iPhone edge vs. Nokia 3G: webpage loading shootout.

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by erandall38, Dec 10, 2007.

  1. erandall38 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    #1
  2. macintel4me macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    #2
    I just read this article. That's really amazing. Yet another example of companies mixing a potpourri of the latest technologies without thinking things through from top to bottom. That's one of the great things about Apple is that 90% of the time they make the best product in the market.
     
  3. stevearm macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    #3
    Sorry, but I find that rubbish.

    A lack of 3G is a huge flaw in the iPhone, hence why SJ has admited to wanting to bring it into iPhone 2.

    He says the iPhone is 5 years ahead of any other smartphone, well sorry Steve but its network connection is 5 years backwards compared to other smartphones.

    Horribly horribly slow web browsing, coming from the N95. And one crappy video clip isn't about to convince me otherwise. Facts don't lie, and the fact is, 3G is by FAR a faster network for data.
     
  4. erandall38 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    #4
    Have you actually compared an iPhone's edge to a 3G phone?
    I am not saying you are wrong... I mean it IS supposed to be faster.

    But in my experience so far seeing it against a couple Nokia phones and vs. the Verizon Voyager I have seen the iPhone faters at times and when not faster its right up to par with it... now thats not rubbish.

    Obviously your area has a big effect on the network speed. Verizon is the strongest network in my area, but I have seen the iPhone outperform and compare to other 3G networks on the verizon network here.

    I would not say lack of 3G was a flaw... many people care about there battery power and I think that is one really strong point of the iPhone.

    Again, 3G is supposed to be faster, but when I compare it to the edge I have never seen it outperform... and if it comes to the test and 3G does not match up then, such in the multiple situation I have checked, how can you say that it is far faster?

    Maybe that is true in your area, which is great, but unfortuante if you are using an iPhone... if the speed really bugs you.

    But here in most of Southern California from Anaheim to San Diego I have not found any 3G phones that have truly "outperformed" the iPhone network speed.

    another point to add, I have yet to see a mobile browser that looks as good as the iPhone.
     
  5. mrtune macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    #5
    3G would be a HUGE addition to the iPhone. While we may not see huge increases in page loading speeds due to things like connection strength, latency, etc, the youtube app will be a much more pleasant experience because of the difference in download size. youtube is horrible while on edge, but good while on wifi speeds. 3G would cure that problem.

    Also, the biggest and most important benefit of 3G is the ability to use youtube and the web with no fear of missing a call! If you are in the middle of downloading a video or webpage, calls will not come through if you are on the edge network. The 3G network doesn't suffer from this.
     
  6. ert3 macrumors 6502a

    ert3

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    #6
    with how few areas in the us actually having 3g coverage as their are I see no need for this battery killing addition yet. Edge is avail almost every where and at decent data rates. 3g is still young and so sparsely available that I fail to see why it would be sutch a huge plus atleast State side
     
  7. mrtune macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    #7
    True, but the phone should simply revery back to the edge network if 3G isn't available. Once on edge, battery life will be the same as it is now. That's how it was on my last phone.
     
  8. erandall38 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    #8
    I have not had to much of any problems with loading youtube and seems to be rather fast.

    You made a very good point in the second part of your response. That is one reason that I would like to have 3G, then again I seem to get a lot of calls while pages are loading... it must have to be at a certain point for it to get block. Then again there have been times where I missed them, and then there are the times where I did not know I missed them.

    One other thing I think we should really consider... Apple's 2.5G iPhone loads faster then some other 2.5G phones bc the processor speed and the friendliness of safari (like it states in the article). So would it be fair to say that a 3G iPhone would work exceptionally faster than other 3G phones?
     
  9. aridon macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    #9
    You can't compare web browsing speeds between different phones, different browsers and make a comparison about a different speed standard.

    First of all, mobile safari does an excellent job of not only rendering the full HTML versions of web pages, but it does it fast. If you were to compare 3g PIE to edge safari the differences are going to be minimal. Not because there is no difference in speed between the standards, but because the phones you are comparing are bottlenecked in different places.
     
  10. erandall38 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    #10

    Why not?
    Is 3G on other phones so much faster than the edge on the iPhone that it makes the iPhone not worth it? Thats what some people live by on these forums.

    Well you compare them head to head. If other companies cant build hardware and software that uses the network as efficiently as it should, therefore causing it to load slower network speeds, then no the edge on iPhone is not making it not worth buying because of slow speeds. Thats there fault, they blew it.
     
  11. Jade Cambell macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    #11
    I've noticed that if i'm in a spot of strong reception with my iPhone (downtown Seattle for instance), the EDGE is very, very acceptable. In fact, it's borderline fast! I wouldn't care for anything faster.
     
  12. aridon macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    #12

    Its not what other companies can do, I don't care about them its people saying 3g isn't a big deal because other devices are only a few seconds faster using it. My point is the Iphone will be even faster comparatively. Play with a WM phone on edge and then play with an iphone and there is a huge difference. The same will be true playing with a WM phone on 3g and the iphone on 3g once it comes.

