07-17-11 10:35 AM
113 ... 2345
tools
  1. rigwrecker's Avatar
    The point goes back to what I said earlier about 4G service being limited, particularly outside the US. Why worry so much about having a 4G device if you are going to be falling back to 3G service anyway ...
    In Canada, if you step away from major cities, the provider service generally drops off (it doesnt matter who the provider is). If you are like me and are in the oilfield, the service is almost non existent at work, and again, it doesn't matter who the provider is. Telus is the best for coverage, and providers like rogers, verizon, virgin, fido etc. have no coverage at all. All you have is an expensive paper weight. All tht is being said here, is that the 4G network isn't everywhere yet, and not worth the change or $ associated with it. unlimited nothing is still nothing... just saying. just my $.0209 - USD... have a good day
    07-15-11 11:24 PM
  2. powerhoghp's Avatar
    it depends on how much 4g you use. you don't have to have it on all day...you can toggle 4G on and off. on for streaming, web surfing, etc. i leave mine on 4G all day and mine makes it through most days fine.

    and to the other poster, i listed earlier in this thread what 4G phones can do that 3G can't...at least on the vzn network. for example....media is much faster. you can stream online audio and video in HD...and that includes to your laptop with the mobile hotspot

    Red text: You shouldn't have to remove functionality to get 18hrs of use out of a device.

    Blue text: What kind of audio are you streaming that would even need 3G speeds? HD video, through tethering i can see this, but 3G is more than sufficient for 480p, DVD quality.

    Mobile hotspot: Novelty feature, nice, but not terribly practical. Running LTE (vzw) and WIFI hotspot will eat batteries.... Atleast with USB tehetering, you can draw charge from the netbook/laptop.
    07-15-11 11:31 PM
  3. anon(51467)'s Avatar
    huh? tell that to new york, LA, san fran, denver, atlanta, nashville, orlando, miami, tampa, boston, detroit, dallas , houston...or any of the 80 plus major markets it's already in. and before rim ever comes out with a 4G phone, it will already be almost everywhere in the US.

    and most of the 4G phones i have seen are about the same size as the bold 9000 or the new bold touch. and the battery is actually much thinner and lighter than the BB battery's. i carry an extra battery in my pocket for the charge...i would never do that with a BB battery.

    4G is here and it's in most major cities already. vzn is adding 10 to 15 markets every few weeks. and people were jumping from rim like flies last week to get unlimted 4G grandfathered in. the droid boards are full on new android users like me that came for 4G.

    but i believe you are right that rim is a long way off before they release a 4G phone...and they totally missed the boat. i once was a fanboy, now i am just disgusted. vzn still wins, but rim loses.
    Please review 4G before you say 80 markets have it. 4G is not available anywhere yet. 4G as defined has much higher MINIMUM throughput than any so-called 4G out there is doing. 4G is currently nothing but marketing hype right now. Until all backhauls are capable and all towers are fully updated there is no 4G.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-16-11 10:59 AM
  4. waterfrontmgmt's Avatar
    is am saying 4G as meaning vzn's 4G lte...its an abbrevation. sorry i had to explain that to you...and also that it is far more than marketing hype and you look a bit silly commenting on something you have clearly never used.

    vzn's 4G lte is faster than most home cable networks. that is a fact. not hype.

    and perhaps you should do your homework instead of spouting off at me. this is a flash site so you will have to figure out where to click on the "cities" link.

    http://network4g.verizonwireless.com/#/coverage

    just try counting them. i also added secondary markets where i have been and had solid 4G lte. plus they are adding 10 to 15 new markets a month.


    Please review 4G before you say 80 markets have it. 4G is not available anywhere yet. 4G as defined has much higher MINIMUM throughput than any so-called 4G out there is doing. 4G is currently nothing but marketing hype right now. Until all backhauls are capable and all towers are fully updated there is no 4G.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by chiplatham; 07-16-11 at 11:42 AM.
    07-16-11 11:36 AM
  5. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    is am saying 4G as meaning vzn's 4G lte...its an abbrevation. sorry i had to explain that to you...and also that it is far more than marketing hype and you look a bit silly commenting on something you have clearly never used.

    vzn's 4G lte is faster than most home cable networks. that is a fact. not hype.

    and perhaps you should do your homework instead of spouting off at me. this is a flash site so you will have to figure out where to click on the "cities" link.

