Jobs SLAMS 3G - Wipes out its future!

Dennis Ferguson <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Yes, and if the 3G group can rise to meet Steve's challenge they have a
> > chance, but if not, they will be superseded. There is no reason a faster
> > protocol needs to be power hungry, it's poor chip design that's all.
>
> Actually there's a reason higher data rates require higher power; google
> "Shannon capacity". You can use low power WiFi if you don't need to talk
> to access points that are further away than across the room, but at the
> distances 3G operates over WiFi would require significantly more power.

ah, so the flaw is related to obsolete cell towers, not the more modern
approach of using higher density, but open 802.11 protocols. good to
know.

---

› See More: Jobs SLAMS 3G - Wipes out its future!

"Rashputin" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Isn't he the same guy who took over the desktop PC market back in the
> eighties?

not sure what you mean, Steve left Apple long before he had a chance to
"take over the pc market", plus IBM was quite powerful at the time. No
Cell Company is as powerful as IBM was in the 60's 70's, so this will be
easy.

Apple now owns the entire high end of the PC market, it will do the same
with Cell Phones, you can bank on it.

"Kevin Weaver" <[email protected]> wrote:

> So by all this, the people that were waiting for the next model that was
> rumored to have 3G is out of the question ?
>
> Look for another price cut in the not to near future.
> When they get down to 200-250 I'll go check them out again.
> Doing the web at 100K Is not fun.

but 90% of the time you'll be on regular WiFi, so speed is FASTER than
3G... being on "2G" is only in desperate times, away from home or office
or restaurants, etc.

Your phone calls don't make any difference, neither do email, google
maps, etc. You'd only notice 3G speed difference if you surf a lot out
in remote areas... where ironically 3G won't be for years, if ever.

How do you figure I'll be on Wi-Fi ?
If Wi-Fi were everywhere like you think it is, then why even have any other
connection in the phone ? Just use Wi-Fi right ?

Wrong, Drive down some hi-way and see how much Wi-Fi you get.

Point is, He is making excuses for not adding it. And that's going to be a
downfall.

"Oxford" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Kevin Weaver" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> So by all this, the people that were waiting for the next model that was
>> rumored to have 3G is out of the question ?
>>
>> Look for another price cut in the not to near future.
>> When they get down to 200-250 I'll go check them out again.
>> Doing the web at 100K Is not fun.
>
> but 90% of the time you'll be on regular WiFi, so speed is FASTER than
> 3G... being on "2G" is only in desperate times, away from home or office
> or restaurants, etc.
>
> Your phone calls don't make any difference, neither do email, google
> maps, etc. You'd only notice 3G speed difference if you surf a lot out
> in remote areas... where ironically 3G won't be for years, if ever.

"Kevin Weaver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> How do you figure I'll be on Wi-Fi ?
> If Wi-Fi were everywhere like you think it is, then why even have any
> other connection in the phone ? Just use Wi-Fi right ?
>
> Wrong, Drive down some hi-way and see how much Wi-Fi you get.


The thought of some brain-damaged idiot driving the freeway while trying to
use 3G on his phone is frightening.
I hope legislation is passed in each and every state to protect the innocent
from ignorant dweebs downloading
or surfing the net instead of paying attention to traffic.

Anyone caught surfing the web, downloading, etc while driveling should have
a minimum one year license suspension.
Second offense should result in permanent revocation of driving license.

I pray you don't wipe out some poor family while you are driving while using
3G.

What an ass!

Honu

Oxford wrote:
> Steve explains what detractors don't understand about 3G.
>
> Told you so!
>
> Watch it and weep...
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntnVxHIEuv4

Oh yeah...I'm in tears all right. Laughing at him not understanding the
communications landscape.


"The EDGE network works really great for the apps on most phones..."

Could it be the apps were taylored for a slow network instead of a fast
network and so many more apps might be unusable on EDGE?

"It perfect for (Google maps)..." if you don't mind some hardly better than
dial up modem speeds. But 3G is much better.

3G has and will always have better coverage than WiFi.

Oxford wrote:
> ah, so the flaw is related to obsolete cell towers, not the more modern
> approach of using higher density, but open 802.11

Ah, so the flaw is thinking that a thousand times more WiFi towers is less
expensive to deploy than cell towers.

Oxford wrote:
> extreme remote locations - where WiFi won't be for awhile)

Even if non-remote locations WiFi won't be there ever.

> Free WiFi makes more sense and will get rid of those pesky cell
> companies that want money for basically a "free service".

You clearly do not understand the difference between cellular and WiFi.

"Reality" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:Cp2Ii.4655$6o2.33@trnddc05...
>
> "Oxford" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "Reality" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> NEVER be ubiquitous (like you contend) is WiFi. Now, wimax
>>> may be something to watch, but wifi certainly will NEVER be a
>>> replacement for cellular.
>>
>> ah, shifting goal posts? just as i figured.
>>
>> wimax is wifi, the cell network is dead, just as i've been saying.
>
> Again demonstrating his complete and TOTAL ignorance....
>
> WiFi operates on 2 UNLICENSED frequencies. Same as many other devices.
> Like cordless phones, baby monitors, etc, etc.... It is NOT an ideal RF situation.
>
> WiMax's implementation in the US will be using LICENSED frequencies.
> (Just like good old cellular Oxford.)
>
> The two are very definitly NOT the same. And, Sprint-Nextel will be building
> wimax out as an overlay to existing CELLULAR infastructure. Clearwire also
> colocates on existing cellular infastructure the majority of the time.
>
> Comparing Wimax with Wi-Fi
>
> Due to the fact both WiMAX and Wi-Fi begin with the same two letters and both have a
> connection to wireless connectivity and the Internet, comparisons and confusion between
> the two are frequent. Despite this, the two standards are aimed at TOTALLY different applications.
>
> WiMAX is a long-range system, covering many kilometers that typically uses licensed spectrum
> to deliver a point-to-point connection to the Internet from an ISP to an end user.
>
> Wi-Fi is a shorter range system, typically hundreds of meters, that uses unlicensed spectrum
> to provide access to a network, typically covering only the network operator's own property.
> Typically Wi-Fi is used by an end user to access their own network, which may or may not be
> connected to the Internet.
>
> If WiMAX provides services analogous to a cellphone, Wi-Fi is more analogous to a simple
> low tech and short range cordless phone.
>
> WiMAX and Wi-Fi have quite different Quality of Service (QoS) mechanisms. WiMAX uses a mechanism
> based on setting up connections between the Base Station and the user device (cell again). Each
> connection is based on specific scheduling algorithms, which means that QoS parameters can be
> guaranteed for each flow.
>
> WiFi has introduced a QoS mechanism similar to fixed Ethernet, where packets can receive different priorities
> based on their tags. This means that QoS is relative between packets/flows, as opposed to guaranteed.
>
> WiMAX is highly scalable from what are called 'femto' scale remote stations to multi-sector 'maxi' scale base
> that handle complex tasks of management and mobile handoff functions and include MIMO-AAS smart antenna
> subsystems.
>
> WiFi simply isn't and it NEVER WILL BE.
>
> YOU are an idiot Oxford.
>

Interesting....... our troll / fanboy Oxford is completely silent, for once.

The "expert" in ALL things here - isn't after all. Really quite the opposite.

The silence speaks VOLUMES in this case, huh?

In news:[email protected],
DTC <no_spam@move_along_folks.foob> typed:
> Oxford wrote:
>> ah, so the flaw is related to obsolete cell towers, not the more modern
>> approach of using higher density, but open 802.11
>
> Ah, so the flaw is thinking that a thousand times more WiFi towers is less
> expensive to deploy than cell towers.


But according to Oxford WiFi is available everywhere already - EXCEPT where
you and I are.

"DTC" <no_spam@move_along_folks.foob> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Oxford wrote:
>> extreme remote locations - where WiFi won't be for awhile)
>
> Even if non-remote locations WiFi won't be there ever.
>
>> Free WiFi makes more sense and will get rid of those pesky cell companies that want money for basically a "free
>> service".
>
> You clearly do not understand the difference between cellular and WiFi.

Oxford clearly (from his spew over the past weeks here) doesn't understand ANY of the
subjects he claims to be an "expert" in....

His posts have demonstrated a number of things.

Troll? Certainly!!

Fanboy? OMG - one of the most blind to reality I've seen in a while. (see below)

"Expert"? No, the exact opposite. He showed a complete lack of knowledge so far.
Every post digs his deep 'I'm stupid hole' that much deeper.

Back to #1... There is always the possibility that he is one of those twisted troll types.
Putting out the most outrageous ****, just to illicit responses. Hard to tell. Certainly most
all that Oxford has posted in the past weeks has been completely devoid of ANY
basis in reality. Now.... is it deliberate, or is it rabid fanboy blindness?

Hertz_Donut wrote:
> "Kevin Weaver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> How do you figure I'll be on Wi-Fi ?
>> If Wi-Fi were everywhere like you think it is, then why even have any
>> other connection in the phone ? Just use Wi-Fi right ?
>>
>> Wrong, Drive down some hi-way and see how much Wi-Fi you get.
>
>
> The thought of some brain-damaged idiot driving the freeway while trying
> to use 3G on his phone is frightening.

But it's even worse with EDGE as their attention is diverted for a much
longer period of time.

"Ness_net" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "DTC" <no_spam@move_along_folks.foob> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> Oxford wrote:
>>> extreme remote locations - where WiFi won't be for awhile)
>>
>> Even if non-remote locations WiFi won't be there ever.
>>
>>> Free WiFi makes more sense and will get rid of those pesky cell companies that want money for basically a "free
>>> service".
>>
>> You clearly do not understand the difference between cellular and WiFi.
>
> Oxford clearly (from his spew over the past weeks here) doesn't understand ANY of the
> subjects he claims to be an "expert" in....
>
> His posts have demonstrated a number of things.
>
> Troll? Certainly!!
>
> Fanboy? OMG - one of the most blind to reality I've seen in a while. (see below)
>
> "Expert"? No, the exact opposite. He showed a complete lack of knowledge so far.
> Every post digs his deep 'I'm stupid hole' that much deeper.
>
> Back to #1... There is always the possibility that he is one of those twisted troll types.
> Putting out the most outrageous ****, just to illicit responses. Hard to tell. Certainly most
> all that Oxford has posted in the past weeks has been completely devoid of ANY
> basis in reality. Now.... is it deliberate, or is it rabid fanboy blindness?

I vote troll. No one is THAT stupid.... (or are they)?????

"Reality" <[email protected]> wrote:

> > WiFi simply isn't and it NEVER WILL BE.
> >
> > YOU are an idiot Oxford.
> >
>
> Interesting....... our troll / fanboy Oxford is completely silent, for once.
>
> The "expert" in ALL things here - isn't after all. Really quite the opposite.
>
> The silence speaks VOLUMES in this case, huh?

I'm never "silent" I just choose to shine a bright light where ignorance
is common place. (like the current cell phone industry)

You'll get it in time "Reality"... I sense you have the intelligence to
understand what I'm saying. I'll give you a few more months...

In the meantime...

if you want to try out the iPhone on the cheap, here is your chance...
go to the below link... then on the right side, click on "special
deals", then "clearance" .... not.... "iphone".... and there you will
find the 4GB iPhones for $299.

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPL...cts/AppleStore

Then, on the "cheap"... when you activate it through iTunes... choose...
999-99-9999 for your SSN number then you will be routed to "Go Phone"
mode... (no 2 year contract - and for sure on a minute to minute basis
more expensive) BUT if you are mainly going to use the WiFi surfing,
email, iPod, google maps etc it's going to be a more robust product than
the iPod Touch. (minus the extra 4-12GB memory of course)

so, something to ponder before apple runs out of them...

the specs:

iPhone, 4GB
Multi-touch display with full QWERTY soft keyboard
Safari web browser
Email access
Built-in Wi-Fi and Bluetooth
Holds up to 1,000 songs
Up to 8 hours of talk time and 250 hours of standby time
2.0 megapixel camera
4.8 ounces
4.5 x 2.4 x 0.46 inches
Apple earphones with built-in microphone
USB 2.0 cable

Price: $299.00

Estimated Ship:
Within 24 hours
Free Shipping

At 19 Sep 2007 13:45:30 -1000 Hertz_Donut wrote:

> The thought of some brain-damaged idiot driving the freeway while
> trying to use 3G on his phone is frightening.


If you actually stopped thinking that every mobile phone user is a
brain-addled teenager, you might conjure up a safe mobile 3G scenario-
i.e. the use of Google Maps, for example. The live maps/traffic
updates typically lag behind real-time at highway speeds when using
EDGE.



> I pray you don't wipe out some poor family while you are driving
> while using 3G.
>
> What an ass!


Show some imagination instead of jumping to a conclusion. The poster
you're calling an ass could be using navigation apps that don't
require his input while driving, or might even be a PASSENGER!
Surely you don't have a problem with my wife checking HER e-mail in
the passenger seat while I'M driving, do you?






--

"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures
or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for
all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with
ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003