To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It's a silly place.
I do have 3G where I live, well around my house. Other places in my village are suspect at best. Even worse where my wife's parents used to live there was no 3G, try surviving for hours with your in-laws without 3G. They recently moved, so I thought the 3G thing would be solved, but their new place is in a dead zone as well. Sometimes 3G appears, but then nothing happens and then 3G goes away again.
And why does my wife get upset if I stare at my phone all the time? The rest read folders and watch Carlo & Irene. Talk about mental torture.
I doubt 4G is very much about increasing theoretical maximum speed for individual subscriber, as far as the telecoms are concerned... in their eyes, LTE has greater spectral efficiency - hence the ability to squeeze more users (each getting "acceptable" speed) in a given chunk of spectrum, particularly in dense locations.
Short-term, probably not that much of a difference for subscribers; not likely to disrupt anything (especially since the new iPhone will certainly work just fine on older networks, and probably use noticeably more battery on the newer)
Any change is always bound to increase prices for us. LTE has a theoretical speed most if not all people will never get anyway.
Rumor has it the new iPhone's battery has only a slightly larger capacity. Unless they have some new generation LTE chips it may cut its operation time shorter than the iPhone 4/4S. I'd prefer it to be a bit longer.
In a way it's a kind of disgrace these cell phones, Apple and others, barely make it to the end of the day on their battery charge. I'd say make it 2 days and even that's crap. You can't use your phone without any power outlets nearby.
Plus, for the carriers (in the US) that do have decent 4g coverage, they cap their data plans such that you can't do anything interesting with it anyway, so might as well stick with 3g/HSPA+.
There aren't a "few" black holes. As a real world example - there is no 2G (let alone 3G) on the train mainline from the South Coast between Petersfield and Guildford. Not on O2, not on Vodafone and not on 3. Given O2 and Vodafone together are close to 50% of the UK carrier market, isn't that pretty pathetic? That's 40 minutes of a 1.5 hour journey on the mainline commuter backbone! From Guildford, the reception is spotty, and the closer you get to central London, the more bogged down it is and the slower the speed is. And yet we now have WiFi on the Tube? I'd LOL if it wasn't so depressing.
Luxury.
Before I had an iPhone I used an iPod touch on the train. The stations had free WiFi, but often before I managed to make a working connection the train would start moving again. Around this time I started to dislike web apps a lot.
Recently I spend 4 days in Belgium in a resort. I found an open WiFi, but I never got an IP address. Tried it every day (while waiting in the snack bar queue). I assumed it was not for visitor use, but part of some system. When we left we could fill out a form grading all the resort services, this included use of the free WiFi(!).





Member since:
2011-05-12
For me 3G is fast enough. I'd rather have 3G everywhere, there are still some black holes. As they couldn't fix these over the last few years I doubt 4G coverage would be better than 3G's.