iPhone 3G Size and Battery Life Analysis

[janey]

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.

So what's wrong with having 3g and edge in the iPhone? Are you saying mere availability of 3g should determine whether or not a phone should have 3g support?..in which case, no phone should, except those pricey smartphones businesspeople use because 3g is somewhat available in most major cities. Oh, wait, what about the iPhone?!

It's awesome how a dirt cheap (with 2 year contract) smartphone like the blackjack can browse faster than my iPhone. Really.

AT&T actually did something to make edge speeds marginally faster. Why they couldn't have spent that time improving their 3g coverage and speeds is beyond me. While edge coverage is more widespread, 3g coverage is growing, and it would not have hurt to include this on the iPhone (ignoring all other considerations for the moment).

Honestly the biggest drawback to the iPhone is edge speeds. Everything else has a workaround, but it's not easy to find open wifi networks all over the place.

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?

How are you disputing it? You're using a false comparison to back up your belief that Apple can "do" EDGE on the iPhone better than the blackjack (who even mentioned blackberries here?), even though they're not the people who designed the chips in use.

Such as that cute small mainboard inside mac mini.

While I don't dispute the mobos Apple used for the mac mini and iMac G4s as being unique, Apple still did not design the controllers and whatnot being used on the mobo in those computers. Mobos are custom designed and come in MANY different "standard" sizes (ATX, microATX, BTX you get the idea), but usually custom for laptops. Mac mini and iMac G4 aren't really exceptions.

What you're suggesting Apple could have done with 3g on the iPhone is tantamount to saying that Apple personally designed the sound card, the ethernet controller, the video card, the disk controllers...on their computers. Apple doesn't. Hence, there isn't really any way for Apple to "improve" 3g in the way you're suggesting they "improve"d edge (Apple themselves didn't).

 

[Cleverboy]

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.

I see. Ok.

~ CB

 

[defeated]

even though they're not the people who designed the chips in use.

While I don't dispute the mobos Apple used for the mac mini and iMac G4s as being unique, Apple still did not design the controllers and whatnot being used on the mobo in those computers. Mobos are custom designed and come in MANY different "standard" sizes (ATX, microATX, BTX you get the idea), but usually custom for laptops. Mac mini and iMac G4 aren't really exceptions.

What you're suggesting Apple could have done with 3g on the iPhone is tantamount to saying that Apple personally designed the sound card, the ethernet controller, the video card, the disk controllers...on their computers. Apple doesn't. Hence, there isn't really any way for Apple to "improve" 3g in the way you're suggesting they "improve"d edge (Apple themselves didn't).

That kind of extrapolation is un-necessary.

Its interesting to call mac mini's mainboard as any "ATX". which I obviously don't agree, mac mini's mainboard does not fit any "standard".

I guess I can make myself more clear by saying

Apple can improve the battery problem and size problem related to 3G as observed in other 3G cellphones in the original article.

any statement must be applied under certain conditions, if you keep extrapolate to a unlimited situation, then there is nothing I can say about it.

 

[janey]

That kind of extrapolation is un-necessary...

Wow what the ****? I never said the mini's mobo was ATX. By the way, there are so many different standard motherboard sizes out there that are vastly smaller than ATX. That's not including custom-shaped/designed motherboards for laptops. Hence your argument that Apple did it with the mini's mobo is moot.

Or do you need to see with your own eyes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Motherboards_form_factors.svg

While Apple can probably find a balance between speed and power usage somewhere, that's still no reason to suggest Apple does it better than anyone else. Anandtech only compared the iPhone to the BlackJack, and I know plenty of phones that last just as long if not longer than the iPhone with EDGE.

 

[defeated]

Or do you need to see with your own eyes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Motherboards_form_factors.svg

While Apple can probably find a balance between speed and power usage somewhere, that's still no reason to suggest Apple does it better than anyone else.

Well, so let me retreat even more on this, how about I say

the size problem and battery problem observed in blackjack shouldn't be an excuse for iphone not supporting 3G?

PS. that image doesn't even have an unit on the axis. Somebody need to update that thing.

 

[janey]

the size problem and battery problem observed in blackjack shouldn't be an excuse for iphone not supporting 3G?

PS. that image doesn't even have an unit on the axis. Somebody need to update that thing.

It doesn't, but it's in millimeters, some of which are smaller than the mini's mobo.

And I'd agree with you on that statement, which is 3g in general not just on the blackjack, but there's other stuff that should be taken into consideration (one already retarded reason mentioned previously about at&t's 3g coverage in the US), for starters. Not saying any of them are particularly good reasons for not including 3g on iPhone, but too late now...obviously will show up in later revisions..

 

[aristobrat]

the size problem and battery problem observed in blackjack shouldn't be an excuse for iphone not supporting 3G?

I think the general consensus here is that if the iPhone had to be larger (or the battery were to last less) because of 3G, people would rather have EDGE + WiFi.

If you think it's realistic that Apple, on their first attempt at a phone, should have custom designed their own 3G modem to work better (be smaller/use less battery) than any other 3G modem that's ever been invented to date, ... well, that's your opinion. I surely don't agree with it. As if they don't have a gazillion other things to worry about going wrong the way the iPhone is currently shipped...

 

[defeated]

I think the general consensus here is that if the iPhone had to be larger (or the battery were to last less) because of 3G, people would rather have EDGE + WiFi.

I just don't believe that. But obviously its not a thing you can convince me or vice versa. Its a subjective observation I just don't agree with you.

 

[JonHimself]

It's awesome how a dirt cheap (with 2 year contract) smartphone like the blackjack can browse faster than my iPhone.

Without getting into any other point you made, this very statement is wrong, you're iPhone can use WiFi and thus can browse (much) faster than the blackjack. And I don't need to hear that "WiFi isn't always available" etc etc because 3G isn't always available either. I would even go as far to say that WiFi is far more accessible than 3G is in almost every city in the US (3G is mainly available in big cities, not small ones... big cities are often very modern and thus also most likely have a ton of WiFi coverage... those small cities without 3G might have coffee shops etc with Hot Spts)

 

[janey]

Without getting into any other point you made, this very statement is wrong, you're iPhone can use WiFi and thus can browse (much) faster than the blackjack...

rofl. please stop with that argument (at least to me).

I live in the 2nd biggest city in the US that's part of the (population-wise) largest state as well.

3g from AT&T in Los Angeles is available a lot more often than an open ANY wifi network.

Despite the plethora of wifi networks in the area whenever I feel like using Safari, pretty much all of them are closed and for the occasional open ones, the range really sucks so I can't really use them at all. So the only time I actually get to use wifi is at home. And then maybe, like, two coffee shops. And one idiot's open network while I'm randomly waiting on a street somewhere. It's also not like I can get ANY tools on my iPhone that'll let me work around the pay-for-wifi or password issue. And I don't have the patience to guess passwords.


btw, it's your and not you're, it wouldn't make much sense to be saying "you are iPhone", would it now?

and lastly, "wifi" is so vague, at least come up with some better number. I could have a wifi network with only dialup, in which case even bloody EDGE is faster than wifi. But I could also have a wifi network with a 100mbit connection, and it would be so fast my iPhone obviously wouldn't be able to handle the bandwidth because the connection exceeds the theoretical limit for 802.11g.

 

[iBlue]

FYI:

3G does not mean large phone. That is very outdated thinking. An SE W880i is a 3G phone and much smaller than the iPhone.

3G is not a lark - the US is just behind the times with mobile phones.

wi-fi is a pathetic reason not to have 3G. that is hardly a seamless transition even if you can frequently find free wi-fi.


Fine, Apple want to be their typical "we know best" arrogant little selves. but for all their european users who know better, apple will lose a lot of customers with their sub-par phone and ridiculous demands... but that's a whole other story.

