Interesting perspective:

globeandmail.com: U.S. iPhone traffic clogs RIM's Bold plans

big surprise. more problems caused by the iphone. does apple test before they put it into prod or do they just think making something look pretty will excuse it?

thanks apple for breaking att's network and delaying devices that actually work.

From the article:

"AT&T will need to spend as much as $1-billion (U.S.) to repair its network"

LOL. They get what they deserve. And to think the 3G iPhones use all that bandwidth and still can't deliver usable sound quality on a simple phone call (at least that is the case with iPhone users who call me). I can always tell when an iPhone user is calling me.....because these are the only people who say "can you hear me now?"

Still, they are a cool fashion accessory, and good for lots of stuff except making phone calls.

I have not heard of similiar issues within the Rogers Network Infrastructure with the iPhone though.

--Phil

That is really interesting. I wonder if it is just volume related. Maybe there are far fewer iPhones operating on Rogers and/or Rogers had a higher available capacity to start with. Or it is a combination of these two factors. I remember when AT&T first switched over to GSM, the service was terrible. But eventually they ramped up the capacity and now it is really good. I just thought AT&T's 3g had been in place long enough to have sorted this type of thing out.

Also, doesn't Rogers impose quota's on its data plan users? This would have a big impact on keeping bandwidth available. AT&T, as far as I know, does not impose any limits on iPhone users, so they are free to hog all the bandwidth they want without any drawbacks.

that just might be Canadian efficiency tho.

Ha

Please explain how AT&T's poor excuse for a 3g network is in any way Apple's fault? AT&T has been pinching pennies when it comes to upgrading to 3g for years now.

Once iPhone made mobile data usage simple and usable for the majority of real consumers (as opposed to techies) guess what? Their bargain bin 3g network couldnt take the load!

Is that what you blame Apple for? Making data so widely and easily used?

This article is hilarious:

Sending data back and forth without backend servers that compress that data????

My god that is just like every other mobile device and computer ever made except for the BB and the Sidekick!!

Give me a break.

This is likely the problem that I was referring to in earlier posts. I suspect we have the same issues here on Rogers but just not reported yet, or possibly delayed Canadian complacency.

Either way I have a question- I use a 3rd party BES server. Would that you be slower than a direct RIM BES or a corporate BES? Every time I try and load a web page the longest part appears to be the 'requesting' part.

Am I being overly critical? If so, that's ok!

This is an interesting take on the issue. One could argue that Apple dumped an inefficient device onto the market. But what is beyond any debate is that AT&T put millions of these inefficient devices into their customer's hands without first upgrading their network to support the new bandwidth-hoggers. That is purely on AT&T, not Apple. And AT&T should have known what the usage characteristics of the iPhone were well before they deployed it. I assumed that they would have upgraded the network first, then released the device. Instead, it appears they did the opposite.

How does this sound for a company philosphy:

"Thanks for giving us all of that money, which we will immediately book as a profit.....we promise to have your problems fixed at some point in the future"

Unfortunately, AT&T is not a pioneer when it comes to adopting this philosophy.

And ironically enough, in the end, we BB users may have the iPhone masses to thank. AT&T is now going to have to do a major infrastructure upgrade as a result of these folks, but we will also benefit from it.

Clearly an ATT issue to me. My Iphone with the new 2.1 update is rock solid.

Yes, with the following notable exceptions:

• The iPhone enables users to transmit a much larger volume of data than "other" devices that use the 3g network as their primary means of connectivity
• "Other" devices, like PC's were not designed from the ground up to utilize a mobile network. The iPhone was.

It makes sense, that when you are designing a handset that is going to use huge volumes of data, you might consider a concept like data compression at least equally to something like an accellerometer that lets you shuffle your music playlist in a neato way Then again, I am not an engineer.

While I agree that building some kind of data compression into iPhone (perhaps like that built into Opera?) would have been helpful there are certainly additional costs and tradeoffs involved in providing for that.

HTC, Palm, Samsung, Motorola et al do not support a back end infrastructure to compress data for the carriers. Why should Apple be criticized for following their lead here?

The only device makers that do provide such an infrastructure are RIM and Danger. And arguably saving bandwith was an after thought when implementing those systems, it was more about security and convenience in my opinion.

AT&T failed to plan ahead and failed to invest enough into their network. Now they are victims of "their" own success. (I say "their" because iPhone is selling in spite of AT&T, not because of them. Apple is doing most the work when it comes to marketing)

I posted about this weeks ago in the bold and att thread and nobody responded. lol It was told to me in so many words the network just had to many users on it. Its that simple nobody thought they would sell that many iphones at once.

What I understand from the article is that Apple's phone does not compress data, as Rim's does, and that Apple does not have servers to serve its units, again as Rim does. So yes, it is Apple's fault that its phones are hogging ATT's capabilities, a fault which is technical in nature, and not one of popularity.

Read post #13.

Tell me why again GSM is so much better then CDMA. You don't hear about these problems with Verizon's and Sprint's 3G networks.

Agreed. I think AT&T is as much or more to blame for this debacle then Apple.

Clearly AT&T infrastructure issues will not be resolved before releasing the Bold. I can't imagine that it would be released if it was going to have the same issues with call dropping and poor email like the iphone. Obviously that would greatly impact RIM's strong image of reliability and security and would not be agreeable to RIM. It will be interesting to see if the Bold will be plagued as well by the supposed AT&T issues. Tragic for RIM in their biggest market if that is the case.

Better coverage. GSM prodomitly runs throughout Europe and South America while CDMA is very localized and not world wide supported.

Hats off to Bryan and JG! Long has it been since I have seen 2 sides of 1 point debated / argued so intelligently and respectfully.
And neither one of them has pulled out their junk to see whose is bigger! There is hope for the interweb yet!

Cheers, guys,
Rob.

have you seen the latest BGR update, it has a AT&T product release form that has Bold delivery date "ETA November"

BGR's word isn't gospel. Its a blog like every other blog on the net. Take it with a glass of salt.

They are usually pretty good.

So I can use my phone in Europe and Asia, places I never go, but can't get reliable 3G here in the US where I live. Yeah, your right, I guess GSM is better.

/sarcasm

I get MUCH better coverage where I live (in Southern California) with GSM through AT&T then I ever did with Verizon on CDMA. I also find that my GSM version of the BlackBerry has much better battery life than the CDMA version of the same device that my wife's best friend uses. I think this may have to do with the way "data packets" work in GSM vs. CDMA, but I am no technical expert on that subject.

Also, another added bonus of being with the GSM company (AT&T) instead of the CDMA company (Verizon) is that I can get devices that are not already over a year old when my carrier decides to release them, and when I get them, all of their features are intact, rather than having been crippled in a way that forces me to use my carrier's inferior, pay-per-use services. That is my personal preference.

CDMA vs. GSM is another one of those silly debates like iPhone vs. Bold. Pick the one that you like best, but don't go around insisting that it is the best for everyone else too.

In terms of which technology is more widespread, and more of a global standard, that question has clearly been answered by the rest of the world: GSM. Ultimately, I suspect this may end up the same way some other format wars have gone, such as Beta v.s VHS, HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray, etc. Personally, I don't care as long as I can get affordable, reliable service that allows me to do my job more effectively.

my $0.02 cents

i have a rogers bold, and i get crisp 3g coverage almost 90% of the time, except the obvious places(underground parking, basement-EDGE only or wifi) while i was in the US last week(CTIA in SF) the 3g coverage by AT&T was spotty at best. my battery got a searious workout picking and dropping 3g like it was going out of style..


i have never had that experience in canada, so i can confidently say that the canadian 3G/HSPA network is years ahead of AT&T in all aspects

i guess paying thru ur nose actually DOES have its benefits

care to disagree?

cheerz \\//

Probably because your GSM phone is not 3G and the CDMA one is. 3G EVDO is used on CDMA BBs and many other phones offered by Sprint and Verizon. Once the 3G GSM BBs start taking hold, you will find your battery life just as poor.

I care to.

I am sure there are areas in the US and Canada that would have similar results. It is possible that you traveled to a specific location (SF) where there is extreme load on the network. Since the location that you visited is a tiny fraction of the AT&T network relative only to the tiny fraction your Canadian location represents on Rogers, you are making a pretty wild assertion.

What I can tell you, has been my experience, is that 3G signal is strong on my Bold from Chicago, east to Philadelphia. Very little jumping back and forth, and battery drain is moderate. I would say, at&t network is not designed for the load it is carrying in specific locations, but by no means does this mean that Rogers is "years ahead".

Could that be that those networks are not carrying 3 Million+ iPhone 3G Hogs? Not sure that has anything to do with the GSM/CDMA discussion.

Crisp? mmfffpph. I am in centre ice Toronto and don't go a day without a dropped call in 3G. No problems on 2G though. And, this is my 2nd BOLD btw.

Is Toronto too congested?

fair enough..

my use was in various areas of SF(not just around the moscone), wide assertion is possible - but i work in the downtown core of toronto which i assume faces more user demand/ capacity challenges then the SF bay area, and i have yet to experience the same while here.

the end result of my experience between the 2 lead me to believe the network in toronto is way more consistent and reliable. which may not be teh case through out the US, but certainly in the areas i tried.

cheerz'

It may be more consistent but that doesn't mean it's in any way satisfactory.

I wasn't aware Apple had sold 3 million + 3G iphones in the US yet. Stop making excuses for the crappy ATT network. This should have been anticipated after the explosive sales of the original iphone, yet it was ignored.

Take a minute to reread my post. There were no excuses made for any network. You brought up the GSM/CDMA issue, and was simply pointing out how wonderfully ridiculous your post was.

Hey torberry, what happened to all the Zen Buddist verbiage you used to grace us with? Be one with the 3G problems. Embrace your inner 2G.

im satisfied, relatively speaking of course.

just to clear up the air.. i(myself, mobilepheen) posted above in relation to the experience > I < had in SF last week, which when compared to my experience in Toronto, was less then satisfactory. but to each their own.

all i was trying to get across was that, the rogers HSPA network has been running far longer then its US sibling has, and seems to be more robust..
AGAIN.. MY OPINION from my various test cases..

I don't think AT&T should be able to completely throw it on the iPhone. Don't blame others for you pinching pennies for years to save money and not expand your network the way you should have. :(

Although I feel we may be getting a little too off topic for the Blackberry Bold forum this article sheds a little more light on the situation and makes me think that there are indeed factors other then iPhone data usage behind the Bold's delay.

Communacopia: AT&T CTO John Donovan: Technology Choices Have To Be Timed For ROI | mocoNews.net

I'm shocked, I've taken my Blackberry now to Brampton, Toronto, North York, Scraborough, Mississauga, Oakville, Burlington, Hamilton, Stoney Creek, Grimsby, Niagara Falls, Virgil and Niagara-on-the-Lake. I kept looking at the service indicator on my blackberry to determine coverage, I was in 3G coverage for over 95% of the time, the only time I confirmed loss of 3G coverage was when I was in a basement in Toronto, at which point I was in 2G service (EDGE).

--Phil

EDIT
This was my 100th post.