Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

Anyone else realize that the iPhone 3G has barely enough RAM to run what is going on already? Think about it... if they added voice command, that would be one more background (and processor intensive) app that they'd have to run on the limited 3G hardware configuration.

Next, the percentage indicator isn't very accurate on the iPhone 3G

Also, I think the accessibility options are on the 3GS because it has the *power* to use them without slowing down the rest of the OS.

I think you have no idea how limited the iPhone 3G is hardware-wise. The iPhone OS keeps getting bigger and hungrier... it's not 1.1.4 anymore... it's a big boy now and you *need* better hardware if you want more features.
 
TheSpaz said:
Anyone else realize that the iPhone 3G has barely enough RAM to run what is going on already? Think about it... if they added voice command, that would be one more background (and processor intensive) app that they'd have to run on the limited 3G hardware configuration.

I think you have no idea how limited the iPhone 3G is hardware-wise. The iPhone OS keeps getting bigger and hungrier... it's not 1.1.4 anymore... it's a big boy now and you *need* better hardware if you want more features.
Click to expand...

It's just not hardware limited. There's really nothing else I can say. My old Windows Mobile phones with far worse processors, with far less RAM, with hungry and memory leaking applications, and with multi-tasking and background processes had more voice command functionality than the 3GS. By saying it's the hardware you're saying Apple is incompetent in programming because that would be the onlyl explanation. That or it was a business decision. Your choice, again.

I can't believe people still believe it's the hardware after Apple released a commercial dedicated to the voice command functionality of the 3GS. It's pretty darn clear what's going on.
 
I don't know where people are getting the idea that the percentage indicator was not accurate on the 3G, it was always accurate since 2.0.

There is no reason for apple to leave that one out IMO.
 
Badandy said:
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).
Click to expand...

They are not necessarily the same challenges. Apple likely implemented a robust voice system they could handle voice control and accessibility through VoiceOver with the ability to scale to more complicated functions in the future. Maybe not, but unless you have inside knowledge, you can't call it the same.

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.
Click to expand...

Or they programmed it to take advantage of hardware features that do not exist in the 3G, and did not want to go through the effort of backporting.

shvartsies said:
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"
Click to expand...

That's fine. The question is whether you have a better explanation as to why they left if off.
 
The real reason is they needed more features to make the 3G-S seem like a better upgrade.

It's like no MMS on the 2G.

Just cripple the software.

Apple is the king of doing this kind of stuff.


Just wait for hackers to put these features on the older phones it will happen.
 
Chaos123x said:
The real reason is they needed more features to make the 3G-S seem like a better upgrade.

It's like no MMS on the 2G.

Just cripple the software.

Apple is the king of doing this kind of stuff.
Click to expand...

Apple is the king of this stuff? :confused: The only time they really crippled software to differentiate products was when the iPod touch first came out. They realized it was stupid and stopped doing it. Microsoft may wear the crown... as evidenced by the multiple versions of Windows!

Just wait for hackers to put these features on the older phones it will happen.
Click to expand...

Huh? These features are already available on jailbroken phones. I'd guess it will require significant programming to get Apple's Voice Control to work on a 3G.
 
BaldiMac said:
Apple is the king of this stuff? :confused: The only time they really crippled software to differentiate products was when the iPod touch first came out. They realized it was stupid and stopped doing it. Microsoft may wear the crown... as evidenced by the multiple versions of Windows!



Huh? These features are already available on jailbroken phones. I'd guess it will require significant programming to get Apple's Voice Control to work on a 3G.
Click to expand...

You obviously never bought a Mac to use with Pro Apps.
 
BaldiMac said:
I've never used Pro Apps, so I have no idea what your point is. :)
Click to expand...

They just turn off features depending on what type of mac you have. Usually way before it's outdated or unable to run the program.


They are masters at creating clear divides in there product lines.

I wish they only did that kind of stuff because the old hardware just could not handle it, never been a fan of artificially crippling hardware with software.

I bought the 3G-S for the actual upgrade (the speed) I could really care less about the voice control and video which could be run on the 2g phone.
 
The fact is... nobody knows the REAL reasons Apple left the software off of the 3G.

All I know is that the 3G is already slow enough without Voice Control.

Also, they're not going to be able to sell the 3GS on the point of "it's faster" alone. They have to give it a different set of features so that the non-nerds like it too.
 
WOW!!! I come back the next afternoon just to see 70 more posts. I wasn't really expecting that. I'll have to read it all now.

Thanks guys for the great response, and that includes those who disagree with me. :)

BaldiMac said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you realized it and did it on purpose, but you just helped my argument by saying that Apple chose not to put it based on time they would have to spend, instead of a hardware limitation.

BaldiMac said:
Or they programmed it to take advantage of hardware features that do not exist in the 3G, and did not want to go through the effort of backporting.
Click to expand...

So you're also saying that Apple didn't want to go to the effort. Make up your mind or don't say anything, if you don't mind.

BaldiMac said:
Apple is the king of this stuff? :confused: The only time they really crippled software to differentiate products was when the iPod touch first came out. They realized it was stupid and stopped doing it. Microsoft may wear the crown... as evidenced by the multiple versions of Windows!
Click to expand...

