Ha ha.
I would imagine all of the readers that do not live in the US are INCREDIBLY bored with US carrier talk. You poor people.
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.
Verizon iPhone to Ship in A Few Weeks with Unlimited Data Plans?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ha ha.
I would imagine all of the readers that do not live in the US are INCREDIBLY bored with US carrier talk. You poor people.
All? I had an iPhone 3GS for a few months. I don't remember using this feature. It may be a deal breaker for you, it's certainly not important to everyone. I'd like to get an iPhone again, but it's not because I want to access data and voice at the same time.
I am so sick of hearing about this. Is there a way to filter stories on the main page? I couldn't care less about american cell carriers. We've had the iPhone on every network here for ages, even the CDMA one who installed an overlay to run GSM phones.
Sounds like you're talked into going with Verizon. Cool. See ya!
Oh, and you're right, AT&T will NEVER modify their usage charges to stay competitive with the competition that has the exact same popular phone. No way would they do that. "Competition" doesn't exist. All companies operate in a vacuum and never offer incentives to lure customers away. The policies that AT&T have now are set in stone, they can never ever ever change.
/sarcasm
what do you mean slower speeds? Didn't VZ just upgrade part of their network to 4G?
Where do you know about data and voice access not being concurrent?
1. Yes they did upgrade to 4G, but the chances of Apple putting out a 4G iPhone 4 are very slim. If they don't the iPhone on Verizon will work on EVDO which in the real world gets about 1.5 Mbps. AT&T has there 3G network running at 7.2 Mbps in most places now so in the real world you see anywhere between 3 - 4 Mbps.
2. CDMA doesn't split up Voice and Data like GSM does so you can't talk and use data at the same time unless you are on wifi.
I sooooo agree with you on this one. Seriously, if I had possibilities, money, I'd sue the hell out of all the companies that misuse the word "unlimited" (even with fine print).
It's like buying a diamond ring in a box that reads "diamond really is a crystal".
Or like buying an alcohol-free drink for a baby with a fine print that reads "alcohol-free really is 10%".
Stupid.
Oh, I'd never argue against free features, whether I'd use them or not. For the same reason, I like having Flash and a free app market. But those things are nothing compared to being able to have solid voice or data connections.
Obviously I was talking about data connections, not voice. And yes, ATT uses WiFi to make up for their lack of 3G coverage.
Forget Verizon. Even Jobs used WiFi as an excuse for not having 3G in the first iPhone:
"The iPhone switches to any known Wi-Fi network when it senses one. What we've found is that Edge is terrific for e-mail and basic Internet usage. When people need more speed, there's Wi-Fi. The nice thing about Wi-Fi is it's way faster than 3G. - http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/corporatenews/2007-06-28-jobs-stephenson-qa_N.htm?csp=34Steve Jobs, June 2007"
Nope. You're confusing SVDO with Enhanced EVDO. SVDO requires no radio network change, since it's basically a device using two radios. What it might require, is some billing tricks (or not), since the easiest way to implement it would be to give each person two cell numbers, one for voice and a secret one for data.
True for heritage accounts............... not true for new accounts.
cheers to the longs
johnG
The reason we have limits on usage is the same reason gas pipelines blow up in California, power blackouts occur more frequently in US, and water pipelines are leeching poisons... companies' pursuit for ever greater profits.
Utility companies are making large profits by cutting maintenance and upgrade schedule, which is great for short-term profits (and the stock prices) but bad for long term profits (hence the likely need for gov't bailouts to utility companies --- too big to fail...)
ATT, VZ, and other companies are following the same business model. Unless there is a very large carrot in front of their noses, they will not upgrade their networks but rather limit usage to maximize customer base...
On another note, is it true that European cellular networks are far superior to US networks (in terms of speed, technology used)??
Utility companies are making large profits by cutting maintenance and upgrade schedule, which is great for short-term profits (and the stock prices) but bad for long term profits (hence the likely need for gov't bailouts to utility companies --- too big to fail...)
ATT, VZ, and other companies are following the same business model. Unless there is a very large carrot in front of their noses, they will not upgrade their networks but rather limit usage to maximize customer base...
