A Detailed Review Of A 3G Phone And Network

An anonymous reader writes "The NEC e606 and 3's recently launched 3G network has been reviewed at Mobileburn. They seem to be happy with the network, but the phone is buggy and unfinished. One cool thing is that you can download sample videos to see what 3G is really like."

Comments

3G Rollout

[aerojad]

Just wondering, I haven't really heard much more about in a while, but whatever happened to the huge rollout of 3G services that we were promised back in 1999-2000. I remember one company in particular, Qualcomm, had wonderful times in 99 on the 3G hype, but it never really delivered as much as promised, and only had a huge rollout in Japan. Is that finally changing, and are these 3G phones that we look at actually ready to be used nationwide yet, or are we still talking major-city-only deals?

Re:3G Rollout

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, after paying huge amounts of money for the spectrum the carriers probably don't have much left to invest in new infrastructure... Not like there's a huge demand for 3G services anyway. 3G will become a reality but it will slowly replace older technology rather than take over by storm.

Re:3G Rollout

[ChilyWily]

Well there are two major reasons why 3G hasn't taken off (atleast in the US):

* The spectrum sales were done in years when money was no issue - unfortunately the dot com bust hit and suddenly the operators who had spent all their dough getting the spectrum had none left to actually build the infrastructure. (that's not to belittle the whole other issue of a seriously fragmented spectrum range here in the US where getting enough band to support 3G is pretty difficult for large operators - and almost impossible for new entrants)

* 3G is a major step ahead as far as the wired backhaul of the cellular infrastructure is concerned. With major companies (e.g. Lucent, Motorola) still cringing from the shock of vendor financing it's upto the operators (Sprint, Verizon et al) to buy the (expensive) upgrades themselves. In this climate today that's increasingly difficult - though there is some hope with people adopting intermediatry technologies. (I believe Verizon is moving ahead steadily on that one too).

But the fundamental questions remain: Do we really need 3G? What is the compelling reason? And will it be cost effective for end users or so overpriced that no one will be able to get it?

Re:3G Rollout

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's my 3G phone/jetpack! They promised me a 3G phone/jetpack!

Obligatory

[Wesley Felter]

That site was slashdotted so fast it must be running on a 3G phone.

Re:Obligatory

[zapp]

Ah, but if it were running on a 3G phone it would have all the bandwidth it needed!

It must be on an older 2 or 2.5G phone.

Poor coverage?

[Archon-X]

A pilot friend of mine recently looked into getting a 3G phone, it'd be nice to be ableto see his wife and kids when doing long haul etc, but the major flaw that he could see wasn't the phone, but the covereage.. the 3G coverage is not global, in fact it's limited to a handful of countries apparently..

Re:Poor coverage?

[superpeach]

Make that a handful of cities in a handful of countries. 3 have different types of coverage, there is the voice only coverage (so, normal mobile phone) which is pretty much the whole of the UK and then there is the video coverage which you can get when you are in certain towns/cities.

Sample Videos

[Psychic Burrito]

This is a direct link to the 3G sample videos.

I think it's funny that one needs to install another video player considering that the videos are supposed to be .MP4 files which should just play fine with Quicktime according to the Apple PR department... especially 3G phone files... strange... :-(

Re:Sample Videos

[Jellybob]

Ohhhh... he will when the bandwidth bill arrives ;)

And anyway, don't they have logs where you work?

Re:Sample Videos

[heli0]

"I think it's funny that one needs to install another video player considering that the videos are supposed to be .MP4 files which should just play fine with Quicktime"

The videos are 3GPP, which is based on mpeg-4 but is an entirely different standard.

Look in the box on the right side of that page.

"Add 3GPP capabilities to your player with the QuickTime 3GPP Component. Download Now"

motorola a830

[Anonymous Coward]

Moto A830 stacks up a little better IMO - Bluetooth, and removable storage (great for MP3s or videos). Can't wait for the 835

Re:motorola a830

[Anonymous Coward]

I visited Motorola during the development of the new 3G-phones. Don't get your hopes up. Motorola phones will continue to suck.

Re:3G make for....

[tomstdenis]

Don't forget that with these higher speeds they can drop your calls quicker :-)

Hey instead of making phones with high speed networks can we make DSL/cable setups with high speed networks? :-)

Or howabout not charge an arm and a leg for anything todo with a phone. E.g. changing an ESN shouldn't cost money!

That being said I'd certainly love the privilege of paying 0.30$/min to download 160x120 worth of crap at HIGHER speeds than I can [9600bps current or whatever CDMA is]. It's amazing reading websites one word per line. Wow!

Tom

Re:3G make for....

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be in the US since you are talking about paying for data per minute. When you catch up with the rest of the world you'll be paying per amount of data transferred. We've been doing that for a while now, with GPRS.

java

[akb]

The most intersting point I found in the article was the one about how the reviewer talked about being disappointed that it was hard to load 3rd party apps onto the phone and how much value he placed on that.

Its good to see phones supporting java, cell phones will be an increasingly crucial platform its good to see some openness.

