Slashdot Mirror
T-Mobile G1 Faster Than iPhone 3G
An anonymous reader writes "CNET UK have run some very simple in-house tests comparing the T-Mobile G1's 3G connection against the iPhone 3G's. Result? The G1 loaded Web pages almost twice as fast as the iPhone's. Of course, the test only applies to the CNET UK offices if you're being scientific about it, as stated, but it's still impressive nevertheless."
and tell me if it's because of:
1. Faster Network access of the device
2. Faster network the device is connected to
3. Faster processor
4. faster browser.
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
I still believe iPhone is all marketing, the product itself is just average. But that's only my opinion...
Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br
Yeah, I hear you. I'd buy a car if weren't those ugly wheels.
The first time I saw an iPhone in person was in rural Virginia. It wasn't fast, but it actually worked out there. T-Mobile doesn't even really have any service out there, so I guess it really is just a moot point for a lot of people.
I can see how that would come into play at the CNET UK offices.
Too bad the tests were done in the UK...
(It's even in the summary for crying out loud...)
Sigs are for the weak.
I didn't think i would, but it's a nice touch.
Still by the time it's got a keyboard, a touch screen, some buttons and a trackball... it feels like it's perhaps over doing it.
Do you think it's ugly in person? Like my last HTC device, it's much nicer in your hand than in pictures.
The integration between the phone and third party apps is wonderful.
When a call comes in that isn't in my phone book, the whitepages app does a reverse number lookup and shows that on screen.
I can use shazam to identify music and then go straight to youtube or the amazon mp3 store to buy or listen to it.
I can scan the barcode of a book, compare the prices at online stores and it'll tell me which local booksellers have it and give me driving directions to the store (although it only seems to work for b&n)
Of course that's all mostly android and not the device.
But I actually called AT&T and talked to the apple rep and BEGGED for an option to turn off 3G, it's beyond a joke. I'd rather have EDGE only, the 3G is so bad it actually causes my phone to take 3 or 4 times as long as my 1st gen EDGE iPhone to load a web page. Thats because the signal is next to worthless in podunk areas like DOWNTOWN FREAKIN SF and I have to wait for the phone to decide... "ohhh... this take too long... me switch to edge and retry"
I hope someone brings about a class action against AT&T for their shitty 3G network and against Apple for deceptive advertising. It's not twice as fast, if anything, it's twice as slow.
I've been with T-Mobile since they were Voice Stream back in 2000 when I was living in Dallas. In Dallas they were great, but I've been in NYC since early 2005 and their service sucks in this area. Most of the time my Internet access doesn't work at all.
Marketing gets the product noticed, it doesn't ensure that people will come back and buy the 2nd generation of a product.
You speak London? I speak London very best.
My room mate, a senior T-Mobile Engineer, did a test just last night of his new G1 on T-Mo's 3G network versus his iPhone on AT&T's network and saw a full 150kbps difference between the two, with advantage going to the G1. On a later test they ran the G1 against the iPhone with both on T-Mobile's network and saw between a 50 - 75kbps difference between the two, again, advantage G1.
So far I'm rather impressed with the device. The trackball is very functional, easy to use, and seems well made. The device is fast and responsive, and while the screen may not be quit as big or pretty as the iPhone's, it's still plenty nice enough. Ok, it doesn't have multi-touch (as far as I can ascertain), but it's fast, very functional and I really really want one now. Web-browsing was a wonderful experience (first time I can say that about a phone), and did I say it was fast? Also the native console and SSH functionality was awesome, and I was very surprised by how well it represented my SSH sessions, including irssi - I must have one.
It really does look better in the hand than it does on photos. Ok, not quite as slick as the iPhone, but I'm also not one of those people who will shell out an extra $X just to get a pretty PC case when all I want is functionality - I don't need my mobile device to be sexy in an artistic way, I want it to be sexy in a functional, useful and powerful way. The teenage emo girls on 4chan can have the iPhone, it's G1 for me.
Don't forget open standards for the phone too, and the fact that with the time and effort you can make it do anything you want to, and not have to be beholden to what Apple thinks you should be able to do, or a glorified pager that is the Blackberry.
"Inveniemus Viam Aut Faciemus" 'We will find a way... Or we will make one!' --Hannibal of Carthage
Apps written expressly for the iphone run faster than the java apps on the G1.
