1. Marcus75's Avatar
    New report from PC World:

    The 3G networks of all four major U.S. wireless carriers deliver slower speeds than customers expect, according to Gartner Inc., which said it has received the most complaints about AT&T's network.

    Redman singled out the iPhone 3G, sold exclusively by AT&T, saying it won't support downloads faster than 1.4Gbit/sec., while some laptop cards get 1.7Mbit/sec. "Companies shouldn't expect the fastest network speeds on the iPhone 3G," Redman said in the report.

    Jeffrey Nelson, a spokesman for Verizon, said 3G speeds are "exactly as promised," and noted that business customers and consumers adopting laptop cards are using the faster speeds for music and video. "I guess the proof is in the customer usage numbers," Nelson said. "Data usage has increased to more than 26% of overall Verizon Wireless revenue, with more than half of that nonmessaging data."
    02-01-09 11:14 AM
  2. thisiscrazy's Avatar
    1.4Gbps? I'd love to get 1.4 Gigabits per second.
    02-03-09 03:02 PM
  3. Yesterdays Shoveler's Avatar
    1.4Gbps? I'd love to get 1.4 Gigabits per second.
    You caught that too eh?
    02-03-09 03:04 PM
  4. Laren's Avatar
    I never even turn on 3G, honestly. I tried it once just to see what would happen, and my reception dropped out. I couldn't use the internet at all with 3G on, haha. Irony WTF.
    02-03-09 03:07 PM
  5. Acid's Avatar
    I Call BS on this.

    3G does not work where I live. They say we have it, but at the most we have 3 bars, unless we go to the rural city below us, and then we have to be RIGHT next the tower to have full coverage.

    I was just telling my friend the other night, we both have 3G phones, and are both not impressed by their "Coverage everywhere" slogan.
    02-03-09 03:24 PM
  6. Laren's Avatar
    This. And I live in the LA area, too.
    02-03-09 03:25 PM
  7. Stevek476's Avatar
    Central jersey 3g also does not work at all..i get zero reception.
    02-03-09 03:28 PM
  8. pstanger's Avatar
    Central jersey 3g also does not work at all..i get zero reception.
    I get great 3g reception in central jersey. Where in jersey are you?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-03-09 03:32 PM
  9. Acid's Avatar
    Not to jump sides here either, but if i go to ATT.com and look for coverage in my area, its better then verizon. verizon's coverage ends only a few streets down from my house while ATT's coverage, covers the full block and then some.

    I've thought about calling and telling them this. its stupid to pay 80 bucks a month for no service.
    02-03-09 03:36 PM
  10. robstitzer's Avatar
    don't forget folks that ... 1XEV = 3G.

    i've never not seen it on my phone!
    02-03-09 03:38 PM
  11. SoK's Avatar
    u have to turn on 3g? sorry i'm new to 3g phones, how do i do that?
    02-03-09 03:38 PM
  12. SoK's Avatar
    don't forget folks that ... 1XEV = 3G.

    i've never not seen it on my phone!
    ahhh, i'm about 10 minutes from cinci and i almost never leave 1XEV
    02-03-09 03:39 PM
  13. Acid's Avatar
    Rob -

    I know that IXEV is 3G. I'm just agreeing with the rest, that the 3G sucks up here. I get like 2 bars max. even with the EVDO i still had crappy coverage. lol
    02-03-09 03:40 PM
  14. danesy's Avatar
    don't forget folks that ... 1XEV = 3G.

    i've never not seen it on my phone!
    Same here. It's always been there, never leaves. And I have never had a problem with reception on my BB.
    02-03-09 03:47 PM
  15. mdude85's Avatar
    1.4Gbps? I'd love to get 1.4 Gigabits per second.

    Keep in mind that 1.4 gigabits per second is actually 0.175 gigabytes per second (i.e. 175 megabytes per second) since there are 8 bits in a byte. 175 megabytes per second is the highest bandwidth available on the iPhone and it would be the download speed if the entire intracellular network was directed to one iPhone alone. But divide 175 megabytes per second among thousands of intracellular networks in the ATT coverage area and you'll understand why 1.4 gigabits per second is not that fast. When you reduce the maximum bandwidth in the pipeline it slows everyone up, much like a clogged drain.
    Last edited by mdude85; 02-03-09 at 03:51 PM.
    02-03-09 03:48 PM
  16. paulmike3's Avatar
    Keep in mind that 1.4 gigabits per second is actually 0.175 gigabytes per second (i.e. 175 megabytes per second) since there are 8 bits in a byte. Now divide 175 megabytes per second among thousands of intracellular networks in the ATT coverage area and you'll understand why 1.4 gigabits per second is not that fast.
    Cute attempt at humor. Right?
    02-03-09 03:50 PM
  17. neevz's Avatar
    I live in central FL and have only lost 3g service 3 or 4 times since I've had my Storm since its release. Hope this stays the same when I move to Key Largo in a few weeks..
    02-03-09 03:57 PM
  18. mdude85's Avatar
    Cute attempt at humor. Right?
    Uh, no... People who make comments about things of which they have absolutely no knowledge are making cute attempts at ignorance.
    02-03-09 04:14 PM
  19. paulmike3's Avatar
    Uh, no... People who make comments about things of which they have absolutely no knowledge are making cute attempts at ignorance.
    I agree.