I'd actually give that award to Verizon. :D

As of now, here is my temporary conclusion. For those of you who think the 3GS is a major upgrade, IT'S NOT!!! All it has is a faster processor and more RAM, apart from the capacity improvement. Everything else (as of now) is a software feature.
 
It's like no MMS on the 2G.
Click to expand...

That could just be a matter of trying to reduce load on EDGE networks. AT&T has been really wanting to be move the GSM spectrum over to 3G too, which means they want to reduce capacity on EDGE to give better 3G service.
 
vinay427 said:
I'm not sure if you realized it and did it on purpose, but you just helped my argument by saying that Apple chose not to put it based on time they would have to spend, instead of a hardware limitation.
Click to expand...

I've been saying the same thing the whole time - Apple's implementation of the voice functions probably requires the new hardware. Of course they could devote significant resources to re-engineer the feature to work on the 3G. At some point the following questions need to be answered within Apple.

-Can we implement this feature on the 3G in a way that meets our quality standards?
-Will the decrease in quality of the feature degrade the experience of the 3G owner more than having the feature makes him happy?
-Can the resources we devote to this project be better used somewhere else?
-And, of course, the popular, would we be better served by not taking the time to make this feature work in order to differentiate the 3GS?

So you're also saying that Apple didn't want to go to the effort. Make up your mind or don't say anything, if you don't mind.
Click to expand...

We are all just speculating here. I can think that more than one scenario is a possibility! And a combination of reasons is likely.

As of now, here is my temporary conclusion. For those of you who think the 3GS is a major upgrade, IT'S NOT!!! All it has is a faster processor and more RAM, apart from the capacity improvement. Everything else (as of now) is a software feature.
Click to expand...

Well except for the compass. And the camera. And the weight. And the bluetooth version. And the battery. And the processor features.
 
Actually I've just thought of another point here, the iPhone 3G chipset is the Infineon X-Gold 608. It's the same chipset on both the 3G and 3G S. And infineon says it supports 7.2mbit.
Yet on the iPhone 3G, it apparently has been crippled to 3.6mbit!
Ok so maybe that phone's biggest bottleneck was the CPU and not the 3G connection, but still this is a crippling of hardware.
http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/channel.html?channel=ff80808112ab681d0112ab6ab94205ef
 
BaldiMac said:
We are all just speculating here. I can think that more than one scenario is a possibility! And a combination of reasons is likely.

Well except for the compass. And the camera. And the weight. And the bluetooth version. And the battery. And the processor features.
Click to expand...

More than one scenario doesn't work when you're arguing for just one side.

Compass: fine
Camera: fine
Weight: It's heavier, unless you feel the heft makes it feel more solid.
Bluetooth version: Not aware, can you explain?
Battery: Really only offsets the additional power consumed by the faster stuff inside.
Processor features: I mentioned speed, and the rest won't really help the user directly AFAIK. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Morn said:
Actually I've just thought of another point here, the iPhone 3G chipset is the Infineon X-Gold 608. It's the same chipset on both the 3G and 3G S. And infineon says it supports 7.2mbit.
Yet on the iPhone 3G, it apparently has been crippled to 3.6mbit!
Ok so maybe that phone's biggest bottleneck was the CPU and not the 3G connection, but still this is a crippling of hardware.
http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/channel.html?channel=ff80808112ab681d0112ab6ab94205ef
Click to expand...

Interesting. Very interesting... :D

This just says that the 3G uses that.
 
lots_of_money.gif


That is why. :D
 
Badandy said:
It's just not hardware limited. There's really nothing else I can say. My old Windows Mobile phones with far worse processors, with far less RAM, with hungry and memory leaking applications, and with multi-tasking and background processes had more voice command functionality than the 3GS. By saying it's the hardware you're saying Apple is incompetent in programming...
Click to expand...

That's exactly right.

Some of the smaller Objective-C libraries are larger than the entire ROM of a Palm Pilot, which allowed faster PIM usage with only 128 KB (not MB) of RAM and a CPU over 100 times slower than a 3GS. An Apple II could do voice synthesis using only 48 KB of RAM and 1 MHz CPU.

No way could they do that now (with their current methodology and requirements). Not even on a 3G. 3GS required.
 
This is called marketing strategy, all of the new features in 3GS supposedly should be on the first generation iPhone (it's capable in terms of hardware/software minus magnetometer).
 
Like loads of people have said it, the 3G is capable of all these things. However if they enabled it all on the 3G it would make the 3G S look even more of a pathetic update than it already is. The 3G S is just so Apple would make it to the front of News Papers.

And because the PALM Pre was dominating the headlines.
 
Nicolasdec said:
Like loads of people have said it, the 3G is capable of all these things. However if they enabled it all on the 3G it would make the 3G S look even more of a pathetic update than it already is.
Click to expand...

I know you're trolling, but I'll bite.

The 3GS is one of the most worthwhile updates I've ever made to an electronic device. This is due to the speed. It changes the way you interact with the phone. Things are opened and closed instantly, I'm more apt to do more complex things because it takes barely any time at all, and rendering and caching on Safari are far faster and more effective.
 
vinay427 said:
3. There is Cycorder that works fine.
Click to expand...


Apple doesnt make products that work fine. They make products that work well. Cycorder is not a very good application. it is NOT a good video recorder. At least to apple' standards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back