With New SDK, VoIP Over 3G Apps Now Working On iPhone 171
silverpig writes "Yesterday marked the announcement of the Apple iPad device, and with it came a new version of the SDK. In this new version, Apple has lifted the VoIP over 3G restrictions that limited VoIP traffic to wifi only. This morning, Fring announced that its iPhone app is 3G-capable starting immediately. No update is needed as apparently the app had 3G capability all along, but a server-side block prevented its use. Furthermore, apparently a 3G-capable version of Skype has been ready for some time now, and has been waiting for this restriction to be lifted."
All markets? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's nice to have this enabled finally. However, the mention that this is something blocked on the server side makes me wonder if this may only be relevant to specific markets.
Yes (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
not knowing how cell network traffic is handled, is VOIP more or less bandwidth intensive than a dedicated voice channel?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Well, it runs over the 3g data network so it is infinitely more bandwidth intensive than a voice call.
Infinitely more? No wonder AT&T can't build a good enough network for the iPhone.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Now that AT&T is allowing this traffic over their network I don't want them to be whining about bandwidth usage - especially when the line item on the bill is "UNLIMITED DATA"
I'm not special anymore (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the best parts about my iPhone being jailbroken was that little hack that let you use VOIP over 3g.
Re:I'm not special anymore (Score:5, Funny)
I guess you could go catch a virus thats exclusive to Jailbroken iPhones. Would that make you feel better?
Re:I'm not special anymore (Score:5, Informative)
You mean the viruses for those people who were stupid enough to leave OpenSSH running on their iphone, with the default login/pw?
Re: (Score:2)
Well to be fair, OpenSSH doesn't exactly stay shutdown, there are a few different conditions where it was reactivate itself.
Re:I'm not special anymore (Score:4, Informative)
According to security expert Charlie Miller, jailbroken iPhones are more vulnerable than non-jailbroken And Charlie Miller should know what he is talking about. After all, he is credited for uncovering the security issue that spawned the first Google Android update, and he did manage to break the Apple developed Safari browser in about 10 seconds and this year’s PWN2OWN competition. While jailbreaking the device is a great way to use the iPhone’s full potential, it also means that you remove all the security protections that Apple built into the device’s software. You will be able to install 3rd party app and other software applications that are not distributed via the iTunes Store, but you will also leave your device wide open to all sorts of attacks.
Re: (Score:2)
While I've no doubt about Charlie Miller's qualifications, jailbreaking an iphone, on its own, does nothing to reduce its security. All jailbreaking allows you to do is install and run software not specifically approved by Apple. It doesn't open up random ports or install services. The applications that you install afterward introduce the vulnerabilities, but this is true whether or not you jailbreak your phone because Apple's App Store reviews do NOT cover security. Even if they claim they do, it's not pos
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the viruses for those people who were stupid enough to leave OpenSSH running on their iphone, with the default login/pw?
This isn't about people being stupid. The vast majority of jailbreakers have no notion of what SSH even is. The geeks know, and if they leave the default password, well, the charge of stupidity may be warranted. They're not like those of us who know how to edit the sshd.conf and how to send files and tunnel over ssh and all that, or even why ssh exists and how it compares with telnet.
These are people for whom ssh is just geek words in the instructions. It's like the ingredients in your food. You understand
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
About time (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
it's in cydia.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The steps are:
1) Jailbreak your phone: http://www.redmondpie.com/jailbreak-iphone-3.1.2-firmware-with-blackra1n-zni327/
2) Enable native tethering: http://www.redmondpie.com/enable-tethering-on-iphone-3g-3gs-3.1.2-firmware-eqw846/
3) Make sure you have the correct mobileconfig (not the benm.at one): http://www.redmondpie.com/fix-iphone-3.1.2-tethering-and-visual-voicemail-vvm-ows754/
Re: (Score:2)
Re:About time (Score:4, Informative)
You can tether with AT&T now the trick is they charge you an extra $20 a month. So if you are a poor AT&T customer your still SOL.
Indeed with the random variabilty of AT&T network speeds and latency why any would want voip over 3G is beyond me. As for verizon well their network is 3G in technology only. It has massive sections that can barely handle voice let alone data.
Re: (Score:2)
AT&T promised it. We're still waiting.
Interesting (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
i used to joke about phones getting bigger and chunkier lately due to features no one wants
but this is no joke
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, it's retro 80s with the iBrick! Now it'll be cool again to hold a ridiculously sized device to your ear just to talk to someone, now that Apple are doing it!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
There's also this one:
Yo momma's so fat she uses an iPad for an iPhone.