    By your logic, the entire 3G network is sharing 1.4Gb/s (.1879 GB/s). So (again, by your division logic), if there are 2,000,000 people sharing 187.9 MB/s, each phone will get about 94 bytes per second.

    Yeah, I guess they really DO have reason to complain.
    02-03-09 04:36 PM
  20. mdude85's Avatar
    I agree.

    By your logic, the entire 3G network is sharing 1.4Gb/s (.1879 GB/s). So (again, by your division logic), if there are 2,000,000 people sharing 187.9 MB/s, each phone will get about 94 bytes per second.

    Yeah, I guess they really DO have reason to complain.
    It doesn't really work that way since 2 million people would not share .175 GB/sec equally. By using the word "divide" I insinuated that the bandwidth was divided but not necessarily divided equally among all the users in the band. It's not really too big of an issue because the actual bandwidth is never as high as advertized or measured. Basically the issue comes in only for enterprise users since a lot of companies have to decide whether to outfit their employees with laptop (air) cards or with iPhones. Since the iPhone restricts bandwidth compared to air cards then it might not be the best choice, especially for high bandwidth scenarios like secure/class (classified) RDP. Not that you would use an iPhone for a class RDP anyway since the class networks like some in the US government don't typically support iPhones for enterprise. The article is just making the point that users are experiencing poor download speeds on the iPhone and its restriction on max bandwidth draw from the network may be a contributing factor. I'm not so sure how much of a role it really plays but it's worth mentioning I think.
    Last edited by mdude85; 02-03-09 at 04:51 PM.
    02-03-09 04:46 PM
  21. paulmike3's Avatar
    It doesn't really work that way since 2 million people would not share .175 GB/sec equally. By using the word "divide" I insinuated that the bandwidth was divided but not necessarily divided equally among all the users in the band. It's not really too big of an issue because the actual bandwidth is never as high as advertized or measured. Basically the issue comes in only for enterprise users since a lot of companies have to decide whether to outfit their employees with laptop (air) cards or with iPhones. Since the iPhone restricts bandwidth compared to air cards then it might not be the best choice, especially for high bandwidth scenarios like secure/class (classified) RDP. Not that you would use an iPhone for a class RDP anyway since the class networks like some in the US government don't typically support iPhones for enterprise.
    You're (mostly) correct, but your math went downhill when you didn't realize that it was just a typo in the article.
    02-03-09 04:51 PM
  22. mdude85's Avatar
    You're (mostly) correct, but your math went downhill when you didn't realize that it was just a typo in the article.
    Well, I was correct that 1.4 gigabits per second is 8 times higher than 1.4 gigabytes per second. Merely because the article made a typo does not mean that I am somewhat incorrect. Perhaps you mean to say that the article is somewhat incorrect.

    I think regardless of typos, it would be interesting to see how the maximum bandwidth restriction on the iPhone, if there is one, affects WiFi rather than 3G, especially since 3G will be phased out soon.
    02-03-09 04:54 PM
  23. paulmike3's Avatar
    Well, I was correct that 1.4 gigabits per second is 8 times higher than 1.4 gigabytes per second. Merely because the article made a typo does not mean that I am somewhat incorrect. Perhaps you mean to say that the article is somewhat incorrect.

    I think regardless of typos, it would be interesting to see how the maximum bandwidth restriction on the iPhone, if there is one, affects WiFi rather than 3G, especially since 3G will be phased out soon.
    Your math was decent. I should have specified - you were somewhat incorrect, because you also stated:
    175 megabytes per second is the highest bandwidth available on the iPhone
    Perhaps that kind of bandwidth is available on the iPhone via USB, but it's certainly not coming over the AT&T (or any) 3G network.
    02-03-09 05:10 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD