Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

3G iPhone to Support 42Mbps Evolved HSPA?

More bandwidth is great--especially for receiving video--but as I understand it, browsing speed is also VERY dependent on processing speed.

The iPhone is fast for a phone (and may be about to get faster for all we know) but it's still slow compared to a modern computer. Memory of course is tighter too. (But thanks to flash, drive space for caching is fast!)

So we should not expect to see pages render as fast on an iPhone as on your Mac, just because you have an optimal 3G signal.

Much like you'd expect an older/slower computer to browse less quickly than a fast new one, on the same connection.
 
gmoney550 said:
Is evolved hspa faster than wifi? And if it is can you tell me how much?
Click to expand...

HSPA+ is currently specced to 28.8Mbps, with 42Mbps expected by 2010 according to the specs I've found.

On an iphone you probably wouldn't see a difference - flash write cycles and limited CPU speed mean that you'd never get that kind of throughput out of it anyway (max. for wifi for the iphone is apparently 1.8Mbps but I haven't found any apple source that verifies that - although https://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/04/test-your-iphone-network-speed/ has an average wifi speed of a little over 1Mbps)
 
That would be great! I hope they release some nice new features to take advantage of this faster speed :)
 
gmoney550 said:
Is evolved hspa faster than wifi? And if it is can you tell me how much?
Click to expand...

It depends which 802.11 protocol you're talking about. If this evolved HSPA is capable of 42Mbps, then it would be certainly faster than 802.11b which maxes out at 11Mbps. 802.11g has a max speed of 54Mbps and 802.11n's max speed is 248Mbps. All these max speeds are theoretical though, you'll never see them in real world conditions.
 
Qualcomm QSC7230

This chip definitely fits the bill. Posted about it on the other thread, which maybe should be merged.

It has everything required and rumored about apart from WiFi on the chip. Although their other chips are stated as being WiFi enabled.

Its speculative but I think that the chip fits the bill quite nicely:

ARM11 applications processor running at up to 600MHz
· Support for 5 megapixel camera, VGA display resolution and TV-out
· Support for third-party operating systems such as Windows Mobile and Linux
· 45 nm CMOS process technology
· 2D and 3D hardware-accelerated graphics
· Fully integrated GPS, FM radio and Bluetooth, eliminating the need for many external components
· Integrated support for worldwide cellular frequency bands

- For CDMA2000: 450MHz, 700MHz, 800MHz, J-800MHz, 850MHz, 1500MHz, AWS, KPCS 1.8GHz, 1.9GHz, 2.1GHz, 2.5GHz
- For UMTS: 700MHz, 800MHz, 850MHz, 900MHz, 1500MHz, AWS, 1800MHz, 1900MHz, 2.1MHz, 2.6GHz
- 4-band EGPRS support in 900MHz, 1800MHz, 850MHz, 1900MHz
Click to expand...

Link about it is here

The press release was from last November, which also puts it in a reasonable time slot I would guess.

EDIT: Darn, scrap above comment just noticed this on the page:

The QSC solutions are scheduled to sample in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Click to expand...

Unless Apple have managed something big with them...
 
gmoney550 said:
Is evolved hspa faster than wifi? And if it is can you tell me how much?
Click to expand...

Can't really answer that. Wi-fi (generally) ranges from 20 - 100 Mbps depending on a lot of factors, but your average broadband connection in the U.S. (cable, DSL) is slower than most wi-fi connections.

So the wi-fi in your house may be fast, but your connection to the internet is something less than that.

The point I'm making is, it's pretty much impossible for me to tell you how much slower or faster this would be than your own internet connection.
 
So why isn't ATT doing this in the US? We're AMERICA!! And the ausssies are going to beat us?
 
Telstra's CEO is an American who seems to have a passion for hating Apple, when the iPhone first made it's debut he's dismissed it and didn't seem at all interested.

Add to this the fact that Vodafone and Optus announced they'd be officially supporting the iPhone in Australia... not Telstra. So why would Telstra know anything?