 

[janey]

Fine, Apple want to be their typical "we know best" arrogant little selves. but for all their european users who know better, apple will lose a lot of customers with their sub-par phone and ridiculous demands... but that's a whole other story.

Agreed.

A fair number of people are obviously unhappy about the lack of 3g on the iPhone, but got them anyway (myself included). Apple might lose a couple of diehard people who absolutely must have 3g, but otherwise...sigh.

 

[Sobe]

Yep, we've established that the iPhone isn't perfect.

Well done.

 

[iWizzard]

What I found most chocking is the wi-fi speeds. Is it true that the speed is only 1 to 2Mbps ?? that is crap, way slower then 3g is in Europe (3,6Mbps and 7,2Mbps this fall)

With slow speed as 1-2Mbps there is not much need for w-fi in developed countries.


And it is just bad engendering if a chip is taking power even when it is not used.

 

[Cleverboy]

I the end of the day, Jobs and company made a pretty good doggone decision. The technology backs it up, according to an article like this. Some people may have wanted Apple to create a BIGGER phone with SHORTER battery life with 3G, but Apple felt it was in their interest to create a SMALLER phone with LONGER battery life, that worked on EDGE only along with WiFi. It's a PERFECT solution for me and MOST iPhone users. While its comforting to have a 3rd party confirm that Apple's reasons actually hold up under scrutiny, these answers will never be enough for some people, who'd likely fire technical consultants they fire themselves if they came back saying that Apple's reasons were valid, and that there was no real way they could escape the fact that WiFi was very fast and inexpensive on the battery, while EDGE was slowest and also least expensive on the battery than 3G, which had truly poor support, and if included, would adversely effect battery life whether in use... or NOT in use.

Most people arguing otherwise have still yet to even produce a single 3G phone that has demonstrably longer battery life than the iPhone, yet as Apple's first entry, they think Apple could somehow change the natural laws of space and time (smaller space than anyone else, in a short development window) to accomplish it. At this point, I guess I should recognize that people who wanted 3G, wanted it so badly that they'd also be ready to complain when it inevitably made the phone experience significantly worst. They would say, "Boy, the iPhone battery life sucks! And the battery isn't removable either! This is horrible!" In fact, with 3G, we'd all be saying that it sucks, and getting even more paranoid about the lack of a removable battery.

I like the product I got. I like its SIZE and I like its BATTERY life, and I like its non-removable battery (because its not super-thick to do it). Making the battery easily replaceable, means that Apple needs to deal with a third-party battery market and its adverse effect on their phones. A lot of other "messy" decisions they could have made either. Same decision for the iPods, yet few people complain.

In the end, its clear the decision for all its pros and cons was Apple's, and Apple's alone. Consumers will choose whether their decision was right, by either BUYING or NOT BUYING the iPhone. Those that BUY the iPhone and still complain that it should have had 3G, seem the strangest to me. At least the ones not buying the iPhone seem to make more logical sense. Those that bought the iPhone purchased Apple's decision making process. While they can say, "I wish it had 3G." Outright disagreeing with Apple's decision in the face of the science and basic logic seems really arrogant to me. I you're going to disagree with Apple, at least accept the science of their reasons and say something like, "I didn't mind a bigger phone with shorter battery life." After a while though, most people would agree that these phones are still out there, and can be purchased for less if the person really wanted that.

~ CB

 

[D1G1T4L]

FYI:

3G does not mean large phone. That is very outdated thinking. An SE W880i is a 3G phone and much smaller than the iPhone.

3G is not a lark - the US is just behind the times with mobile phones.

wi-fi is a pathetic reason not to have 3G. that is hardly a seamless transition even if you can frequently find free wi-fi.


Fine, Apple want to be their typical "we know best" arrogant little selves. but for all their european users who know better, apple will lose a lot of customers with their sub-par phone and ridiculous demands... but that's a whole other story.

Go look at the space leftover in the iPhone. Where is the 3G going to go? Fine the W880i has it but it is also missing some things the iPhone has.

Apple "we know best" and yet you turn around and say "european users who know better". Hummmmmm........

What I found most chocking is the wi-fi speeds. Is it true that the speed is only 1 to 2Mbps ?? that is crap, way slower then 3g is in Europe (3,6Mbps and 7,2Mbps this fall)

With slow speed as 1-2Mbps there is not much need for w-fi in developed countries.


And it is just bad engendering if a chip is taking power even when it is not used.

That is what Apple is complaining about. 3G chips need to be improved. Of course with the ban in place that is going to slow things down

 

[JonHimself]

btw, it's your and not you're, it wouldn't make much sense to be saying "you are iPhone", would it now?

Damn homonyms get me everytime. Thanks for the grammar lesson but was it necessary? Probably not... it's not like my post was full of errors and was unreadable, and don't tell me that it weakens my argument or makes my point any less credible because you can't take me seriously if I can't write properly, afterall you did write 'rofl' in your post...

Regardless, yes you live in LA and 3G coverage is excellent there, great. I was just responding to the fact that he said his blackjack (a really cheap phone) could surf faster than a $600 phone, which technically it can't.
Further, my second line was, "And I don't need to hear that "WiFi isn't always available" etc etc because 3G isn't always available either" which is kind of what you would go on to write about... I made a blanket statement, there will be many exceptions, one of those being from someone who spends most of (or all) their time in an area with 3G - of course you will want 3G coverage because it is always available to you. For myself it doesn't really matter if I get a 3G phone (mostly because no one is even carrying the iPhone yet, but also because Rogers 3G coverage, in Ontario at least, is limited to a geographically small area) Having EDGE is fine on my phone and rarely am I without a free WiFi hot spot nearby throughout my entire city.

 

[atszyman]

I love the iPhone debate threads and people telling Apple what they should have done...

Apple had a few choices when designing the iPhone, AT&T or T-Mobile (for major GSM carriers in the US) or to go CDMA with Sprint or Verizon and whether or not to include 3G.

The carrier choice was almost a no-brainer. If you're planning on making the phone available worldwide they almost had to go with AT&T. T-Mobile doesn't match their coverage (yet) and GSM is the more universal network on the planet so that ruled out Sprint and Verizon or would force them to design a second version for international (Yes they could have used Verizon's or Sprint's 3G networks but a phone for them would not fall back to GSM where 3G isn't available which would have been a problem internationally). Their only other option was to release an unlocked GSM phone, but they wouldn't have been able to get their voicemail working without the cooperation of at least one carrier and I doubt any one carrier will go through the effort without some sort of deal on the iPhone.

The 3G question is a bit less of a no-brainer but with the iPhone's initial (debug) release in the US 3G doesn't make a lot of sense. Most carrier's 3G networks are still in their infancy (in the US) and with the iPhone being Apple's first cell phone it makes sense to use the more proven network in the US. By going with the more established network it creates an easier product debug since you most likely won't be questioning the network when problems arise eliminating time consuming multiple debug threads to determine if it's the fault of the phone or the network.

For a first time phone builder Apple took the safest path to reach the greatest number of people which is not a bad thing in a Rev A product. I'd expect to see 3G available in a Rev C iPhone within the next 18 months. I think we'll see some fixes in the Rev B iPhone that will be made available internationally and then the Rev C with the update to 3G once the initial tech has proven itself.

 

[iBlue]

..
Apple had a few choices when designing the iPhone, AT&T or T-Mobile (for major GSM carriers in the US) or to go CDMA with Sprint or Verizon and whether or not to include 3G.

The carrier choice was almost a no-brainer. If you're planning on making the phone available worldwide they almost had to go with AT&T. T-Mobile doesn't match their coverage (yet) and GSM is the more universal network on the planet so that ruled out Sprint and Verizon or would force them to design a second version for international (Yes they could have used Verizon's or Sprint's 3G networks but a phone for them would not fall back to GSM where 3G isn't available which would have been a problem internationally). Their only other option was to release an unlocked GSM phone, but they wouldn't have been able to get their voicemail working without the cooperation of at least one carrier and I doubt any one carrier will go through the effort without some sort of deal on the iPhone.

The 3G question is a bit less of a no-brainer but with the iPhone's initial (debug) release in the US 3G doesn't make a lot of sense. Most carrier's 3G networks are still in their infancy (in the US) and with the iPhone being Apple's first cell phone it makes sense to use the more proven network in the US. By going with the more established network it creates an easier product debug since you most likely won't be questioning the network when problems arise eliminating time consuming multiple debug threads to determine if it's the fault of the phone or the network.

For a first time phone builder Apple took the safest path to reach the greatest number of people which is not a bad thing in a Rev A product. I'd expect to see 3G available in a Rev C iPhone within the next 18 months. I think we'll see some fixes in the Rev B iPhone that will be made available internationally and then the Rev C with the update to 3G once the initial tech has proven itself.

Apple did not have choices, they had demands and AT&T were the only ones willing to tolerate them. Verizon (and simiarily Vodafone in the UK) told them to shove it. I imagine T-mobile (also a big presence here) did the same.

I don't see how AT&T is supposed to be such a "no-brainer" or so global, I thought that was mainly an american thing. Carriers are not as big of a deal here either as it's a smaller space and coverage is not such an issue. Having a crippled piece of hardware locked to a carrier is, however. ...but that's not what we're talking about right now.

3G is a wise choice for a mobile phone in europe. not having it alienates a lot of would-be customers. that alone is not the problem though, it's just something that grates on a lot of nerves.

Your other parts of the post make sense but I can't see apple being that worried about risk. I digress.



As to that bit someone posted about where are Apple supposed to fit the 3G - it's apple, they fit a whole computer into something no bigger than most monitors. I hardly think that's the issue.

 

[meagain]

AT&T's 3g morphs to EDGE when 3g isn't available.

People make it sound like if there's no 3g in their area - there's no service.
This is wrong.

 

[aristobrat]

As to that bit someone posted about where are Apple supposed to fit the 3G - it's apple, they fit a whole computer into something no bigger than most monitors. I hardly think that's the issue.

Then what you would say the issue is?

Why would Apple purposefully leave out a piece of technology that may very well kill the iPhone over in Europe (other than it has always treated Europe like a second-class market to the US, based on the forum posts complaining about the prices and sub-par service)?

 

[sushi]

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.

Good points.

Battery life is very important as well. It seems the 3G is not there yet with regards to long battery life in a small form factor. Someday it will, but for now, I think that Apple's solution is a good one.

OT, for anyone with an iPhone. How easy is it to connect to a secure WiFi spot?

 

[JonHimself]

OT, for anyone with an iPhone. How easy is it to connect to a secure WiFi spot?

I second that question, in one of the Apple videos (or maybe it was on a post on the forums) someone said that all you have to do is enter in the password, but I also remember reading a couple posts about it not being as easy as it sounded

 

[aristobrat]

I second that question, in one of the Apple videos (or maybe it was on a post on the forums) someone said that all you have to do is enter in the password, but I also remember reading a couple posts about it not being as easy as it sounded

Entering a password is all I've had to do on my iPhone when connecting to my home AP and at friends' houses.

By default, the iPhone is set to tell you when there's a Wifi network available. It just pops up a bubble asking if you want to connect or not, along with the names of the networks it's detected.

 

[darngooddesign]

Apple should have included 3G AND EDGE with the ability to turn 3G off like you can with WIFI. The size comparison to the SE880i is irrelelvant because it doesn't have to make room for the screen, larger motherboard and flash memory, big ass battery, and to the best of my knowledge wifi b & g.