Where's your benchmark to prove it? The truth is Java runs "on hardware" in most mobile devices. There's a chip which translates the Java opcodes to native ARM intructions without any delay or slowdown whatsoever. Naturally nothing less could be expected on a device so strained for power and speed.
You do realize that they're both based on WebKit, right? The same core rendering engine? The dramatic differences between Chrome and Safari are the shell (Chrome really scores here on Windows) and the JavaScript engine. Neither are likely to be relevant on the mobile platform.
Back to the desktop: sure V8 is faster than the engine used by Safari 3.1, but if you're comparing products that aren't yet complete you might want to look at a Safari nightly build. The SquirrelFish Extreme engine is even faster than the Chrome V8 engine in the Chrome beta.
I remember when the iPod first came out its competition was (IMO) pretty worthless.
Apple seems to be a good innovator, but they are (again, IMO) not able to compete with the products that imitate them. A lot of Apple's competitors release decent products inspired by Apple's products, but in a (much) lower price range.
Better than what? The average phone is the RAZR, so in THAT standpoint the iPhone is better than the average.
GPL Deconstructed
Actually, the Dalvik VM doesn't JIT (yet).
In terms of hardware capabilities I agree. But the iPhone is a really great design, which the G1 has not matched. The trackball, moving screen, tilted bottom piece, lack of standard 1/8th" audio jack of the G1 are awkward in the end. I would like to see something with the simplicity of the iPhone with an open architecture and cutting edge hardware. Disclaimer, i realize that there are drawbacks to the iPhone design, battery service comes to mind, but that is a sacrifice I would make due to the elegance of the rest.
five years ago?
I will be moderated troll/flamebait as always in this kind of threads but I don't care.
So, could you tell me which ones are the good non-overpriced ones?
Imho:
Nano - non-good.
Classic - non-good.
Touch - somewhat good, but there are better and more price worthy players out there.
iPhone - insane price.
Mac mini - are you kidding?
Macbook - somewhat good but over-priced.
Macbook Pro - Good but really over-priced.
iMac - Good and decent price at release for 24" ones, only product worth it's price if you're not an übergamer and actually need the screen.
Mac Pro - Over-priced (don't give me this "omg just compare it to another machine of similar spec"-bullshit. I don't give a shit, I would never configure a machine that bad. I could get much better performance for less.)
Airport Express - Rather cool if it could play audio even outside iTunes, but I don't think it can so overpriced.
Airport Extreme - Very overpriced.
AppleTV - Why?
They're both based on WebKit, but there are some huge differences between the two WebKit branches. They have different JavaScript implementations, and they have completely different code in the platform-dependent layer. This layer is responsible for, among other things, network connections, URL parsing / handling, text glyph loading, and drawing.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I love generalizations.
In the first place, Android apps are not Java apps. They are compiled to a different byte-code and run on a different VM, which is Android-specific.
Yours is the typical VM FUD. If it's a VM, it MUST be slower, right guys? Please. Look what native code has gotten the iPhone: no multi-tasking for custom apps, no garbage collection, developers saddled to an antiquated language (ObjectiveC). These things can be worked around, and there are lots of great iPhone apps, but native-code is not everything it's cracked up to be.
VM's are a GOOD thing, and the Android implementation is excellent. The system-wide event model is outstanding, allowing one to write apps that stay running, and do things, say, when you change locations (your physical location), flip the phone upside down, run too fast, receive a phone call, etc. The VM has made all of this much easier to accomplish, because the code is managed.
Mir tut es leid, Menschen daß Einfältigfehlersuchenbaumfolgendenaffen sind.
I've had a G1 for about a week and I don't think your comments make much sense.
The trackball is very convenient, it gives you mouse-like control over the screen. On the G1 and the iPhone, the touchscreen is good but it's no replacement for a mouse. The iPhone would be better with a trackball. The moving screen is handy, because there are so many good apps for Android already, you'll run out of room. The titled bottom piece causes absolutely no issues whatsoever. The only complaint I'd give credit to is the audio jack thing. They should have included a regular 3.5mm jack.
I've used both the G1 and the iPhone and I like the G1 a lot more so far.
It has a nice smooth interface, in the same ballpark as the iPhone. It has an easy to use app store, which is nicer than Apple's because it already has apps that you'd have to jailbreak the iPhone for. It uses standard mechanisms for thinks like uploading music, etc. Instead of locking you into their stupid iTunes product. As a developer, you get to develop on any platform you want and the dev kit is free.
So, honestly, the iPhone is a decent product, but it's been bested by Android already IMO. It will be interesting to see just how awesome Android becomes on future products.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Other than the lightsaber app, that's pretty standard on most high-end phones. I pay a lot less for my Nokia N95 8GB, and on features alone it beats the iPhone. Naturally, it can't compete on interface, but it's not as bad as people tend to report. In some ways I prefer the interface even - buttons have their advantages.
Almost everybody here is comparing phones on different networks. The only way you can say anything useful about the phones is if they're using the SAME NETWORK.
"3G" is not a bandwidth value. Neither is "Edge". For both of these, data transfer rate depends mainly on how far you are from the cell company's antenna, and how many walls and trees are between you and it.
Unless those factors are identical for both phones, your comparison says nothing about the speed of the phones, and nothing useful about how the phones will behave for someone else. The only person here who's made a sensible comparison is dnwq, who said
If you really want to do a comparison... just unlock the damned thing and put in SIM cards from the same network!
I have an iPhone myself (first gen), and it I wouldn't say it's all marketing. It is an excellent phone by the virtue that it is enjoyable to use, as opposed to other phones which feel clunky and, well, unusable. It does excel at its core functionality and wraps it up in a beautiful interface. However, I do feel Apple's role in the market isn't as a market leader, but as an innovator. The iPhone really helped point cell phone developers where the phone market should be heading. That being said, I think the G1 is the first real response to Apple's innovations. In fact, if it wasn't for the fact that it is a horrible mp3 player compared to the iPhone, I'd probably buy one right now.
How many boards would the Mongols hoard if the Mongol hordes got bored?
You forgot what it is that Apple sells. You just listed a bunch of parts.
Apple sells an integrated interface to as many digital devices as they've come up with components for. Music, video, TV, the computer, phone, and whatever else I'm not recalling.
That's what people are paying for.
Just for gits and shiggles, I decided to try the same tests on my Windows XP Laptop with Netscape 56k modem, and on my Commodore 64's 2400 "baud" text-only browser:
>>>Our first test, timed by the venerable Rupert Goodwins, involved visiting eHam.net
Commodore 64 == 40 seconds
Netscape ISP == 5 seconds
G1 = 13; 3G == 24 (CNET test)
>>>this time visited CNET UK's sister site silicon.com
Commodore 64 == 100 seconds
Netscape ISP == 15 seconds
G1 == 21; Omnia == 45 (CNET test)
>>>we visited barackobama.com.
Commodore 64 == 60 seconds
Netscape ISP == 200 seconds (stupid Flash)
G1 == 45; 3G = 1:38 (CNET test)
So in most cases, the Netscape with Image Compression was faster than the Internet-capable phones, except when it had to deal with annoying Flash animations. And the ancient 1982 Commodore was about the same, so long as you don't mind doing text-only web browsing.
Man I'm bored.
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
No, I mean it's resources/capabilities should be a lot better. :)
Well, you're not really paying for resources and capabilities with an Apple product.
Apple has become a design-oriented company. They try to make sure everything looks and feels consistent. They make things as intuitive as possible, even if that means sacrificing some functionality. They don't add unusable junk to their products just so they can have the largest feature count. They spend real money on good industrial designers who make products that are nice to hold and look at. I think it's worth a price premium to get something that, even if it doesn't 'just work' as the ads suggest, has clearly been thought about for a good long time by people who know about creating a well rounded product.
I honestly don't care if the G1 is faster than my iPhone, just like it didn't bother me much that my old iBook's G3 processor was MUCH slower than the processors in Windows laptops of the era. You might not understand why people purchase Apple's stuff, but at least understand that those of us who do are not retards who don't carefully consider the pros and cons before spending $600 on a cellphone.
Sounds to me like you'll be an Apple fanboy once you get a new job and start making more money! :)
FYI, the most common 3G frequency is 2100MHz. Neither ATT or T-Mobile uses 2100MHz in the US market. ATT uses 850/1900 and T-Mobile uses 1700.
Both the G1 and the iPhone 3G are capable of working at 2100MHz though, which means both phones can operate on the 3G network in most of the world.
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
The plan is $70 before tax ($40 for the lowest-price voice plan, and $30 for UL data), but there is no SMS included. It's unlimited data, not texting. (Which, IMHO, is retarded.)
;-)
If course you can certainly SMS out of other iPhone apps, so at least for sending them you never need to accrue a SMS charge.
Offhand, the UL data plan is pretty competitive. Certainly it's better than Verizon's continued bullshit (which was much of why I wasn't on a Treo years before), and it seems right in line with the others. (Sprint you seem to be able to do a lot better with if you know how to get the SERO plan.)
In the end, that's pretty much the point, though. It's worth it if you plan on taking advantage of what UL data and online-access-everywhere can bring you. If THAT isn't worth the money to you, then certainly the iPhone (or just about any other smartphone) isn't worth it for you. You might as well get a regular cell phone and pick up a Touch if you want to hop on the platform, rather than cart around the data charge.
Man I'm bored.
Man I'm bored.[2]
Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br
"Apple-fans...MOBILIZE!
I'm not really sure, but I think something in this article says something bad about iPhones.
You know what to do..."
You are welcome on my lawn.
Other than the lightsaber app, that's pretty standard on most high-end phones. I pay a lot less for my Nokia N95 8GB, and on features alone it beats the iPhone.
My primary phone these days is a Nokia E70. Nice phone overall and I like it. The features are roughly identical to my wife's iPhone 3G - but only if you are just doing a checkbox feature comparison. Technically it has the "same" stuff but not all of it is usable. In actual usability there is a pretty wide gap for most people. Why? The interface.
The interface on Nokia's S60 phones just sucks in comparison. Yes, a geek like me (and presumably you) can make it work just fine but ONLY a geek like me would bother. Getting an iPhone configured is a breeze by comparison - not to mention using it. It took me hours of navigating obscure menus to get my E70 working "properly" and I've had a series of Nokia phones for 10 years so I'm plenty familiar with their interface. The physical keyboard is nice but the iPhones virtual one works adequately. Particularly galling were:
By comparison, setting up my wife's iPhone took 30 minutes and I had never held one before hers. Is the iPhone perfect? Heck no, but I've spent quality time with plenty of S60, Blackberries and Treos and for 9/10 people I'd recommend the iPhone over any of them if they have a choice. It's just less hassle. Fortunately it seems to have gotten the handset manufacturers off their rear ends so we are seeing a nice wave of innovative new phones coming out.
It's really nothing special, just more idiot-proof and much less flexible.
Flexibility in a mobile device is a two edged sword. It might give you capabilities but the designer isn't careful the cost is usually a degradation in usability. I have an S60 based phone and my wife has the iPhone 3G. I'm a geek with plenty of technical skill and if given the choice today I'd take the iPhone over my Nokia without a second thought. It's just easier to use for the stuff I actually use a smartphone for. All that "flexibility" bites Nokia in the ass when it comes time to actually use the device since they paid (IMO) so little attention to how people actually use these things.
Turns out it's an O2 network issue: From TA: "Update: A previously published version of this article concluded that the G1's browser and processor were able to render pages faster than the iPhone's. In response to reader comments regarding a Wi-Fi test, we have now run a set of tests and concluded that, indeed, both phones load pages at a similar speed over Wi-Fi. This means there's little difference in processor or browser performance. Clearly the G1 is a superior Web phone to the Omnia, but it seems to be O2's network that is holding the iPhone back."
I agree that I would like a 3.5" jack but at the same time I also understand why there isn't one. This is sort of the elegance in design AshtangiMan likes in the iPhone. Everything is done through a single port on the G1 rather than having to place multiple ports on it. If you want to use earphones other than the ones provided or plug it into your car stereo you can get an adapter fairly inexpensively.
I know that's not a perfect solution but then what is? It is six of one (single port with adapters) or half a dozen of the other (multiple ports).
I've tested the same web-site on wired & 3G tmobile connection, & tmobile reduces the (byte) size of all image files on the fly in their transparent proxy. Might improve performance a tad! A proper test would use https as this cannot be interfered with in this way.