Sounds like you bought in to the FUD and have wasted a year when you could have had a wonderful phone with great service.
Step up to the plate and find out the truth by buying one.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
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?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Step up to the plate and find out the truth by buying one.
I'm a little confused, what is the difference between these 42 Mbps (5250KB/s)???
I know the obvious answer of Megabits and Kilobits, I'm not stupid, but I just did a speed test of our internet here at my work on http://www.speedtest.net/ and it said download was "6161 kbps". So that would be about 50 Mbps right?
So how does that work when I am almost positive that at home I only get 3 Mbps with Quest but it is faster than at my work???
Sorry, but can someone explain this to me a bit? lol
One megabit is 1024 kilobits. So, 42Mbps is 43008kbps. And if you want it in Megabytes or Kilobytes you need to divide by 8.
6161kbps is about 6Mbps.
Only smaller if you include Alaska. We're almost exactly the same size as the contiguous US.
You're right about the population though.
Everyone seems to think this is great but nobody seems to realise we're talking about Telstra here. The greediest, most anti-competitive company ever.
Telstra are the reason we're stuck with monthly download limits in the hundreds of megabytes and still consider 512k to be broadband. They're awful.
I always thought that making the K lowercase was strange, but I do it myself so....
By the way, we're all forgetting the limiting factor here: servers. Most servers will give you a connection between 400-900K (50-113kbps connection). Unless you're downloading from multiple sources, or on a really fast direct connection with a server, you'll never even see 1MBbps. 3.6 or 7.2Mbps HSDPA is all we'll really need for a while. At least until we're able to do file transfers and the like with fast servers. For the most part, the slowness of the internet isn't due to our connection to it, but to all of the other slow connections that exist along the way.
I got my facts from wikipedia, which seem to be in line with those that Australia puts out. Australia is roughly 7.6 million kilometers and the US is roughly 9.6-9.8 million kilometers—depending on the source.
Alaska and Hawaii are considered in the US figure, but they're a part of the US. Your map includes Tasmania
It's a part of Australia like Hawaii and Alaska are part of the US. 
Not many avatars have goten my attention. Yours did.
Dr. Q needs an avatar archive.
Rocketman
There is something a bit whiffy about this report.
I don't think the NextG network that is being referred to will be capable of 42 Mbs until nearly Christmas 2009.
And has been pointed out, there is no currently available mobile chip for it. I think the earliest is third quarter 2008, which I would have thought doesn't make the grade for this model of the iphone.
And then this is Tel$tra, a extortionist company that is only upstaged in price gouging tricks by Rogers in Canada. Ask the Canucks.
As for the relative qualities of phone services in the US vs Australia, I would like to add a few comments:
1. Australia's terrestrial tele services really suck the big one compared with the US: we have download caps and broadband is considered 256 kps (hey, it's ADSL ain't it?). For example, Tel$tra's cheapest package is $29.95 for a 200mb monthly download at 256k, with additional Mb at 15 cents. It's cheapest ADSL2+ package is $59.95 for a generous (not) 600Mb. Tel$tra gets away with this as it was originally a government monopoly, and the competition has had difficulty getting traction once the market was opened up. It only switched on ADSL2 to try and hold off the competition in exchanges competitors were inserting DSLAMs.
The US has always had competition in the tele market, and so it has a better terrestrial network ad better terrestrial internet access..
2. Mobile. The US was first to develop cell networks, so all its companies have considerable investment in older tech, including tech that has become a dead end. nevertheless, the tele companies must recoup costs for this infrastructure. So new tech adoption is slower.
A decade ago in OZ, as the government-owned telstra was a monopoly, it didn't bother investing too much in mobile in the early days. With the opening of the market, and parallel privatization of Tel$tra, competitors could develop networks almost as fast as the monolith. It is also cheaper for competitors to develop mobile networks than terrestrial. End result: Tel$tra had to move faster on mobile than terrestrial in order to protect its market. But even here it was slower to move than some of its competitors, which is why we had a 3G network in the cities that was competitors', not Tel$tra , for several years. Telstra's NextG network only came on stream this year, and before that it was edge. Ironically, telstra dicks were claiming that edge was more than adequate and 3G was crap up until about two years ago.
You could say that the only reason Telstra has 3G now is because it was privatised and subject to competition, but strangely, there are a lot of romantics with a socialist bent who still believe Telstra should be government owned, which would somehow miraculously reduce prices.
I don't think the NextG network that is being referred to will be capable of 42 Mbs until nearly Christmas 2009.
And has been pointed out, there is no currently available mobile chip for it. I think the earliest is third quarter 2008, which I would have thought doesn't make the grade for this model of the iphone.
And then this is Tel$tra, a extortionist company that is only upstaged in price gouging tricks by Rogers in Canada. Ask the Canucks.
As for the relative qualities of phone services in the US vs Australia, I would like to add a few comments:
1. Australia's terrestrial tele services really suck the big one compared with the US: we have download caps and broadband is considered 256 kps (hey, it's ADSL ain't it?). For example, Tel$tra's cheapest package is $29.95 for a 200mb monthly download at 256k, with additional Mb at 15 cents. It's cheapest ADSL2+ package is $59.95 for a generous (not) 600Mb. Tel$tra gets away with this as it was originally a government monopoly, and the competition has had difficulty getting traction once the market was opened up. It only switched on ADSL2 to try and hold off the competition in exchanges competitors were inserting DSLAMs.
The US has always had competition in the tele market, and so it has a better terrestrial network ad better terrestrial internet access..
2. Mobile. The US was first to develop cell networks, so all its companies have considerable investment in older tech, including tech that has become a dead end. nevertheless, the tele companies must recoup costs for this infrastructure. So new tech adoption is slower.
A decade ago in OZ, as the government-owned telstra was a monopoly, it didn't bother investing too much in mobile in the early days. With the opening of the market, and parallel privatization of Tel$tra, competitors could develop networks almost as fast as the monolith. It is also cheaper for competitors to develop mobile networks than terrestrial. End result: Tel$tra had to move faster on mobile than terrestrial in order to protect its market. But even here it was slower to move than some of its competitors, which is why we had a 3G network in the cities that was competitors', not Tel$tra , for several years. Telstra's NextG network only came on stream this year, and before that it was edge. Ironically, telstra dicks were claiming that edge was more than adequate and 3G was crap up until about two years ago.
You could say that the only reason Telstra has 3G now is because it was privatised and subject to competition, but strangely, there are a lot of romantics with a socialist bent who still believe Telstra should be government owned, which would somehow miraculously reduce prices.
Gizmodo has pretty well shot this rumour down
In fact, I would not be surprised, given Telstra originally told apple to "stick to its knitting" and bagged out the iphone, that it doesn't even get a deal with Apple to sell it.
In fact, I would not be surprised, given Telstra originally told apple to "stick to its knitting" and bagged out the iphone, that it doesn't even get a deal with Apple to sell it.
Hmm. That might be why I never recall Kg instead of kg. I must have known it was correct and never thought about it. So naturally I continued it to computer units
In terms of SI Units, it doesn't make sense that it would be lowercase though, unless you consider that kilo- is generally the last sizable quantity that you'll experience or generally need to measure.
Only smaller if you include Alaska. We're almost exactly the same size as the contiguous US.
You're right about the population though.
Everyone seems to think this is great but nobody seems to realise we're talking about Telstra here. The greediest, most anti-competitive company ever.
Telstra are the reason we're stuck with monthly download limits in the hundreds of megabytes and still consider 512k to be broadband. They're awful.
he he big up too beautiful britain who could believe we once had you both in our pockets including a third of the planet.
he he big up too beautiful britain who could believe we once had you both in our pockets including a third of the planet.
Nice careful wording there. "Could believe," is quite apt. Without that, you're just plain wrong
I always wonder what it would be like if Britain's imperialism had occurred in this century and ended in the same way. I always come to the same conclusion. You guys would have had terrible PR.
Just read up on it a bit, and technically, according to SI, we're incorrect. There's technically a standard that you may have seen. Ki, Mi, Gi, etc. It's just that, well, no one uses it, and no one wants to.
By the way, why would you need to multiply by 1000 on a calculator? Or are we talking about the non graphing variety? Although I do think my TI-86 has that key. I checked. It doesn't.
Nice careful wording there. "Could believe," is quite apt. Without that, you're just plain wrong
I always wonder what it would be like if Britain's imperialism had occurred in this century and ended in the same way. I always come to the same conclusion. You guys would have had terrible PR.
trust you americans to get the timing wrong when going on a world tour
trust you americans to get the timing wrong when going on a world tour
We don't take time for tea
he he big up too beautiful britain who could believe we once had you both in our pockets including a third of the planet.
Redcoats!
No, the complaint is that the iPhone is literally the ONLY camera phone on the market that can't send or receive picture messages/MMS. On top of that, there is no video recording. This is a phone which has put such an emphasis on multimedia like music, video, internet and staying connected to the world , that cant even send a picture or video to most other cell phones in the world.
Such basic features missing, on supposedly such a revolutionary phones, is just plain stupid. And even worse, there is no sign that they are even coming.
I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for old features like MMS.
The iPhone is breaking new ground not retreading old.
You will get your MMS from the apps store, no need for everyone to have what they don't want or need.
And if Apple doesn't add video recording on this upgrade then you will may be able to buy that at the Apps store as well.
Only smaller if you include Alaska. We're almost exactly the same size as the contiguous US.
You're right about the population though.
Everyone seems to think this is great but nobody seems to realise we're talking about Telstra here. The greediest, most anti-competitive company ever.
Telstra are the reason we're stuck with monthly download limits in the hundreds of megabytes and still consider 512k to be broadband. They're awful.
Don't sell the American carriers too short! Hopefully a new 3G iPhone will encourage companies in America and Australia to move ahead to at least the technology of Finland, circa 2004.
Where are you getting this "MMS = outdated" deal? MMS is more popular than ever, along with SMS. EVERY camera phone on the market can send MMS, why not the $400/$500 iPhone? I mean, when I spend half a grand on a phone, I expect it to do everything my cheap-o LG chocolate can do and more. If not an exact match for match in features, I want to at least have a viable alternative. Sending a picture through email is not a viable alternative, as I cannot receive MMS, nor send a picture/video to anyone without a smartphone. What do they gain by excluding it?
And video recording, as far as I know, is a hardware deal, not software that can be bought.
Video recording works just fine on the iPhone. There are already more than one app that has this feature already, this is the one I use:
http://www.iphonevideorecorder.com/
Works brilliantly.
My understanding was that k = 1000 x and Ki = 1024, likewise, GiB was a real gigabyte (1024 x 1024 x 1024) and GB was just giga, ie. x 1 000 000 000 bytes. Which link were you reading up on? At least with kilo/kila, if you type K or k, we know what you mean, unlike m = milli (10^-3) and M = mega (10^6). It doesn't really matter I guess, I've just always seen it as lower case k, and will continue to use it that way.
zync said:
Non-graphing. The fx-100AU (I think) has k, G, m, µ, M, etc.
Didn't you know the iPhone feature set before you plunked down half a grand?
Take a deep breath, you have only a few weeks until you can get an app for MMS.
And no, video is already available to jailbroken iPhones.
Maybe you should have stuck with your cheapo chocolate.
No, I do not have an iPhone anymore. Just an Ipod Touch (until 3G iphone). However, that does not dismiss my point. Im just saying for such a revolutionary phone, it sure is missing some basic features for seemingly no reason at all. No video camera (legally), no MMS (legally), no stereo bluetooth, non-removable battery, etc.
As for the video... So the iPhone can record video? Strange... Why wouldn't Apple enable it?
If Apple addressed these problems, there'd be absolutely no reason NOT to get an iPhone (besides coverage problems, but that's AT&T). Its like they purposely handicapped it.
1) It should have had MMS to start with. Also, what's the name of the app that'll give the iPhone 2.0 MMS?
2) Those so called video applications shoot at 6-15 FPS (with the higher rates only available if you encode at end of session) which is rubbish. Oh and you have to crack the phone to use it.
You do make me laugh.