EDGE Slower than Heinz Ketchup

Is there any hope of seeing a speed increase on the EDGE network or is this the best it can do? If AT&T has a 3G network why would Apple choose not to support it?

I love the phone but the slow EDGE speeds are a deal breaker for me. I may have to suck up the 10% re-stocking fee and wait to the 3G version but it's going to be very hard to give it up.

jr

vlj9r said:

Is there any hope of seeing a speed increase on the EDGE network or is this the best it can do? If AT&T has a 3G network why would Apple choose not to support it?

I love the phone but the slow EDGE speeds are a deal breaker for me. I may have to suck up the 10% re-stocking fee and wait to the 3G version but it's going to be very hard to give it up.

jr

Click to expand...

I doubt that the EDGE speed will be boosted. It is what it is. Good not great.

It all depends on how willing you are to put up with it or work around it using WiFi.

Personally, I think Apple is betting that people will modify their behavior and just use WiFi more and only use EDGE as a backup/last resort.

That's how I am approaching it.

I'm not migrating from a 3G phone though. Maybe if I were I would care more about the slow speed over EDGE.

the edge network was boosted recently (before the iphone launch) to get the speed its at now. it used to be a lot slower.

a 3G iphone was not originally deplyed because the AT&T 3G network is not fully deployed in all areas where the iphone was sold, also the 3G network still needs to have is capacity expanded to support more 3G users at one time. By the end of 2007 the 3G netowrk should have lots of capacity added.

so be on the look out for a 3G iphone by the end of the year.

jab119 said:

the edge network was boosted recently (before the iphone launch) to get the speed its at now. it used to be a lot slower.

a 3G iphone was not originally deplyed because the AT&T 3G network is not fully deployed in all areas where the iphone was sold, also the 3G network still needs to have is capacity expanded to support more 3G users at one time. By the end of 2007 the 3G netowrk should have lots of capacity added.

so be on the look out for a 3G iphone by the end of the year.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but a couple of your reasons are just rubbish. You do not have to be in a 3G network to use a 3G phone. They will run on EDGE too. Otherwise, AT&T wouldn't be selling all those other 3G phones so successfully. People could have a 3G phone and use it on EDGE until the 3G becomes available in their area.

The current 3G networks do not need to be expanded to cover the 3G users. AT&T already sells 3G phones and has sold millions of them with no worries about capacity. It's not like they're going to do a half-baked install of 3G in an area and then come back later to build it up even more. That makes no sense, They would build it to capacity they expect the first time then move on to other markets.

What would have been nice is to develop 2 versions: one with EDGE and WiFi, and the other with 3G and no WiFi. They say they used EDGE because 3G sucks more energy, but WiFi is an even bigger energy hog! A 3G only handset probably would easily outlive an EDGE/WiFi handset and if you're on 3G would wouldn't need the WiFi.

lol @ the title.. is a 3g version def coming out or is everybody just guessing?

fleurya said:

Sorry, but a couple of your reasons are just rubbish. You do not have to be in a 3G network to use a 3G phone. They will run on EDGE too. Otherwise, AT&T wouldn't be selling all those other 3G phones so successfully. People could have a 3G phone and use it on EDGE until the 3G becomes available in their area.

The current 3G networks do not need to be expanded to cover the 3G users. AT&T already sells 3G phones and has sold millions of them with no worries about capacity. It's not like they're going to do a half-baked install of 3G in an area and then come back later to build it up even more. That makes no sense, They would build it to capacity they expect the first time then move on to other markets.

What would have been nice is to develop 2 versions: one with EDGE and WiFi, and the other with 3G and no WiFi. They say they used EDGE because 3G sucks more energy, but WiFi is an even bigger energy hog! A 3G only handset probably would easily outlive an EDGE/WiFi handset and if you're on 3G would wouldn't need the WiFi.

Click to expand...

your right, I guess I dont know what im talking about.

i don't see what the huge deal is with the EDGE network. yes, it is a bit slow, but it seems to me that most people who bought an iphone would have fairly regular access to a wifi network when they want to so some heavy surfing on their phone. aside from that, is the really a HUGE inconvenience to wait ten seconds rather than 3 to get directions to a location?

the thing is that normalywhen you are in a place with wifi, you are on or have access to a real computer.

jab119 said:

the edge network was boosted recently (before the iphone launch) to get the speed its at now. it used to be a lot slower.

a 3G iphone was not originally deplyed because the AT&T 3G network is not fully deployed in all areas where the iphone was sold, also the 3G network still needs to have is capacity expanded to support more 3G users at one time. By the end of 2007 the 3G netowrk should have lots of capacity added.

so be on the look out for a 3G iphone by the end of the year.

Click to expand...

I hate to think of what it must have been before then, because now it seems about like the old 33.6 modem I had back in the 90's. I can actually watch pictures load at times line by line. Maybe it's just this area.

If a 3G model comes out by year end (or before my 2 year mandantory non-upgradeable unchangeable non-refundable contract runs out) I and a lot of other people are going to be really pi**ed. The contract stated somewhere as I was reading it thoroughly, that basically for 2 years you are stuck with your current iPhone and that it can't be upgraded no matter what new hardware may come out. I assume you could always fork out full retail, but then you would still be stuck with this current phone as well.
The battery thing is bad enough. Yeah, here's your new phone. If the battery goes out next week we will gladly replace it for $86 after you driv to your authorized Apple store (which there are NONE in Arkansas), but not the ATT store where you bought it cuz they aren't going to be authorized to collect these $600 phones for repair. I guess Chicago or Dallas wouldn't be too bad of a 2 day round trip just to get my loaner phone. Yeah right.

I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that it works in the future as well as it does now. I really like the phone and its features, but EDGE does really blow in this part of the country. I do like the phone on Wifi though.

I hate to think of what it must have been before then, because now it seems about like the old 33.6 modem I had back in the 90's. I can actually watch pictures load at times line by line. Maybe it's just this area.

Click to expand...

EDGE averages at about 200kbps. Are you sure you're on EDGE? Maybe you're on the even older network, I think its GPRS. In my home town, which is pretty much out in the sticks in Indiana, they don't even have EDGE coverage. They're still on the older network. Where in Arkansas do you live? Unless it's a heavily-populated area, I wouldn't hold my breath for 3G.

I assume you could always fork out full retail, but then you would still be stuck with this current phone as well.

Click to expand...

Well, you're forking out full retail now, so there's no difference. A doubt Apple would let AT&T tie you down to a certain phone when they can make more money on a second gen model. In fact, I would bet people replacing their current one with a gen 2 iPhone is part of their sales strategy. There will be a market still for the first iPhones for people who are not covered by 3G and want something cheaper but still a cool iPhone. Of course you won't get what you paid, but when do you ever when selling something used?

I don't believe they will release a 3G phone for a while yet...

Here in Europe reading the press reports in the FT and others, the iPhone will hit France the UK and Germany first and they will be Non-3G phones..They will hit other European countries in 2008..

No 3G is major issue for us Europeans, I use it all the time on my tiny Sony Ericsson W850i. It's credit card slim, yet great battery life with 3G. So why can't Apple do the same?

3G coverage here is excellent. it's instantaneous, I get my e-mail immediately and access to the web. I need this as I travel a lot in Europe and need access to my mails. What Apple have no realises is that we do not have the same Wifi coverage as the US does. So this is a major problem for future European customers like myself...

The problem is that huge screen is an energy hog and the battery can only be so big. WiFi sucks a lot of energy too.

I really wish we could ditch cellular tech altogether and create large WiMax areas like South Korea. I imagine in the future their wireless internet coverage will be sufficient enough to completely abandon cellular technology.

The litttle "E" is lit on the phone so I assume that means edge. I live in between Little Rock and Fort Smith in a town called Russellville - a smallish college town of about 40K people. So you're probably right, 3G will be a while coming here. Sometimes in the middle of the night it seems decently fast - I'd say a lot like a 56K modem with the V90 update (if thats what it was called way back when - I've been on cable modem for over 6 years now), but it definitely is annoying trying to surf pages that have graphics of any kind. Here in the house it uses my wifi and works great. It is only when I am out running around or sitting out at the lake while the kids swim and such that I use the EDGE network. I used it for a couple hours yesterday at the lake and some pages were really fast - ones with few or no graphics like this forum for instance. Checking the state weather radar, myspace, blogspots, and flikr pages you can almost forget even attempting on EDGE here. It won't much matter much longer for me as I am moving to the NYC/NJ area in August. Of course there I hear that the phone coverage itself is weak with ATT, although of the hundreds of times I have used my previous cellulars with Cingular when I was there I had no problems with them.

There's some site you can use that will deliver a "stripped-down" version of web pages for you so they load faster. I can't remember what it's called, maybe it's something from Google. But I've seen comments that it really helps speed up the internet on the phone if you just need content and not pictures or graphics.

I've used 3G on my 8525 and granted, EDGE is slower, but since AT&T upgraded the speeds, it's not THAT bad. It only takes me a couple extra seconds to do things compared to my 8525, and the built in apps don't take much longer. Youtube videos load up just fine, as do most websites.

It's only the graphics-heavy pages that bog it down, but then again, most of those sites are in Flash, and the iPhone doesn't display flash...yet. I can imagine EDGE being a problem once full Flash supported is added

fleurya said:

I really wish we could ditch cellular tech altogether and create large WiMax areas like South Korea. I imagine in the future their wireless internet coverage will be sufficient enough to completely abandon cellular technology.

Click to expand...

interesting. for data this would be very well worth it, but its still going to be "cellular" in nature. I cant find much on this WiMax for voice calling, but im assuming it would work similar to VoIp.

the term "cellular" really is meant for how the "wireless" or "radio frequency" network is designed. the base stations contain many radios in which your voice call or data is broadcast over from the tower to your phone. the "cell sites" are the locations where the "cell towers" are located. It does not matter it if is TDMA, CDMA, GSM, 3G or what ever, its still "cellular" in nature.

Yeah, basically, I meant get rid of the GSM, CDMA stuff and just use a WiFi kind of data network. convert all towers into WiMAX towers and port the current phone services over to that, like the way cable TV providers started sending internet service over coax cables. Either that or the current phone providers start VoIP services, which I guess would be the same thing.

I have wild hopes and fantasies for wireless technology. I hope someday we get widespread wireless internet access so fast that laptops will essentially become "dummy terminals" similar to Palm's latest creation, with very little onboard memory, low processor requirement, and to cut down size and power use. All data and apps will remain on a home server that you access with your "dummy" laptop. Basically a monitor keyboard combination connected to your home computer wirelessly.

yes that would take a huge load off the cell network if the data was on a different technology. the current design is limiting on the ratio of voice calls to data "calls" (web type applications) you can have at one time per tower. it should really be separated out and on different technologies.

the FCC is supposed to release a bunch of spectrum in the 700mHz (i think) range in 2008 that the broadcast TV stations used for analog TV signals.

Ok, so maybe I was exaggerating when I compared EDGE here to a 33.6 modem. I just ran this test from the phone and got a whopping 40.6 Kb/s so I take back everything I said about it being as slow as a 33.6 modem. I still stand by my old 56K being faster though! What speeds is everyone else getting?

http://reviews.cnet.com/Bandwidth_meter/7004-7254_7-0.html?tag=feat.2

846.5 kbps over wifi
129.5 kbps over EDGE

using the cnet bandwidth meter widget.

Not dsl but it'll do.