Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Nov 2012 02:14 UTC
Google "The Nexus 4 is absolutely wonderful, but it's also vexing. Frustrating. Annoying. It's easily the best Android phone on the market right now, and has some of the most powerful software that's ever been put on a mobile phone. It's an upgrade from last year's Galaxy Nexus in every way. It's terrific - save for one small thing. " Lack of LTE, obviously. Bigger issue for me as a European: glass back. Apparently it cracks. Who'da thunk?
Thread beginning with comment 540958
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

More recent 3G networks can also use IP, at least on the carrier side (probably most of what they care about, their side of the infrastructure; and what can be done in foreseeable future, since a lot of people will continue using old phones & it seems 2G is here to stay for a while) - some Huawei-supplied networks do that.

LTE deployment is generally also about more efficient utilisation of scarce spectrum resources - just like 3G was vs 2G. Not necessarily brining much higher speeds for the individual, but able to service more people in a given area with acceptable speeds.

Honestly, I'll trust you on that one, though I still don't understand why the ITU would make such a big deal of 4G being an all-IP network in such a case.

And I doubt 2G/3G hybrid "sucks power at a crazy pace" you mostly just do one or the other - and since standby times are good, it strongly suggests the connections don't use much power when not-very-active.

This discussion reminds me of something... Haven't we already been talking about that in the past, before being stopped by OSnews' 5-day comment limit as usual ?

Anyway, I agree with you that 3G standby consumption alone should be too low to explain it, but it is my experience that in two different French cities (Paris and Grenoble), with two different phones (Nokia E63 and Sony Xperia Mini Pro), two different operators (Orange France and Bouygues Telecom) and my same old phone usage patterns (lots of texts, occasional web browsing and e-mails), I have always approximately halved my battery life by switching from EDGE-only connections to UMTS-only connections in my phone settings.

Which, combined with 3G's significantly more sloppy coverage in "difficult" areas like trains and big buildings, is why I tend to keep these little gadgets on EDGE unless I really need the extra speed ;)

Edited 2012-11-03 21:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe they make a big deal because it's through-and-through IP? (and/or because when the story get going there were no IP 3G networks - which are still back-end only, I suppose essentially tunneling "legacy" services)

Yeah, we discussed it - but maybe not the limit stopped us, maybe there was not much more to add. And I must again point out that, if using the handset only for data (with data-only SIM, any "legacy" channel used only for control messages - which, considering long standby times, should be irrelevant), switching to UMTS from EDGE also ~halves battery life. ;) (likewise when switching to... LTE)

Reply Parent Score: 2

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Maybe they make a big deal because it's through-and-through IP? (and/or because when the story get going there were no IP 3G networks - which are still back-end only, I suppose essentially tunneling "legacy" services)

And shouldn't such a "pure" IP architecture imply some extra niceties for operators and/or users? I would imagine that a 2G protocol tunnelled through an data-only network would not have the same flexibility on the phone-carrier link side as an end-to-end IP network.

As an example, I don't know enough about cellular networks to find out if it would be doable, with 2G tech, to efficiently use a different voice codec if the receiving phone supports it. A use case for that would be to use Opus for voice communication on phones without violating carrier fair use clauses or modifying the underlying network.

Yeah, we discussed it - but maybe not the limit stopped us, maybe there was not much more to add. And I must again point out that, if using the handset only for data (with data-only SIM, any "legacy" channel used only for control messages - which, considering long standby times, should be irrelevant), switching to UMTS from EDGE also ~halves battery life. ;) (likewise when switching to... LTE)

I can understand that for heavy data use: if significantly more bits are transferred per second, it sounds logical that even the most efficient modem could draw more power. What I don't understand now is why UMTS will draw that much more power when I don't make heavy use of the extra data link.

Edited 2012-11-04 08:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2