Why doesn't Apple enable some 3GS features on the 3G?

[Morn]

Voice control may well require the faster CPU, remember the new CPU also now has SIMD instructions, for a computational feature like voice control the new CPU might actually make a massive difference so it's reasonable that it's only on the gs.
Perhaps that 4 year old phone used a DSP processor or something.

But.

2. Battery Meter: They probably think that the battery on the 3G will not display accurate results with the %

No, there are 3rd party apps you can get for the 3G that will already show the battery level as a percentage.

 

[pooryou]

A lot of older phones would actually send your voice to their server and do the processing there, then send the commands back to the phone (thus increasing ARPU in the process). The iPhone does the processing on the phone itself.

 

[thor79]

I don't know why you're being sarcastic, but this is, very simply, the reason the 3GS has some extra software features over the original 3G. They want people to upgrade. It's called business.

Why is my reply on the 3rd page when this was posted both to the 1st and 2nd page? This is the bottom line...they had to draw a line somewhere to give us an incentive to upgrade...that's it. There may be hardware issues which require the 3GS so the phone runs optimally but the primary reason is that they want you to upgrade...end of story.

(jailbreaks can easily get the percentage for the battery. But again...see my above statement.)

 

[BaldiMac]

No, there are 3rd party apps you can get for the 3G that will already show the battery level as a percentage.

The fact that apps can show battery level as a percentage does not speak to its accuracy.

Do you have a better theory? The marketing thing is silly, who is going to upgrade for a different battery meter?!

 

[kdarling]

This has been discussed before. For one voice support is very challenging programatically.

Yes, it has been discussed before.

It has been pointed out that not only are there other iPhone voice recognition apps, but that less powerful phones running Windows Mobile have a more comprehensive voice command available.

So nope, it's not a programming challenge.

At first, I thought perhaps it was because the Voice Control app needed the extra RAM to stay loaded into, so the current app can stay running. But apparently the current app exits? Is that right?

 

[diamond.g]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)



But if someone payed $599.99 for a Phone, Apple should allow the user to use all the capibillitys the hardware can support.

Pfft, what about the 2G owners that payed that price? Should they not get all the features their hardware can do as well? (MMS, A2DP, etc)

Yes, it has been discussed before.

It has been pointed out that not only are there other iPhone voice recognition apps, but that less powerful phones running Windows Mobile have a more comprehensive voice command available.

So nope, it's not a programming challenge.

At first, I thought perhaps it was because the Voice Control app needed the extra RAM to stay loaded into, so the current app can stay running. But apparently the current app exits? Is that right?

No when exiting Voice Control it returns to the program you were running.

 

[-aggie-]

The problem with the voice recognition apps that others say are already available to us is that they need you to unlock your phone, look at your screen, click the app, and then hit the press speak to use it (just too much to have to do while driving). We simply want the ease of use the 3GS has, so I would really like that to be added to the 3G software.

 

[kdarling]

No when exiting Voice Control it returns to the program you were running.

Thank you.

Okay, if the current program doesn't actually exit, then that could mean that Apple is worried that voice control wouldn't always have enough memory to run.

Therefore, from their viewpoint, the extra RAM in the 3GS is required.

What's odd to me is that they overlay the entire screen with their voice control, unlike other phones where you never lose sight of the current app.

 

[GfPQqmcRKUvP]

Therefore, from their viewpoint, the extra RAM in the 3GS is required.

No. It. Isn't. 4 year old phones with processors and memory FAR worse than even the first generation iPhone had voice control that worked quickly, efficiently, and with more breadth than iPhone voice control does. Guys, it's a business decision, stop trying to justify it with all these nonsense theories.

 

[Hawkeye411]

Hey,

I've always wondered why Apple doesn't enable the various 3GS features on the 3G that can be enabled? Here are the features I thought of.

1. voice command
2. battery percentage meter
3. video (like Cycorder)
4. EDIT: Just thought of Accessibility options

Other than a speed and ram bump, there would be very little difference between the 3G and 3GS if they included these options on the 3G. This is one of the reasons I didn't upgrade. The speed is fine for me on the 3G so I don't see how voice command and video justify spending the money for the upgrade.

 

[Acronym]

for a comparission of Cycorder and the 3GS

visit my youtube video iPhone 3G And 3GS Comparision Video

 

[BaldiMac]

No. It. Isn't. 4 year old phones with processors and memory FAR worse than even the first generation iPhone had voice control that worked quickly, efficiently, and with more breadth than iPhone voice control does. Guys, it's a business decision, stop trying to justify it with all these nonsense theories.

Without knowing how Apple has implemented Voice Control and VoiceOver your theory is just as much nonsense. Four year old phones could do email. That doesn't mean that Apple's Mail app could run well on 4 year old hardware.

As has been said before, it's probably a combination of marketing, performance, and added programming time. Apple likely decided that it was not worth the considerable effort to re-engineer the features to work on the 3G considering the marketing advantage and performance issues.

 

[sesnir]

No because it needs a more powerful processor to run.

But doesn't the Google app offer voice command searching? That came out a long time ago...

 

[cenetti]

But doesn't the Google app offer voice command searching? That came out a long time ago...

exactly. It works perfectly on 3G hardware.
if they gave you all those features, how would you be able to justify getting on your knees every year ? pfft !

 

[joro]

Pfft, what about the 2G owners that payed that price? Should they not get all the features their hardware can do as well? (MMS, A2DP, etc)

You bring up a great point which is the fact that Apple is trying to differentiate the 3GS through features such as Voice Control, Battery Indicator, and Video Camera. They can’t consistently build new products into old phones – even if the capability was there – because it would deter people from buying the latest and greatest phone. So from a business standpoint it makes no sense for them to offer these features to the “old” version.

 

[diamond.g]

Thank you.

Okay, if the current program doesn't actually exit, then that could mean that Apple is worried that voice control wouldn't always have enough memory to run.

Therefore, from their viewpoint, the extra RAM in the 3GS is required.

What's odd to me is that they overlay the entire screen with their voice control, unlike other phones where you never lose sight of the current app.

I think the overlay is there as a form of help, if you watch it you will see the beginnings of phrases you can say float by. Others here are right, The Google app did voice recognition, so there isn't a real tech reason why it isn't allowed (much in the same way the 3G can send MMS when on EDGE yet the 2G cannot send MMS at all). It is mainly to get people to upgrade.

 

[mappyman]

But doesn't the Google app offer voice command searching? That came out a long time ago...

The google app, sends your voice to the google servers for processing.

 

[GfPQqmcRKUvP]

Without knowing how Apple has implemented Voice Control and VoiceOver your theory is just as much nonsense. Four year old phones could do email. That doesn't mean that Apple's Mail app could run well on 4 year old hardware.

But I'm not comparing just email to email. I'm comparing two programs with the same set of features and programming challenges (in fact, some of the older programs had more voice functions).

There are two possibilities: Apple made a good business decision and left it off of normal iPhone 3G's OR they're absolutely incompetent at properly coding a voice control app. Your pick.

 

[propropro]

All the third party apps that do voice recognition that I have seen in AppStore, do it just by sending the recorded audio to a server which processes it. iPhone 3GS does it by itself. I think that is a GREAT difference, and I can only hope the make this available to programmers through an API in a future SDK release

 

[firewood]

My 4 year old phone had voice control that was as accurate as the iPhone's. You don't need an ARM Cortex A8 and 256 MB of RAM for limited voice recognition capability.

The question isn't whether some 4 year old software written by somebody else would run on the iPhone (Apple doesn't own that software anyway.) The original posters question was whether the currently existing Apple voice recognition software, as written for the 3GS, could run and thus be enabled on a lesser device, as is. Check the memory footprint before you answer.

 

[GfPQqmcRKUvP]

The question isn't whether some 4 year old software written by somebody else would run on the iPhone (Apple doesn't own that software anyway.) The original posters question was whether the currently existing Apple voice recognition software, as written for the 3GS, could run and thus be enabled on a lesser device, as is. Check the memory footprint before you answer.

Which is why I responded with this:

There are two possibilities: Apple made a good business decision and left it off of normal iPhone 3G's OR they're absolutely incompetent at properly coding a voice control app. Your pick.

Look, if they couldn't put voice control (as it currently exists with its limited set of features) on the 3G then they don't know how to code. I think it's obvious they know how to program, so you're left with one option: They could, but didn't. That realization has one explanation: business.

Am I mad? No, I have a 3GS. Am I surprised? Nope, it's business. But anyone saying the iPhone 3G needs superior hardware is being an apologist (and a naive one at that).

 

[kdarling]

No. It. Isn't. 4 year old phones with processors and memory FAR worse than even the first generation iPhone had voice control that worked quickly, efficiently, and with more breadth than iPhone voice control does.

I already pointed that out. Unless Apple is incompetent, there is likely to be another reason. Could be business as you say. Could be implementation.

Guys, it's a business decision, stop trying to justify it with all these nonsense theories.

Not nonsense. I've been doing multitasking OS's for decades. I first wrote voice recognition code back in 1980.

I give Apple no slack when I think they are making up bogus excuses. But I'm an engineer first, and there could be a valid reason for their decision.

Apple has consistently taken the safe (aka wimpy) path with the iPhone. They would be rightfully worried that an app would use up most of the current memory, and leave nothing for the voice control to use... causing it to fail... thus violating a primary iPhone philosophy.

So from that OS point of view, it follows that they would pre-allocate some of the extra RAM in the 3GS just for voice control use... RAM that older models lack.

 

[ouimetnick]

Pfft, what about the 2G owners that payed that price? Should they not get all the features their hardware can do as well? (MMS, A2DP, etc)



No when exiting Voice Control it returns to the program you were running.

I am using a 2G. Original iPhone 8 GB. $599.99 June 29, 2007

 

[diamond.g]

I already pointed that out. Unless Apple is incompetent, there is likely to be another reason. Could be business as you say. Could be implementation.



Not nonsense. I've been doing multitasking OS's for decades. I first wrote voice recognition code back in 1980.

I give Apple no slack when I think they are making up bogus excuses. But I'm an engineer first, and there could be a valid reason for their decision.

Apple has consistently taken the safe (aka wimpy) path with the iPhone. They would be rightfully worried that an app would use up most of the current memory, and leave nothing for the voice control to use... causing it to fail... thus violating a primary iPhone philosophy.

So from that OS point of view, it follows that they would pre-allocate some of the extra RAM in the 3GS just for voice control use... RAM that older models lack.

I wonder how much RAM it uses, using the sysstatlite app I see that there is 118MB that is not measurable. Too bad it doesn't break that out.

I am using a 2G. Original iPhone 8 GB. $599.99 June 29, 2007

I was too, until I got the 3GS (gave my wife my 8GB to replace her 4GB).

 

[shvartsies]

Voice control takes up too much processor speed.
Those other apps can run on the 3G, but they don't run to the Apple standard.
Can they search music and contacts in such an intuitive interface with such good recognition? No, they cannot.

The battery % however, is baloney.

On my jailbroken 3G when the battery % is 10% I get the 10% left warning.

Also, on the program that they run at the apple store to diagnose your iPhone
(behavior scan), I've seen it say "94% battery left"