And of course, if they did know something, why on earth would they risk spoiling relations when they know what happens when companies speak prematurely of future products.
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

That is blazing fast for cellular Internet.
 
jlanuez said:
I just hope my new iPhone will make telephone calls. :D
Currently, it drops call, can not connect to the AT&T network to even get a signal, calls go right to voice mail, on & on...
As it is right now - it is the worst "cell phone" I have ever had.
Click to expand...

Either you have a defective phone, or you're in a bad signal area.

I divide my time between Kentucky (greater Cincinnati) and Florida. In KY, i have a strong signal even in the basement of my 80-year-old brick-on-brick (double-thickness masonary) construction house, and service is great in surrounding areas. In FLA, on the other hand, i can't conduct a hand-held call anywhere in my block and frame-construction townhouse, or immediately outside, even though ATTs service map indicates i'm in a "best" signal strength area. The phone works ok elsewhere in St. Petersburg. The local ATT office acknowledges I'm in a bad signal area where one of their prior managers' phones wouldn't work. (I've found if i leave the phone immobile on the kitchen counter and use it via bluetooth headset, i can conduct calls fairly reliably.)

My frustration in FLA is compounded by the fact that not far away there's one of ATTs billboards proclaiming "more bars, more places". Argghhh.

My point is, if I'd judged the phone solely by my FLA experience, I'd conclude, reasonably I think, that it was a crappy phone. Having used it in a second location with very different results, I've concluded, rightly I think, that it's crappy ATT service (the problem's been reported to ATT customer service at monthly intervals for the past six months, they say they're trying to re-direct a tower, but nothing improves).

Ironically, "Locate Me" works precisely at my Florida home, and 150 feet in any direction from my KY home. But in my KY home or in the yard there, it "locates" me one county, three cities, and four miles from my actual location, with or without wi-fi turned on. I've sniffed surrounding routers and reported their MAC addresses to Skyhook, but after more than a month Locate Me still doesn't work at my house. Baffling!

I'd suggest you contact ATT and see if they can fix your local signal better than they've done for me.

ATT's purported coverage map: http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/
 
TonyHoyle said:
.
Click to expand...

Like how you just made your comment dissapear there to a full stop when you realised you had made an absoultely ridiculous post.

Cant you just admit you made a ridiculous mistake and edit it like I did. I noticed now that the chip I said isnt even available after reading more closely.

Didnt just erase my comment.
 
3G is good, but not quite enough to get me excited.
However, I'm very impatient to see if the new iPhone has GPS and another camera for video chat!
Not including these items would mean that it would be lagging behind the new generation from the competition, such as Nokia N96 (not as nice, but some people are not Apple fans!) It would be a shame...
 
Even if the iPhone cannot handle the throughput of the new service, I would think it would atleast keep the input stream maxed out for phone. I think it is better to keep the data coming faster then the phone could handle vs. having a phone that can handle more then what is coming. My guess is it would help in those areas where signal is weaker around town, but you could still get very fast data since the network can push a lot more.

As an example, full signal can push 42Mps, but a weaker may only push 7Mbps, but you wouldn't be able to tell the difference since the device can only process say 5Mbps. Is this how this could work?
 
mr_matalino said:
So why isn't ATT doing this in the US? We're AMERICA!! And the ausssies are going to beat us?
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, cue the racial slurs.
I Love Australia.

USA is not all that great for networks in the world. Australia has the largest and fastest network in the world (next G), dont be to ashamed, we rock down here
 
Santa Rosa said:
Like how you just made your comment dissapear there to a full stop when you realised you had made an absoultely ridiculous post.

Cant you just admit you made a ridiculous mistake and edit it like I did. I noticed now that the chip I said isnt even available after reading more closely.

Didnt just erase my comment.
Click to expand...

It wasn't ridiculous - it was a post about no mention of support for GSM, EDGE, etc. but since I noticed the release date was going to edit the post to mention that instead, but you got there first.

It appears to be based on CDMA, not GSM - so wouldn't be on an iphone anyway. Not surprising as it's qualcomm. (apple could produce a CDMA phone for the US market if they thought there was enough money in it, but they've shown no signs of it so far).
 
bacaramac said:
I don't know, did anyone hear about he C2D Processor in the MBA before it came out? Apple for some reason seems to get things before the world knows about it. Could be the same situation here.
Click to expand...

