iPhone 3G Size and Battery Life Analysis

[cire]

Looking back at the prelaunch concerns, after three weeks of using my iPhone I think the big stories for me are: 1) Virtual keybord works better for me than the physical keyboard on the phone I replaced 2) Most of the time, EDGE is far better than I expected and much better than dialup 3) battery life is what I expect for a device that I actually use all the time. 4) My fears about the touch screen breaking and getting scratches were overblown.

While I would love 3G, I am very happy with the compromises that apple made. Now if I just could find a case that I actually like and that doesn't let the phone fall out of the holster on to the concrete!

 

[Rocketman]

I have been an advocate of Apple adopting EDGE long before there was an iPhone (look it up), primarily because it is so widely deployed in the USA. I was not aware it could have its bandwidth substantially improved as it has been leading to the iPhone rollout.

What I wonder is if the 3G system could be set to sleep when not in use and if the bandwidth difference between EDGE and 3G is sufficient to save battery net-net due to shorter load times when active. In short why can't each 3G send-receive event be a distinct connection event as well?

Rocketman

 

[megfilmworks]

Not only is Wifi the future, but it is a solution with freedom.
Would you rather have ATT control your data access or have the ability to use the internet for free? Anyone can set up a great WiFi, but only the big corporations can set up 3G..Let's see; less money, more freedom, better battery life and better performance....hmmmm tough choice.

 

[TPALTony]

IMHO I totally agree.

Me too. I'm currently roaming in the UK with the iPhone and the EDGE network over here is definitely slower than in the US, but mainly because the 3G network is more widely deployed.

In the US the compromise isn't a compromise, because that implies that the decision isn't the best one. In the US case I think the decision was the best one. No point having a 3G phone that can't get on the data network half the time when you're not in a city! It sounds for me a lot like the Sprint network in my area. "Sprint: Where all your calls are clear." Yeah, sure, in the 3 places within a 5 mile radius of my house you can can actually MAKE a call, I'm sure the call is very clear! I also know what they mean about network prioritization. My ex had a Sprint Treo and you had to call 3 times before it would go through to the phone rather than voicemail. She got a lot of email and it was forever prioritizing the network data and missing calls. Drove us nuts!

Oh, and over here in the UK, if someone sees an iPhone, they think you're a rock star. Every flight attendant on the way over wanted to see it (I was watching some TV shows on it) and thought it was really cool. Finally a gadget that attracts women! I might NOT die alone! LOL!

be well

t

 

[Yankees 4 Life]

I have been an advocate of Apple adopting EDGE long before there was an iPhone (look it up), primarily because it is so widely deployed in the USA. I was not aware it could have its bandwidth substantially improved as it has been leading to the iPhone rollout.

What I wonder is if the 3G system could be set to sleep when not in use and if the bandwidth difference between EDGE and 3G is sufficient to save battery net-net due to shorter load times when active. In short why can't each 3G send-receive event be a distinct connection event as well?

Rocketman

hey on my old samsung blackjack, you could turn off the 3G network and have it run on edge, but it took a while to go back to 3G, and wastes a lot of battery running 3g.

Me too. I'm currently roaming in the UK with the iPhone and the EDGE network over here is definitely slower than in the US, but mainly because the 3G network is more widely deployed.

In the US the compromise isn't a compromise, because that implies that the decision isn't the best one. In the US case I think the decision was the best one. No point having a 3G phone that can't get on the data network half the time when you're not in a city! It sounds for me a lot like the Sprint network in my area. "Sprint: Where all your calls are clear." Yeah, sure, in the 3 places within a 5 mile radius of my house you can can actually MAKE a call, I'm sure the call is very clear! I also know what they mean about network prioritization. My ex had a Sprint Treo and you had to call 3 times before it would go through to the phone rather than voicemail. She got a lot of email and it was forever prioritizing the network data and missing calls. Drove us nuts!


Oh, and over here in the UK, if someone sees an iPhone, they think you're a rock star. Every flight attendant on the way over wanted to see it (I was watching some TV shows on it) and thought it was really cool. Finally a gadget that attracts women! I might NOT die alone! LOL!

be well

t

Haha i was in canada and totally was kickin int with the women when i showed the ladies my iPhone!


this post should go on the main page, this is very important stuff, i still love my iphone regardless....

 

[meagain]

Other phones (on Verizon, Sprint and ATT) have a minimun cost of $40 per month.

And allow tethering to a laptop.

Not only is Wifi the future, but it is a solution with freedom.
Would you rather have ATT control your data access or have the ability to use the internet for free? Anyone can set up a great WiFi, but only the big corporations can set up 3G..Let's see; less money, more freedom, better battery life and better performance....hmmmm tough choice.

But many of us find it a great inconvenience to drive to a Panera Bread, etc. to get Wifi. I'd still like to know where everyone's getting this constant free fast Wifi cuz I sure can't get it on the road in a car, outside at a picnic, etc. etc.

 

[Furgster]

i knew edge was the way to go

 

[cyberdogl2]

one thing they didn't mention was that although 3G wasted more energy (23% i believe), 3G is also hundreds of times faster, loading webpages a little (beating edge by seconds i guess) faster. This saves both time and power.

In light of this, however, the electrons wasted per bit send/receive is probably better on edge.

 

[Andrmgic]

one thing they didn't mention was that although 3G wasted more energy (23% i believe), 3G is also hundreds of times faster, loading webpages a little (beating edge by seconds i guess) faster. This saves both time and power.

In light of this, however, the electrons wasted per bit send/receive is probably better on edge.

For data, yes.

However, in their tests, having 3G enabled on the blackajck murdered talk time as well. For iPhone, less than 3 hour talk time (especially without a removable battery) would be far less acceptable than using the EDGE network for data and building in Wifi for faster data access

 

[kdarling]

Not only is Wifi the future, but it is a solution with freedom.
Would you rather have ATT control your data access or have the ability to use the internet for free?

The trouble is, somebody has to pay, somewhere. Hotspot. Routers. Cables. Servers. Nothing is free.

The major utilities are still carrying a lot of the network load, and they need to pay hundreds of thousands of workers to keep things going and to expand coverage.

Yes, cities sometimes put up free WiFi, but they tax for the privilege.

It's possible that someday the Feds will take over providing free WiFi... but at a price in privacy.

 

[mikeinternet]

I haven't had any problems with edge, not with speed or coverage. And wifi is growing anyways.

 

[atszyman]

But many of us find it a great inconvenience to drive to a Panera Bread, etc. to get Wifi. I'd still like to know where everyone's getting this constant free fast Wifi cuz I sure can't get it on the road in a car, outside at a picnic, etc. etc.

Well, in the car you just have to be selective about where you pull over to do your browsing. If you're trying to browse while driving, you might want to re-think your driving habits....

 

[d21mike]

And allow tethering to a laptop.

Yeah, but it will cost you an extra $20 per month for it. Right? For me I would prefer to only pay $20 per month (for me and my wife's phone) on a slower network without the need to use my laptop. I mainly use data for email and some web access which I normally use the mobile version of the various web sites for faster access and for less data on the screen. If I had a real requirement for laptop access I would just get a card for the laptop from a provider that provided the fastest access. Again, why should I pay for that on all of my pda phones.

 

[Sobe]

I don't understand the love for tethering. If I'm mobile, I'm happy to use what the iPhone has. If I am lugging around a laptop 99.9% of the time I'd be in a hotel or a coffee shop or an airport where I can get wifi anyway.

Where are you people using your laptops--on the side of a highway?

 

[nallwdrgn]

Good... now they should run a test and see if the extra amount of battery life makes up for the extra amount of time needed to load larger websites in crappy areas with edge

</sarcasm>

 

[toneloco2881]

one thing they didn't mention was that although 3G wasted more energy (23% i believe), 3G is also hundreds of times faster, loading webpages a little (beating edge by seconds i guess) faster. This saves both time and power.

In light of this, however, the electrons wasted per bit send/receive is probably better on edge.

People also have to remember the superiority of Apple's software and their optimization. I've used 3g on a variety of other devices, including the Blackjack, and it's browsing speed is comparable if not slower than the iPhone on edge. My father has a Blackberry 8830 through Verizon, that operates on their 3g network, and it's not even close to the iPhone in terms of an on-device browsing experience relative to surfing the iPhone on edge.

When tethering with 3g phones is where you see the benefit of the higher data speeds. I think some people look at the data speeds, and automatically assume the browsing experience would be that much better; but in practice the software on other phones is so horrible and slow, it negates that advantage imo.

 

[kdarling]

True, it'd be easier to get a 3G card for a laptop. But then you'd need another data plan. So it's cheaper to pay for one (the phone) and tether to it.

A lot of airports (even major ones) don't have free WiFi everywhere or at all.

A lot of coffee shops don't have free WiFi.

A lot of hotels still try to charge for Internet access, WiFi or cable.

But there's another reason. Let's say you had to access a customer website that used Flash. Oh wait, can't do that on some phones. No sweat, just use the more powerful laptop for display and tether to the phone's data plan.

I'm sure there's other reasons you can think of. Heck, what you wanted to ssh into a work server and your phone didn't do that? Basically, lots of applications where you NEED the laptop, and NEED the data plan... but they're on two different devices

 

[cyberdogl2]

When tethering with 3g phones is where you see the benefit of the higher data speeds. I think some people look at the data speeds, and automatically assume the browsing experience would be that much better; but in practice the software on other phones is so horrible and slow, it negates that advantage imo.

which is the story behind many apple products, especially somewhere around the G3 G4 days vs. intel/amd

 

[yayaba]

Good argument going on in this thread. Here's my two cents.

I don't understand the love for tethering. If I'm mobile, I'm happy to use what the iPhone has. If I am lugging around a laptop 99.9% of the time I'd be in a hotel or a coffee shop or an airport where I can get wifi anyway.

Where are you people using your laptops--on the side of a highway?

The tethering argument for me is lessened with the iPhone because it has Safari which renders pages basically like my desktop browser. But tethering is useful because most places (at least in the US) don't have free wifi. I can't access my company's WiFi because it's VPN which requires special software which I can't install on the iPhone. Bookstores like Border's and Barn'es and Nobles have paid WiFi. Hell, SFO (San Francisco International Airport) didn't even have free Wifi in the international terminal that I was in. With my old phone, tethering on my Macbook was extremely useful as it let my bypass those no-free-Wifi restrictions.

I personally don't get what everyone complains about with 3G. Sure if you have it in your area it would be great. But seriously the majority of the country doesn't have it on AT&T's networks. So from a business standpoint there really wasn't a compelling reason for them to have it in the iPhone. Plus wifi is being deployed at a faster rate than 3G is being rolled out. I think carriers are starting to notice that wifi really is the way of the future so 3G will be a very mute point. If you look alot of the carriers are already opening up their hot spots. AT&T has already announced they will. Plus they are working with Metro areas to deploy city wide wifi. So it will just be a matter of time til wifi over takes 3G anyways. Just my two cents!

This sounds incredibly idealistic. The day when entire towns are blanketed in free wifi is a long ways away. Why wait for that solution when a current solution (3G) already exists?

Wifi really isn't as great as some of you make it out to be. Yes, I know 3G isn't available in every city but it still is loads better than Wifi because of one simple fact -- it exists across an ENTIRE city no matter where you are while a wifi hotspot is only inside of a specific store. It's incredibly useful when you're on the go in someone else's car, walking down a street, in a place with no free wifi, etc.

As for why Apple decided to go with EDGE, I'll go with the argument that at the time (2 years ago at least), 3g wasn't as prominent in the US as it is now. I'm sure no one at Apple enjoys using EDGE and you can be for certain that they have 3g prototypes already. As for when those will come out, who knows for sure.

I'm personally OK with EDGE. I've never used 3g before so I don't know how much faster it can be over EDGE but doesn't latency play into it also? I don't think 3G signals have better latency do they? If not, it'll still be pretty slow browsing but download speeds will definitely be better.

 

[Sobe]

so it's not a lack of access issue, it's a lack of free access issue.

 

[bigjohn]

Add 3G, Lose WiFi and make WiFi a 30-pin connector add-on device...

Problem solved, how is that so tough?

 

[bigjohn]

Add 3G, Lose WiFi and make WiFi a 30-pin connector add-on device...

And then you can also add WiFi to your iPod, move it around from device to device.

 

[synth3tik]

WOW it's cool that they went ahead and did this. It does add a layer of fact to Steve's comments on the matter.

 

[amx]

Add 3G, Lose WiFi and make WiFi a 30-pin connector add-on device...

Problem solved, how is that so tough?

Well if you closely study the article the wifi chip is quite small. Wifi has been commercially available for over 5 years now and has been through many reductions and is quit power efficient and embedded. You cant just replace it with a 3G chip. A 3G system is not quit as reduced or efficient as wifi modules are. Hence Steve Jobs comments align with that of Anandtech article. The technology is not mature enough yet at a silicon level. So give it 6 months, with the launch of iPhone there are many companies that probably have a smaller and less power hungry 3G chip on their roadmap. The next iPhone will definitely have 3G or better communication platform.

Also to respond to some one else's comment earlier to the fact why didnt apple just make it smaller. Apple is an OEM, they do not design or manufacture silicon. Hence they go out and buy different chip packages from different companies like Samsung and Intel.

 

[MacTheSpoon]

Wow, great article by Anandtech. After reading that, I feel that my doubts about my iPhone not having 3G have been laid to rest. I think EDGE was the best decision by Apple, after all. I agree with the trade-offs they decided to make in terms of battery life and iPhone size.

Having said that, once a smaller, lower power 3G chipset becomes available, it will be awesome to have it in my iPhone. That iPhone 2.0 is going to kick some serious ass... it'll have at least 16 GB of RAM, plus 3G, plus by then Apple will have solved the 3d party developer access problem.

Really an exciting product. Apple really stepped up to the plate and delivered. All those who worked on it should be really proud of themselves.