    4G LTE Network | Verizon Wireless

    just try counting them. i also added secondary markets where i have been and had solid 4G lte. plus they are adding 10 to 15 new markets a month.
    LTE is not that much faster then HSPA+ and the new OS7 devices will be capable of it. HSPA+ is also classed as "4G" now.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-16-11 11:44 AM
  6. waterfrontmgmt's Avatar
    mainly radio (from around the world) and rhapsody (to get true unlimited music on subscription). vzn's 3G will not stream without contant buffering

    why would you use usb tethering when you can just plug your phone in a wall charger and get 4G? or for that matter, you can still plug a 4G phone into USB....but again that doesn't make sense.

    and this whole power management is way over blown. my laptop runs out of battery before my phone does.

    and this whole idea that speed is not important and it's not worth it. geez...if you haven't tried a vzn 4G device, you are're really qualified to speak about it, are you?

    i have yet to see one person post any fact that is negative about having 4G, except those who don't have the opportunity yet to buy it. it is blazing. i can be in a van on a road trip and 10 people can be on their laptops faster than most people can at home.

    4G lte is not novelty, it is the next wave of the present and certainly the near future. wait until a year from now.


    Blue text: What kind of audio are you streaming that would even need 3G speeds? HD video, through tethering i can see this, but 3G is more than sufficient for 480p, DVD quality.

    Mobile hotspot: Novelty feature, nice, but not terribly practical. Running LTE (vzw) and WIFI hotspot will eat batteries.... Atleast with USB tehetering, you can draw charge from the netbook/laptop.
    07-16-11 11:53 AM
  7. waterfrontmgmt's Avatar
    that is great. but vzn doesn't support HSPA, or do they?

    LTE is not that much faster then HSPA+ and the new OS7 devices will be capable of it. HSPA+ is also classed as "4G" now.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-16-11 11:56 AM
  8. WillieLee's Avatar
    Same reason Apple doesn't have a 4G phone. They require two radio chips, one for LTE and one for the fallback network, and that drains the battery. The number of people that are using their phones for streaming movies and television still make up the minority of buyers and there's little use to build phones for a small market that can't be sold to your larger base.

    They'll switch to LTE when the kinks are worked out of the system.
    07-16-11 12:04 PM
  9. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    Here's an interesting read to put this nonsense to rest:
    WiMAX vs. LTE vs. HSPA+: who cares who wins? telecoms.com telecoms industry news, analysis and opinion


    A

    The question that we should ask of the authors is Who cares who wins? The torrent of propaganda washes over the essenc

    In the HSPA+ camp, authors fire out theoretical peak data rates of 42Mbps DL and 23 Mbps UL. The WiMAX forces respond with

    Sprint has stated that it intends to deliver services at between 2 and 4 Mbps to its customers with Mobile WiMAX. In the rea

    3G has transformed the way that people think about and use their mobile phones, but not in the way that they were told t

    Every pundit has a pet theory about the likely deployment of mobile broadband technologies. One will claim that HSPA

    More likely, but less stirring, is the prediction that they are all coming, theyll be rolled out to hundreds of mil

    Confusion unsettles investors, who move to other markets and starve us of the R&D funds needed to deliver mobile broadband. At

    The first topic concerns delivery to the end user of a seamless application experience that successfully converts the impro

    The second topic, the tidal wave of data, should force us to be realistic about the strain placed on core networks b

    In Anite, we see the demands placed on test equipment by mobile broadband technologies at first hand. More than testing

    So, for the sake of our long-term prospects, lets stop this nonsense about how one technology trounces another. Important people, the end users, simply do not care.* WiMAX, LTE and HSPA+ will all be widely deployed. As an industry, our energy needs to be focused on delivering services and applications that exceed the customer expectations.* Rather than fighting, we should be learning from each others experiences.* If we do that, our customers will reward us with growing demand. If we all get sustained growth, then dont we all win..?the technical integrity of the protocol stack and its conformance to the core specifications, we produce new tools that test applications and simulate the effects of anticipated capacity bottlenecks. Responding to the increased demand for mobile applications, were developing test coverage that measures applications at the end-user level. Unfortunately, not everyone is thinking that far ahead. Applications that should be Wow, in theory, may end up producing little more than a murmur of disappointment in the real world.y an exponential increase in data traffic. We have seen 10x increases in traffic since smartphones began to boom. Mobile device makers, network equipment manufacturers and application developers must accept that there will be capacity shortages in the short term and, in response, must design, build and test applications rigorously. We need applications with realistic data throughput requirements and the ability to catch data greedy applications before they reach the network.ved data rates to improvements on their device. This can mean anything from getting LAN-like speeds for faster email downloads through to slick, content-rich and location-aware applications. As we launch mobile broadband technologies, we must ensure that new applications and capabilities are robust and stable. More effort must be spent developing and testing applications so that the end user is blown away by their performance. street level, confusion leads early adopters to hold off making commitments to the new wave of technology while they wait it out to ensure they dont buy a Betamax instead of a VHS.* Where we should focus, urgently, is on the two topics that demand open discussion and debate. First, are we taking the delivery of a winning user experience seriously? Secondly, are we making plans to cope with the data tidal wave that will follow a successful launch?lions of subscribers and, within five years, will be widespread. We must stop the confusion about which technology is going to win; it achieves nothing positive and risks damage to the entire industry.+ might delay the deployment of LTE. Another will posit that WiMAX might be adopted, predominantly, in the laptop or netbook market. A third will insist that LTE could replace large swathes of legacy technologies.* These scenarios might happen, but they might not, too.o expect. In the case of 3G, mismanagement of customer expectations put our industry back years. We cannot afford to repeat this mistake with mobile broadband. Disappointed customers spend less money because they dont value their experience as highly as they had been led to expect by advertisers.* Disappointed customers share their experience with friends and family, who delay buying into the mobile broadband world.* What we all want are ecstatic customers who cant help but show off their device. We need to produce a Wow factor that generates momentum in the market.l world, HSPA+ and LTE are likely to give their users single digit Mbps download speeds.* Away from the theoretical peak data rates, the reality is that the technologies will be comparable with each other, at least in the experience of the user. These data rates, from a users perspective, are a great improvement on what you will see while sitting at home on your WiFi or surfing the web while on a train. The problem is that the message being put out to the wider population has the same annoying ringtone as those wild claims that were made about 3G and the new world order that it would usher in. Can you remember the allure of video calls? Can you remember the last time you actually saw someone making a video call? theoretical peak data rates of 75Mbps DL and 30Mbps UL. LTE joins the fray by unleashing its theoretical peak data rates of 300Mbps DL and 75 Mbps UL. All **** breaks loose, or so it would appear. Were it not for the inclusion of the word theoretical, we could all go home to sleep soundly and wake refreshed, safe in the knowledge that might is right. The reality is very different.e of mobile broadband and puts sustained growth in the mobile industry at risk. By generating fear, uncertainty and doubt, the mobile broadband battle diverts attention away from the critical issues that will determine the success or failure of these evolving technologies.* The traditional weapon of the partisan author is the mighty Mbps; each wields their peak data rates to savage their opponents.nyone among the curious band of people who track articles about the status of mobile broadband (and the chances are that you are one of them) will have noticed an interesting trend over the past 18 months: the temperature of the debate about the technology most likely to succeed is rising rapidly. Increasingly polarised articles are published on a daily basis, each arguing that Long Term Evolution (LTE) is the 4G technology of choice, or that WiMAX is racing ahead, or that its best to stick with good old 3GPP because HSPA+ is going to beat both of them. It remains surprising that their articles invite us, their readers, to focus slavishly on the question WiMAX vs. LTE vs. HSPA+: which one will win?
    We must stop the confusion about which technology is going to win; it achieves nothing positive and risks damage to the entire industry.
    Last edited by belfastdispatcher; 07-16-11 at 12:29 PM.
    07-16-11 12:22 PM
  10. West Coast Flavor's Avatar
    Be thankful you have internet on your phone. People don't have internet in they're houses. Think about it.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-16-11 02:08 PM
  11. Branta's Avatar
    and ya know what? i don't live in india or any other parts of the world. all that matters to me are my options as a customer is the US. and i still say in the US RIM missed the boat. plus all the vzn users will have to pay much higher rates for the hotspot than those on 4G phones prior to last weeks new plans.
    And the rest of the world has utter contempt, not to say derision, for the gullible US consumers whe were suckered into believing that minor proprietary enhancements to 3G systems could honestly be called 4G. The day of the wild west snake oil salesman have not yet ended.

    The plain hard truth is that for 4G development the US market alone is not important. RIM will develop phones for the world, not just for one insignificant pissant bunch of whining crybabies who think everyone owes them a living. So far there are experimental networks on the two broad tech schemes accepted by ITU, but the networks making up 95% of the world's phone users have not reached a consensus about the final practical implementation. The major international chipset manufacturers will also be waiting for that consensus and finished standards before they launch volume production of a commercial product.
    Alberta Blue likes this.
    07-16-11 02:45 PM
  12. CanuckSoldier's Avatar
    is am saying 4G as meaning vzn's 4G lte...its an abbrevation. sorry i had to explain that to you...and also that it is far more than marketing hype and you look a bit silly commenting on something you have clearly never used.

    vzn's 4G lte is faster than most home cable networks. that is a fact. not hype.

    and perhaps you should do your homework instead of spouting off at me. this is a flash site so you will have to figure out where to click on the "cities" link.


    just try counting them. i also added secondary markets where i have been and had solid 4G lte. plus they are adding 10 to 15 new markets a month.
    I think you should do your research before posting! Because unless a carrier meets the International Telecommunications Union spec for 4G/LTE it is NOT 4G. Yes it might be faster than HSPA+ or any of the other 3G technologies. But you are either compliance with the official 4G spec or you are not. And right now no North American Carrier is compliant with the spec.

    From the ITU spec.

    "This article uses 4G to refer to IMT-Advanced (International Mobile Telecommunications Advanced), as defined by ITU-R. An IMT-Advanced cellular system must fulfill the following requirements:[7]

    Based on an all-IP packet switched network.
    Peak data rates of up to approximately 100 Mbit/s for high mobility such as mobile access and up to approximately 1 Gbit/s for low mobility such as nomadic/local wireless access, according to the ITU requirements.
    Dynamically share and use the network resources to support more simultaneous users per cell.
    Scalable channel bandwidth 5–20 MHz, optionally up to 40 MHz.[8][8][9]
    Peak link spectral efficiency of 15 bit/s/Hz in the downlink, and 6.75 bit/s/Hz in the uplink (meaning that 1 Gbit/s in the downlink should be possible over less than 67 MHz bandwidth).
    System spectral efficiency of up to 3 bit/s/Hz/cell in the downlink and 2.25 bit/s/Hz/cell for indoor usage.[8]
    Smooth handovers across heterogeneous networks.
    Ability to offer high quality of service for next generation multimedia support."

    So unless Verizon meets all these requirements them calling themselves 4G, is just marketing hype, what they really are until they meet all the requirements is really fast 3G... And I notice the Verizon web site is all about calling their LTE "lighting fast" and 10 times faster than 3G(without mentioning what 3G standard they are refering too), all very vague and no were do they actually state download speeds that I can fine. So yes alot of hype and very little documented facts.

    CS
    Last edited by CanuckSoldier; 07-16-11 at 03:46 PM.
    Alberta Blue likes this.
    07-16-11 03:39 PM
  13. CanuckSoldier's Avatar
    Even Rogers, the first Canadian Carrier to announce a 4G LTE service in the Ottawa area, doesn't technically meet the ITU standard. But they do state that the service will "evolve" to provide upto 150 Mbps in the future which would exceed the 4G spec.

    "At launch, the LTE Rocket stick will be capable of maximum theoretical download speeds of up to 75 Mbps on the Rogers LTE network. Typical download speeds can range from 12 Mbps to 25 Mbps. As device selection evolves, maximum theoretical download speeds will increase to up to 150 Mbps."

    So at least they are being honest with consumers about the real world speeds they can deliver.

    CS
    07-16-11 03:50 PM
  14. waterfrontmgmt's Avatar
    i know you are a moderator and all...but there is no excuse for your name calling.

    and you can't be speaking from experience on vzn's network (or the future of the music business, which is global). vzn's 4G lte is night and day from vzn's 3G. i have both and i travel all over the country. you can use your own eyes or apps...speedtest.net, etc. it's all relative and 4G is a HUGE speed improvement over 3G. maybe is's just really fast 3G. who cares what it's called. it's fast. very fast.

    and if 4G is not so important to RIM, why are they working on a 4G playbook?

    and why is everyone in denial? i love my BB's. is it wrong for me to want them to compete with what the other phones are offering?

    And the rest of the world has utter contempt, not to say derision, for the gullible US consumers whe were suckered into believing that minor proprietary enhancements to 3G systems could honestly be called 4G. The day of the wild west snake oil salesman have not yet ended.

    The plain hard truth is that for 4G development the US market alone is not important. RIM will develop phones for the world, not just for one insignificant pissant bunch of whining crybabies who think everyone owes them a living. So far there are experimental networks on the two broad tech schemes accepted by ITU, but the networks making up 95% of the world's phone users have not reached a consensus about the final practical implementation. The major international chipset manufacturers will also be waiting for that consensus and finished standards before they launch volume production of a commercial product.
    Mr Bigs likes this.
    07-16-11 04:04 PM
  15. CanuckSoldier's Avatar
    No it is not wrong for you to want to have a LTE BB for your personal needs. But the business reality is not the same as your needs. RIM is not going to spend the time engineering 1st gen LTE chips into their phones, that are not integrated chips that add to the battery drain and require more physical space in the phone.

    All to serve 10% of the market as it stands now. In 2012 when that market is much larger(at least in NA) they will also have much more effiencent 2nd gen chips to put into new phones. And you will no doubt see 4G/LTE BB's everywere then.

    This is not just a RIM attitude, Apple has no 4G/LTE phones right now either for the same engineering reasons. Tablets are not phones, they have much larger batteries and form factors and can afford to have a power sucking 1st gen LTE chip in them.

    CS
    07-16-11 04:40 PM
  16. jerry12's Avatar
    In stead of saying what Rim want do because there is no market for 4G in the business market just in case you haven't been reading the news some of the. Biggest company's in North America are dropping Blackberry & going with Androids & Iphone. The new Androids & i phones are more secure & business friendly & the trend is away from Blackberry.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-16-11 05:11 PM
  17. qbnkelt's Avatar
    In stead of saying what Rim want do because there is no market for 4G in the business market just in case you haven't been reading the news some of the. Biggest company's in North America are dropping Blackberry & going with Androids & Iphone. The new Androids & i phones are more secure & business friendly & the trend is away from Blackberry.
    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Oh come now. Please explain the bolded statement.
    I'll pull up a chair....get some ice tea....get comfy...

    Please do tell where Android and iOS are more secure than Blackberry.

    (just to let you know, neither platform has been certified for the federal government yet BB has)
    07-16-11 05:22 PM
  18. waterfrontmgmt's Avatar
    i agree...and that is my point. by mid 2012 4G lte and other forms of higher speed access will likely be double.

    if rim had a 4G phone in the works (like some they have in the playbook) wouldn't we be hearing about it now? i have been following CB for years and i can't remember a phone that didn't come out around a year after it started being discussed here.

    which makes it hard to believe we will see a 4G in BB by this time next year.

    No it is not wrong for you to want to have a LTE BB for your personal needs. But the business reality is not the same as your needs. RIM is not going to spend the time engineering 1st gen LTE chips into their phones, that are not integrated chips that add to the battery drain and require more physical space in the phone.