On another note, is it true that European cellular networks are far superior to US networks (in terms of speed, technology used)??
Yes
(CDMA is old technology)
Define "old technology". GSM is older.
You are obviously using outdated information.
Feature Phones &
3G Smartphones
(email and web for
BlackBerry/Smartphone) $15 150 MB $15 per 150MB Included
$29.99 Unlimited Included
My AT&T iPhone rarely sees speeds over 1mb and they usually top out around 1.5mb. SO yeah...not exactly kicking Verizon's butt as many of you would like us to believe.
And you don't know what Verizon's CDMA can do. You don't know if they implemented VoRa or SVDO with the iPhone. Why don't you wait until Tuesday...then if it's not there you can criticize all you like.
We have no idea how much power a 4G chip uses yet. Thats not even an assumption, it's pure guessing.
And the network is the same size as AT&T's 3G network was at the time of the iPhone 3G launch.
I'm not saying it will be 4G, I have no idea. But you are making some major assumptions.
No, a fact is that without a network change AT&T can implement SVDO.
A rumor is that Verizon has already changed their network to implement VoRa.
If either is true, we're covered.
So, when will we see the first Verizon CDMA iPhone get jail-broken to work on the Sprint CDMA Network?
Problem is getting Sprint to add the ESN to their database. We'll see, they may change their tune for the iPhone.
Did you even read the article? It's $30/month for unlimited (NO cap) data
I'm still so lost as to why people make posts that are completely uniformed. Go read up a little before posting here. CDMA has support for voice and data now. We'll just have to see on Tuesday if Verizon and/or Apple implemented it.
Seriously? Who uses the WiFi? It's SOOO limited!
AND MUCH slower data all over the place
Not according to my speedtest results. Mine are on par w/ my Verizon buddies.
Yes
You can't. Based on what I looked up, looks like the poster added that in since it doesn't say that on Verizon's website. Or perhaps they copied the data plans for aircards?
Exactly what is untested about a network with 92M users with more laptop users and high usage Android users? According to reports a few months ago, they already handle more data than AT&T as well.
Fixed that for ya.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
I am extremely educated. And I take people for their word. An educated person would ask that companies use the truth for a sales pitch not implying "hey everyone -get your unlimited data plan!" and not be able to provide for all those that jump on it and use it. It's kinda like this push for all things digital (ie streaming (subpar) hd video), downloading of software, texting til cows come home, etc. and now with data caps getting smaller and smaller though stating unlimited and then getting gouged for it. How does your education jive with your cap and gown?
cameronjpu said:
I am extremely educated. And I take people for their word. An educated person would ask that companies use the truth for a sales pitch not implying "hey everyone -get your unlimited data plan!" and not be able to provide for all those that jump on it and use it. It's kinda like this push for all things digital (ie streaming (subpar) hd video), downloading of software, texting til cows come home, etc. and now with data caps getting smaller and smaller though stating unlimited and then getting gouged for it. How does your education jive with your cap and gown?
Dude, what are you talking about? I have a droid and the plan is $15 for 150mb and $29.99 for unlimited...no 5gb cap. The 5gb cap is for aircards on laptops, NOT smartphones.
You need to get your facts straight.
Last edited:
Lots of good points made from both sides. Lots of great info, fanboyism, and all that good stuff.
My only comment is the few times Visual Voicemail has come up. With Google Voice why even worry about it? Take your voicemail box from carrier to carrier w/ it, and it'll visual voicemail you via a text (or I believe they finally released an ios app, correct?). So even if Verizon doesn't offer it free it's not like there's not an easy option. At least IMHO.
I'm going to leave off my speculation until Tuesday as I quit my job in the Cellular industry a few years ago so my touch w/ things is getting out of date on how Verizon is configured, and CDMA updates post 2008.
My only comment is the few times Visual Voicemail has come up. With Google Voice why even worry about it? Take your voicemail box from carrier to carrier w/ it, and it'll visual voicemail you via a text (or I believe they finally released an ios app, correct?). So even if Verizon doesn't offer it free it's not like there's not an easy option. At least IMHO.
I'm going to leave off my speculation until Tuesday as I quit my job in the Cellular industry a few years ago so my touch w/ things is getting out of date on how Verizon is configured, and CDMA updates post 2008.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
You get it! You totally get it. Bet you have a PHD... glad you see it. I was accused of being uneducated for thinking unlimited should be just that. But I guess anyone who believes words don't mean what they say. Well who knows what they mean by uneducated. LOL
Im just sayin'. LOL
PBF said:
You get it! You totally get it. Bet you have a PHD...
glad you see it. I was accused of being uneducated for thinking unlimited should be just that. But I guess anyone who believes words don't mean what they say. Well who knows what they mean by uneducated. LOL Im just sayin'. LOL
Again, WRONG...unlimited is unlimited, I know folks on Verizon who use 10gb a month, no overage....so see my screenshot above and do some research. Again, the 5gb is for mobile broadband = laptop aircards.
Yes, the very same reason. If everyone on ATT used 20GB then service would be much more reliable. And if only everyone used more power and paid less for it in CA, there would never be blackouts. Right.
I'm just a bystander without a dog in this fight
but my curiosity was piqued, so I did some Googling, and it appears that NKT is correct: SVDO is a new phone chipset feature available in more recent Qualcomm CDMA2K 'sets that has nothing to do with the network! So no additional network support or upgrades are needed for SVDO handsets to support simultaneous voice + data usage on a given network.This surprised me because I did remember, back when Verizon first started rolling out EVDO services, reading about EVDO (with the "DO" standing for "Data Only") and it being compared to the forthcoming EVDV ("DV" == "Data+Voice") standard which was going to allow for a circuit-switched voice channel and packet-switched data channel to both operate simultaneously within a single "EV" session. EVDV was never deployed by any of the U.S. IS-95/CDMA2K carriers, and in fact I've not read anything that suggests it ever got off the ground, period.
From what I've been reading about SVDO, though, it sounds like kind of a hack.
The reason that non-SVDO chipsets cannot do data and voice simultaneously is because the entire 1.25MHz "channel" has to be wholly owned by either the CDMA 1x voice session, or the EVDO data session. They can't share or partition the session in any way, a problem that EVDV would have solved by introducing a voice component to the new "3G" version of CDMA2000. Instead, because EVDO is "Data Only," voice calls get handled by the same 2G service that handled voice before (1xRTT), and then when you want to use data, your phone baseband has to "train up" to 3G service (EVDO). (I am still unclear about whether perhaps the old CDMA2K 1xRTT "2G" data service could operate simultaneously on the same carrier with a 1xRTT voice session. If so, then it is rather amusing that where "2G" GSM [EDGE] did not allow simultaneous voice and data usage only to have "3G" GSM [UMTS/WCDMA] solve that problem, CDMA2K went in the opposite direction and LOST the same feature that GSM gained, and which CDMA once had...).
Without either EVDV or something akin to the aforementioned VoRA (packetized voice; like VoIP but without the "IP" part, heh), the CDMA2000 standard by itself cannot solve this problem. There is nothing in the standard that allows 2G voice and 3G data to share the same carrier.
So how does SVDO work? Well, it seems that what clever Qualcomm has done in their latest chipsets is to include two complete RF chains! Meaning: two separate radio transmitters and two separate receivers that operate independently of each other. So if you are doing just voice, or just data, you are only using one radio. But if you do voice + data at the same time, you are actually using two separate radio transmitters in your phone simultaneously!
...which is what I meant when I said that SVDO sounds kind of like a hack. I could be wrong and they may have done an incredible job making this work efficiently (at the very least, I'm sure they managed to get both RF chains on a single chip die, otherwise SVDO would also be a nightmare for handset manufacturers to engineer around if they have tight space requirements, like Apple surely would in a CDMA version of the iPhone), but it sounds to me like a voice + data session on an SVDO handset is going to be a battery's worst nightmare, whereas I'm pretty sure that on a UMTS/HSPA handset, the baseband doesn't have to work any harder than normal whether you use one service, or the other, or both at the same time.
