> 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.
If people on Digg took a reading comprehension test, they'd fail miserably just like Tippis and wellyuk did. I never said ALL .com sites are American-based, just a majority. Take into account that Digg IS an American-based website and you get people flipping out when someone writes an article as if the reader is also located in the same country. Boo hoo.
You 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...
Not to mention the fact HSDPA really doesn't suck more juice than UMTS. In fact, it more or less has the exact same power requirements, because it IS the same standard.
It 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!
wrong. I know plenty of people that would jump at that idea. There are tons of people who dont want to switch to ATT for their cell service or who are part of a family plan that could cost up to a $1000 to switch over all the lines. If it was cheap, like the $10 he suggested, then alot of those people who bought the Touch instead of iPhone (and theres alot) could then get online with their iPods. oh and the skype comment doesnt exactly hold true either, there are companies that sell microphones for iPods and you dont need speakers if you just use the head phones. If people really wanted to use skype, the technology is there to do it.
skellenerFeb 11, 2008
> 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.
mcmlxxiiFeb 11, 2008
I was quite interested in the idea of Apple helping to create a large scale wifi network. Then I saw Mac chick of the month *drool*
Closed AccountFeb 11, 2008
If people on Digg took a reading comprehension test, they'd fail miserably just like Tippis and wellyuk did. I never said ALL .com sites are American-based, just a majority. Take into account that Digg IS an American-based website and you get people flipping out when someone writes an article as if the reader is also located in the same country. Boo hoo.
0rcinusFeb 12, 2008
You 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...
0rcinusFeb 12, 2008
Not to mention the fact HSDPA really doesn't suck more juice than UMTS. In fact, it more or less has the exact same power requirements, because it IS the same standard.
0rcinusFeb 12, 2008
I'm afraid LTE is still ages away :)
0rcinusFeb 12, 2008
It 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!
phoenixuprisingFeb 13, 2008
wrong. I know plenty of people that would jump at that idea. There are tons of people who dont want to switch to ATT for their cell service or who are part of a family plan that could cost up to a $1000 to switch over all the lines. If it was cheap, like the $10 he suggested, then alot of those people who bought the Touch instead of iPhone (and theres alot) could then get online with their iPods. oh and the skype comment doesnt exactly hold true either, there are companies that sell microphones for iPods and you dont need speakers if you just use the head phones. If people really wanted to use skype, the technology is there to do it.