Why no voice control on the 3G 3.0 update

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by Dinalli, Jun 21, 2009.

  1. Dinalli macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    #1
    been puzzling me for a little while. Where as the 3.0 camera and video are hardware releated upgrades.

    I cant really see any reason why Voice control isnt in the 3.0 3G update. I mean they have a mic so why not ?
     
  2. The General macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    #2
    Speech synthesis of this quality requires a lot of processor power. Also, they want people to buy the new iPhone.
     
  3. WilliamG macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Location:
    Seattle
    #3
    I think the reason for a lot of these things missing from the 3G is that the 3G is slow enough already with its processor/128MB RAM. By adding essentially more background apps (which I know the battery % and think voice dial are), it causes more strain on the iPhone 3G and thus an even further degraded experience. Some may argue well they're only small apps, but seriously - every MB of RAM lost is just one further way in which the overall 3G experience is diminished. Apple has to stop it somewhere. The iPhone 3G is already doing too much for its processor/RAM to handle. I mean it can't even handle a few Apple apps open, and then several web pages open and going back and forth without having to reload the entire page!
     
  4. Hunts121 macrumors regular

    Hunts121

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #4
    not sure i buy that, my last two lg phones were perfectly capable of voice commands
     
  5. Maclver macrumors 68020

    Maclver

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    Location:
    36°07′53″N 95°56′14″W
    #5
    but your LG phone didn't have such a superior operating system on it.... ( Which requires lots of processing power )
     
  6. jaltamirano macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    #6
    I really think It's just there to make the 3gS unique...
     
  7. Dinalli thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    #7
    i see your point, however i thought you had to press and hold the home key to open it. So does that mean its not a background app ?
     
  8. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #8
    It's a product differentiation issue, not a memory issue. The voice control software doesn't even run unless you press and hold the button. Once it's launched, it doesn't use that much memory. The CPU can handle it - that's why you can get voice control apps on jailbroken phones.

    Apple simply wanted to make more of a differentiation to encourage upgraders, and it's reasonable - 3G owners can't really complain, since they were never promised it in the first place.
     
  9. golden3159 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2009
    #9
    Wrong.

    Exactly.
     
  10. BaldiMac macrumors 604

    BaldiMac

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #10
    Most likely, Apple's implementation of voice control takes advantage of hardware specific to the 3G S.

    http://daringfireball.net/linked/2009/06/17/3g-s-hardware-thurrott

    Kind of like MMS, they could have implemented it for the older hardware, but they did not want to do the extra work for what they considered to be a lesser experience
     
  11. Scorch07 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    #11
    Could it maybe be a more high-quality microphone on the 3G S?
     
  12. The General macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    #12
    Wrong.

    Exactly.
     
  13. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #13
    Ditto that. My TI-99/4A, which I think I got sometime around when VIC-20's were popular, had better speech synthesis than the iPhone.
     
  14. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    Cabin by a lake
    #14
    Did you mean to say, speech recognition?

    In any case, the iPhone's previous "processor power" should be plenty.

    Windows Mobile's Voice Command does a lot more than iPhone's Voice Control, and yet works fine on slower phones with far less memory.

    There must be another reason.
     
  15. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #15
    Ditto that, too. This is (more or less) "low entropy" voice recognition - the software understands a pre-determined set of commands and words. Based on a small set of commands, it knows you can only be talking about something from your contacts or your itunes library. It's among the simplest types of voice recognition to implement, and the iPhone 3G has more than enough processing power to cope with it.
     
  16. The General macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    #16
    Right, your speech synthesis from the '80s was better than the iPhone 3G S. :rolleyes:
     
  17. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #17
    Speech synthesis (not recognition), yes. There was a star trek cartridge, and you could fire up basic and issue text-to-speech commands that would soun exactly like the characters from the show. Lots of games had very good speech synthesis - all you needed was a little brick that plugged into a slot on the side. It was famous for its speech synthesis, in fact. It ran at something like 4MHz. iPhone should be able to spank it, but it most assuredly does not.
     
  18. The General macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    #18
    First, I know what n speech synthesis and speech recognition are. No need for people to keep asking me that.

    Are you talking about this?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUHVfb7LJpM

    LOL, yeah that's way better than the iPhone. :rolleyes:

    I found a video of the Star Trek game. I can record myself saying "entering sector" and the numbers 1 through 9 and make it seem realistic as well. :rolleyes:

    I did find this, though ... the emphasis and way it talks is great, but the sound quality is garbage.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LN4fYDrQXkc
     
  19. gloss macrumors 601

    gloss

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Location:
    around/about
    #19
    Heh. Radiohead.

    A Pig
    In a Cage
    On Antibiotics.
     
  20. The General macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    #20
    Actually, after watching this video, I see why the last one in my previous post sounded so real.

    Because it WAS real.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVDE-6TtmFQ

    I'm convinced that the speech synthesis on the TI-99/4A is not at all how speech synthesis works now.
     

Share This Page