Slashdot Mirror
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."
Moto A830 stacks up a little better IMO - Bluetooth, and removable storage (great for MP3s or videos). Can't wait for the 835
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.
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?
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
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
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.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
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?
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?
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.
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.
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
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.