Anyone have links to any development sites or places where 3rd party apps might be available. Ogg vorbis on a cell phone?

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

Look here

Re:java

[fireshipjohn]

Hi,

I use Ogg vorbis on my Sony Ericcson P800 all the time! See http://www.geocities.com/p800tools/ :)

John

Re:3G make for....

[tomstdenis]

Actually I live in Canada. And I find all the extra doo-dahs totally useless. I make and receive calls. That's about it. I hate having to pay extra for the infrastructure used to entertain toys of the minute BS like picture phones, 10Mbit/sec 1X networks, etc...

Tom

Ho hum

[fm6]

I'm getting less and less interested in this 3G boondogle. All that hassle and expense to access a network that's only 3 times faster than GPRS? And who is going to buy a phone that's only good for 24 hours of standby?

You could argue that the phone's other shortcomings (can't handle Bluetooth without an adapter; no spare battery slot in the charger) are just mistakes on this one project. But I think it says a lot about how totally screwed up the whole 3G thing is.

Reviewer forgot to mention heat. Device that sucks up power that fast must get pretty hot.

Re:Ho hum

[jodonoghue]

Actually, in the UK at least, the most compelling reason to choose the 3G network ('3') is that is's quite a lot cheaper than the established GSM players - you get about five times as many minutes for a given subscription as you would anywhere else here, and the phones are being practically given away.

I'd be the first to agree that the 3G phones on the market today are little better than prototypes. They're bulky and use more power than GSM because they are, effectively, two phones inside: GSM and WCDMA (more accurately, there are two separate chipsets). This will change, and pretty soon. I, for one, have a phone in my hand which is little bigger than a current GSM phone, and has about four days standby time, but supports data up to 384 kbit/s (you'll reliably see no more than about 45kbit/s on GPRS with UK networks). You'll be able to buy something like it in a few months time.

GSM (and 1x) are mature technologies - they've been around for a long time, and there has been plenty of time to perfect them.

Fact is, at least for GSM, in many locations the networks are already at maximum capacity *for voice*, so 3G is needed simply to keep pace with the demand for voice calling. GPRS is OK for some data applications, but is very poorly suited to streaming/multicast applications (mainly due to the fact that it is slow in selecting between cells, and typically looses at least a couple of seconds of data).

I'd probably agree that 3G was launched too early, and with too much hype, but make no mistake, it is coming, and as it matures it should represent a compelling technology for many users.

Re:Ho hum

[fm6]

OK, I had heard that 3G phones would be power hungry all by themselves, but perhaps that was wrong.

If GSM networks are maxed out, does it really make sense to expand capacity using technology that requires more bandwidth? That is the big problem I have with 3G: there's only so much radio spectrum. Wireless streaming and multicasting may be ultrakewl, but I just don't see how millions of cell users can use this kind of application all at once.

The bit rate you report for GPRS is about what's claimed by providers in the U.S. But it's my understanding that this is less than half the theoretical limit for the technology. The best technology in the world can't squeeze blood out of a turnip.

Re:Ho hum

[jodonoghue]

I've been away from the Internet for a week or so, so apologies for the wait for a reply.

You're right to identify spectrum as a scarce resource, and the 3G networks generally do try to make a better job of allocating it than current technologies - you should get about 3-5 times the number of voice conversations in the same spectrum as you would with a 2G technology. You could argue that that isn't a great improvement, but it's really the start of things - GSM networks have been optimised way beyond the expectations of the original design.

Actually it isn't too dificult to do multicasting and the like provided that the use of uplink resources (i.e. from user to network) is minimal or (preferably) eliminated. Whether it's something with real uses rather beyond showing your mates that you can watch a football match on your phone is another question, but I could imagine multicasting e.g. local traffic information.

It's true that many of the new services which are being hyped are rather greedy of bandwidth (384 kbit/s videocall anyone?), but I really doubt that these will be used very heavily - and if they are, the user will have to pay dearly for using all that bandwidth.

It's certainly true that some customers on one of the commercial 3G networks have had difficulty making video calls on their shiny new toys as the network was 'busy' (despite relatively few subscribers as yet) - as you say, the resource is limited.

The theoretical limit for GPRS is somewhere in the 170 kbit/s area, but this depends on a very good channel (unlikely), a network supporting coding scheme 4 (unlikely) and no users sharing the same radio resources (unlikely). I've never seen more than 58kbit/s in a cabled RF environment with coding scheme 2 (which is what everyone uses in parctice) and no other users of the resources. This is probably good enough for many mobile applications, although I'll note, once more, that GPRS is slow in performing reselection between cells while a transfer is taking place.

Re:Ho hum

[fm6]

Thanks for clearing up some important details. I remain skeptical of the whole 3G thing. It's not that I see no demand for the apps -- imagine all the CNN wannabes out there! Nor does it bother me that the networks are overtaxed -- you can always expand a network. But if everybody starts using high-bandwidth applications on any kind of wireless network, where is the spectrum going to come from? Even without 3G, we're beginning to run short.

You're right, 58kbs is plenty fast for a simple network application. That's about the speed of the modem I'm using right now. Some time in the near future, I'm gonna get a GPRS/Bluetooth phone and never be offline again.

Alternative report, examples

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually you just need to add a new codec to the Apple Quicktime player to play MP4s from the e606 Check out a related report at http://caia.swin.edu.au/reports/030715A

Re:Alternative report, examples

[Psychic Burrito]

Well I tried it out again and the codec must have been downloaded in the background, since the video now apears. Thanks!

However, audio is still missing: Quicktime Player tells me it doesn't know the audio codec... still strange...

Re:Alternative report, examples

[wirde]

However, audio is still missing: Quicktime Player tells me it doesn't know the audio codec... still strange...
Most likely because the audio codec is AMR. Don't know if you can find an AMR codec for Quicktime.

3G is all hype...

[WIAKywbfatw]

Never have I seen a new technology that was more hyped up but less uselss than 3G.

The marketing people behind these products seem to have forgotten that the whole point of having a mobile phone is so that you can talk to people.

Why do I need video calling when audio calling works just as well at a fraction of the cost?

Why do I need picture messaging when text messaging (SMS) works just as well at a fraction of the cost?

Why do I need to be able to slowly download movie trailers, news and sports clips to watch on a tiny screen when I can watch those things on my TV or PC at a fraction of the cost?

Right now, with no decent applications, 3G is a joke. The only thing I've seen that even demonstrates a good use of this technology is doctors sending each other picture messages of patients' X-rays when looking for a second opinion. I guess it could be useful to other professionals too, such as estate agents, but for the price you pay to send a picture message right now you'd have to be mad to use it constantly like it was a digital camera.

If you've got money to burn then go ahead and buy one of these phones. But if you've got that much money to waste then you can send me some too at the same time.

Re:3G is all hype...

[Kenshin]

Why do I need video calling when audio calling works just as well at a fraction of the cost?

Why do I need picture messaging when text messaging (SMS) works just as well at a fraction of the cost?

Why do I need television when radio works just as well at a fraction of the cost?

Why do I want a phone when a telegraph works just as well at a fraction of the cost?

Yes, things are expensive and buggy when they first hit the scene, but give them a few years and they will go down in cost and go up in reliability.

Personally, I think a video cellphone would be wonderful. Cellular is the perfect platform to introduce it to, since POTS tech is kinda at its limits.

Re:3G is all hype...

[6e7a]

I wish the manufacturers would spend some time making mobile-phone gear that can tell us the difference between the other party's silence and a loss of signal. I'm sick of having to say, "can you hear me now?" over and over. Forget the 3G frills until you make basic moile telephony work better.

Mobile telephony service is already overpriced. I don't want to pay even more exorbitant monthly fees for Internet access and video, I just want my mobile phone to work reasonably!

Re:3G is all hype...

[Anonymous Coward]

Eh? I have my phone set up in such a way as to make a bunch of noise when I drop a call. Apparently is phone-dependent, and/or somewhere around page 400 of the phone's manual.

Re:3G is all hype...

[WIAKywbfatw]

Why do I need television when radio works just as well at a fraction of the cost?

Why do I want a phone when a telegraph works just as well at a fraction of the cost?

Yes, things are expensive and buggy when they first hit the scene, but give them a few years and they will go down in cost and go up in reliability.

1. There's a world of difference between radio and television.

Would Orson Welles' War of the Worlds radio broadcast had as great an effect on the public if it had been on TV? Would it have fooled anyone? I don't think so.

Similarly, would the Apollo moon landings been as appealling to a mass audience without TV footage of the takeoff, the landings themselves and the final splashdowns? Would even the most poetic of writers truly be able to describe the awesome power and dramatic effect of a nuclear detonation as effectively as a few seconds of TV coverage? Could the horrific events of September 11th be as accurately portrayed on radio as they were on TV? Not in a million years.

TV and radio are totally different mediums. There's some crossover in their programming but they essentially serve different functions - I can't remember radio broadcasters ever putting on live coverage of, say, golf, swimming or a marathon, and it's been a long time since any radio channel devoted any time to kids' programmes.

2. A phone call is an instantaneious, live, convenient two-way method of communication. A telegraph is not.

Last time I checked, people don't have telegraph stations in their homes. There's a reason why.

3. If you had read my original post properly you would have read this line:

"Right now, with no decent applications, 3G is a joke."

Please don't tell me that you don't understand what "right now" or "decent applications" mean.

The difference between TV and radio or between telephones and telegraphs is chalk and cheese. The difference between an audio only phone and a video phone (assuming that the person that you're talking to has a similar phone, that you're making a video call, etc) isn't that great.

Even if 3G was offering Dick Tracy-style wrist video phones it wouldn't be of significantly greater benefit and use than the previous generation of mobile phones. At the end of the day, it's still just a phone.

(And, please, don't tell me you don't understand what "significantly greater benefit and use" means.)