    It will be a pretty big difference and worth the upgrade for many.
     
  13. TurboSC macrumors 65816

    TurboSC

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #13
    3G or not, I'm perfectly content with the EDGE service on the phone. It's slow, yes, but when you actually need to use the EDGE it's manageable.
     
  14. page3 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2003
    Location:
    Vicar of Dibley-land, UK
    #14
    I compared my Sony Ericsson M600i running Opera over T-Mobile 3G to that of my iPhone running Safari over O2 Edge. The iPhone was faster by far - so no complaints on speed. However, 3G coverage is way better than Edge.

    At least I can leave my iPhone checking for email every 15 minutes on GPRS/Edge/WiFi without fear of the battery lasting 15 seconds, like the O2Exec (HTC Universal) I had previously. It might have had 3G and WiFi but battery life, usability and speed was a joke.

    Like everything iPhone related, don't just compare technical specifications, as real world usage differs considerably. :)
     
  15. stevearm macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    #15
    Since the US isn't the centre of the universe, you may wish to note how popular 3G is in Europe... which is VERY popular. Pretty much every handset out these days is 3G enabled. Why wouldn't they be, it's a better technology than EDGE.

    You can watch all the 'comparison' videos in the world, the fact remains, 3G is much faster than Edge and many people have been turned off getting an iPhone for the simple fact that it doesn't have 3G (not to mention a crap camera, no picture messaging, no video recording, no radio......).

    3G on my N95 is blindingly fast, with pages like amazon loading in just a few seconds. 3G would mean youtube, maps and iTunes would be able to run properly in non-Wifi enabled areas, not to mention the fact that you can have multiple connections with 3G.

    Thankfully SJ has realised this flaw and releasing it in iPhone 2
     
  16. tonywob, Dec 11, 2007
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2011
  17. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #17
    Because there has to be something to complain about with every release of any Apple product.
    IE: moo'ing, yellow screen, no 3g, old graphics card.
    Not saying it's not valid, but it's par for the course.
     
  18. erandall38 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    #18
    I see what you mean, so you were agreeing with this idea?

    You are definitly right about that... that plus the no missing call things gets me excited, but batery life is really important to me. I doubt Apple would come out with 3G and no god battery life.


    Man, you got that right.
     
  19. macintel4me macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    #19
    Right now it's a trade-off between faster internet and battery life. I'm looking forward to the 2008 event when this tradeoff no longer exists.
     
  20. stevearm macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    #20
    Just like there has to be some mac fans having a dig at Microsoft products/services for the sake of it.

    Just like there has to be die hard mac fans who are incapable of seeing anything negative about Apple products

    I would say that a lack of 3G, decent camera, picture/video messaging, video recording, flash, photo editing, cut/copy/paste, downloadable emails, high res photo viewing, radio, flash web browsing, Java, and the (official) inability to have your own custom (free) ringtones etc etc gives people every right for people to complain or at least COMMENT about the lack of features in the iphone.
     
  21. macintel4me macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    #21
    Just to name a few... :p
     
  22. rayward macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #22
    Jobs said that they didn't include 3G because the chips were too big, ran too hot and were too thirsty; so that given the relatively low availability of 3G service it was not a need for the iPhone 1.0.

    I have seen articles where these assertions have been put to the test - mostly linked from this forum - and they support Jobs' claims. A 3G chip would be very hard to shoehorn into the iPhone's sleek case, whereas the combo of EDGE and WiFi chips fits...just.

    But cramming a 3G chip in there creates heat issues even before you factor in the additional heat from a 3G chip (and we've all noticed the phone getting hot when using the web features heavily - like for YouTube).

    And 3G chips use more juice than WiFi chips, and much more juice than EDGE chips. In side-by-side tests, 3G phones burned up their batteries much faster than iPhones when performing the same tasks.

    So, when 3G chips get smaller, run cooler, are more efficient and the service is more widely available, Jobs will stick one in an iPhone. Until then, the iPhone is still better, IMHO, than any 3G enabled phone out there.
     
  23. slffl macrumors 65816

    slffl

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #23
    Yes, a great result. We all know how usefull the iPhone is even when using EDGE. I had an EVDO phone before the iPhone and it wasn't even close to being as useful as the iPhone.
     
  24. stevearm macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    #24

    And for the time being we'll be stuck with slower loading pages, and a youtube, wifi music store and google maps apps that don't work on EDGE, the former two, at all.
     
  25. sokrates macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    #25
    I cannot share this opinion at all..... youtube and google maps work flawlessly on EDGE, I don't know where you live and how you're edge connection is, but I was pleasantly surprised by how good it actually works, sure pages some times take longer to load, but youtube and google maps work rather fast in my opinion (of course slower than they would be with hsdpa, but still, it's usable)
    And besides that, EDGE is fine for being on the road and having to check something, when you actually sit down in a café, a restaurant or a train station/airport, they always have wifi.
     

Share This Page