What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Think Choosing a Gift For A Teen Girl Is Impossible? view!
bestbuy.com - Hello-o-o! No WAY! Email, IM, chat, social networking & streaming audio/video are all on Netbooks.
93 Comments
- OSJunky, on 02/11/2008, -4/+47dude - good point on AT&T and Apple not doing 3G, but it isn't WiFi. It is more like WiMax or 4G or something else. WiFi implies 802.11A,B, G, N
- adie, on 02/11/2008, -0/+233G iPhones in 2008 have already been confirmed by the CEO of AT&T. On top of that, it would take years for AT&T to get the infrastructure in place to use the 700MHz spectrum for some sort of nationwide WiMax.
Terrible article just speculating (and not even smart speculation) about the iPhone to get attention. - fr3nch13, on 02/11/2008, -0/+15You're right. WiFi operates at 2.4GHz. How would the 700MHz spectrum use WiFi? Unless Apple planned ahead and slipped in a 700MHz radio I don't see this happening. Although, as an iPhone user it would be nice.
- Makaveli604, on 02/11/2008, -1/+13I wasn't aware .com = .us
Edit: Just for clarification, I thought the proof of the original statement was obvious, but then I remembered the group discussed. - 1jaxstate1, on 02/11/2008, -2/+12Damn idiots. Quit trying to make up excuses for the iPhone and add frickin' 3G...sheeesh!
- greganalytic, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7I'm confused, Wi-Fi doesn't use 700Mhz. Any ideas what they mean?
- wearescience, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7Didn't Steve Jobs and the CEO of AT&T both say that there would be a 3G iPhone by the end of the year?
I like the idea of nationwide WiFi, but the fact that 80 new cities in the US are getting 3G from AT&T seems to suggest they are still interested in bulking up that network. - TheFiestyFaun, on 02/11/2008, -6/+13By now, you must have realized that one word comments will only get you buried.
- danbowden, on 02/11/2008, -1/+7and who wants to hang out with a regular G?
Word up homes! - Butros, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5They wrote a technical article without a technical understanding
- kuwan, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5No, the guy who wrote the article is an idiot, that's all. Nothing to see here. That almost no one else has pointed this out is somewhat troubling.
- chambana, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5This kinda mindless speculation shows the worst of blogs and why professional media will continue to be needed if people ever want to learn about anything around them.
- akatsuki, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5Given AT&T's big announced push into HSUPA speeds, there is definitely a 3G iPhone coming. Even if LTE/WiMax or whatever comes down the line, it will be several years minimum before it is ready to go, and Apple has rarely waited to replace their own product with something better (recognizing it is better to outcompete yourself than have someone else do it).
- Tippis, on 02/11/2008, -1/+5...except that the WWW came out of the work of an English developer working in Switzerland. And you'd be surprised how many .com:s belong to international or even non-US national companies.
- sgoogle, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4But the main basis of this argument is that the OLD iPhones would support this rather than 3G. If they could not, surely they would go with 3G rather than this 'WiFi'
- nunofgs, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3Let's think that argument through, shall we?
So, Apple would cooperate with AT&T over the next (imo) 3-5 years to deploy a MASSIVE nationwide Wi-Fi network (that can't be b/g/n because of the 700Mhz range so they'd have to use a different standard? dunno about this, just speculating). They would lose tons of money to r&d/hardware/testing/etc and still not cover the entire country.
On the other hand, they can simply come out with a 3G phone THIS YEAR and not piss people off by making them wait 3-5 years for the nationwide-wifi phone.
Sorry macinstein dude. It's gonna be a 3G phone. - wellyuk, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4That there are significant % of .com sites that aren't American means that it's not safe to assume .com = .us, majority or otherwise.
- cr3ative, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3I've had an iPhone for about 4 months now, and use it for everything. As a commuter, I spend 4 hours a day on a train, so the iPhone is pretty much my entertainment / communications hub, when I'm not on the laptop (as I am now, on a train.)
The speed of the mobile internet REALLY irks me. EDGE coverage is about 30% here in the UK, so most of the time, the browsing experience is piss-poor. On Wifi, it's joyous.
Disclaimer: It is a business iPhone that I don't pay the contract for, so I'm fairly impartial. It's not like I actively sought an iPhone, but I wasn't going to turn one down. Nothing attracts girls like an iPhone user in the middle of a club. Try it some time. - ShuttleDisaster, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4jobs and ATT CEO have already confirmed 3g iphone in 08. What is the dispute? How ignorant can you get?
- wellyuk, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4By (Digg being an) American-based website, do you mean the content is American, the servers are hosted in the States or what? Digg is an international site, whether the servers are hosted in the US and A or not, and whether Kevin Rose is from the US and A or not. So, in conclusion, you're wrong.
- xthroughmyeyesx, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3This is excellent, I never put two and two together. I couldn't care less about a 3G iPhone if this is true, to be completely honest.
- scoottie, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2would be better for them to do a 4g or better phone 3g will already be old
- smacksaw, on 02/11/2008, -2/+4Interesting. Not original, but interesting.
What is more likely is that Apple and/or AT&T have something completely different up their sleeves. If you can guess what it's going to be, they probably aren't doing it. But if it sounds pretty far-out or strange, that's probably it.
It's probably something nuts like a partnership with Google on the Touch and they are just going to quit development on the iPhone's connectivity features altogether and just make it for AT&T and then tell us that iPhone was a promo for their real idea, the Touch replacement which is not a phone and that the word "phone" is now dirty etc.
And it would ***** AT&T in the ass...because Apple is all about the lulz. It would be hilarious if they ended up making AT&T their bitches instead of being the bitch of some telco. Let AT&T have an exclusive iPhone. Apple probably gives two ***** about it anyway, especially considering how stung they got with the naming of it. - springo, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2I don't see how Apple would make money from this, so I don't see how this can happen.
- j0hnc0ry, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3I can't believe nobody has mentioned that wifi runs @ 2.4 GHz. There is no way wifi devices will communicate over 700MHz. This is the dumbest "tech" article I have ever read.
- jonshipman, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3T-mo's 3G isn't compatible with AT&T's 3G
- cptaintylor, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Google phone, Google 700mhz buying, etc.
Wild, unreasonable speculation shouldn't be surprising. - yabos, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Yeah that'd be nice & everything but none of the current hardware would work with this. Changing frequencies requires new transceivers not just new software.
- MacParrot, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2awww...does someone need a hug?
- FoxFaction, on 02/11/2008, -4/+63G means it's 3 times as good as regular old G.
- thesledman, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2I agree with you, although I don't think Free (as in beer) WiFi was in question. The article made it clear that IF it were to happen it would certainly be a pay service. I believe you get what you pay for and Free WiFi does not interest me one bit. I want instant guaranteed high speed access and I'm willing to pay for it.
That being said, I think the article is wrong in all sorts of ways. There will be a 3g iPhone, no doubt about it, more then likely this summer. Eventually there will be a decent nationwide WiFi provider and in that case ALL WiFi devices will have access ... for a fee. - hudef, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3I am one of those people who rarely buy leading edge products as they always have bugs, are very expensive and are soon obsoleted by newer leading edge products. Hell, I still just use my phone to make calls and my computer to do everything else. I am amazed by how many people upgrade their phones two or three times a year.
- Jerk, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2"I can't believe that a human being could write an article that long composed entirely of nothing but speculation."
You must be new here. - inactive, on 02/11/2008, -3/+5I think it shipped with no 3G just as a way to annoy the consumer. If you notice, every smart phone seems to have 1 or 2 features, left out or missing. I think they do this on purpose
- wellyuk, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Yeah, let's be real! Who needs more than 384 Kbps? And who needs more than 640k,while we're at it.
1980 just called, they want their backwards thinking back. - skidooer, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2"The current iPod touch does not have a microphone"
No, but it does support one through the dock connector. Apple could sell a case that implements the microphone and speaker. Not that I see it happening, but definitely possible. - inactive, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3I have an iPhone and love it. Can you please point me to some people that really use their iPhone day in and day out that dislike it? I have not met any ... but I'm guessing they exist somewhere?
- timlopez, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2"For $20 a month, plus the ability to tether the touch to a laptop to gain mobile WiFi access, likely every college student and Mac business professional would snap one up."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you wouldn't need to tether from your touch/iPhone because the same wifi capabilities are more than likely IN your laptop? Especially if you login to the service the same style you would tmobile's hot spot service. - trouble916, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Is everyone else missing the obvious? AT&Ts 3G rollout has taken about 5 years to just cover major metropolitan areas.
The new 700mhz spectrum is brand new and untested (and in my understanding probably can't even be truly tested until the old analog TVs are shutoff).
You're at least 4-5 years from that point before a viable product based on the 700mhz spectrum will even be close to available.
iPhone on 3G is likely a "this year" thing if only for Japan and other European markets, not to mention the [already announced] AT&T 3G buildout here. If not by the end of this year then definitely early next year.
Anything else is wild-eyed speculation... and not particularly well thought-out. - skellener, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2> If AT&T were able to provide a nation-wide WiFi network,
> many iPod touch users would jump at the chance to pay
> them a monthly fee to be able to access it.
100% inaccurate. People who purchased a Touch, didn't want to have anything to do with monthly fees. Besides, there's no mic or speaker on a Touch for even a Skype call. You might as well just get an iPhone if you want to make calls. - digithed, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1This whole argument about battery life doesn't hold water. Nokia and Sony Ericsson both already have phones capable of using UTMS and HSDPA with download speeds of up to 7.2Mbps and they already have battery life which is longer than that of the iPhone. This has always just been a lame excuse from Apple designed to hide the fact that they are not ready with a 3G design. It's not the battery life that is the problem so they must be having some other kind of problem that Nokia and Sony Ericsson have already solved.
- andrewpmk, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1This is complete BS. Wi-Fi is a short range protocol (the range is about 100m or so) so it is completely useless for creating a national broadband network. You'd need so many transmitters it would be uneconomical. And, it would not work indoors (the City of Toronto has a "municipal Wi-Fi system" downtown but it is almost impossible to get a signal indoors). The only viable protocols for long-range internet are the 3G protocols and WiMax.
- Ler224, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1LTE not wifi
- ChayD, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1Although there's nothing stopping you from putting Opera on there. Unlike certain other no-3rd-party-software-please type phones I could mention.
- johnpaul191, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1The current iPod touch does not have a microphone, so there will be no overnight unlocking of some trojan horse, and it's not like the 700MHz stuff will be worked out for a while anyway.
Even if Apple has some partnership with Google down the road, i am sure an iPhone will sell well for a while. People will be apprehensive about some cell replacement, the same way they have apprehension about VOIP. The hard work on the iPhone is done, and it's nearly a global product (not Japan etc since they use CDMA, right?). Any nationwide WiFi may not work around the world, and they have to account for that.
With no inside info, i can buy the major assumptions about the lack of 3G. AT&T 3G network is spotty, and the iPhone is not big enough to include multiple chipsets. The 3G chipset still uses significantly more power than EDGE, and battery life is an issue. Except web browsing or google maps, the EDGE network is fast enough. Now i guess Apple/AT&T have some stats about how much time average users actually spend on Safari, so they know if that's a big deal. - MacParrot, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1As much as I hate spelling Nazis, your comment = fail
- 0rcinus, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1It can't even be WiMax nor 4G (LTE). Bandwidth is a function of frequency, as simple as that. Low frequency = low bandwidth; High frequency = high bandwidth.
And BTW:
WiMax = 10-66 GHz
LTE/4G = 2.0-2.6 GHz
Which means, this article iiiiiiis... *drum roll* ...that's right! Complete and utter shyte! - 0rcinus, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1You really aren't the sharpest pencil in the drawer, are you? You should go and do some homework before writing garbage, just like the author of the article should.
Yes, data can be sent on any frequency, but:
1. bandwidth is in direct correlation to frequency,
2. all frequencies bounce and go through obstacles - the difference is what obstacles and how many of them, and we're talking about CITIES with BUILDINGS, not your typically american paper-and-wood-mache 'burb houses, and finally
3. noticed any chip, antenna or base-station makers that make 700 MHz equipment lately?
Gawd, people around here are dumb... - drunkenoaf, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Gene Munster? Why does his name crop up so much? He says something logical that any Apple consumer could come up with, and he gets talked about? Even better than that, he pulls random half-baked ideas-- out of his ass-- and people report those too. Why? Why!? Engaget need a quote for respectability? Who knows.
- tdahlia, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Nice fantasy.
-
Show 51 - 94 of 94 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is