Re:Interesting (Score:4, Insightful)
This still doesn't resolve the fact that you're going through THEIR pipes and given the corporate friendly FCC in this decade that decided to roll back regulations, THEY choose how to fuck you over... there are precious few providers, and two of the four use CDMA (which in its current implementation doesn't allow voice+data) while the other two use GSM/HSDPA (which is what's required for the iPad).
Now the situation in Europe might be different, but that's because their governments mandate standards and interoperability which creates competition.
In short, without government intervention there is very little hope of avoiding the balkanized price-gouging cell market we have today in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a data-only connection. I'm presuming that means Skype is okay, though.
Bluetooth Keyboard drivers (Score:2)
When is the iPhone getting that? The iPad can use a bluetooth keyboard, but the iPhone can't? What kind of crap is this?
Re:Bluetooth Keyboard drivers (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. iPhone OS 3.2 is iPad only. There's a giant note on the download page for it. Again, this SDK will not work for iPhone. This is a giant non-story.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Alternative Bluetooth stacks are in the works for jailbroken phones. They already have file-sending working, and presumably Bluetooth HID are next.
Re: (Score:2)
It's done. You can have a bluetooth keyboard on your jailbroken phone. There's experimental support for a mouse as well.
While we're at it... (other bluetooth profiles). (Score:5, Insightful)
When is the iPhone getting that? The iPad can use a bluetooth keyboard, but the iPhone can't? What kind of crap is this?
And while we're at it.... why not bluetooth syncing (with SYNCH, FTP, & OBEX), DUN for the touch and iPad, BPP (printing), and Audio/Video Remote Control Profile (AVRCP)?
This isn't just an Apple problem, by the way. This is an industry-wide problem right now: "bluetooth" means a lot of things and most of the market doesn't seem to care to specify what. The BSIG ought to require those using the Bluetooth logo to specify which profiles a device supports, for the sake of consumer awareness and market pressure.
Re:While we're at it... (other bluetooth profiles) (Score:2)
Let's see, synching over USB is pretty slow. USB has a raw transfer rate of 480 Mb/s. Bluetooth maxes out at 3 Mb/s. See the problem?
Re: (Score:2)
That's a really good point, and I can see why that means that you wouldn't want to use bluetooth as your primary means of moving large media files between devices. And then, if you're going to go with a cable, I guess everything else is redundant.
Thing is, though, redundancy can be pretty nice for the consumer. If you've forgotten your cable, it might not be the time to download a few movies onto your iPod, but it might be nice to still be able to move a podcast or two, your calendar, some ringtones, and a
Re: (Score:2)
Apple COULD set things up so you could do a MobileMe type sync (Address Book, Calendar) to your computer instead of having to go through MobileMe as an intermediary. That would be very nice. I have to say, since I got MobileMe I really don't sync my iPhone as much as I should, for backups, so the over the air sync actually fulfills a lot of the needs.
I can certainly understand why they don't support Bluetooth sync for anything else though.
Re:While we're at it... (other bluetooth profiles) (Score:2)
The BSIG ought to require those using the Bluetooth logo to specify which profiles a device supports, for the sake of consumer awareness and market pressure.
They have standardized a series of icons [parrot.com] indicating support for headsets, input devices, file transfer, etc. If you use those icons, you have to be supporting specific profiles.
My understanding.... (Score:3, Insightful)
was that there was never a technical problem with this, but it was the face that ATT didn't want people to use VOIP over 3G because it competed with their voice offerings.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess in theory VOIP packets don't NEED to use much more bandwidth than voice packets do (granted, the network isn't optimized for them, and providers might take more bandwidth than they really need, and they are on different bands/etc).
However, since VOIP is close to free what it does do is allow people to consume a whole lot more calling time than their plans would otherwise cover, which means that demand is going to soar.
Re: (Score:2)
Well I'm not sure, but I would guess that their digital voice is using something more efficient than TCPIP, and in addition they're compressing the hell out of the audio whereas a VoIP program might opt to use lesser compression. Beyond that, I don't know if there's something like different "channels" where they've set aside a certain portion of their bandwidth for voice and other portions for data, which means that using that not-using their voice service doesn't necessarily open up more bandwidth for dat
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Well I'm not sure, but I would guess that their digital voice is using something more efficient than TCPIP, and in addition they're compressing the hell out of the audio whereas a VoIP program might opt to use lesser compression. Beyond that, I don't know if there's something like different "channels" where they've set aside a certain portion of their bandwidth for voice and other portions for data, which means that using that not-using their voice service doesn't necessarily open up more bandwidth for data.
Voice is circuit switched in UMTS so of course there are different "channels", or tubes if you like. Voice is mostly likely AMR coded over the air interface which is then sent over a ds0 over a T1, either physical or inverse multiplexed over a STM-1 further into the circuit switched core network.
So, yes it will be much for efficent than your run of the mill VoIP which will travel over as UDP over a GTP-U tunnel terminated in the GGSN.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No. He's just showing off.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I thought this was a geek heavy site and that networking would be somewhat understood.
In "lay man"'s terms, cellular standards before LTE (I am talking mostly of 3GPP standards but I assume this applies to WiMAX as well) are really really messy.
A normal UMTS radio access network which has evolved from GSM to UMTS might be amix of TDM, ATM och IP based networks with legacy protocols such as SS7. Through that together with general telecom wierdness where much intelligence is deep inside the network.
These net
Beginning of the end of telephony? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Beginning of the end of telephony? (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh God I hope so. It goes great with VoIP on the home-line side.
Why should there be a marginal cost to a phone call? There isn't - once you're paying for the infrastructure, it's free.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We're used to thinking this way about the Internet because most wired ISPs don't charge per amount of data (although some use bandwidth caps and rate-limiting). But as it does require more infrastructure to send more data, charging for each phone call spreads the cost of the infrastructure over its users more fairly. I don't think the idea of charging per byte for cellular Internet will go away soon.
Because... (Score:2)
Why should there be a marginal cost to a phone call? There isn't - once you're paying for the infrastructure, it's free.
Costs of maintaining and more importantly expanding the capacity of the infrastructure are directly tied to usage, though: each call connected goes through at the opportunity cost of another potential phone call. Having some kind of economic feedback go through the system based on usage makes a certain amount of sense.
Of course, nobody likes being on the meter all the time, particularly if
Re: (Score:2)
Insofar as we are headed that way, that "end" began a long time ago -- long enough that the FCC (as discussed on /. [slashdot.org] last month) is already investigating regulatory approaches to handling the transition from the existing telephone network to a IP-based network.
Apple allowing VoIP over 3G on iPhone isn't the beginning of that end.
Re: (Score:2)
God yes, obviously no one ever did VoIP on a mobile device before Apple allowed it. Now that the less than 5% of Iphone users can do it, that's the real tipping point!
AT&T has allowed VoIP on 3G network since Oct (Score:5, Informative)
AT&T now allowing iPhone VoIP calls over 3G [engadget.com]
AT&T Greenlights VoIP For the iPhone [techcrunch.com]
Maybe someone can fill me in here (Score:2)
Really? (Score:2)
Re:Maybe someone can fill me in here (Score:5, Informative)
$0.02/min to China, as opposed to $3/min.
Re: (Score:2)
For $30 I have 6 GB of data transfer a month - way more than I can hope to use on the phone. For $35/month I have 100 minutes of anytime voice. See why I might want to use VOIP, even for local calls?
Re: (Score:2)
Using VOIP over 3G while on roaming in another country would be by far the most expensive way to make a call... data roaming charges are typically so high the iPhone even has a specific option to disable 3G data on roaming connections.
What about multitasking? (Score:5, Interesting)
I assume multitasking is still missing so how's skype/fring going to work? "Call me so I can log in"? "While in a skype call - let me log out, I need to check this links/mail/etc?"
Re: (Score:2)
Just hold down the Home button to activate background mode.
Re: (Score:2)
Holding down the Home button is for killing off the current running app.
Re: (Score:2)
Holding down the Home button is for killing off the current running app.
I'm guessing that was the joke.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume that unlike android that an app can't intercept SMS messages?
On android even with single-tasking there is an easy way around this issue. Just have your app bind into the SMS interface and look for messages with a unique code in them (sent by Skype). When that message is received the app would launch and connect to the Skype servers to find out what is going on and display an incoming call.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
As of last July for Fring [fring.com]
and September for Skype. [skype.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Did you even read the Skype link? It says nothing about push notifications being enabled, and indeed, most of the comments are from people asking why they're not available and when they will be.
SDK version 3.2 only? Skype not updated yet... (Score:2, Redundant)
This restriction is lifted in SDK 3.2 for iPad, and it's not certain that it will be available on the iPhone. Also, as of now Skype does not have app for iPhone that is 3G enable in the app store.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I have tried skype on my iPhone. Still refuses to work over 3G.
Re: (Score:2)
Skype requires an update. They've said they've got one all ready to go.
I think all that information was actually in the summary.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, Skype have been saying that for months now. It's Apple that actually has to allow and approve VOIP over 3G app, which they have not to this date. That's all I'm saying.
I don't think we'll see updated Skype app for a few months until the 3.2 SDK is out, and even then it's not certain that 3.2 SDK applies to the iPhone?
Re: (Score:2)
Fring claims they are supporting VOIP over 3G now. What you mean, and what wasn't clear in your other posts, is that Apple hasn't specifically approved a VOIP over 3G app yet because Fring managed to enable theirs without an app update. That's true, but they also haven't pulled the plug on Fring, which they are more than capable of doing and have done in the past.
Re: (Score:2)
I just tried skype on my iPhone...went through on 3g with no problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Jailbroken iPhone? I'm in Canada on Rogers network, iPhone not jailbroken. Still refuses to do VOIP calls through 3G, which according to Skype is expected. A new update app is needed to enable it.
data-only plan? (Score:2)
is there such a thing as a data only plan w/ AT&T? how about other carriers?
i rarely talk voice on the phone. it sort of irks me that i way $50+ a month for it.
Too Little, Too Late, AT&T (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And since users have chosen the iPhone model and made it a success, they're obviously fine with it...so why blame anyone? Apple has chosen the appliance paradigm, and the users agreed with it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I was just pointing out that blaming a company for continuing to use a financially successful model is pointless. Successful businesses do what is good for business.
If someone really wants to blame someone for Apple's behavior, it should be the users that support Apple because they wouldn't be able to continue that behavior without the support they receive.
But I agree with you, if everyone on the inside agrees it is a good thing then the people on the outside need to stay out.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The device fills a gap, and it seems a lot of people were stuck there until this device came along. Why do we have to wave our torches and pitchforks outside the fence when we could simply let these people have the all the tech they will ever need in a sensible form factor (and leave us alone)? We will still have our toys anyway (Android, Nokia N800 et al), and to an extreme, in that same form factor if one is determined enough.
If there ever comes a time when they will need us say, to do some jailbreaking (
Re:Lifted until? (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree. I was in the hospital recently, and the pretty nurse happened to notice that I had an iPhone. She was very curious about it. I showed her e-mail, and the browser, and google maps, and IHeartRadio, and she decided there and then she'd go and buy one. She came back the next day and waved it at me. Now, she's a nurse, she's reasonably clever, but not computer person. She does have a computer, and knows how to dock the phone with iTunes. Does she want a philosophical discussion about open v. proprietary? No. It's just got to work.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I know this is Slashdot, so I won't even ask if you got her phone number, did you at least get her IPhone's IP or IMEI address? :)
Re: (Score:2)
3.1 million activations by AT&T in the US this last quarter. Oh, those poor sheep!
If you're on the AT&T network, you have to abide by their conditions. I'm presuming either that AT&T has decided to open things up -- that the $60 for their unlimited data is enough -- or that Apple has plans of moving to other networks during the life of iPhone OS 3.2.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed - but also blame the places that give media coverage almost solely to the Iphone, whilst ignoring the many (more popular) products like those from Nokia that don't follow this model. Then we get Slashvertisements like this, where Apple are then wowed for removing these restrictions.
My 5800 phone recently added kinetic scrolling in a firmware update - shall we have a front page story for every little thing like that, I wonder...
Re:Lifted until? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait!
So, first it's "Apple is evil, it;s so locked down! It sucks! They should open it!", and when they actually do open it up and enable new function that they had previously prevented (for whatever reason) it's "Apple is still evil! They will restrict it again!"
Which is it?
Do you want them to remove restrictions or not?
Re: (Score:2)
No. Go back and never restrict it to begin with! Apple is still evil until it was never evil from the beginning.
Re:Lifted until? (Score:5, Funny)
Now don't go getting all biblical on us. Won't work because we understand recursion.
Re: (Score:2)
No they can't, because most phones let you run whatever applications you want, from any download site (you know, how it used to be, with old fashioned desktop and laptop computers, remember that?) without needing permission from the manufacturer.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell that to all those locked down handsets that can't use ringtones due to a carrier restriction, not a technical one - to force you to buy ringtones from Verizon and AT&T etc.
The iPhone is not unique in having non-technical restrictions placed on it - the phone market is not a typical fully open environment to start with - something hopefully Android will change.
Re: (Score:2)
I know, it has to be one of the other. The world is Black or White, Good and Bad. There has to be GOOD or BAD.
There is a serious problem with people who think like this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple aren't evil per se, they're a corporation. If people don't like their products they're free to not buy them, hack them, make their own, or bitch and moan. Hardware I buy is _my_ hardware however, (unless I sign some contract waiving my property rights) and I'll do whatever the fuck I want to with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Google Voice? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since Google Voice is not, and never has been, a VoIP service, I can't imagine this would have any effect.
Further, since they now have an HTML5 web-based app that does pretty much everything you'd want out of a Google Voice app, I'm not sure there is much need for such an app.