They need an awful lot of unreleased technology to make this useful. They'd need this unreleased HSPA+ chip, which has to have better performance than anything on the market AND have low power consumption (it's hard enough just to find low power 3G chips).

Then they need to have a processor which is 5-10x faster but without any major increase in battery consumption, just to begin to make full use of the bandwidth increase over EDGE. This is 186x faster than EDGE!
 
TonyHoyle said:
It wasn't ridiculous - it was a post about no mention of support for GSM, EDGE, etc. but since I noticed the release date was going to edit the post to mention that instead, but you got there first.

It appears to be based on CDMA, not GSM - so wouldn't be on an iphone anyway. Not surprising as it's qualcomm. (apple could produce a CDMA phone for the US market if they thought there was enough money in it, but they've shown no signs of it so far).
Click to expand...

If your post wasnt ridiculous, why did you delete it. Stop digging yourself further.

Have a look here as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_HSPA

My understanding on the subject isnt great I admit, but yours is plain non existent
 
rtdunham said:
Either you have a defective phone, or you're in a bad signal area.

I divide my time between Kentucky (greater Cincinnati) and Florida. In KY, i have a strong signal even in the basement of my 80-year-old brick-on-brick (double-thickness masonary) construction house, and service is great in surrounding areas. In FLA, on the other hand, i can't conduct a hand-held call anywhere in my block and frame-construction townhouse, or immediately outside, even though ATTs service map indicates i'm in a "best" signal strength area. The phone works ok elsewhere in St. Petersburg. The local ATT office acknowledges I'm in a bad signal area where one of their prior managers' phones wouldn't work. (I've found if i leave the phone immobile on the kitchen counter and use it via bluetooth headset, i can conduct calls fairly reliably.)

My frustration in FLA is compounded by the fact that not far away there's one of ATTs billboards proclaiming "more bars, more places". Argghhh.

My point is, if I'd judged the phone solely by my FLA experience, I'd conclude, reasonably I think, that it was a crappy phone. Having used it in a second location with very different results, I've concluded, rightly I think, that it's crappy ATT service (the problem's been reported to ATT customer service at monthly intervals for the past six months, they say they're trying to re-direct a tower, but nothing improves).

Ironically, "Locate Me" works precisely at my Florida home, and 150 feet in any direction from my KY home. But in my KY home or in the yard there, it "locates" me one county, three cities, and four miles from my actual location, with or without wi-fi turned on. I've sniffed surrounding routers and reported their MAC addresses to Skyhook, but after more than a month Locate Me still doesn't work at my house. Baffling!

I'd suggest you contact ATT and see if they can fix your local signal better than they've done for me.

ATT's purported coverage map: http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/
Click to expand...

Maybe you're just unlucky in St. Petersburg. I get excellent signal in Tampa. My only problem is at work, but I work in an interior office in Centro Ybor. Our office is under a theatre and the entire building is brick. Only CDMA phones get signals in here because CDMA passes through buildings better. In the front offices, my signal is excellent and at my house it's even better.
 
Santa Rosa said:
If your post wasnt ridiculous, why did you delete it. Stop digging yourself further.
Click to expand...

It wasn't relevant any more... I already told you exactly what was in the post.

Why are you so bothered by this? You quoted a press release and got tripped up by it.. it's no biggie and happens all the time. Chill out.

btw. that wikipedia article isn't particularly helpful unless you're into reading technical documents..
 
TonyHoyle said:
It wasn't relevant any more... I already told you exactly what was in the post.
Click to expand...

So why didn't you just put an EDIT and they say that, instead of trying to hide something?? :confused:

TonyHoyle said:
Why are you so bothered by this? You quoted a press release and got tripped up by it.. it's no biggie and happens all the time. Chill out.
Click to expand...

Dont try and swing it my direction, at least I have the balls to admit Im wrong. You had a go at me first, with your now deleted post.

TonyHoyle said:
btw. that wikipedia article isn't particularly helpful unless you're into reading technical documents..
Click to expand...

So why are you trying to make a technical analysis??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back