Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Latency is a huge bottleneck on both the device end and the carrier end. With a chipset and technology that fixed this, Web browsing would be much much faster even at lowers speeds over the existing network. latency decreased on the device end would actually speed up the carrier network as a whole, dropping greatly the number of concurrent open server threads.
 
AT&T's plans for faster 3G running at 7.2 Mbps, up from the 3.6 Mbps speed of the current network.

3.6? Really? Five bars of 3G service right here, and I can only seem to get 2.0 Mbps (which is actually the fastest 3G I've ever seen in Austin...) At my apartment, I hardly get any service (in the middle of the city!)

AT&T needs to work on coverage first, then their user capacity, then can they work on jacking up the speed for everyone. There's no point in having 7.2 Mbps speed if only 4 people can actually connect at that speed at any given time.
 
3.6? Really? Five bars of 3G service right here, and I can only seem to get 2.0 Mbps (which is actually the fastest 3G I've ever seen in Austin...) At my apartment, I hardly get any service (in the middle of the city!)

AT&T needs to work on coverage first, then their user capacity, then can they work on jacking up the speed for everyone. There's no point in having 7.2 Mbps speed if only 4 people can actually connect at that speed at any given time.

they can do both, especially if the report regarding a large part of this speed upgrade is software based.

d I can only seem to get 2.0 Mbps

So if you get that now. Double it. Should make _most_ folks happy...
 
Faster page rendering please.
yeh exactly... N doesn't really solve anything here without a faster processor to actually handle that data. The only thing for N here is wireless range might improve a bit.

It's a bit like gigabit ethernet—unless you have a really tuned system, the difference isn't that much over fast ethernet. A fatter pipe doesn't necessarily mean faster speeds—anyone with a really fast connection will tell you it depends on the other end of the pipe too (the sending server).
 
sounds like new iPhone will be capable of HSDPA.

For those in US, this is something networks in Europe have rolled out over the last 12-18months. A number of devices over here are already capable of using this.

Be good seeing this in next iPhone for sure :cool:

12-18 months? BAHAHAHAHA we've had it waaaaay longer than that!:D:D
 
Is HSDPA+ happening yet (or is that part of LTE)?
Said to top out at 42 Mbit/s downlink.

hmmm...no idea is HSDPA+ has been rolled out yet, but this definately sounds like standard HSDPA

"High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) is a 3G (third generation) mobile telephony communications protocol in the High-Speed Packet Access (HSPA) family, which allows networks based on Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) to have higher data transfer speeds and capacity. Current HSDPA deployments support down-link speeds of 1.8, 3.6, 7.2 and 14.4 Mbit/s. "
 
Telstra's 3G (NextG) network in Australia already supports 21Mbps, and apparently upping it to 42Mbps this year. It covers 99% of Australia's population but costs an arm and a leg to use.
 
June / July can't come soon enough...

My wife's 2 year agreement (we're on a family plan) with t-mobile just expired last week and I've been able to upgrade for a long time.

All I have to do is hold on for about another 90 - 120 days...

In the interim, I can get my :apple: fix with a new 15" MBP I'm planning on getting in the next couple of weeks ;)
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

HSUPA in addition to HSDPA?
 
I find it funny that a lot of people don't jump and discuss about the network, but I guess this isn't HoFo and a consumer end forum.

AT&T has actively deployed 3.6 HSDPA already and 7.2 is TESTING. So it really doesn't matter that your iPhone gets 7.2 HSDPA but no one even gets speedtests of 3.6mbps yet, so ehh.
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

HSUPA in addition to HSDPA?

Usually called HSPA... ;)



As the U stands for uplink and the d stands for downlink
 
I was just guessing though :p

Well, to be fair, it was a good guess...

I always feel sorry for americans when they're getting excited over 3G phones, and compaining of only getting EDGE speeds in certain areas...

Ahh the good 'ole days of 2001 :D
 
Electronista also points to the possibility of a new Broadcom 802.11n chipset being used in the next-generation iPhone to bring increased Wi-Fi speeds.

Other than for the raw 'compatibility' factor with 802.11n, and dual-band operation, there is no reason for it. My iPhone never even scores above 802.11b-capable speeds even when I'm connected to an 802.11g network with available bandwidth over 20 MB/s.
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

@diamond.g
I know, but since they already support HSDPA I thought I'd specifically point out the Uplink portion 
 
802.11n is not going to increase your internet speeds when your broadband connection maxes out at 10Meg anyway. 802.11b is enough for most everyone. And you really don't have much of a need for fast network speeds at home unless you go against Apple's will and jailbreak.
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

@diamond.g
I know, but since they already support HSDPA I thought I'd specifically point out the Uplink portion 

Yes - it will have HSUPA and then some kind of new video feature to take advantage of the uplink speeds, maybe a second camera (on the front) and mobile video chat. Good luck getting a connection at SXSW next year.
 
I'm betting it's quite likely we'd see both draft-N and doublespeed 3G in the next hardware revision of the iPhone.

If they add draft-n wireless, I hope it's compatible w/ more draft-n access points. Last summer, I helped overhaul my school district's wireless network. We installed Cisco access points that has both 2.4 GHz & 5 GHz antennas & is dual band (like the new Airport Extreme Base Stations) so we can use b/g & n at the same time. Unfortunately, Cisco's draft-n APs isn't compatible w/ the district's MacBooks, or so says the district's Network guy. Hopefully, Cisco and/or Apple will release a fix. Wireless network in the district leaves much to be desired (but we have several dozen 4-6 year old iBooks running in each school so that may be part of the problem).
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

I don't think that this will be enough for me to update from my current iPhone. It would be nice to see 802.11n on the phone though but that will really only make a difference if Apple brings about syncing via a wireless network.
 
Who cares...

Yeah, not really impressed. Unless the page rendering speeds up it won't matter much. I was surprised how fast my edge connection was when I tethered it to a computer (jailbroken phone), but the iphone renders web pages so slowly it doesn't matter how fast your connect is at this point, though I guess for downloads it would help a bit.
 
probably not hardware

The gen 2 iPhone is very slow to browse with, even when on wifi. 802.11b/g is infinitely faster than anybody's dsl so bringing it to 802.11n isn't going to make any difference. what they are referring to is a probably a much needed software upgrade.

btw - "the nations fastest 3g network" seems to be just faster than a modem.
 
Wireless N doesn't do downloads any faster than Wireless G. It's the device-to-device traffic that's faster. The only thing Wireless N would do is make it so the iPhone could work on N-only networks, which would be a bonus.

My understanding of the old Airport Extreme's is that is you allow and use g traffic everything is downgraded so transfers from my server to my Apple TV will be a g speed. Hence will the new Airport Extremes dual band.

Althought $179 for a a dual band router is probably a better deal :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.