Re:3G is all hype...

[bluGill]

Obviously you don't have that ability. I just got a camera phone, and it is worth it (at $50 and a year contract - but I was planing on not switching providers soon anyway, greater cost might not be)

Now when I see the kid of someone my sister went to school with I can take a picture and show my sister. Every try describing what someone looks like? "He is soo cute, and he looks just like his daddy" - which is nice and all, but even if you know his daddy doesn't really tell you what he looks like. If I sent you a picture of the kid you have a reasonable chance of recignising him if you had to.

Have you ever tried to describe why a wiget won't fit? I know one carpender who spend a hour on the phone describing a problem and the boss describing the fix before the boss gave up and came to do it. One look and the boss said "Oh ... I see why that won't work..." A picture is worse much more than a thousand words. Mind you sometimes a picture isn't as good.

Since I don't have video calling I don't know why I would want it. It might be worth it. I suspect that it is one of those things that once you have it you will wonder how you got along without it. Maybe not right away, but 5 years latter you suddenly realize that the gimic that you thought was useless is extreemly useful when applied to a problem you don't even think about now.

Sure I can download movie clips to my PC, but that is at home, as is my TV, and I'm sitting here in the carpool with nothing to do. Sure they make TVs for cars now, and I could get a laptop but neither has useful content, a cell phone connected to either now provides the ability to get useful content anywhere.

Or did you limit yourself to a cell phone sitting alone all the time and not consiuder that it can be connected to other devices. Lets consider that case then: your out on a date in the park and you and the date want to sit down, perhaps a movie, but you don't know what is playing. Getting tiny trailers could help you decide what to see.

The most useful part about 3g cell phones might not even exist yet. Back before telephone you went to visit someone a few miles away without knowing if they were even home. What a waste of time (one horseback) compared to today where you call to be sure they are home and up to visiters.

Re:3G is all hype...

[icebike]

Yes, things are expensive and buggy when they first hit the scene, but give them a few years and they will go down in cost and go up in reliability.

The Idea is not to take two steps backward while attempting to take one step forward?

If you pay a penalty in terms of both COST and Functionality to get a feature that you will have little chance to use (because no one else has compatible equipment) then you will wait until it becomes more popular, cheaper, and does not penalize you in other areas (battery life, etc).

Simply asserting that they will get it right someday does not make me want to part with my money. Look how many years cell phones were available before they took off and went mainstream (really less than 5 years ago).

I don't want to watch a movie trailer on my friggin phone. I don't want to sit in on a meeting and have half the poeple waveing phones at me so their buddies back at the office can watch me spill coffe on my shirt or pick my nose.

I would pay for a phone i could think to instead of punching tiny buttons on. My Doc gives me and EKG and tells me what I had for breakfast. Why can't the phone dial Fred when I think "FRED" to it? I'd pay for that.

Re:3G is all hype...

[maheshm]

You will find that it is actually cheaper to be on the 3 Network in Australia over the long run as the audio calls are cheaper and capped at $100 (for acceptable use).

Did anyone notice

[headbulb]

That the camera is placed such that if you place the phone up to your ear. That the people could see inside. WOW your heads so empty.

no-one cares

[Anonymous Coward]

and there's no reason why they should either.
That's why 3G will fail miserably.

My executive summary

[tftp]

• The phone is heavy, buggy and runs out of power in a day if left unused. If you talk a lot you need to carry spare batteries!
• The phone is badly designed, has tons of defects, and generally suffers from being the first.
• The audio quality is as bad as always (probably due to standard G.7xx codecs.)
• The 3G network has poor coverage.
• There is little to no content on the network.
• Video calls require handsfree kit and a head vice.
• The phone is no more useful than any other phone. Actually, it has worse coverage than AMPS.

So here is the question: who needs this phone and this 3G network? Am I alone in rejecting Web browsing on a tiny LCD, often paying per minute? Am I alone in treating this 3G propaganda as pure marketing that doesn't satisfy any real need that people have?

Re:My executive summary

[akb]

You forgot that the review is a network in Australia and has max speed of 384k vs the 144k in the US.

Re:My executive summary

[Illserve]

I'm getting it for the 500 anytime/xnetwork minutes for £25/m. That's a truly unbeatable deal.

They are bending over backwards to sell these things and I'll deal with it for a year for those numbers.

Re:My executive summary

[ThaReetLad]

I wish i'd seen this review before I went out and got one last week. Yes the software is buggy, and more to the point really badly designed. It just doesn't work the way you expect it to. Also network coverage is spotty and intermittent, and the battery life is pittiful. I should have got a p800.

idea...

[Dorothy 86]

how about....

1. Make poorly designed new phone
2. market it as "new age" techonolgy
3. ???
4. Profit!

Re:3G make for....

[yomegaman]

I just got a Kyocera 7135 from Verizon, and the America's Choice plans now include Express Network (1XRTT) access. The EN usage just comes out of your minutes, so if you use it nights/weekends it's free. I think it's pretty cool so far.

3G Distorts Gravity?