    All to serve 10% of the market as it stands now. In 2012 when that market is much larger(at least in NA) they will also have much more effiencent 2nd gen chips to put into new phones. And you will no doubt see 4G/LTE BB's everywere then.

    This is not just a RIM attitude, Apple has no 4G/LTE phones right now either for the same engineering reasons. Tablets are not phones, they have much larger batteries and form factors and can afford to have a power sucking 1st gen LTE chip in them.

    CS
    07-16-11 05:25 PM
  19. CanuckSoldier's Avatar
    Yes but we have heard nearly nothing about the QNX phones, except one "leak" that says the first one will be a larger all touch screen phone much like the current droid and iphones. But I'm sure RIM did not buy QNX and TAT for them to just sit around enjoying a coffee at work. And since this is a generational leap of technology, not just an other number upgrade, we might very well not hear many solid details until Q1 of 2011.

    CS
    07-16-11 05:31 PM
  20. jerry12's Avatar
    NQUOTE=Qbnkelt;6488175]Oh come now. Please explain the bolded statement.
    I'll pull up a chair....get some ice tea....get comfy...

    Please do tell where Android and iOS are more secure than Blackberry.

    (just to let you know, neither platform has been certified for the federal government yet BB has)[/QUOTE]

    No bolded statement & is it you don't want to hear the truth & I guess you don't think the stock holders of Rim are speaking with there money & when sales in North America of Rim phones went down the stock fell from 80.00 a share to 30.00 so I guess you don't want to hear that either.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-16-11 06:34 PM
  21. jerry12's Avatar
    Oh come now. Please explain the bolded statement.
    I'll pull up a chair....get some ice tea....get comfy...

    Please do tell where Android and iOS are more secure than Blackberry.

    (just to let you know, neither platform has been certified for the federal government yet BB has)
    I didn't say they are more secure than Rim but the iphone & android are more secure than when they first came out.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-16-11 06:41 PM
  22. qbnkelt's Avatar
    I didn't say they are more secure than Rim but the iphone & android are more secure than when they first came out.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    You're right...you didn't say it outright but I believe the implication was there.
    Neither Android not iOS has managed security certifications. Android is nowhere near. iOS is closer and even it has a long way to go.
    Last edited by Qbnkelt; 07-16-11 at 07:06 PM.
    07-16-11 06:56 PM
  23. qbnkelt's Avatar
    Jerry12

    No bolded statement & is it you don't want to hear the truth & I guess you don't think the stock holders of Rim are speaking with there money & when sales in North America of Rim phones went down the stock fell from 80.00 a share to 30.00 so I guess you don't want to hear that either.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    There was a bolded statement but you didn't see it since you were on WAP.

    As a matter of fact I heard that loud and clear. That's when I jumped on the opportunity to buy and undervalued solvent company's stock...only problem is I bought too soon. Wish it had been lower.
    I'll ride the market. I used expendable cash. Market jitters are simply that...market jitters. Rim had a bad quarter but the company is solvent.
    I guess you don't want to hear that.
    Last edited by Qbnkelt; 07-16-11 at 07:04 PM.
    07-16-11 07:01 PM
  24. the_sleuth's Avatar
    The majority of smartphone owners are non-techies nor venture forums such as this site.

    The average customer looks at reception (carrier), voice quality, email functionality, and useful apps for overall user experience.

    Security concerns do not cross their minds. Most customers believe their devices are more secure than their virus prone PCs at home.

    We all admire BB security. But it is not achieving any mindshare of sales reps at carriers nor consumers. The smartphone unit sales and market share results reflect this sad fact.

    Things will change if there is a major hack at Google or Apple just like Sony's PSN fiasco.
    07-16-11 07:01 PM
  25. qbnkelt's Avatar
    I don't want a company to create a product for me based on the uninformed consumer. I want a product that meets a high standard of whatever I happen to value.
    It will be interesting to see public reaction to the allegations that 9/11 families' phones were hacked. The importance of a secure platform as opposed to the availability of games may gain change consumers' minds.
    As a consumer, I happen to care greatly about security.
    07-16-11 07:49 PM
113 ... 2345
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD