read this from AppleInsider.com, they covered the story pretty well with links to the past. De La Vega Quotes, Graphs and all.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/20/apples_2009_iphone_to_support_faster_3g_networks_report.html

I have to say though, I hope you guys are spot on with the "it needs a faster processor/more RAM" idea. Those are 2 of the main upgrades I'm hoping for.

[MacFly123]

I think this June's iPhone will support up to the 7.2Mbps and video, and the next year will be 20Mbps with OLED screen and iChat front camera :)

[TripHop]

who cares? 32Gb please.I find most interesting about this article is the obvious certainty that the next iPhone 3.0 will contain the choice of 16GB and 32GB Models while the iPod Touch will offer 16GB, 32GB and 64GB models at the same prices as today's 8, 16 & 32 models. The RAM modules that Apple uses are already cheaper than those half their size were when Apple made the RAM upgrade and other improvements to the Touch last February. So we're really behind on the upgrade to both probably waiting for the OS 3.0 and new hardware parts to ship besides cheaper bigger RAM modules like those described in this article.

Looks like it's going to be a very large improvement in the platform. Certainly will be a great party in the queue at the stores this Summer.

[starnyc]

slowness by erroneous wireless and network "chatter" that is caused by lack of cache, latency and the nature of dropped packets up and down - frequent checksum errors - due to the nature of the wireless connection - mobile, versus a static, wired connection. Better code and faster rendering will take care of dropped packets and latency on the software end of things. If they give it a cache (not sure if the type of memory is a limitation), this will also decrease latency greatly by cutting down on duplicate requests and lowering the number of concurrent server threads both sending and receiving.

You can throw all the speed you want at it, but a 7.2 network with a ton of latency is still going to feel like edge when browsing the web to an end user.

[cameronjpu]

"wireless N doesn't do downloads any faster than Wireless G. It's the device-to-device traffic that's faster. The only thing Wireless N would do is make it so the iPhone could work on N-only networks, which would be a bonus."

Beric....are you sure about that? I was going to say that it was time to upgrade my airport but if what you say is true then I really don't need to.

please clarify as that is the first time I ever heard that so I am skeptical

You're kidding, right? That CANT be the first time you've ever heard that wifi is 50 times faster than your internet speed.... Because it's been like that for the past 10 years, from B to G to N now.

[cameronjpu]

for (30 dollars!) a month, it should be a lot faster!!

For a dollar a day, it should be a lot faster!

[coryjb]

I was traveling along I-80 through rural Nebraska earlier in the month with a Verizon phone and my iPhone. I had EVDO coverage on the Verizon the entire distance, but only GPRS on my iPhone. I'd vote to expand their 3g footprint to compete with Verizon before upgrading existing markets. Now, granted Verizon's EVDO network is not nearly as quick as AT&T's 3g network (depending on location), but at least I can hop online with reasonable connection speeds wherever I am.

[nebarik]

This is all well and good for you american and european, and well proper country people. But here in australia i have yet to see my 3g speeds go beyond 10KB/s. And yes i live in a city (brisbane) either optus sucks more then i once thought or all the isps are like this here.

Main problem with this is the fact the internet is down on my landline (thanks again optus). So i have to rely on me iphone. I got this 3g for a reason

[Mercury7]

You're kidding, right? That CANT be the first time you've ever heard that wifi is 50 times faster than your internet speed.... Because it's been like that for the past 10 years, from B to G to N now.

Sorry if I confused you, You said there would be no difference between N and G , I currently have G and so according to what you said a new airport that runs on N would not help my internet speed throughput to any of my devices...ie a macbook with n or a iphone with n.

[cameronjpu]

Sorry if I confused you, You said there would be no difference between N and G , I currently have G and so according to what you said a new airport that runs on N would not help my internet speed throughput to any of my devices...ie a macbook with n or a iphone with n.

That's right, because your wifi is already way faster than your internet. Imagine the internet as a water pipe - it runs to your house through a 1 inch diameter pipe, and once it gets inside your house you hook it up to a 12 inch diameter pipe. That 12 inch pipe is not going to blast you back in your chair, you'll get your 1 inch of pressure still.

[manu chao]

I currently have G and so according to what you said a new airport that runs on N would not help my internet speed throughput to any of my devices...ie a macbook with n or a iphone with n.
Correct, g is 54 Mbit/s (nominally), how fast is your internet connection? My cable modem is rated at 25 Mbit/s and that is the fastest on offer in my city.

[trose]

You're kidding, right? That CANT be the first time you've ever heard that wifi is 50 times faster than your internet speed.... Because it's been like that for the past 10 years, from B to G to N now.
Theoretically.

I've yet to encounter a network that didn't seem noticeably more sluggish on the wireless side than the wired computers on the same LAN.

802.11b was/is especially poor... I know it *can* do 11Mbps, but it never really does.

G is much better, but still far from perfect.

Also, don't exaggerate. 50 times faster? Really? A typical broadband connection in the US is somewhere around 6Mbps. 802.11G is 54Mbps peak.
That's 9-10x more bandwidth at 802.11G's maximum bandwidth. A far cry from "50x".

Let's not even delve into latency on wireless vs wired networks...

Wireless has a LONG way to go before it'll be able to top a wired connection, even for web browsing. It's very good, but to a discerning user such as myself, it's an obvious difference.

Now for my rant on this 3g nonsense...

I live in Portland, ME and 3g was rolled out here last November. For the first few months, it was relatively speedy and I was quite pleased. It has quickly degraded, and the 3g service is now not only slow, but also so spotty that I leave EDGE on most the time, preferring a reliable connection to quickly check my email rather than crossing my fingers that the 3g will actually establish a connection, give me an IP and let me download what I want within a reasonable timeframe.

I'm not sure where they will be managing to deploy 7Mbps 3g with any reliability... I think AT&T is a little in over their heads.

[Tres]

I agree with everyone that says that page rendering needs to be sped up. Even on my home broadband connection over Wifi (17mbps) Safari is slow because of the time it takes to render.

It'd also be really nice if the new iPhone had enough RAM so that Safari tabs weren't swapped out every time you switch to a different one. That really pisses me off.

[Sehnsucht]

Its got a gigabit ethernet socket on it.

Yeah, sure, riiiight...and FireWire 800 no doubt. ;) :D

Wireless N doesn't do downloads any faster than Wireless G. It's the device-to-device traffic that's faster. The only thing Wireless N would do is make it so the iPhone could work on N-only networks, which would be a bonus.

Um, I'm fairly certain that downloads/uploads are much faster on N than G. :confused: I use my iMac and iPod touch frequently with both, and G is just miserably pokey. It's almost like being on dial-up. ;)

[donbadman]

meh,
I notice no difference in speed between gen 1 and the 3g as it is, sorting out the dropped calls and crap reception is more of a priority for me, after all unless the thing is usable as a Phone :eek: then the other bells and whistles are a moot point...

Edit: Come on Apple sort it out and make a world wide cellular network and let us pay a flat monthly fee that includes calls from whereever we are on the planet, you have the cash and people need mobile providers that make no distinction between countries.

[lucas]

I would bet they just mean faster browsing. the iphone networking hardware is quite capable, but the iphone is slow as molasses at computing and displaying what it receives, even over 802.11g it's pathetically slow; that's not to imply that anyone else does it any better though.

to demonstrate the slowness, load slashdot.org over 3g on your iphone, and then load it on a notebook that's using pdanet to use the iphones 3g connection. loading it on the phone takes 15-30 seconds on average, while loading it on the notebook using the same network to provide the data is more like 1-2 seconds. you can substitute slashdot.org with any number of complex sites and see similar results.

upping the power of the iphone so it could render pages as fast as it can download them would result in "faster internet speeds" in the eyes of users.

while I'm bitchign about slowness, I'd also hope they put a lot more memory in the next iphone. I'd love to be able to switch between a bunch of "tabs", without each one reloading the page when I go back to it. you can sometimes get away with it if a website opens another basic site in a new tab, you read it and close it and the original site doesnt insist on reloading, but 95% of the time it acts like you've restarted safari and re-renders the unchanged page (taking 15-30 seconds for a complex site).

[SFStateStudent]

"I have the need for SPEED!" Bring it....:p

[branjosef]

I heard President Obama said the current 3G speeds from ATT were not that "fast" and "a bit retarded", but then realized he mispoke, apologized to ATT ,and was forgiven. He now says he is eager as are all Americans to embrace such change. Nancy Pelosi is already drafting a bill to ciphon 75-90% of the bandwith because it is incomprehensible to do such a thing at a time like this.

[Sehnsucht]

I heard President Obama said the current 3G speeds from ATT were not that "fast" and "a bit retarded", but then realized he mispoke, apologized to ATT ,and was forgiven. He now says he is eager as are all Americans to embrace such change. Nancy Pelosi is already drafting a bill to ciphon 75-90% of the bandwith because it is incomprehensible to do such a thing at a time like this.

He actually used the word "retarded"? GTFO!! :D :D

What's next?


http://i485.photobucket.com/albums/rr214/TheDavidFrom1988/omgbecky1.png
"Oh. My. God. Becky, look at her butt, it is SO big!"

:D :D :D

[mozmac]

He really say that? I think it's great that Obama is focusing more on IT infrastructure, but, hmmm....

[FreakinBock]

Also, Apple searched for WiMAX-skilled engineer about a year ago. So I'd believe that this is not just a rumour.

http://www.iphonity.com/apple-goes-wimax.html

[vvebsta]

Hmm...faster internet, multi-core, video ichat, push notifications...the next iPhone is shaping up to be a pretty sweet update! :D Apple must be really scared about the Palm Pre. I have a feeling Apple will be pushing video in the next update, especially with Apple's new video optimization that was demoed with the ESPN app. Yet I shouldn't get my hopes up cause usually what I think should happen and what actually end up happening are usually two different things.

[zenjabba]

Unfortunately, it just comes with living in such a spread out country. The population density in the US is a lot lower than Europe, so it takes more equipment to cover the entire country. This means that the carrier is going to try to leverage the installed technology as long as possible before performing system wide upgrades.

Then how come Australia with even less population density outside the major citys can have 21MB/s UTMS network? No, its just ATT like normal is raping everybody for every penny they can.

[iamthedudeman]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/20/next-generation-iphone-to-have-faster-internet-speeds/)

Silicon Alley Insider reports (http://www.businessinsider.com/next-gen-iphone-rumor-faster-internet-speeds-2009-3) on rumors from a mobile industry source saying that the next-generation iPhone will have "a significantly faster Internet connection." While no further information is given as to whether this is referring to cellular or Wi-Fi connectivity, Silicon Alley Insider lays out some possibilities based on what is known about the state of the technology.Electronista provides more detail (http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/03/20/faster.3g.on.next.iphone/) on AT&T's plans for faster 3G running at 7.2 Mbps, up from the 3.6 Mbps speed of the current network.Electronista also points to the possibility of a new Broadcom 802.11n chipset being used in the next-generation iPhone to bring increased Wi-Fi speeds.

Article Link: Next-Generation iPhone to Have "Faster Internet Speeds"? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/20/next-generation-iphone-to-have-faster-internet-speeds/)


You guys might want to consider and take this little bit of news down.

The current iphone according to a poster for the article you were referring to displayed the specs for the current 3G chipset. I will repost them here for your viewing pleasure.

http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/findProductTypeByName.html?q=SGOLD3H

I am averaging speeds in excess of 1mp down usually 1.5 down on average. 3g on the iphone is fast. My area is also in a 3.5 HSDPA area.

[acidfast7]

turbo3g ... about freakin time.

[4np]

802.11n is not going to increase your internet speeds when your broadband connection maxes out at 10Meg anyway. 802.11b is enough for most everyone. And you really don't have much of a need for fast network speeds at home unless you go against Apple's will and jailbreak.

But, if the iPhone is 802.11n instead of 802.11b/g the iPhone joining your home Wireless LAN will not make the whole wireless lan scale down to 802.11b/g speeds. So while most of you probably don't need 802.11n in your phone, it will be better for your overall wireless network performance.

[4np]

The gen 2 iPhone is very slow to browse with, even when on wifi. 802.11b/g is infinitely faster than anybody's dsl so bringing it to 802.11n isn't going to make any difference. what they are referring to is a probably a much needed software upgrade.

btw - "the nations fastest 3g network" seems to be just faster than a modem.

Not entirely true, as I can get 50/6Mbit cable here and 100/100Mbit fibre....

[4np]

I agree with everyone that says that page rendering needs to be sped up.

I'm sure that will speed up as soon as the multicore rumors come true...

[4np]

I live in Portland, ME...

Nice, I was there in september 08. Nice lighthouse ;)

[Saladinos]

Wireless N doesn't do downloads any faster than Wireless G. It's the device-to-device traffic that's faster. The only thing Wireless N would do is make it so the iPhone could work on N-only networks, which would be a bonus.

It would improve the signal quality, which would improve the speed of actual data.

Correct, g is 54 Mbit/s (nominally), how fast is your internet connection? My cable modem is rated at 25 Mbit/s and that is the fastest on offer in my city.

Yes, but you're not actually getting 54Mbps. That's peak throughput when you're nudging the base station with your iPhone. Switching to 802.11n doubles the usable range (by using multiple antennas and the 5Ghz band), making it more likely for you to be in a spot where the WiFi speed can provide all the speed of your internet connection.

The greater speed could also be perceived speed from a faster processor rendering pages sooner than the current iPhone 3G.

[FastLaneJB]

Not entirely true, as I can get 50/6Mbit cable here and 100/100Mbit fibre....

Well they'd need a really fast processor to take advantage of these speeds in browsing because it's CPU intensive to render the pages. Even more so for a mobile browser I imagine because it cannot just show the pictures and text as it's piped down but both need to be scaled to fit the screen and zoom level. You don't generally need to zoom in and out on a desktop / laptop so they don't have that problem.

No doubt if they added in N wireless you'd be able to download podcasts, etc at lightning speeds though :)

As for the 3G and 7.2MBit. So many people in this thread still don't understand that the current iPhone 3G has supported it all along. Just because AT&T hasn't enabled it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or work in parts of the world where we have faster 3G networks already.

Also contension is always a big problem on mobile phone networks. In London I'll never drop off a 7.2Mbit HSDPA connection but there is so many people connected it isn't as fast as less dense areas. That screenshot I posted with me clocking in over 6MBit was reached in the middle of no where in Wales. I didn't see any sheep browsing on any 3G phones so I probably almost had the whole tower to myself :) The phone can do it, but even when AT&T turn on 7.2Mbit it ain't gonna be all that much quicker in the big cities.

[simulacra]

Why wouldn't they add LTE compatability?
If Apple wants to stay ahead and force next-gen tech they should make the iphone the first LTE smartphone...

[wakeborder556]

a lot of internet speed has to do with the device processing the information. My att laptop card is fast as hell (still 3.6) but my mbp. Might suggest hardware upgrades??

[InkMaster]

Not sure if anyone brought this up already or not - didn't read all the previous pages, but...

How would "faster internet speeds" help anything? I mean maybe downloading songs/apps etc it would slightly help, but for regular browsing, it wouldn't help at all what so ever. Currently what's limiting page load speeds isn't the internet speed but rather how fast mobile safari can render the said pages.

For example I can take any regular desktop or laptop computer, put it on a 768Kbit connection. Take the iPhone and connect it via WiFi to a network with a 10Mbit connection, and the computer would still render the page faster simply because it can process the data MUCH faster then the iPhone.

Just something to think about...

[Revelation78]

Why wouldn't they add LTE compatability?
If Apple wants to stay ahead and force next-gen tech they should make the iphone the first LTE smartphone...

So Apple should put LTE in to the iPhone now, when there's no functioning LTE network - ANYWHERE? Apple also has to give you a reason to buy the iPhone in 2011 when LTE should be readily available. Afterall, Apple is in business to make money, why would you buy the new iPhone in 2011 if your 2009 iphone could do the same thing?

Let me know if you ever start your own company or become a CEO, CIO, CTO of a publicly traded company - so I know who NOT to invest with.

Furthermore, the faster speeds will of course include better rendering on the iPhone itself as well as 3.5G @ 7.2Mbs. AT&T has been upgrading their network and the faster speeds of 3.5G are available on some USB modems though AT&T. I also agree with most here the AT&T needs to work on their coverage. I hope you get your wish their.

[el3ktro]

That's going to be faster than the average home broadband connection

Uh? What do you think is the average broadband connection speed in the US?

[Snide]

How would "faster internet speeds" help anything? I mean maybe downloading songs/apps etc it would slightly help, but for regular browsing, it wouldn't help at all what so ever. Currently what's limiting page load speeds isn't the internet speed but rather how fast mobile safari can render the said pages.

For example I can take any regular desktop or laptop computer, put it on a 768Kbit connection. Take the iPhone and connect it via WiFi to a network with a 10Mbit connection, and the computer would still render the page faster simply because it can process the data MUCH faster then the iPhone.

Just something to think about...

To further illustrate your point, my dial-up at home consistently tests at 22 kbps
(which is about 1/2 speed of a normal dial-up). The MacBook on this connection
renders pages MUCH, MUCH faster than the iPhone on a 16 megabit cable line.

[funkdis]

12mpbs wireless here in japan wireless. nothing else.
anything less, you'd be providing a lower service than any other network.

[roberry82]

12mpbs wireless here in japan wireless. nothing else.
anything less, you'd be providing a lower service than any other network.

I'm officially jealous. :o

[Boomhowler]

If the phone was coming out closer to christmas I'd say that it will probably have a HSPA evolution chip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSPA_Evolution
making it available for networks that can provide up to 42Mbps in the downlink, networks that are already up and running in Italy for example and will be up in Sweden later this year. But I'd say that it would do fine with a 7.2Mbit HSPA chip as well, though not as "future proof".

LTE chips are probably not as "portable" yet so that is almost out of the question, though it would be REALLY cool.

I doubt WiMax since it has almost the same coverage as HSPA evo (HSPA+, eHSPA.. whatever :) ) but is really not better than standard HSPA.

[simulacra]

So Apple should put LTE in to the iPhone now, when there's no functioning LTE network - ANYWHERE? Apple also has to give you a reason to buy the iPhone in 2011 when LTE should be readily available. Afterall, Apple is in business to make money, why would you buy the new iPhone in 2011 if your 2009 iphone could do the same thing?

Let me know if you ever start your own company or become a CEO, CIO, CTO of a publicly traded company - so I know who NOT to invest with.


We'll be getting our first LTE network at the later part of this year, and with massive implemetation during 2010...

I was at the swedish apple office this wednesday and the swedish iphone marketing manager told us that apple skipped the discdrive in the imac in '98, because in the future disc drives would be obsolete, that's the same reason why they skipped on mms, until us backwards europeans whined them into submission.
So I would say the LTE support is right up their alley.

[Romanesq]

Well we know that rendering on the iPhone is somewhat a processor driven issue so one can expect that there will be some improvement from that side.

But it's funny reading the thread and noting all the negative votes. Who are these people? Did they not get their stimulus money or something?

We haven't even confirmed the details yet. Funny though.

[JensenJJ]

I'm telling you guys the next iphone will have 4G capability...while the service might not be up yet, I'd bet money the next iphone will support it.

http://joywire.com/Old%20Stuff/4g.jpg

Why would you have an icon on the home screen for something that is pure hardware?

Did you see a EDGE, og 3G icon on the first two iPhones?

[manu chao]

But I'd say that it would do fine with a 7.2Mbit HSPA chip as well, though not as "future proof".
Except that people have shown that the iPhone can have a download speed of over 6 Mbit, meaning it already has 7.2 Mbit-capable chip but naturally this only works if the network also supports it.

[Leo74]

Hopefully this is about page rendering speed, which is pretty pitiful right now.

And while we're at that, if they could get rid of the whole reloading every page when you hit back, it'd be fantastic.

[ddTaylor]

While this is great news, it still won't fix the problem of too many people using AT&T's 3G network at once in metropolitan areas.

Or the fact that only a few market even HAVE 3G opposed to Verizon which has a 3G type Rev. A network in almost EVERY market. I like in a city of almost 200k people and STILL do not have 3G yet V has had it for close to a year. Stinks - maybe Verizon will get a crack at the next iPhone rev.

D

[iMule]

Do those of you who hope for an OLED iPhone, is it because it saves battery life w/o having to use backlighting? From what I understand, it's more expensive to make. Afterall, it's a phone and the resolution is already great for a small screen... I like the idea of using an OLED, but it just doesn't seem like the next model will have it.

[manhattanboy]

Why would you have an icon on the home screen for something that is pure hardware?

Did you see a EDGE, og 3G icon on the first two iPhones?

The "G" is just a google app.
Not some fancy 4G hardware....
everyone in the US must be dreaming if you think Apple and AT&T are going to release a 4G phone this year!!!!:p

[manhattanboy]

Or the fact that only a few market even HAVE 3G opposed to Verizon which has a 3G type Rev. A network in almost EVERY market. I like in a city of almost 200k people and STILL do not have 3G yet V has had it for close to a year. Stinks - maybe Verizon will get a crack at the next iPhone rev.

D

Welcome to the new AT&T... with yesterday's technology

[mccldwll]

He actually used the word "retarded"? GTFO!! :D :D
What's next?
:D


No. Branjosef said that. And then included a photograph of himself in the post.

[princigalli]

I have Iphone and a my little 200 Euro Nokia in Italy. The Nokia can connect to my computer with an USB cable and I get access to internet at 7.2 Mbps. I don't see why the next Iphone would have trouble with that.

[carlgo]

Or the fact that only a few market even HAVE 3G opposed to Verizon which has a 3G type Rev. A network in almost EVERY market. I like in a city of almost 200k people and STILL do not have 3G yet V has had it for close to a year. Stinks - maybe Verizon will get a crack at the next iPhone rev.

D


I would sure like to see legislation that requires the gigantic phone companies to provide service everywhere for the privilege of making easy billions in selected urban markets. Seems fair to me.

[alphaod]

Is HSDPA+ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSPA%2B) happening yet (or is that part of LTE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution))?
Said to top out at 42 Mbit/s downlink.

I think we need widespread terrestrial speeds like that before we can go wireless with it.

[sam-i-am]

The current iPhone hardware is capped at 1.4Mbps. Most other AT&T phones support the 3.6Mbps and many are capable of 7.2Mbps already (like the Tilt via a hack). Unfortunately you can't hack a hardware cap like the iPhone has, though.

They did it that way so they could naturally throttle the usage of high demand devices and avoid cell tower congestion. The popularity of the iPhone is its own worst enemy.

reference: http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/340/C15501/

[manhattanboy]

The current iPhone hardware is capped at 1.4Mbps. Most other AT&T phones support the 3.6Mbps and many are capable of 7.2Mbps already (like the Tilt via a hack). Unfortunately you can't hack a hardware cap like the iPhone has, though.

They did it that way so they could naturally throttle the usage of high demand devices and avoid cell tower congestion. The popularity of the iPhone is its own worst enemy.

reference: http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/340/C15501/

Thanks for that!!
I somehow totally missed that fact in all the hype surrounding the 3G iphone.
Here's another link FYI:
http://www.9to5mac.com/3g-iPhone

I am seriously considering giving up my 3G iphone.
The 3G portion has been extremely pathetic.
If I cannot get the sling stream to work, then it's off to another phone.

[Stratus Fear]

The current iPhone hardware is capped at 1.4Mbps. Most other AT&T phones support the 3.6Mbps and many are capable of 7.2Mbps already (like the Tilt via a hack). Unfortunately you can't hack a hardware cap like the iPhone has, though.

They did it that way so they could naturally throttle the usage of high demand devices and avoid cell tower congestion. The popularity of the iPhone is its own worst enemy.

reference: http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/340/C15501/

That's not entirely accurate. AT&T caps phones on their end during higher network load (not on the handset), but I've gotten speeds over 2mbps during off-peak hours on their network before. Consistent 1.5-1.8 isn't uncommon if you're in a city where their 3G network is built well.

[alphaod]

12mpbs wireless here in japan wireless. nothing else.
anything less, you'd be providing a lower service than any other network.

How's the latency?

[wickedawesome31]

I apologise if this has been asked but what month is the WWDC 09 is it July?

WWDC is the World Wide Developers Conference and it traditionally takes place in the beginning of June

[kprf]

Oh if only I didn't have to give $500 deposit I would for sure get next iPhone.

[bamboi84]

Not supposed to be telling anyone this, however i have a close friend that works in a T Life store in sydney, who advised that they recently received an update on the version 3 of the iPhone. Apparently shortly after the standard Gen 3 iPhone is released, Telstra in Australia will have its one model developed to work on its faster 3G service.:)

But with all things Telstra you can get bet you will be charged through the nose to use the fater service.:(

[alphaod]

Oh if only I didn't have to give $500 deposit I would for sure get next iPhone.

Do you have good credit? AFAIK, they only force that if you have bad credit...

[michael.lauden]

faster internet speeds would be pretty awesome.

but i think with a faster processor and or more RAM the whole SYSTEM could benefit.

i'm very excited to see what Apple has in store for us these next few months.

although, i'm not about to purchase Leopard when Snow Leopard could come out sometime this year. sooo 10.4.11 for my mac mini will have to do for now :)

planning on upgrading to a 500GB 7200RPM too.. but why clone my MacBook when i'll have to format my Mac Mini again to install the new OS

oh well.. guess i can't complain too much :rolleyes:

[KIRA]

faster internet is great and all but i want to see an upgrade in design of the new iPhone.

[Andreios]

I would like to see a faster and more powerful iPhone as long as it doesn't impact the battery life too much, as for the design of the iPhone I don't think it needs changed too much.

[bigchief]

I understand the posters frustration with the fact that Apple can only upgrade the phone with a hardware revision instead of a software update. The other night when 3.0 was announced, a podcast I listen to praised apple for distancing itself from other phone makers by showing that it can support its phone through software rather than hardware updates (unlike some phone makers who release a new phone every month!)

I will be pretty dissapointed if Apple announces any new drastic updates in its hardware revision this year (if one happens) because it might make them look like all of the other phone makers. The iPhone hardware is amazing, and as apple showed with the 3.0 preview, they can still do a heck of a lot with the current hardware.

So I really hope Apple waits on this one and shows that its 3.0 software can stand on its own without new hardware. This would send a strong message to all of those manufacturers who create phones and then immediately work on the next revision without supporting its previous hardware: the software is more important than you think.

I remember when I originally tries to buy the iPhone, someone tried to sell me another touchscreen phone saying that it was comparable. But the first thing that popped into my mind was that I KNEW Apple would support their phone way more than Samsung or whoever it was would. 3.0 is a testament to this fact.

Sorry for possibly derailing, but I feel some frustration with this "announcement" as it kind of makes what apple has built so far look weak because it goes against this importance of software updates and makes them look like every other phone manufacturer. I really hope they wait this one out and do a hardware revision with LTE when it is ready

So what your saying is you wish you would have waited for the upgrade this summer.

[branjosef]

No. Branjosef said that. And then included a photograph of himself in the post.

That wasn't me- silly! That was a picture photoshopped by someone to make fun of mentally challenged people. I found it on google. :p

[ruftytufty]

While this is great news, it still won't fix the problem of too many people using AT&T's 3G network at once in metropolitan areas.

won't "fix" it, but it will help - each channel will be able to carry twice the total traffic. as users upgrade to 7.2mb/sec devices, a given amount of data will use half the network resources as before.

of course, at the same time, people will spend less time waiting (and therefore use more total bandwidth), the number of 3G devices will increase, the number of bandwidth-intensive sites and apps will increase, etc., so it's a never-ending battle to keep up.

[Minimoose 360]

Bah. I still don't get 3G where I live. XD

[RyanR.]

I just want 3G in my area good/bad I don't care EDGE sucks.:rolleyes:

[vvebsta]

Why would you have an icon on the home screen for something that is pure hardware?

Did you see a EDGE, og 3G icon on the first two iPhones?

Those aren't app icons...their feature icons. I don't think they are going to have a copy and paste app or a parental control app either. They are features.

[vvebsta]

The "G" is just a google app.
Not some fancy 4G hardware....
everyone in the US must be dreaming if you think Apple and AT&T are going to release a 4G phone this year!!!!:p

There's no way that's a google app. Google's icon has always been a lower case 'g' plus we can only see half of the app, which makes me think it's something+G. 3.5G? It seems more likely that since 4G is coming as soon as all tv goes digital that Apple would be smart to build the technology into the phone. Like they did the Stereo Bluetooth.

[doubleohseven]

There's no way that's a google app. Google's icon has always been a lower case 'g' plus we can only see half of the app, which makes me think it's something+G. 3.5G? It seems more likely that since 4G is coming as soon as all tv goes digital that Apple would be smart to build the technology into the phone. Like they did the Stereo Bluetooth.

4G won't be coming until around 2011. I'm quite sure that there was a thread about it last year.

[marcosscriven]

While this is great news, it still won't fix the problem of too many people using AT&T's 3G network at once in metropolitan areas.

I know what you mean, but the argument is kind of on its head; surely AT&T's network is not big enough, rather than too many people using it?