[Freddles]

From the article:

> Weighing in at 150g, the e606 is no lightweight,
> but it certainly didn't feel as heavy as other phones
> that weigh this much

Huh?

I got one

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone i know (wink wink nudge nudge) is in charge of the 3G handset group at motorola...I got me a sweet A830...it plays mp3s, mp4 videos, you can make video calls, run java games, upload your own midi ringtones, wow. even in the US without a 3g network, i still have the coolest phone in town....

dream world

[bigbigbison]

Well, g3 would be nice. What would be even nicer is if i could get any kind of cell phone access at my house. Not every area is even covered by existing mobile phone technology, let alone new technology.

I have the sidekick

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

I have an excellent GSM phone. It's a 2.5G GPRS device. It takes photos, albeit low-resolution ones. It has a nice color screen. It has AIM and SMS. It has a great microbrowser. And, to top it all off, it has an excellent *real* QWERTY keyboard. None of that "T9 predictive text entry" garbage... I can type 20 WPM on this thing. Think Blackberry, but spaced more. It runs a custom Java OS with a nice SDK. And the user interface is excellent.

Add to that the fact that I get 200 voice minutes, 1000 weekend minutes, no roaming (anywhere in my country), no long distance (anywhere in my country).

I also get unlimited GPRS data. Yeah, that's right. Last month I transferred 130MB of data.

Oh, yeah, of course, and I can roam onto any GSM/GPRS network in my country (there are three major ones) and not pay roaming. And, of course, I can also switch to a different phone and keep my SIM card. Or switch to a different provider and keep my phone.

All for about $40 per month.
I paid nothing for the phone, but I had to sign up for a year.

Any guesses where I live? It's the country with the first EDGE service. It's also the country with the most GSM towers.

It's the USA.

Re:I have the sidekick

[jquirke]

Please.. get off your high horse.

What model of phone is it?

Re:I have the sidekick

[ssstraub]

Yeah, the US might have the most GSM towers but it certainly does NOT have the best GSM *coverage*.

That's quite a big, but important difference.

Re:I have the sidekick

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

Yes,

The US is 3x the size of Western Europe, with roughhly the same number of people. So, it's not hard for us to have "the most GSM towers". Per capita, nearly every European country has far more than the US. The EU has far more towers as well.

Second,
Remember the size difference here. For reference, France is about 2/3 the size of Texas. Germany+France would fit nicely into Alaska, with room to spare.

Take, for example, Wyoming. Wyoming has 200,000 people in an area only marginally smaller than France. It's just not sensible to cover that area with 16km GSM cells. That's why AMPS coverage is so good - cells can be 50km or more. CDMA technologies (as are used by Sprint and Verizon in the US, and soon Cingular - WCDMA) also allow for larger cell sizes.

Another note: all major areas of population are covered, as are airports, and all major roads. No, you can't get service in the Wyoming wilderness. But you can get service in practically every city (of 2,000 people or more).

My point was not that the US GSM network is so great. It's not. That's partially because of demographics. It's partly because CDMA is far more popular over here (Verizon, for example, has excellent coverage). By area, GSM coverage in the US is probably 80% what it is in Western Europe. The problem is that the US isn't 80% of Western Europe's size, it's 300%.

My point was that the US *does* have GSM coverage, we *do* have GPRS, our phones *do* have SIM cards, and there *is* a healthy GSM industry over here. We also have a healthy CDMA industry. Heck, we even have 3G CDMA everywhere (1xRTT barely qualifies as 3G, but it does qualify - and both Sprint and Verizon have very large 1xRTT networks). Cingular just implemented EDGE. AT&T will begin WCDMA (3G CDMA GSM) in early 2004.

So, next time someone tells you that the wireless system in the US is antiquated, or that there's no digital coverage, or that we don't have GPRS, or that we don't have SIM cards, remember this:

- Our system is the same GSM the rest of the world uses (OK, different frequency, but you get the point). Not to mention the (barely) 3G CDMA coverage. EDGE too. And, coming soon, WCDMA.

- Everyone uses digital phones in the US. Less than 1% of all cellphones are analog. Many have an analog mode, however, so they can roam onto analog service. Remember that analog cell sizes are not limited by slot delay (as is GSM). Regardless, analog is usally only needed when you are in Wyoming or another sparsely populated area.

- We do have GPRS. Three networks, in fact. They all have roaming agreements, too. T-Mobile offers unlimited GPRS for $20 a month. Sprint offers unlimited 3G CDMA (144kbits/sec) for $10 a month with any plan. Other providers also have plans.

- Not all phones here have SIM cards, but all of the GSM phones do. If it's an important feature, buy GSM.

- CDMA sounds better than GSM. It's less compressed and has less noise. If that's your main criteria for buying a phone, buy CDMA.

Re:I have the sidekick

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

Sorry... just wanted to dispel some of the myths of the US as a "backwards" country with no GSM or GPRS.

Anyway,

It's a T-Mobile Color Sidekick. If you're in Europe, well, sorry - the Sidekick is a single band phone and won't work in Europe (different frequency). They are planning on introducing a tri-band model.

The Sidekick is actually a rebranded version of a device called the Hiptop from a company called Danger, Inc.

http://www.danger.com

I hear that the Nokia 3650 is quite nice as well, but that the keyboard layout sucks.

Re:I have the sidekick

[ssstraub]

I'm interested in what you know about Cingular. I just learned myself that they support both TDMA and GSM in the same phone. They have 2 models that do this, the Nokia 6340i and the Sony Ericsson egg-shaped phone.

So my question is this: If Cingular is currently using TDMA and transitioning to GSM, then why would they ALSO be adding WCDMA? I mean, isn't that 3 networks to support by the same company?

Here's a source of info on the transition from TDMA to GSM. There are other places where you will read the same thing, of course:
The driving force behind this standard is the fact that two major US carriers - AT&T Wireless and Cingular - are both transitioning their networks from TDMA to GSM technology. During the transition period, they will be operating both types of networks at the same time. Therefore, it will be beneficial to have phones that work seamlessly on both types of networks.
From: http://www.phonescoop.com/glossary/term.php?gid=2

German article on the same subject

[Alex Farber]

http://www.heise.de/mobil/artikel/2003/07/03/umts/

I love 3G data services!

[Daniel Wood]

I'm typing this e-mail from my laptop connected to the net through my Sanyo phone and Sprint PCS Vision.
I pay $10/month for Unlimited data usage, and it is well worth it.
I have been using this setup since November 2002. The coverage is excellent and the speed is awesome, except on Sunday evenings.
My average download speed is over 100kbits. If I use multisource downloading I can almost always pull 138+kbits with bursts up to 250kbits.
Supprisingly the upload is much faster than the download. Average upload speed is over 150kbits with bursts of over 350kbits.
The only thing the service is not suitable for is low latency applications(games). Ping times average 1500+ in game, with over 50% PL.

This service is a roadwarrior life saver.

Re:I love 3G data services!

[Anonymous Coward]

>The only thing the service is not suitable for is low latency applications(games). Ping times average 1500+ in game, Ouch I've found standard GSM connections have a latency of about 900ms, I was hoping GPRS and 3G would be able to improve on that. Surley that kind of latency makes video conferencing a problem.

3G speed

[felesii]

there are a few varieties of 3G, the most common is CDMA2000 1x which has a theoretical speed of 144kbps compaired to 77kpbs of gprs, but WCDMA which is used in japan has a theoretical rate of 2mbps (if you are using the phone during the summer solstice and a full moon and catch bill gates using linux simultaneously)

Re:3G speed

[gad_zuki!]

Actually GPRS theoretical is around 120 kbps, depending on the provider it can go as low as 20-30 kbps.

Re:3G speed

[fm6]

I'm reminded of the way they used to advertise those cheap cartridge tapes. They never listed their formatted capacity, only their theoretical maximum compressed capacity. That's just the sort of thing that makes consumer cynical!

Due to my Sprint PCS experience, I have a terrible prejudice against any technology based on CDMA. And all the fun people in GSM-only countries have had with things like SMS prejudices me against any cell technology that doesn't aim to be universal. I guess I'm just immature.

Re:3G make for....

[chris234]

Hmm, I'm in the US and pay a flat rate for unlimited GPRS. Guess we've caught up, and passed you by....

I have a handful of nails.......

[MegaHamsterX]

Yep, new 3G phone, uh huh, people are rushing out to buy it right?

All of these nails are going in the US 3G coffin...

One of them is voice quality, I have a "next gen" att phone, the voice quality sucks, I think I'll go back to old technology where I could understand the caller and get a signal in the middle of nowhere, or in a building in the middle of a city.

Another one is WiFi, why do I need data on my phone with so many WiFi hotspots, it doesn't make much sense, now if this next gen stuff worked in the middle of nowhere, well it might just be worth it, but nothing modern is in the middle of nowhere.

How 'bout easy to use, I understand text messaging is big in Europe, but if I send them to people here, they call me, Americans use phones as phones, very few care about the yuppie features, like cameras and video games, but people do like voice quality here.

Bigger bill is my last one, I simple just don't need any more shit from my cell phone provider, the voice messaging system sucks big time, every other feature is broken somehow, I'm probably going back to cingular even though it does cost more, and the phone I have is an older one, but my voice quality was always really good, even in the middle of nowhere or in a building.

Wrong idea

[DaCool42]

Am I the only one who feels that phone manufacturers have gotten the totally wrong idea? I mean, why don't they work on making a cell phone that doesn't sound like garbage instead of making a cell phone that has 2 ultra crappy cameras and a color screen? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the purpose of a phone was to talk to people. The "normal" features make sense (text messages, vibrate, etc), but all this PDA, camera, web, junk is kind of ridiculous.

Re:Wrong idea

[ctid]

Are you in North America by any chance? The thing about "sounding like garbage" is not a concern in the UK where I live. In the cities at least, phones tend to have very good reception.

As for the PDA functionality, it's a logical next step, because virtually EVERYONE carries a mobile phone. If manufacturers want to sell us a PDA, it's going to have to have phone functionality otherwise we'll have to carry two gadgets.

Having said all that, my friend got one of these e606s and he's not been overwhelmingly impressed by it. "Early adopter syndrome", I keep telling him. "Yeah, but it was free", he tells me back.

Re:Wrong idea

[jquirke]

You must be in the USA. Voice quality on phones is not a problem anywhere else. If you survey any mobile user in Australia, or the UK, or Asia 99.99999% of them will say there is nothing wrong with the voice quality.

Just the USA, as usual.

GPRS good enough for me

[d99-sbr]

I'm sticking with GSM/GPRS for a few more years. We now have pretty much 100% GPRS-coverage in Sweden, and it works very well. Together with WAP it is quite a decent solution. My phone is rated at 48kbps, and lives up to its promises. Personally, I'd rather have a stable 48kbps than a flaky 376 kbps. Data rates has got to come down further. I get 3MB free and then pay 19 SEK (~2.1 EUR) for every additional MB, which certainly does not allow for web surfing.

Re:3G make for....

[Xrikcus]

Sadly true, £3/meg GPRS on orange in the UK. Friend on sprint in Montana has unlimited data. Most annoying. Ok, on orange you can pay for bigger packages that bring that price down, but it still doesn't become unlimited.

COOL in Japan that phone is one year old!

[schouwl]

The coolest stuff is here in Japan ;)

Waiting for critical mass or killer app....

[amembleton]

Well, I'm waiting for more ppl to sign up for 3G. So far I know of one person, of course, they can't actually make use of the video call feature cos they've got no one to call. I'm gonna wait until it gets to a point where ppl want to video chat with me and then I'll go and get one.

Alternativelly I'll buy one if my network (Orange) shuts down its 2G service or if a killer app is produced for the phones. I can't think what though.

The first phones are always going to be poor, in three years they'll be far superior and probably worth purchasing.

it's not complicated

[Illserve]

Because it's bigger for the same weight it doesn't "feel" heavy. Your brain looks at it and guesses a weight based on size. It's lighter than that. A small phone that weighs 150 g feels heavier.

Perhaps you've picked up objects before?

If not, just take my word for it.

I have that phone -

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems alright to me - I'm in the UK - the biggest advantage for me is that you get 750 minutes, any time any network - this deal is unbeatable in the UK.

Before that I was spending £70+ a month in bills, while hardly using it - mainly because they punish mobile to mobile (different networks) calls in this country.

So it is heavy, at least you can't lose the fucker. Battery life is less than stellar, but there are two of them.

Also coverage is a little bizarre, but it works at 3G speeds where I live (small village) and in London (large village ;])

Don't know anyone else with one, so can't comment on video calls -

I have the e606 - insights

[Maquis196]

I myself got the e606 about 3weeks ago here in London. The main i chose this phone and network was mainly because of the tariff! Lets see,i get 1000mins to any network,250 free txt's,100mins free video calls and free insurance. This tariff alone makes the whole thing worthwhile. Video calling has that cool factor,a few of my friends have switched over so i can make good use of it but like the review said the requirements of the handsfree make video calls on the move annoying (especially if the handsfree is tangled which it frequently gets being stereo). however the voice on video calls is about 750ms faster then the video which can be quite frustrating at times. The battery is a pain in the ass,pure and simple! The phone came with just 2 batteries (the 700ma variety) and 2 chargers but like the review said u can only charge one at a time and the life is horrible; about 100mins of talktime was the usual and maybe about 45mins of videocalls if you were lucky. The network isnt so bad but 3G coverage allthough good in and around London is still sketchy!! You could be sitting at home and every 5mins your phone will switch between 3G and 2G mode (which as i understand it uses the T-mobile network) my beef is that if the switch takes place during a call you loose all signal and the call will cut out,it happens a lot more then the review suggested! Overall - Phone is great for the tarif and the cool factor and the network problems should be gone in 2-3mnths (according to 3) i myself am wating for the ericcson version to come out! Maquis196

I have recently switched to 3G.

[zzztkf]

The reasoson is NTT Docomo has started to support GSM cmpatible USIM card on 3G phone(it's called FOMA Card). Just inserting FOMA card into GSM phone enables to connect to telephone network. Motion picture, higher data taransfer speed were not enough to persuade me.

I have sufferd enough from dis-compatiblity between PDC(Japan's 2G service) and GSM.

Just new FOMA card has justified cost of transer(approx $230), shorter battery life(40% of before), heavier terminal weight.

video call for A830?

[xxie24]

I am just wondering how did you get video calls from A830. All the spec I saw about A830 did not say it got video call funcitions(in Australia, 3 is making big ads now). Coz I am thinking to buy it, do I need a firmware updatpe or something to get it work?

Re:video call for A830?

[Anonymous Coward]

A830 does not support video calls. I don't really care about this feature. A835 will do that though.

This phone sucks.

[Renesis]

I had one of these a few months back when they first came out, and I'm the sort of guy who buys into ALL the new gadgets and lives with the bugs. Heck, I buy into the BETAs of all the latest gadgets and live with the bugs.

This phone had 2 good points: The Screen (its gorgeous) and The Keypad (really solid and positive).

Everything else about this phone is junk.

The user interface is almost impossible to figure out - as the reviewer says the thing is like some crazy puzzle with the Select button changing randomly all the time. The interface looks like something from the 80s - except for the Main Menu, pretty much everything is in black and white and text-based, and its obvious to see the Japanese i-Mode roots in this handset.

The SMS was unusable. You had to press a whole series of buttons everytime you wanted to write a message just to switch the T9 input on - it wasn't on by default and there was no way of setting this, that I could find. It doesn't even support receiving concatenated messages (i.e. longer than 160 characters)!! Every phone I've owned in the last 6 years has had this basic feature!

The battery life... ah, the 2 batteries and 2 chargers gave it away when I opened the box. Make a call on this phone and it won't last the day. Most of the battery is probably eaten lighting up the gloriously bright screen!

The "3" services were pretty poor too - nothing you'd actually want to use on a phone as they were mostly too fiddly. The videos were adequate quality once you'd downloaded them, but they would typically take about 1 minute to download a 3 minute clip. You tend to look a fool standing around for a minute waiting to download the video whilst flapping around trying to get a 3G signal.

Most of the UK is NOT covered by a 3G signal. The centre of my city was meant to have complete coverage. Yeah, right. I live and work in the centre and I could only get a signal in one corner of my office tower block - one of the highest points in the city. If it did think there was a 3G signal to be had it would spend minutes flapping about trying to lock on, at which point you couldn't do anything that required the network - i.e. make a call. And there was no way of locking it to 2G, only to 3G.

No real Bluetooth on this phone either - so no hands-free in the car, which means I can't make or receive any calls while I'm driving.

I took mine back within 2 weeks and bought a wonderful Nokia 3650 (well, except for its daft keypad). Upgraded it with a 128Mb MMC, downloaded my favourite apps, videos etc and have been very happy since.

I'll wait for the SonyEricsson Z1010 and then have another go - the calling plans on the 3 network are a great price at the moment because no-one is buying into it.

> Chaz

on the premature aspect of the subject

[db_helix]

there are two fundamental flaws in most of the posts that I read: a) people compare 3G to GSM GSM is mature and tested. 3G is new untested and not widely deployed. Yes I accept the fact that many companies spent a lot of money on buying bandwidth and now they will take them forever to actually setup a network with decent coverage but it's early! That was the case with GSM too when it first took off wasn't it? Handsets look ugly and bulky but this is not a serius argument anyway. Look at an early analog handset! Battery life is crap, but this is also hardly an argument because whenever there is need for more power companies tend to release a new form of battery or energy saving chip to overcome this problem, again I refer you to early GSM phones. b) (and most important) 3G is NOT really about any of the above! 3G is supposed to be an ideal platform for new services! To name a couple: - location specific services i.e. you step into a museum. Your mobile phone automatically detects that and it presents you with a multimedia guide to the musem etc. (this service requires a suitable access point installed in the museum) - seamless international roaming and integration with your home telephone. By seamless I mean that, the services you subscribe and the way you access them is _exactly_ the same wherever you are. As far as I know at the moment you only have that if the GSM provider that you subscribe to happens to have a network in the country you are visiting. Not to mention the language issues. I know that some companies (ericsson and panasonic I think) support the latter point, that is to use your mobile as a handset for your home wireless basestation but these are proprietary standards. - the number follows _you_ (similar to divert) Again this is something that I've seen on the net (companies that let you have a unique contact number that follows you by "registering" the respective fixed tel. number that you can be reached) but in 3G this is supposed to happen automatically e.g. as soon as you walk in your office you phone detects where you are and all the calls are redirected to your office phone. On top of that keep in mind that with 3G you have more bandwidth available which is always a pro. I would name a few more nice things about it but this post is long enough already. I agree that at the moment 3G sucks but in my oppinion... be patient! forgive me if someone made the same points earlier on but I did not read all the posts.

Brick-city

[jtrascap]

Wow - and I thought my P800 was a brick in my pocket (well, compared to my old Siemens SL-45, it was, but not compared to my SL-45 AND Palm Vx in the same pocket).

This baby's huge - and I can easily view MP4's on my phone, admittedly not as fast while oline, but at that resolution...why?

Cellboost for your cellphone

[cellboost]

Everyone knows this scenario all too well. You are at the airport, late for your flight, running to the gate, all the while you are on a critical conference call. Then, all of a sudden, you hear the sound of death 'beep beep', your cell battery goes dead. You frantically search for your charger that you have packed away in your bag. You have lost a crucial call and more importantly your ability to communicate. Never lose your ability to communicate. Cellboost gives you that power! Visit cellboost.com for more info. "Don't Be Caught Dead".