Basically MMS = SMS + Attachment. Everyone should at least read the Wiki on MMS.
WAP (traditionally) is used to retrieve the attachment. In this case the WAP may be pointing to a http server of some sort.
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.
Highlights of Apple's iPhone OS 3.0 Preview: Copy and Paste, A2DP, MMS, Much More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
WAP (traditionally) is used to retrieve the attachment. In this case the WAP may be pointing to a http server of some sort.
I'm going to assume the push notification works well. None of these other issues are a problem. It is just useless whining. The one major problem I see is the alert system. The problems are:
-people can have instant messages and other apps coming in every minute and a single alert screen is not going to work.
-the alert screen forces you to deal with that first and whatever you are doing second. Only iCal should have that ability.
-you will not see multiple notifications at once forcing you to constantly deal with the alert screen messages.
Apple did not think this up very well. This will not scale well. Android and the Pre have shown better alternatives to this idea because it does not get in your way and you have a way to see all of your updates at once. This is a very serious issue that apple has to deal with.
I agree with you, just the person that I was replying to asked what people were moaning about now, so I gave him a recap as he didn't want to read through all the pages.
O.K. Maybe we can agree to the following.
We both know, that the so called "hardware limitation" is a marketing lie by Apple.
You think it's o.K., that Apple will only allow the full 'Apple MMS experience', and therefore 3G and GPS is a must (esp. considering your location).
I think it is a blatant attempt to force first gen iPhone user into an upgrade.
We are both entitled to have our opinions, but maybe we can agree that we don't buy into this "hardware limitation" crap, as handsets nearly a decade old could perfectly work with MMS all over the world. (And I know for sure, that my first UMTS handset was a Nokia one, therefore the Siemens S55, the Siemens S65 and the LG Chocolate do MMS just fine over GPRS).
MMS is a data transmission that runs alongside the SMS message. I think that's effectively what I was saying regarding the whole stew of whether EDGE data (MMS attachment) and VOICE service (incoming phone call, concurrent phone call) can operate at the same time on an EDGE only radio. Looking at the Wiki article, I thought the "challenges" section was interesting:
- Content adaptation - Multimedia content created by one brand of MMS phone may not be entirely compatible with the capabilities of the recipients' MMS phone. In the MMS architecture, the recipient MMSC is responsible for providing for content adaptation (e.g., image resizing, audio codec transcoding, etc.)
- Distribution lists - Since most SMSC vendors have adopted FTP as an ad-hoc method by which large distribution lists are transferred to the SMSC prior to being used in a bulk-messaging SMS submission, it is expected that MMSC vendors will also adopt FTP.
- Bulk messaging - The flow of peer-to-peer MMS messaging involves several over-the-air transactions that become inefficient when MMS is used to send messages to large numbers of subscribers, as is typically the case for VASPs.
- Handset Configuration - Unlike SMS, MMS requires a number of handset parameters to be set. Poor handset configuration is often blamed as the first point of failure for many users. Service settings are sometimes preconfigured on the handset, but mobile operators are now looking at new device management technologies as a means of delivering the necessary settings for data services (MMS, WAP, etc.) via over-the-air programming (OTA).
- WAP Push - Few mobile network operators offer direct connectivity to their MMSCs for content providers. This has resulted in many content providers using WAP push as the only method available to deliver 'rich content' to mobile handsets. WAP push enables 'rich content' to be delivered to a handset by specifying the URL (via binary SMS) of a pre-compiled MMS, hosted on a content provider's web server. A consequence is that the receiver who pays WAP per kb or minute (as opposed to a flat monthly fee) pays for receiving the MMS, as opposed to only paying for sending one, and also paying a different rate.
I think citing "hardware issues" as the reason they don't do it, might be interpreted as the reason they "can't" do it... which I think would be incorrect. One moderator commented at the beginning of the thread, that this limitation is purely for financial gain, and an excuse to get people to upgrade their hardware. I think its NOT "purely" to get people to upgrade their phones. I think there is a serious hardware-related issue at root... and that if it were simple to support, Apple would not hesitate to throw the feature to 1G users and call it a day. --They just refuse to spend much ADDITIONAL money on backwards compatibility.
MMS support did not exist in iPhone 1.0. Or 1.1. Or 1.3. Or 2.0... or 2.1... It simply hasn't been there. Each of the phones you mention can have any number of disparate, orphaned development efforts in how their MMS is implemented. Apple has finally chosen to implement MMS for its 3G iPhone hardware and the hardware of future devices... and chose NOT to go back and architect a solution for 1st generation iPhone users on their EDGE radio.
I think the difference between our opinion is that you feel your cynicism over Apple's "explanation" as simply common-sense ("follow the money"). I see Apple's "explanation" as a simplification of a set of complex challenges regarding how they approach MMS support moving forward. Trust me, when Apple released their Apple TV, and only supported digital sets... my mind was bending over the fact that I didn't have a digital set at the time, and that maybe Apple was trying push digital televisions through its stores. Eventually, I came to realize that digital tvs are what everyone should have, and that Apple's decision was forward thinking and correct. I think its the same case here. Similarly, I also think Apple, as a company, would prefer NOT to use DRM, while so many people have criticized them for using it... because it tends toward creating a "walled garden", which makes them more money. I can see why it doesn't make sense for them in the long run. I think Jobs did too. Like the the online music challenge, I think Apple's "MMS" implementation hurdles has more to do with providing a single solution that is manageable across all their iPhone versions in all countries... than it does with whether they could launch MMS on any single device running iPhone OS in a given country like the U.S.
Some choices aren't always about "following the money". Sometimes companies need to made tough choices that keep the focus on progress and not unnecessary extravagance or time sinks.
~ CB
So the inability to get data while on the phone is supposed to be the entire reason for not allowing the 1G to get MMS? Again, so when the iPhone 3G isn't in 3G service does it still get MMS?
That's an interesting theory. That because EDGE can't handle voice+data at the same time, it can't handle MMS. Seems simple enough. I hope Apple actually has a legit reason why this doesn't work and isn't claiming some ******** reason that hackers/investigators find.
Well we already know MMS work on the 1st Gen iPhone through hacks, it's been that way since just about the beginning of jailbreaking, the question is why isn't Apple allowing it? Looking at the info it seems we're all grasping at straws and I think basically the reason they don't allow it is cause they didn't see much point in putting in the extra cost/effort when the return would be minimal, they want you to buy more stuff, that's what it comes down to in the end.
EDIT: either way the end result is the same despite the reason, if you have a 1st gen iPhone either don't use MMS, upgrade, or jailbreak.
Yeah. I personally don't care for MMS. I have zero interest in sending or receiving. CCP, Tethering, Landscape and Spotlight. That's where the party is at.
LOL at least soon you won't have that problem anymore.
EDIT:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/18/usb-tethering-publish-video-and-find-my-iphone-found-in-os-3-0/
Worlds First Real TriCorder
ok . . . is it me, or did Apple just hand the world it's first TriCorder? I may be a geek, but if I now have access to Accessories, I can effectively add a chemistry set on the end of the phone and send back data . . . this thing is so far beyond being a phone . . .
ok . . . is it me, or did Apple just hand the world it's first TriCorder? I may be a geek, but if I now have access to Accessories, I can effectively add a chemistry set on the end of the phone and send back data . . . this thing is so far beyond being a phone . . .
If it was the "entire" reason my post would have been shorter, wouldn't it? Sigh. Nevermind though. I guess all my spitballing and I'm the only one who'll admit to guessing at things we don't know.
Apple bad! I'm with ya now. DRM, no MMS for iPhone 2007 customers, and charging iPod Touch owners. Cheap corporate bastids.
No one said it "can't handle MMS". I could quote myself saying precisely the opposite, but I'm going to assume at this point I may as well be speaking pig-latin for all the attention you're paying to what I'm actually implying.
~ CB
Some people protest against paragraphs
In all seriousness, I love this update. Can't wait.
Try out paragraphs, they're a beautiful thing.
In all seriousness, I love this update. Can't wait.
I will admit to not knowing either. It just seems odd that Apple, with all their money, can't/won't get MMS working on the 1G iPhone. I guess all I want to know at this point is if MMS will work on the 3G iPhone when it isn't in 3G service.
Coupled with knowing all we can about the differences in radio (besides the 3G) hopefully we can get a better picture of what the problem is.
Honestly I have no real problem with Apple exercising its capitalistic rights, shoot if I were running the place I would squeeze every last cent from all its fans. <shrug>
Such handheld instrumentation (and more) has been around for years on Windows CE, DOS and proprietary OS devices.
For example, almost ten years ago I did a field application where a plugin test device communicated its results into a handheld.
Back in the beginning of what MS called Pocket PCs, most had a CF card slot, where you could plug in all sorts of interesting miniaturized sensors. Later they graduated to using Bluetooth connections.
As for the first "real" TriCorder, many consider that to have been Vital Technologies 1996 Mark I
I'm anxious to know this too. Someone I'd read earlier said that MMS would not be available when 3G service wasn't. It sure sounds mighty peculiar. Whether its Gruber, Dilger, or Wu... I'm sure the answer, when it comes, will sound logical to some and suspect to others.
Indeed. It might be my own weakness, but I'm treating Apple's response like a cryptic puzzle to figure out, which puts me in danger of looking for an answer to something that might not even be a question.
Ever since I picked up the book Zen and the Art of the Macintosh, I've unfortunately been inducted into the society that empathizes deeply with Apple's dedication to simplicity and greasing the wheels of consumer appreciation by making tough choices.Honestly I have no real problem with Apple exercising its capitalistic rights, shoot if I were running the place I would squeeze every last cent from all its fans. <shrug>
Whether its Steve Job's interview with Rollingstone Magazine, where he tries to convince the record industry that DRM doesn't work before finding a happy medium, or when they lowered the price of DVD's from $20 to $5 a pop, or when they started releasing their iLife and iWork packages at obscene prices like $79... I think I "got it". They charge what they think the market will bear, and they make a habit of trying to concentrate on getting average people to use above-average software solutions. When I saw the Lotus background on the iPhone, I thought it was fitting.
Why GarageBand, itself, didn't start at $129, if Apple was trying to squeeze people, I don't know. The way I see it, Apple gives away software (almost dumps it on the market), in order to sell hardware. They did it when they bought and lowered the price on DVD Studio Pro. Suddenly Sound Jam became iTunes, the best, cheapest Mp3 software around at the time it came out. When it comes to backwards compatibility with older hardware, I think the furthest I've seen Apple reach, was rosetta. When they forced me to buy a new machine to run Leopard, I was mad, but in the end... they're not Microsoft, holding the weight of decades of compatibility on its shoulders.
Part of me can't help but accept that. Maybe I've got Kool-Aid in my cup. I'd like to think I don't.
~ CB
Such handheld instrumentation (and more) has been around for years on Windows CE, DOS and proprietary OS devices.
For example, almost ten years ago I did a field application where a plugin test device communicated its results into a handheld.
Back in the beginning of what MS called Pocket PCs, most had a CF card slot, where you could plug in all sorts of interesting miniaturized sensors. Later they graduated to using Bluetooth connections.
As for the first "real" TriCorder, many consider that to have been Vital Technologies 1996 Mark I
Yeah,
I've read about some of that stuff, but my point was that it's not just about the instrumentation, it's the fact that I now have a powerful enough computing device where the instrument is not the point. Plus, I'm not sure if I could fit a mass spectrometer in my pocket.
Having access to the accessory I think will drive some miniaturization of sensors that can be packaged together, i.e. glucose meter + heart rate monitor. Along with the EMF meter and other stuff.
How about an app that automatically pulls up a patients information when you are in proximity to them because you pick up their info via bluetooth from a tag they are wearing....
No clue, but that would be an issue... Of course if exclusivity does end this year, maybe Verizon could get an iPhone
Oh, I checked it out and according to this exclusivity doesn't end till 2010
That's the best guess. No one really knows for sure what kind of contract the two companies have.
I was hoping it would end in 2009
but yeah it is a guess so I suppose it's possible it could end in 2009, but not with my luck.
Considering both Verizon and AT&T's LTE 4G implementations will likely be compatible, I'm thinking Apple will forgo dabbling into any CDMA compatible iPhone, regardless of its AT&T contracts.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/21/verizon-dumps-cdma-for-gsm-based-lte-in-4g-networks/
Moreover, I'd heard that the AT&T exclusivity wasn't as long an arrangement as Apple's "no CDMA" in the U.S. pledge. This would allow them to hook up with T-Mobile sooner than Verizon or Sprint. As soon as Verizon starts its roll-out, we'll start getting an idea of when it will be useable coverage, AT&T won't be too far behind, but its a way for the tables to turn, I think.
Verizon Wireless to begin LTE rollout in Q4 2009?
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2008/12/10/verizon-to-begin-lte-rollout-in-q4-2009/
http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/02/17/att.on.4g.rollout/
~ CB
3.0 - Apple Plays Catch Up and Moves Ahead
The Media Event was two paths converging. Path 1: User features that are long overdue. Path 2: Awesome SDK to push the device ahead of the pack. In so many ways the iPhone is a leader, but in others areas it still lacks basic smartphone functionality. I switched from my iPhone back to a Blackberry. Today's announcements haven't made me change my mind.
The Media Event was two paths converging. Path 1: User features that are long overdue. Path 2: Awesome SDK to push the device ahead of the pack. In so many ways the iPhone is a leader, but in others areas it still lacks basic smartphone functionality. I switched from my iPhone back to a Blackberry. Today's announcements haven't made me change my mind.