05-28-09 11:24 AM
65 123
tools
  1. lastraid's Avatar
    accept on planes and over seas and in my basement....

    ;/
    HOw the heck did we all live pre cell phones. jeepers, one needs sancuary from time to time wiith the electronic leash.
    05-27-09 09:51 PM
  2. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    HOw the heck did we all live pre cell phones. jeepers, one needs sancuary from time to time wiith the electronic leash.
    so go tell those bastards at at&t and TMO to stop this ... "advancement of technology!" lol
    05-27-09 10:10 PM
  3. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    accept on planes and over seas and in my basement....

    ;/
    You don't understand LTE then, do you?

    It is coming to planes, trains AND automobiles.

    BTW, boys & girls - for smartphones, in-flight WiFi is not only expensive, it sucks. Not too many people are willing to cough up the in-flight WiFi access rates for the crappy Internet experience we see on smartphones.

    Especially considering the average flight time.

    Then there is the horrible satellite lag - you won't be making any Skype calls with it.

    I hear & see people all the time complaining about 25 cent text messages, who then cry about not having WiFi for use on an aircraft. At upwards of $15 per domestic flight per device.

    On a laptop, it is tolerable - but unless you want to wait for that Facebook transfer, you won't like it. Forget about online RPGs - you will be constantly disconnected. Netmeeting & Skype? Nope - text messaging & IMs work, but you will wait a lot longer for those connections.

    So, before anyone brings up in-flight WiFi as a reason to have it on a BlackBerry, ask yourself - is as much as $5/hour worth it to surf on a BlackBerry that has very little in the way of cache and requires many sites to fully load each & every page? Then with the lag, constantly get page errors & communications failures?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-27-09 11:04 PM
  4. vatothe0's Avatar
    You don't understand LTE then, do you?

    It is coming to planes, trains AND automobiles.

    BTW, boys & girls - for smartphones, in-flight WiFi is not only expensive, it sucks. Not too many people are willing to cough up the in-flight WiFi access rates for the crappy Internet experience we see on smartphones.

    Especially considering the average flight time.

    Then there is the horrible satellite lag - you won't be making any Skype calls with it.

    I hear & see people all the time complaining about 25 cent text messages, who then cry about not having WiFi for use on an aircraft. At upwards of $15 per domestic flight per device.

    On a laptop, it is tolerable - but unless you want to wait for that Facebook transfer, you won't like it. Forget about online RPGs - you will be constantly disconnected. Netmeeting & Skype? Nope - text messaging & IMs work, but you will wait a lot longer for those connections.

    So, before anyone brings up in-flight WiFi as a reason to have it on a BlackBerry, ask yourself - is as much as $5/hour worth it to surf on a BlackBerry that has very little in the way of cache and requires many sites to fully load each & every page? Then with the lag, constantly get page errors & communications failures?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Dude, stop it with all the logic and factual posting. People only want to hear about thoughts they already had, especially when they are absurdly incorrect.
    05-27-09 11:12 PM
  5. sprke81's Avatar

    It is coming to planes, trains AND automobiles.


    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    So LTE is going to be at 35000 ft in the air to?

    Please explain.
    05-27-09 11:18 PM
  6. sprke81's Avatar
    Posted from my 9630 CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I just seen that. You lucky dog....
    05-27-09 11:23 PM
  7. jahutch's Avatar
    ah....

    well then in that case, "give us free GPS!!!"
    Okay... they ARE giving you free GPS. The Storm's GPS is UNLOCKED. It works in google maps and in everything else. By all accounts, the Tour, and all future BB's, will be the same.
    05-27-09 11:58 PM
  8. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    So LTE is going to be at 35000 ft in the air to?

    Please explain.
    Well, think of the way WiFi works. WiFi is a radio signal, as it LTE, CDMA, GSM, FM, AM, etc.

    You don't think those jumbo jets are pulling along a CAT5 cable, do you?

    But pretty much the same issues I have with WiFi in an aircraft would apply to LTE, as well. If you've ever tried satellite internet (like Hughes), you understand the latency issues. At least LTE will work in a broader spectrum. With WiFi, think of that latency, divided by the number of users connecting simultaneously. There is only so much bandwidth to be had. I don't care if you're on A, B, G, N or whatever, a shared connection is still shared with WiFi. With LTE & CDMA, adding more users doesn't appreciably slow the connection. Put 25 people on a WiFi connection that is fed by satellite & your speeds will drop off considerably, on top of that latency - or as the gamers call it, lag.

    So what you have with WiFi in the air is like satellite on the ground. Limited bandwidth on top of satellite latency. Then, to top it off, you have signal degradation caused by a speed often in excess of 500MPH. It doesn't make for a connection I ever look forward to, much less want to pay for. Unless, of course, I have to.

    It is a writeoff for me. I use a laptop & do what I have to do. If I didn't have to do it, I'd pull the shade, close my eyes & get off at my stop.

    One other thing - one of my guys brought up WiFi on planes recently. He thought itd be cool to be able to use it in flight. Sad thing is, he has taken exactly four flights in two years - three to San Diego, a 50 minute flight, and one to Las Vegas, a 30 minute flight.

    It is a misguided sense of self-relevance. Some of the people here have wasted more time arguing for WiFi than have spent time on a plane in the past two years.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-28-09 12:40 AM
  9. noaim's Avatar
    Well, think of the way WiFi works. WiFi is a radio signal, as it LTE, CDMA, GSM, FM, AM, etc.

    You don't think those jumbo jets are pulling along a CAT5 cable, do you?

    But pretty much the same issues I have with WiFi in an aircraft would apply to LTE, as well. If you've ever tried satellite internet (like Hughes), you understand the latency issues. At least LTE will work in a broader spectrum. With WiFi, think of that latency, divided by the number of users connecting simultaneously. There is only so much bandwidth to be had. I don't care if you're on A, B, G, N or whatever, a shared connection is still shared with WiFi. With LTE & CDMA, adding more users doesn't appreciably slow the connection. Put 25 people on a WiFi connection that is fed by satellite & your speeds will drop off considerably, on top of that latency - or as the gamers call it, lag.

    So what you have with WiFi in the air is like satellite on the ground. Limited bandwidth on top of satellite latency. Then, to top it off, you have signal degradation caused by a speed often in excess of 500MPH. It doesn't make for a connection I ever look forward to, much less want to pay for. Unless, of course, I have to.

    It is a writeoff for me. I use a laptop & do what I have to do. If I didn't have to do it, I'd pull the shade, close my eyes & get off at my stop.

    One other thing - one of my guys brought up WiFi on planes recently. He thought itd be cool to be able to use it in flight. Sad thing is, he has taken exactly four flights in two years - three to San Diego, a 50 minute flight, and one to Las Vegas, a 30 minute flight.

    It is a misguided sense of self-relevance. Some of the people here have wasted more time arguing for WiFi than have spent time on a plane in the past two years.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com


    It all depends how much your on a plane

    nah I know all about satellite internet and I still want it.....

    yes I know its not as fast as typical connections but still I want wi-fi for it..



    its simple people argue against having wi-fi its nonsense to argue against it.

    Because those same people would argue against me when I start arguing about how no mobile needs GPS because I don't use it. I probably will never use gps on my mobile. I very rarely do now. I have a GPS unit to do that.

    small portable and in my car when I need it. So there is no need for anyone out there to have gps on there phone.


    On another note when I had wi-fi on my phone I used it frequently at least once a day sometimes more.

    so I think the argument that gets me is the fight against it. Why limit the options.
    05-28-09 04:56 AM
  10. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    see... arguing that its not verizons fault and more of a CDMA limitation is one thing... but arguing against the feature all together is ludicrous! That's where I don't understand the logic!
    05-28-09 06:50 AM
  11. scurvydlicious's Avatar
    see... arguing that its not verizons fault and more of a CDMA limitation is one thing... but arguing against the feature all together is ludicrous! That's where I don't understand the logic!
    Not everyone needs wi-fi. Take your examples why wi-fi is necessary:

    1. Global travel//Access to Data while in another country: I never leave the city I am in. I live on the beach, no need to go anywhere for vacation.

    2. Basement/No Signal/No coverage areas: Like I said, I never leave the city I am in, and I have great coverage everywhere I go, except when I'm in the grocery store, and it's only in the back of the grocery store that I don't get good service. But guess what, my local grocer doesn't offer wi-fi, the jerks.

    3. Faster Speeds: The only place I go that there is an available wi-fi signal, is my house, and when I'm at home, I use my laptop.

    Why is wi-fi useful to me? Sell me onto the wi-fi bandwagon.
    05-28-09 08:15 AM
  12. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    Not everyone needs wi-fi. Take your examples why wi-fi is necessary:

    1. Global travel//Access to Data while in another country: I never leave the city I am in. I live on the beach, no need to go anywhere for vacation.

    2. Basement/No Signal/No coverage areas: Like I said, I never leave the city I am in, and I have great coverage everywhere I go, except when I'm in the grocery store, and it's only in the back of the grocery store that I don't get good service. But guess what, my local grocer doesn't offer wi-fi, the jerks.

    3. Faster Speeds: The only place I go that there is an available wi-fi signal, is my house, and when I'm at home, I use my laptop.

    Why is wi-fi useful to me? Sell me onto the wi-fi bandwagon.
    see, thats fine for u ... personally! But just because u won't get a benefit, doesn't mean it shouldn't be there for everyone. lets not forget, its a global phone. So just because u dont travel, doesnt mean the "global" part should be taken away

    If you have no use for GPS Nav, does it mean you won't support having it? There's also a difference between passive support (ppl like u) and active support (ppl like me). In the end, we all benefit even if u dont use it! Same concept applies to bluetooth
    05-28-09 08:53 AM
  13. sprke81's Avatar
    Well, think of the way WiFi works. WiFi is a radio signal, as it LTE, CDMA, GSM, FM, AM, etc.

    You don't think those jumbo jets are pulling along a CAT5 cable, do you?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I understand how wifi/radio signals work. There still isn't going to be LTE radio signals beamed from the ground up to jet cruising altitudes let alone over the ocean. I would take a wild guess that current cell coverage would disappear around 10,000 ft.

    I would think satellite would be the only way to get internet connection on an airplane but I'm open to correction.

    I'm not arguing the fact that wifi in a airplane would suck on a bb. In my experience with my 8900 I had a hard time making a paid wifi connection work it mostly refused to connect to rims bis. Free was the only way it would work. I'm trying to wrap my brain around pulling my LTE berry out in the plane and having signal

    The airlines don't let you have the cellular radio on anyway.
    Last edited by sprke81; 05-28-09 at 10:02 AM.
    05-28-09 09:40 AM
  14. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    It all depends how much your on a plane

    nah I know all about satellite internet and I still want it.....

    yes I know its not as fast as typical connections but still I want wi-fi for it..



    its simple people argue against having wi-fi its nonsense to argue against it.

    Because those same people would argue against me when I start arguing about how no mobile needs GPS because I don't use it. I probably will never use gps on my mobile. I very rarely do now. I have a GPS unit to do that.

    small portable and in my car when I need it. So there is no need for anyone out there to have gps on there phone.


    On another note when I had wi-fi on my phone I used it frequently at least once a day sometimes more.

    so I think the argument that gets me is the fight against it. Why limit the options.
    We're not arguing against WiFi - we argue that not having it is not a big deal for the vast majority of us.

    As for the options argument, if there were options on the same model - say a 9930 & a 9930W - one without WiFi & one with, there might not be the opposition.

    I have heard Samsung is considering WiFi-free options on Saga/Omnia, because of issues & conflicts with the WiFi - and they use the same WiFi radio as do many other makers.

    I don't want the added complexity or cost of something I have no interest in and which would be useless for me. You can deactivate WiFi on most WiFi devices, but if that radio fails, the phone usually fails with it - and even while off, it still requires power. Not as much as when on, but it still can draw as much as 10% as when it is on. It is integrated, after all.

    If you're good with Windows, you can further isolate WiFi, by some OS trickery. But we don't have the OS access on BlackBerry. Working some magic on the Saga, I have increased standby battery life to equal BlackBerry Curve. But WiFi is no longer an option - and the chip still draws power.

    There are a lot more important things in smartphones than WiFi, yet it seems to be the predominant subject here - one topic dies or is locked & someone starts another.

    And invariably, the tone is GIVE US WIFI NO MATTER WHAT without any consideration for those of us who value our current device functionality & battery life.

    I mean, should I force you into a convertible, with all of its inherent compromises (noise/chassis rigidity/security/fuel economy/weight) if you'll never put the top down?

    LTE could make WiFi simpler - or as some have mentioned, it may make it irrelevant. I have even heard the two will not coexist on the same device - I don't believe the latter, but it did come from the mouths of a couple Intel engineers in Chandler, AZ - they work on such things, so who am I to doubt?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-28-09 10:36 AM
  15. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    I understand how wifi/radio signals work. There still isn't going to be LTE radio signals beamed from the ground up to jet cruising altitudes let alone over the ocean. I would take a wild guess that current cell coverage would disappear around 10,000 ft.
    It isn't difficult to understand, when you step back & look at it.

    In-flight WiFi = Satelite-fed WiFi router in the plane.

    In-flight LTE = Satelite-fed Network Extender.

    There would probably be no in-flight 1xRTT relay.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-28-09 11:24 AM
65 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD