iPhone Doesn't Surf Fast Enough for Jobs

ElvaWSJ writes with a link to a Wall Street Journal interview with Steve Jobs and AT&T's CEO Randall Stephenson. As you can imagine, they're pretty enthusiastic. Just the same, they address the possibility that the iPhone will slow internet access on Ma Bell's cell network. "Mr. Jobs acknowledged that the company's new iPhone won't surf the Internet as fast as he would like on the network, called "Edge," but added that the device's ability to connect to Wi-Fi hotspots would give consumers a speedier alternative for Web browsing. For his part, Mr. Stephenson said the iPhone represents a broader push by AT&T into Wi-Fi services, including, potentially, mobile Internet calling. The two men also discussed the iPod's "halo effect" and reflected on the origins of their corporate partnership."

Not much choice

[elrous0 (869638)]

Since AT&T was supposedly the only provider who would agree to Apple's list of detailed demands, it's likely they had little choice but to accept their network. It's not like other providers were lining up for a chance at it.

ch-ch-ch-turn and face the strange choices

[Gary W. Longsine (124661)]

AT&T has an HSDPA [wikipedia.org] (3G) network, but there are two issues with it. (1) It's not widely deployed (a few dozen cities, compared to EDGE, which is everywhere that AT&T offers cell service). (2) Although the network is quite fast, the chipsets that support it presently consume too much power. Apple apparently wants a lower power chipset so that battery life of the iPhone isn't adversely affected.

Not fast enough?!?!

[gravos (912628)]

But 640kbps ought to be enough for anyone?

Wow

[svendsen (1029716)]

I was afraid we wouldn't see a single iPhone advertisement...I mean article today...my fears have been relived...

WiFi

[jshriverWVU (810740)]

I'm amazed AT&T or any cell company would allow a cell to enter their market that has built in wifi. Won't this cut into their profits? Since anyone can go to McD's and check their email instead of having to pay their provider for the online minutes.

Re:WiFi

[bruns (75399)]

If you offer unlimited data plans with your device, having built in wifi means that the end user wont bog down the network as much when they are around a local wifi AP. If you rely strictly on the cellular network for data and people actually use the service they are paying for, the performance in general will start to suck if you haven't built out the network properly.

I'd say its AT&T protecting itself when problems start to crop up with their data network.

Re:WiFi

[WhiteWolf666 (145211)]

Many of T-mobile's devices have built-in WiFi, and their newest devices actually use VoIP when on a WiFi network (unlimited minutes while on WiFI, too!)

See http://theonlyphoneyouneed.com/ [theonlyphoneyouneed.com]

I find the lock-in with a provider retarted.

[Lumpy (12016)]

Why did not apple buck the whole system and offere the iPhone as a unlocked device only.

that way you could get your choice of service, your phone is not held hostage by unscrupulous Service providers, and it would have forced a change in the way cellular companies abuse their customers.

a win,win,win situation.

Re:I find the lock-in with a provider retarted.

[chill (34294)]

You've drunk the Kool-Aid.

Apple is NOT your friend, and they are NOT trying to bring about a revolution for the little guy. They are trying to worm their way in to every possible aspect of getting your money. Why do you HAVE to go thru iTunes to set a ring tone? Why can't you just use an existing MP3 that you downloaded/copied over to the phone? Because Apple doesn't get a cut that way.

The phone is not unlocked because Apple gets a cut of the service from AT&T. The phone will most likely only be unlocked when Apple negotiates a cut from the other GSM service providers.

Re:I find the lock-in with a provider retarted.

[Hijacked Public (999535)]

Wait just a minute here, you are saying that a for-profit company in a capitalist economy is trying to get my money?

The most they can you say?

Well this is an unsettling development.

Ignore what it is, think of what it could be!

[0xdeadbeef (28836)]

What is up with Jobs selling nonexistent features?

Ringtone business gets a tease:
Mr. Jobs: One might imagine a lot of things down the road.
Mr. Jobs: There's a lot of things you can imagine down the road.

But you can forget 3G in revision one:
Mr. Jobs: No, we just don't comment on future stuff.

I also got a kick out of this:
Mr. Jobs: There's often times a Wi-Fi network that you can join whether you're sitting in a coffee shop or even walking along the street piggybacking on somebody's home Wi-Fi network.

Theft of service, it's the Apple way!

Does it autoconnect or manual to wifi

[jshriverWVU (810740)]

With all the hype over people getting sued and arrested for using someones open AP, I wonder if the iPhone autoconnects without user intervention or if it requires some manual selection. If auto this could cause legal problems as the user would be according to recent suits "stealing bandwith and computer fraud by illegally accessing an another persons network" I dont agree with it, but that appears to be the direction we're going.

AT+T jsut boosted EDGA speeds

[Brit_in_the_USA (936704)]

Seems that there are credible reports coming in that in the last 24 hours AT+T have increased EDGE speeds to >200 k bits/s. This should be good news to all AT+T EDGE users:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/28/atandt-customer s-seeing-sudden-boost-in-edge-speeds/ [engadget.com]

As we know, increased means they probably removed some artificial cap....

I wonder how many days will go by until the drop the speed again? I guess there will be a halo effect of new iPhone buyers showing their friends - "hey look at this I can browse the web" - just for the sake of it....

This great new product!

[packetmon (977047)]

It will surf teh interweb, answer email, make calls, play MP3's, wash your car, clean your house, spank you off. FINELINE PRINT: Product may not work as advertised. In order to benefit from our huge technologically advanced vertically intergrated technologically advanced technology, users must first purchase an advanced proactive neurally intergrated vertically horizontal network card from our vertically implemented horizontally vectored service provider.

Re:EDGE is a slow network.

[arivanov (12034)]

Agree. Though the problem is not that GPRS (with or without EDGE) is slow as a network. The problem is that the ubiquity of the Blackberry has largely driven it over capacity in the places where the demand for mobile computing is likely to be the highest - commuter routes and tourist areas.

Here are some number from the UK Vodafone GPRS (non-Edge) network collected on a typical Cambridge to London Commute:

1. Business commuter trains (starting time) 7:15-8:45 and 17:15-18:45 97% downlink packet loss, totally unuseable. Looks like the BB is actually prioritised versus any other traffic to ensure that the people who enjoy a vibrator up their crotch have an instant vibration regularly.

2. Transition period: 8:45-9:15 and 16:15-17:15 - works in some areas depending on cell capacity

3. Non-business commuter trains 9:15-15:45 and after 19:15 - works flawlessly except a couple of holes in coverage. Speed is not great, but quite tolerable. Definitely useable for some minor surfing, checking mail, working on a couple of documents.

I would not expect ATT to be much different. In fact, it is likely to be worse. With or without Edge.

Re:EDGE is a slow network.

[illumin8 (148082)]

Here are some number from the UK Vodafone GPRS (non-Edge) network collected on a typical Cambridge to London Commute:

Just because Vodafone oversold their GPRS network doesn't mean that AT&T has. I live in one of the most rail commuter heavy areas in the world (NYC area), and I see people on the train using all kinds of Blackberries, Treos, and other wireless devices. I get 160kbps downstream (tested using mobile speed test [dslreports.com]) consistently in this area, provided my train isn't going through a tunnel or underground. I use a Treo 650 GSM on Cingular/AT&T network.

The reason I switched from T-Mobile to Cingular was the data speed. T-Mobile clocked in around 40kbps average, where Cingular/AT&T was 160kbps.

Re:EDGE is a slow network.

[elrous0 (869638)]

Better to grant 50 people email access than websurfing to 1.

But what if one of those 50 people is a...TERRORIST!?!?!

Re:EDGE is a slow network.

[falcon5768 (629591)]

Your right it aint 3G which means the entire country can use it instead of roughly two dozen cities that have 3G support leaving the rest of the country out in the cold.

Oh and the iPhone can last a day with normal consumption, not 45 minutes because 3G chipsets consumer insane amounts of power.

Seriously this not 3G crap is getting old. Its not 3G because in the US 3G is NOT READY YET.

Re:EDGE is a slow network.

[Scyber (539694)]

I thought most of cingular's 3G phones fall back to EDGE when not in a 3G coverage area. If that is the case, then the entire country could still use the iPhone if it was 3G.

Wrong!

[Mr2001 (90979)]

EVDO is 3G, and it's available across the US [evdomaps.com]. And my EVDO phone's battery lasts a lot longer than 45 minutes.

The US is 3G ready - it's Cingular/AT&T and T-Mobile who aren't.

Re:EDGE is a slow network.

[gEvil (beta) (945888)]

Gotta love /. moderation. You get modded flamebait when you correct the spelling in your own post... : p

Re:oblig

[el cisne (135112)]

"I love the smell of Wi-Fi in the morning. Smells like....bandwith."

Re:Halo

[nbvb (32836)]

> If I were running an AT&T competitor right now I would be wondering why Jobs didn't approach me with this opportunity and what I could do to earn his approval. I wouldn't want to be left behind

Unless, of course, you're Verizon who had the balls to stand up to Apple. Right decision in the end or not, at least they stood up for their business.

If someone came to you and said:

1) We want you to agree to sell our product, sight unseen.
2) You have to cut all of your partners out of it.
3) We will tell you whether the phone can be replaced if a customer has a problem.
4) We want a percentage of service revenue.

- does that sound like a good business decision to you? You're going to alienate all of your other partners (i.e. Best buy, Walmart, etc..) You're going to alienate your customers (Sorry, we'd love to replace your handset Mr. Big-Important-VIP-Customer, but Apple said no. Can't help you.), and worst of all, you open the door for *EVERYONE* to take a piece of your service revenue - why wouldn't Motorola/LG/Samsung/etc. ask for the same deal? (You did it for Apple - either split revenue with us, or no RAZR2 for you.)

I agree - I think it would've kicked butt if VZW had the iPhone. A real 3G network (EV-DO) would complement iPhone wonderfully, as would a real voice network (GSM quality is crap. CDMA not only covers more area per tower, but it has a better vocoder as well.)

But can you blame them for turning it down? I would have, given the way Apple approached them.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-01-28-veriz on-iphone_x.htm [usatoday.com]

Re:I didn't get far...

[xeno-cat (147219)]

So Jobs should have appended, "...except, of course, for the Xerox Star. We all remember the Xerox Star right?"

There were several little incubator projects or outright commercial failures for GUI's in the early 80's. Macintosh was the one that brought it to the world. They are the ones that got it right. That gives them some pretty significant bragging rights.

Re:Revolutionary?

[LKM (227954)]

What part of "revolutionary user interface" did you not understand? He isn't even talking about the "touchscreen capabilitites" or "playing music" or "viewing the web." He's talking about how the touchscreen is used, how your play music, and how you view the web.

Yeah, my P990i does have a touchscreen, does view the web, does play music. That doesn't mean the iPhone's UI isn't revolutionary.