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.
Sprint CEO Says iPhone Extends Ability to Offer Unlimited Data
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ive actually found this to be true so far. with my android, wifi was horrible and i only used sprints 3g; now i use wifi 95% of the time with my 4S
Seriously? I've had numerous Android and iOS devices and never noticed a bit of difference on wifi, or how fast the device connected. The Sprint CEO is talking out of his butt and offers no proof to back up his claim. You would be the only Sprint user I ever ran across that preferred Sprint 3G to wifi on any device.
Last edited:
Just going to point out that there is an App I believe called phone usage that can help track down the data. It will tell you which Apps are sucking down the most and it might surpise you where it comes from.
If you are not running any time on wifi email and web browsing can quickly suck up a lot of data.
At the end of day, Android fanboys hate that their POS plastic phone, that barely operates is a data hog.
Let's see what happens when apple destroys GOOGLE by enforcing it's patents for lock screen. Hand me over $50B, better yet $50B + $10 from each android user.
Headlines in a few months, google stock plumpts, due to patent infringement. Carriers cap Android data usuage, and charge premiums for data usuage.
Now that would be justice!
Let's see what happens when apple destroys GOOGLE by enforcing it's patents for lock screen. Hand me over $50B, better yet $50B + $10 from each android user.
Headlines in a few months, google stock plumpts, due to patent infringement. Carriers cap Android data usuage, and charge premiums for data usuage.
Now that would be justice!
Flash Player does not use data inefficiently.
Developers might make it use data inefficiently, but you could do that just as easily with JavaScript.
Also the reason for data ususage so high, is theres more CRACK DEALERS on Android! Hogging up all the data with 2 for 1 plans
This is clearly nonsense. There is no evidence that Android phones "hog data", it's also quite clear that Android phones are not all plastic and function far better than you seem to understand.
While this is outside of the scope of this thread, I do not see that patent being enforceable, simply because someone else had done it before Apple.
Wrong flash is a data hog, and drains battery life! search the web, and do your research
Wrong flash is a data hog, and drains battery life! search the web, and do your research
I don't need to do any research.
Please provide proof that Flash is a "data hog".
You wont be able to.
Flash is an environment that allows developers to write things - primarily in a language called ActionScript.
This web page uses JavaScript, which is very similar to ActionScript, but runs in your web browser (probably Safari).
Flash Player in itself doesn't send or receive any data. It will only do that when the developer programs it to. Unless that developer does something extremely wrong, it will not "hog data".
This web page sends and receives data from your computer using JavaScript, yet it doesn't do that inefficiently - that is because the developers of this site have not made it do so.
It is enforceable, Apple won the patent, what don't you get. They can enforce it, anyway they see fit.This is clearly nonsense. There is no evidence that Android phones "hog data", it's also quite clear that Android phones are not all plastic and function far better than you seem to understand.
Androids are plastic garbage. I've seen enough of them to know, and have one
While this is outside of the scope of this thread, I do not see that patent being enforceable, simply because someone else had done it before Apple.
----------
There such a thing as Google [that's about the only thing that company is good for, is a search engine SMH
]You clearly don't understand the patent system.
Many patents are awarded, but then later found to be invalid.
A product existed that implemented the feature Apple has patented BEFORE Apple applied for the patent.
This is a clear violation of the patent rules.
It should therefore be trivial for the patent to be found invalid in court (as it has been in the Netherlands).
----------
There such a thing as Google that's about the only thing that company is good for, is a search engine SMH
Just to humour you, I tried a search for "flash hogs data" and I found absolutely nothing relevant - probably because it doesn't exist.
Last edited:
Have you ever programmed or used flash before on websites? well I have, and duh the SWF output file is large, unless you break up into multiple swf files, and link them, so a 3MB SWF will take up data duh.
The size of your SWF will entirely depend on what it is doing and how efficiently you have designed it.
Something using data because it absolutely has to does not make it a "data hog".
Using your logic, plain text is a data hog because you could make a really long text file.
How is slower speeds more effective? You loose customers over that - that is lost revenue. Lost revenue is not effective. Everything else is neutral to customers until other customers are using the bandwidth you want to use. Then it becomes your problem and you'd wish these other customers' phones would use less data specifically if it is only due to waste of code etc.
Judas is right. If people aren't using the so-called '3G' network of Sprint, then heck yes, that's EXACTLY what Sprint wants. Every carrier wants your data dollars but prefers to have you on Wifi--it's a no-brainer.
I agree, unfortunately.
Sadly, this is truth. My Sprint Iphone 4s was terribly slow ... too pitiful to even be called an "internet communicator" without WiFi access. It shouldn't take 30 seconds for me to pull up a baseball score on a mobile phone website. That's horrendous in my eyes.
On the plus side, Wifi was instantly accessible on my home Wifi network and ran great! Still, I needed the outside data and Sprint wasn't cutting it, therefore I'm no longer a Sprint customer.
Thats because thats seriously the worst android phone out and one of the slowest as well.
T-Mobile: 2GB of data before our speed is throttled. Sprint: Speed throttled at 0KB!
So Sprint advertises that T-mobile throttles customer speed at 2GB... That is true. You get two whole GB of data before your speed gets throttled. That's TWO WHOLE GB MORE than Sprint offers. At what I'm seeing now, Sprint is throttling our speed at 0KB! If only T-Mobile gets the iPhone...
So Sprint advertises that T-mobile throttles customer speed at 2GB... That is true. You get two whole GB of data before your speed gets throttled. That's TWO WHOLE GB MORE than Sprint offers. At what I'm seeing now, Sprint is throttling our speed at 0KB! If only T-Mobile gets the iPhone...
Probably all the same stuff that's getting sent when people complain about their iPhones sending hundreds of megs of phantom data.
I have no idea though, since my 3Gs and Focus both use single digit megs of data per month when I'm not travelling.
So, if I understand that correctly, the iPhone uses less data transfer doing the same job i.e. uses less resources for the same result i.e. performs better? If I have 2 cars, one using a 5.0l V8 to get 200HP and 10mil/gal and another one has a 5.0l V8 with 500HP and 15mil/gal, I would say the second one performs better.
Especially if you have a limited network speed, you wan the phone which gets most out of it. Therefore it performs better.
Sure, for your particular analogy, yeah. But when somebody says "performs better", they have to say what the metric is.
If you had a 2.5L 200HP 30MPG car, and a 5.0L 400HP 15MPG car, which one performs better? Answer: It depends on what you care about.
iOS and Android arn't directly comparable. iOS is certainly more efficient. Android is more flexible. Neither metric guarantee that a user will get more out of the phone unless you had a particular task to compare with.
Now, for what I do, I know that my iPhone 4 performs much better than my Nexus S. And for a particular friend, Honeycomb/Xoom works better for him than his iPad. But can any of us say which device is definitely better? Only if you specify the actual benchmark.
Actually, there is. If you know about how and why the iOS push notification system is designed the way it is, and understand that Cloud-to-Device (made available on Froyo) implements the same thing, you'll know why. It's the flip side of why do-as-you-wish multitasking on Android isn't all fun and games as people make it sound.
The basic summary is that prior to 2.2, the only way for an app to receive background notifications was to write their own background process that communicates with whatever server the service needs. The process would run in the background and poll through the data connection.
Since most developers straight up suck at implementing efficient persistent network connections, most of the daemons would start and stop the network interface as they please to contact their server. So the phone's radio would turn on, connect to the network, initiate a TCP connection to a server, and then tear it down every x number of minutes. That overhead of starting up the connection and tearing it down is practically half the data transferred when doing a simple poll. (if the poll was larger, then that developer is even more of a moron.)
Now, that's one app. What if say I had 2 apps on a Eclair phone which polled. One at a rate of 5 minutes, one at a rate of say 15 minutes. What if they didn't start and stop at the exact same time? Say 1 minute apart?
At 0 minute: App A uses the network.
At 1 minute: App B uses the network.
At 5 minutes: App A uses the network.
At 10: A.
At 15: A.
At 16: B.
... and so on.
The time it takes to bring up a data connection and connect with the network is about 2 seconds. Likewise, taking it down is about 1 second. The phones don't do this bring up/teardown within every second though. It's actually like over a minute or two in order to make sure that while you're reading the page and about to click something, it doesn't cost them another 3 seconds. So once it's started up, it might wait for about a minute or two...
Which means, in that example, the radio stays up in between 1 and 5 for another minute. 16-20 for another minute.
What about a third app? That could overlap. Or it could make things worse.
Pretty soon, with just 4 apps, your radio might be operating half the time your phone is sitting in your pocket. How easy is it make it to 4 apps? Gmail, Whatsapp, Facebook, GoogleVoice. Done.
Of course this is an example since timeout, network connection time, and all that can vary from model to model and carrier to carrier. But it's there in general.
So that situation was pretty much guaranteed prior to Android 2.2. In Android 2.2, Google copied Apple's push notification backend design and provide that as a service. The problem is, if the developer of the apps don't switch to using it, they'll still do the lame stuff they did in older Android phones.
What's so good about APNS and Cloud-to-Device?
Simple, it reduces overhead (less data sent), reduces the amount of time the network connection needs to be on (less battery life used, less time spent on the network to accomplish same goal), and less work for the developer since they don't need to learn about how to make their own background notification system.
How does it work?
Apps who need to get notifications connect to a server. The server gathers all of these together. The phone has one service designed to connect with the notification server whenever possible. Instead of starting up a TCP connection, it can send UDP which is less data sent.
Instead of everybody polling whenever they want to, the phone's service will coordinate when the poll so that all of the apps get their data in one go.
When the phone is already online, the phone side of things knows that it's not a problem to poll sooner.
When the phone is idle, it can slow down polls to save battery power.
Combined together, it just ends up being better for everybody.... as long as people use it.
Apple forced developers to use this through the lack of other options and the App Store approval process. This is good.
Google implemented this late, and has no way of encouraging its use. Heck, even in Google's own Android apps, it seems questionable that all of them are using it as well.
At any rate, this goes to show you one of the reasons that iPhones use less network data than Android and get better battery life, while trying to accomplish the exact same thing.
Agreed, not to mention that in the previous post about Sprint's network many a user posted their speedtest.net results and they consistently showed much greater than the .05kb that people are claiming.
I am sure living in the middle of nowhere will help you NOT get the speeds of a person in a major metropolitan area . . . but then again, I've spent time in the middle of nowhere and have always had pretty decent speeds on Sprint.
Along with Mattie, I've also had 1 bar and gotten YouTube and Netflix streams just fine.