1. ad19's Avatar
    Has anyone done a speed comparison between CDMA and HSPA. I now my bridge browser is pretty slow but I am just wondering how big factor the CDMA network speeds are playing into this.
    05-31-11 01:37 PM
  2. rlarsen462's Avatar
    It's not exactly blazing on AT&T either through my 9700.
    05-31-11 01:41 PM
  3. papped's Avatar
    None of the current BBs support even 7.2mbps HSPA, so it's kind of moot until the new devices launch.
    05-31-11 01:47 PM
  4. my_handle's Avatar
    Would it be different since bridge is BT not wifi?
    05-31-11 02:13 PM
  5. papped's Avatar
    If it's BT 3.0, yeah it would matter.
    05-31-11 02:16 PM
  6. grahamf's Avatar
    If it's BT 3.0, yeah it would matter.
    ...but it's not Bluetooth 3.0. iirc it's BT 2.1+EDR
    05-31-11 02:46 PM
  7. papped's Avatar
    Yeah, even with EDR though, you would still likely gain some benefit from HSDPA phones higher than 3.6 (since none of them probably even hit 3.6 realistically).

    More likely that a 7.2 or 14.4 phone would get closer to the data rate of 2.0 + EDR than a 3.6 phone.
    05-31-11 03:37 PM
  8. BestBuyAndrew's Avatar
    HSPA (or GSM for now) typically has higher speeds than CDMA in the data category anyways.
    It's the way the two different network types prioritize their data connections.
    Once the new phones are able to use HSPA+, I assume there would be a vast difference, but bluetooth 2.1 does inhibit that ability to transfer data. We'll have to wait and see.
    05-31-11 03:42 PM
  9. q649's Avatar
    I think it's a good time to resurrect this thread. Anyone have one of the new
    HSPA+ devices to perform a test with?

    Here's the problem: Bluetooth will now be the bottleneck. (Edit: just noticed that
    BestBuyAndrew) had the exact same realization above.
    08-03-11 02:33 PM
  10. HaTaX's Avatar
    Remember, the PB is using TI's WiLink 7.0 chip (WL1283C). That chip is listed as supporting Bluetooth 4.0.

    If they updated the drivers, we could see much better bridge performance down the road. Not too sure if we'd see this soon though considering all the projects they've currently got going for the PB.
    08-03-11 03:19 PM
  11. 2001bmw330xi's Avatar
    But then the question is - up to what level of bluetooth do the new OS 7 devices support? If they are still limited to bt 2.1, then the playbook's advanced 'potential' is moot.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    08-03-11 08:43 PM
  12. z_scorpio_z's Avatar
    08-04-11 02:58 AM
  13. HaTaX's Avatar
    That's depressing, wonder if the hardware in the new berries is capable of anything better then 2.1? If not, then any 3.0+ goodness would have to wait for the QNX handhelds, which is a ways off.

    Nice that the PB hardware is future proof, but frustrating that they don't provide handhelds to take full advantage of it when they introduce new models 4 months later. And they could still fix this by making bridge work over wifi, and giving OS 7 the wifi hotspot feature that we've seen before in 6.1 screenshots.

    Hmmmm...
    08-04-11 07:20 AM
  14. lavrishevo's Avatar
    In my experience, Verizon's CDMA is much slower then AT&T's 3G GSM. I have hit as high as 6 mbps down (tethered to my MBP) on AT&T GSM but it usually is between 1.5 - 3.5 Tethering to my laptop maxes out 3G capabilities much more then the phone itself. Verizon's LTE on the other hand is blazingly fast.

    I wifi tether my iPhone 4 to my iPad 2 or Playbook frequently and it performs very well with AT&T's 3G. HSPA+ (4G) on AT&T maxes out at 6 Mbps down, which is pretty sad considering Verizon's LTE easily hits over 20 all the time. If you can afford it, a LTE myfi is the best answer for fantastic 4G data speeds. I don't know what kind of speeds you guys see over bridge but I am are it is not very good in comparison.
    Last edited by lavrishevo; 08-04-11 at 08:05 AM.
    08-04-11 07:52 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD