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.
iPhone 3G Size and Battery Life Analysis
- Thread starter paymaster
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I honestly dont see the point in 3G when you have WiFi unless you really need to surf the web or do other things on the go all the time. I also think Steve Jobs is right about 3G not being mature enough yet.
the point is that wifi is spotty and if someone had 3G in their previous phone, going to EDGE is not fun.
That being said, I think EDGE + wifi gives a good enough experience that I'm thankful for the longer battery life.
Coming from a Blackjack with 3G, EDGE is painful. Can I live with it? Sure, but I'd rather not...
I've been watching all this jabber/complaints about 3G, availability, etc. Another HUGE hurdle is the towers. Even though AT&T may have a bunch of sites already set up for GSM/EDGE networks, they'd have to send techs back to all the towers to swap out the antenna equipment, which means they have to renegotiate all their leasing contracts, review the site engineering, purchase equipment etc. It's a HUGE capital investment and from all indicators, cell site aquisition is in a (cyclical) downturn/capital conservation mode in most markets. Realistically, it's going to be a few years before we see a significant workable 3G network for data in the States.
Actually for most a lot of people on AT&T 3G would not even be available.
WiFi is only spotty if you live a weird lifestyle or are a fuller brush salesman.
Where I spend most of my time I have wifi which blows 3G out of the water. Both in terms of throughput and latency.
This is just a weird comment, to me. How many times when you are out around town do you really have WiFi access? If you happen to stop near a coffee place with free WiFi, maybe you get a signal. The vast majority of the US does not have WiFi coverage that the random iPhone user can tap into.
I don't think EDGE is a problem, I just wanted to say that I live a perfectly normal lifestyle in southern CA and I'm not exactly blanketed with free WiFi.
Interesting article. I've seen alot of talk on this forum about how their batteries drain faster on wifi and that it should be turned off when not it use and also turning it off, can offer better charging times while on the dock.
This article is completely opposite. Here I am at home with the wifi always off to conserve battery and these guys are getting better battery life with wifi on an connected.
This article is completely opposite. Here I am at home with the wifi always off to conserve battery and these guys are getting better battery life with wifi on an connected.
Coming from WiFi, 3G is painful...not as fast and more battery drain.
Who needs it? The EDGE is fine for the very rare moments I don't have WiFi.
3G will come and go (just like EDGE) but WiFi will grow and grow.
For me it is a simple choice.
It makes sense, WiFi is a short range low power solution compared with EDGE and 3G which are longer range, higher power solutions.
Well at least we can take from this article that Steve wasn't just making up excuses for not wanting to put 3G in the iPhone
Wow, Great article. Though this was apparent in the beginning, the whole analysis helped to understand it. I can relate as I have owned a blackjack in the past and know that the battery life when using 3G is horrible.
This makes me feel better that I am using an iPhone
This makes me feel better that I am using an iPhone
It's funny. Even with 3G disabled, the battery life still suffers (taking for granted that the battery was otherwise comparable). This kind of raises serious questions for all those people saying, "Wow, I wish Apple had let ME decide if I wanted 3G enabled or not..." If 3G kills one IOTA of my battery life... not worth it. Why? Because, I've actually looked at the coverage chart (unlike most people complaining about wanting 3G).
Even if it improves several months from now... I'll take several months of better battery life and decent EDGE coverage versus lessened battery life and spotty coverage. I've been surfing on EDGE all weekend, and with one notable exception where the connection just dropped, it was GREAT. Not "good", but "great". This of course from someone who didn't have 3G or EDGE before, but IDEN on Nextel (sucky, sucky, sucky).
~ CB
Even if it improves several months from now... I'll take several months of better battery life and decent EDGE coverage versus lessened battery life and spotty coverage. I've been surfing on EDGE all weekend, and with one notable exception where the connection just dropped, it was GREAT. Not "good", but "great". This of course from someone who didn't have 3G or EDGE before, but IDEN on Nextel (sucky, sucky, sucky).
~ CB
The whole article is fishy. The conclusion is based on a false assumption:
Apple will have no way of improving the "problems" 3G has.
size is bigger, battery lasts shorter, blah, blah, but take a look at their own chart
if apple can do egde better than others, why don't they think apple can do 3G better than others? or reduce size better than others?
Apple will have no way of improving the "problems" 3G has.
size is bigger, battery lasts shorter, blah, blah, but take a look at their own chart
if apple can do egde better than others, why don't they think apple can do 3G better than others? or reduce size better than others?
wait, where's THAT statement coming from? edge is edge. AT&T upgraded their edge network to up bandwidth recently. None of this was from a direct result of something Apple did to the hardware - it was just because the iPhone was a high profile product for at&t and because edge was sucking, and still sucks, they poured millions of dollars into making it ever so slightly faster.
Now, I really wish the iPhone had 3G, and AT&T poured the money from fine edge into their 3G network instead.
If Farmer Joe can improve the size of the brown chicken eggs, why can't he improve the size of white eggs? Or wave his magic wand? Do you even realize that Apple didn't build the chip? When Apple comments on the size of the chip and the integration, they're talking about what solutions vendors have been able to offer them. Moreover, if these same specialists can't make the 3G chips smaller, why is it that Apple can magically make the chip smaller?
If you pose two unrelated questions, you can usually get people to agree with you, if they also don't have any background knowledge on the technology involved. You just read an article by technology specialists, so I can't see why you still don't "buy" it. If you're a project manager and you start saying things like, "If one person can do this project in one week, then two people should be able to do it in 3.5 days, right?" Anyone in project management should immediately boo you.
~ CB
And you never once considered the tiny little fact that there are so many different factors that affect 3g/edge+battery life out there that such a comparison is pretty useless? You know, like different chipsets and batteries and hardware in general and...you get the idea.
Honestly, I'd trade battery life for faster loading pages. EDGE is painfully slow. I mean the time I wait for pages to load on edge sometimes make me wonder if that's enough to be practically the same as having shorter battery life to browse pages faster but...load them faster.
Once again, this is not just an Apple issue, it is an ATT issue. Right now, Edge is available in over 13,000 cities in the US while 3G is in 165 cities. There are 15 states with NO 3G at all and 15 more with only 1 city in the entire state with ANY coverage. One could argue that there is way more free wifi coverage in the US than there is 3G coverage.
As I have maintained from day 1, the next iPhone will not be an upgraded version, it will be a cheaper phone targeted at the 13-22 crowd. You will not see 3G until the network matures and any upgrades in the middle will likely be for storage space and perhaps GPS. I think fall 2008 will be the first chance at an iPhone 2.0
ash =o)
As I have maintained from day 1, the next iPhone will not be an upgraded version, it will be a cheaper phone targeted at the 13-22 crowd. You will not see 3G until the network matures and any upgrades in the middle will likely be for storage space and perhaps GPS. I think fall 2008 will be the first chance at an iPhone 2.0
ash =o)
I was just disputing the statement by anantech which claimed that 3G will be too much battery consuming for iPhone because blackberry's 3G is draining battery faster, do you have a problem with that?
oh please, its more like how you arrange 5 eggs to occupy smaller space than reduce the size of one egg, what do you think the iphone is? a brick?
Yeah, I can't see any logic behind that sentence, and I've read it three times. My egg comparison is basically saying that if you can coerce your chickens to make a smaller brown egg, the same techniques and solutions may not be available to you if you were trying to effect the white eggs too. This is of course, if Apple was in charge of the chickens/chips at all, which they're not. They're talking to the farmers, and the farmers are saying "Nope, can't be done yet. But we're working on it."
So, the review... Apple ain't the farmer.
~ CB
alter that "charge" to "significant influence", I bet its 80% possible. Its not first time in history a hardware manufacture makes special design for a big company. Such as that cute small mainboard inside mac mini.