Here in the UK I find both O2 (official iphone carrier) and t-mobile have major contention issues. The good news is iphone/android/pre are all going to drive data capacity expansion (finally).

Will rejoice the day I can (at least) get a reliable 512 mbit at any time of day, even in the city. I know 512 mbit isn't that great, but it would at least be as good as the first time you got ADSL, and is fast enough to stream video.

[Chupa Chupa]

So what your saying is you wish you would have waited for the upgrade this summer.

I think you nailed it. It doesn't make sense to say, "gee I hope hardware technology stands still for a year." Just because Apple is one of the few phone makers that offers feature-laced firmware upgrades doesn't mean it can afford to slow down introduction of new product. Each iPhone model is what it is. Whatever extras Apple adds via software, are just that...extras. Besides, the iPhone 3G was only a "speed bump." The iPhone is due for some hardware upgrades.

[RaZaK]

But "N" wifi isn't any faster for the internet than "G".
Isn't the internet slower than "G"?

I believe the "G" wireless standard maxes out at 54 Mbps. That's a lot slower than most home broadband connections (100 Mbps and up).

Also, "N" is supposed to be a faster standard, but I have not gotten a chance to use it yet.

[brop52]

I believe the "G" wireless standard maxes out at 54 Mbps. That's a lot slower than most home broadband connections (100 Mbps and up).

Also, "N" is supposed to be a faster standard, but I have not gotten a chance to use it yet.

No it isn't. While most of the time the real maximum of the wireless is about half that that is still above the maximum internet download speeds of most ISPs.

[robbieduncan]

That's a lot slower than most home broadband connections (100 Mbps and up).

Where do you live that most home broadband connections are 100Mbps? Maybe on the internal ethernet interface, but most of us are stuck with ADSL or cable delivering, if we are really lucky, 20Mbps or less. For example I only get 8. This is the limit on your connection speed.

Now latency? That's a different question (and one where a wireless connection can be adding latency).

[mccldwll]

That wasn't me- silly! That was a picture photoshopped by someone to make fun of mentally challenged people. I found it on google. :p


I rest my case.

[jtara]

See my comments on N Wifi the newer thread:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=7331197&posted=1#post7331197

Summary: no way. The current iPhone can't even max-out (not even close) on G. There's some other limitation, (at 5mbit/sec) and that's more likely what would be changed.

Note that if ATT did roll-out 7.2 mbit/sec service, the current iPhone can't fully utilize it, even if the radio hardware supports it.

So, my best guess is increase of the 5mbit/sec networking (at least WiFi) cap, and possibly 7.2 mbit/sec service. But that would take an awful lot of faith in ATT, of which I have none.

[branjosef]

I rest my case.

Finally :rolleyes: Glad we straightened that out. I didn't mean to offend anyone. I thought only "retarded" people used windows. Sorry I should be more politcally correct "slow folk" ...thats much better

[Patcoola]

arrg...

im so jealous, i live in Canada where i can't get a iphone, and i pay $60 per month for a 2Mbps ADSL with 10GB monthly data transfer.

:< *crying*

[twoodcc]

i hope the next iPhone has wireless-n as well as faster 3G speeds

[bandola]

Where do you live that most home broadband connections are 100Mbps? Maybe on the internal ethernet interface, but most of us are stuck with ADSL or cable delivering, if we are really lucky, 20Mbps or less. For example I only get 8. This is the limit on your connection speed.

Now latency? That's a different question (and one where a wireless connection can be adding latency).

I'm located in Sweden and I and a lot of people I know have access to 100mbit fibre connections. Although some only have 1,4 or 10 Mbit subscriptions since they are cheaper. Some (very few) can order 1Gbit connections, but they are pretty expensive, about $100 a month.

I pay about $30 for my 100mbit connection and I get about 95 mbit download speeds. My wireless connection to my laptop is only a G connection at 54 mbits (and tops at about 15 mbits downloads), so my WiFi is far from as fast as my broadband connection.

And yes, the iPhone 3G was advertised as using a 7.2 Mbps connection here in Sweden. I ran a test just now and only reached 3.2 Mbps using the 3G network, and I reached 15 Mbps via WiFi.

The "faster internet speeds" that are rumored is probably about AT&T rolling out HSDPA in the US and/or a new faster Safari browser (which is needed).