(For those in the know: do SVDO handsets have two distinct ESNs, one per radio? So a single SVDO phone would appear to the cellular network as TWO distinct devices? If not, then how would SVDO not at least require a minor software upgrade on the carrier's equipment to work properly?)
-- Nathan
Huh? Me and my roommate have been doing exactly that (have AT&T's cheapest and are on our second set of iphones). My mom just did that (she has the 15 minute data plan plus some cheap voice plan that she has grandfathered in for a long time, they don't even offer her voice plan anymore).
I've never seen AT&T care what voice plan you have, just that you have a data plan.
And from what I understand from some one who has Verizon (but honestly I'm not sure how much she understood her own plan to be fair), you have to get text with your data. Which does make Verizon cheaper if you want both (least her plan was). But if you don't want to pay much extra for texting (rather pay nothing at all for none if you can't get it for very cheap), AT&T is cheaper cause texting is seperate. For some few of us, that works. It's not that I wouldn't like having texting, it's not something I find worth paying that much for. I'd rather not have it at all if I can't get a really good price on it (even Verizon's deal of buying both together is not cheap enough for me honestly). I mean like I'd pay 10 bux extra for enough of it that I don't have to worry I'd go over the limit. It's just not important to me *shrug*.
Agreed. BBB isn't really the best source. I will point out though, and once again not the greatest source, that polls on this forum seem to always show people preferring AT&T despite seeing all the AT&T hate/Verizon love on this forum. Every poll I've seen people put up asking if people would stay with AT&T or go to Verizon if given the choice more people say they'd stay with AT&T (or there is one that asks carrier of your choice, AT&T has the lead, followed by Verizon, who both have large leads over Sprint or T-Mobile). So it says to me (for at least this forum) that what we're seeing is that AT&T haters are just more loud mouthed, not that there are more of them.
Me? I've been with Cingular/AT&T a long time. I've never really had an issue with them and seen no real reason I'd change (unless some one else had a phone that was tempting enough, but even so I tend to prefer not to have to switch as it is a hassle and I have no real reason to dislike AT&T so it would have to be a very good phone).
Only carrier I actively dislike is Sprint. And to be fair that was 8 years ago so for all I know they've improved (I never could understand a word my parents said when they called me on their Sprint phones, I was happy when they went to Cingular cause all the sudden I could understand them. They didn't have disconnected calls, just very very staticky ones). I'd suspect they have improved cause at the time most people I talked to had the same problem with Sprint so I couldn't see them surviving this long if they stayed that bad (but I bet it's why they are so small now they have to be really competitive with prices to keep up).
I'll say this, if they do offer FT over 3G, it will make quite the statement on the confidence in the network. What an awesome selling point! It will be truly interesting to see what they do. I won't place a bet either way.
That would be Ivan Seidenberg...the current and STILL CEO. Perhaps he's a bit embarassed...but his career was not exactly harmed.
We put up with the chatter about every other network in the world. You know what I did? Ignored those stories. Perhaps I should have gone in and made a snyde remark about how the stories are soooo boring and I'm sick of seeing them?
No, I'm on the fence. And yes, I truly believe AT&T will hold their ground. They know that Verizon will eventually follow their original plan and moved to tiered data.
I call BS. I've never seen those speeds. IT's 100% NOT 7.2Mbps and the 3-4 Mbps is NOT in MOST places. I spend my time in several large cities including AT&T's home turf and I don't see 3-4 Mbps. PCMag put them at 1.79-2.75 Mbps. Being generous that's 2-3, not 3-4. Either way, I don't even experience the 2-3 here in Dallas and the idea of 7.2 is a joke.
I think you got that backwards; BECAUSE CDMA splits up voice and data on separate channels, you can't talk and use data at the same time. However, there are solutions available to address this now.
Yes, this irks me to no end!
Thank you...I should have done that.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
It does cause harm on the wallet when they gouge you. But I expect you must have the cash to freely hand over to those that don't deliver.
Just saying.
cameronjpu said:
It does cause harm on the wallet when they gouge you. But I expect you must have the cash to freely hand over to those that don't deliver.
Just saying.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
I love the word irk!!
I love the word irk!!