iPhone Alternatives?
Discussion
Don said:
It does lots of stuff you may or may not want - but the thing you absolutely but positively want is mobile internet - and it doesn't do it. Oh sure - its got WiFi - but then you have to be in a hotspot. The LG device has 3G which means you can use it in a much wider area. GPRS (which they both have) is frankly shit.
Ah, common misconception. In the case of the iPhone the browser is simply excellent. I have yet to come across a 'mobile' browser which is so well supported and as quick as it is (Safari). It renders pages brilliantly and is comfortable to use, even when sat at home on WiFi. It really is the type of device you can just pick up and browse the web, something that you cannot necessarily say for other phone devices; where browsing is usually a forced experience and bloody difficult to do!I have said it before, but I used to have a Nokia E70 with 3G and the wife has an iPhone. A direct back-to-back comparison between the Nokia and the iPhone proved that the Apple was able to download, display a standard web page (in my case the BBC news site) faster than the supposedly quicker Nokia. The claims from the mobile networks are just that - claims. 3G and broadband speed? Yeah right, pull the other one its god hoofing great bells on it! Also, the power of the device, its ability to process the data and ultimate how quickly it can render the page is actually more important than the speed of download. I have just upgraded my Nokia E70 to an E90 - the communicator one - its around 3 times quicker for standard tasks and is HSDPA enabled but for some reason coverage is a little limited around me. Again, back-to-back tests for a faster Nokia using 3G against an iPhone on EDGE showed that the iPhone still has it licked. Even on WiFi (8Mbps service) had the iPhone working quicker! Come on, data speeds? Pull the other one - proof is in the eating, not on the tech-specs.
Don said:
And the data tariffs! My word - what a total rip!
Er, think you mean call tariffs. The iPhone on O2 is unlimited data included in the package (and access to The Cloud WiFi for free). And yes, they were a little excessive. However, they have just dropped them:http://www.o2.co.uk/iphone/o2tariffsforiphone
£35 a month gives you 600 minutes, 500 texts, unlimited data and access to The Cloud. Actually, thats pretty competitive.
I will give you that the iPhone is not for everyone. I would have one if I could, but cant due to corporate push-email requirement. Its a good phone and works well, but it isnt for everyone. Some love it, some don't - that's fine. Try one out and see, but its not a perfect phone for everyone - its good, but not perfect.
TonyHetherington said:
Ok, with all that talk about iPhones, I really do want one. Especially as I've just got an iPod touch which is frankly brilliant - I love the user interface and now want a phone like it!
TonyI've got the new Sony Ericsson W960i which is a touchscreen smartphone with 8GB internal storage, 3.2m camera, ability to run additional Symbian software, WiFi, 3G etc.... Even runs ActiveSync to sync up Exhange server emails like you get on PDAs.
Have a look at it.
http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_ericsson_w960-2008.ph...
off_again said:
I have said it before, but I used to have a Nokia E70 with 3G and the wife has an iPhone. A direct back-to-back comparison between the Nokia and the iPhone proved that the Apple was able to download, display a standard web page (in my case the BBC news site) faster than the supposedly quicker Nokia.
Isn't that because the iPhone is pre-rendering the page on the server side, rather like Opera Mini does (and Netfront did several years before Apple invented the whole thing 
and a new Firefox Gecko based browser ) instead of downloading it all and then making it fit like Mobile Explorer (which is a dog, whatever way you look at it).Whilst I completely agree that it should be a real world test of browsing speed, rather than stats, I don't think a single instance location and pre-rendered web page can tell the whole story. Certainly I get upwards of 800kbps day-in day-out on HSDPA. Trying to claim EDGE is as fast as HSDPA simply isn't true most of the time. No amount of serverside help will let you download a 15Mb presentation any quicker.
As ever, it really depends on what you want. If you can't live without fast download speeds then it won't be for you.
Noger said:
off_again said:
I have said it before, but I used to have a Nokia E70 with 3G and the wife has an iPhone. A direct back-to-back comparison between the Nokia and the iPhone proved that the Apple was able to download, display a standard web page (in my case the BBC news site) faster than the supposedly quicker Nokia.
Isn't that because the iPhone is pre-rendering the page on the server side, rather like Opera Mini does (and Netfront did several years before Apple invented the whole thing and a new Firefox Gecko based browser ) instead of downloading it all and then making it fit like Mobile Explorer (which is a dog, whatever way you look at it).There's lots of reasons the iPhone is quicker - lots more RAM, a faster processor, a faster graphics subsystem, and superior client software.
Noger said:
Whilst I completely agree that it should be a real world test of browsing speed, rather than stats, I don't think a single instance location and pre-rendered web page can tell the whole story. Certainly I get upwards of 800kbps day-in day-out on HSDPA. Trying to claim EDGE is as fast as HSDPA simply isn't true most of the time. No amount of serverside help will let you download a 15Mb presentation any quicker.
Completely agree about a single instance and in now way am I suggesting that HSDPA is quicker than EDGE. In fact, I did say that it wasn't HSDPA as it is unavailable where I am currently (though is just around the corner from me, strangely). No, the difference is in the ability to retrieve and display the information.My wife recently had one of those mobile USB modem things while her ADSL line was down. Yes, throughput was rather good and it clearly shows that you can get good throughput. But does 800Kbps download speeds really result in a faster web browsing experience on a mobile handset? Does it really allow for the rendering of web pages on a mobile quicker? Or does the low-power processing of the mobile handset cripple the ability to render the HTML? For example, why does a Core2Duo laptop with Firefox download a web page quicker via WiFi on my broadband connection than my Nokia E90 (and iPhone)? Its the same connection, with the same speed. Or is it down to the ability to open up connections, download the data, render and understand that data and subsequently display it? The limiting factor for most mobile browsing is not the download speed, but the ability to crunch the numbers and actually do something with it.
You can of course simplify the browsing experience (Opera Mini) and do it this way, but it still doesn't get close. Personally though, mobile browsing is still in its infancy. No device really provides the full experience and offers the ability to do it seamlessly and easily. Maybe it will come later, but everything is a compromise and NO device offers everything to everyone (YET).
GHW said:
No. There's no server-side trickery with the iPhone.
There's lots of reasons the iPhone is quicker - lots more RAM, a faster processor, a faster graphics subsystem, and superior client software.
Wow, that is impresive then. But I still doubt a GRPS based iPhone would get anywhere near a similarly powerful HSDPA device in "normal" circumstances, despite the obviously clever rendering. A collegue has an iPhone, so may tap him up for a little test in a speedy area.There's lots of reasons the iPhone is quicker - lots more RAM, a faster processor, a faster graphics subsystem, and superior client software.
Despite the inflated claims of speed, 3G is still pretty quick. And quick enough on a laptop connection to not really notice the difference between it and broadband for most normal browsing. I can even play WoW over it ! Try that on EDGE
off_again said:
Does it really allow for the rendering of web pages on a mobile quicker? Or does the low-power processing of the mobile handset cripple the ability to render the HTML? For example, why does a Core2Duo laptop with Firefox download a web page quicker via WiFi on my broadband connection than my Nokia E90 (and iPhone)?
A quick test (I really should do some work) suggests ..1= IE7 on a Core Duo and Opera Mini on a TYTN II (both via HSDPA)
3 (by some way) Opera Mobile on a TYTN II (so no server side) via HSDPA
4 (by not a lot) Safari on a iPhone over EDGE.
Opera mini really does fly. Very cut down, as you say.
Interesting.
Tycho said:
Zod said:
Fidgits said:
the Nokia N95 looks pretty good - probably does everything you need, but no where as stylish as the iphone..
the ordinary one is let down by shockingly poor battery life. The new black 8GB version is fantastic. The battery lasts for days rather than hours and the satnav gets a lock in a minute or so, instead of fifteen minutes.Aha, so Apple/iPhone don't require serverside stuff, but it would appear that O2 in the UK might well have a proxy to speed EDGE up.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2007/11/iphon...
ETA : Whatever way it is speeding things up, it clearly works well.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2007/11/iphon...
ETA : Whatever way it is speeding things up, it clearly works well.
Edited by Noger on Wednesday 30th January 15:35
Noger said:
1= IE7 on a Core Duo and Opera Mini on a TYTN II (both via HSDPA)
3 (by some way) Opera Mobile on a TYTN II (so no server side) via HSDPA
4 (by not a lot) Safari on a iPhone over EDGE.
Opera mini really does fly. Very cut down, as you say.
Interesting.
For reference, can you try the same on an N95 or similar 3G/HSDPA smartphone device?3 (by some way) Opera Mobile on a TYTN II (so no server side) via HSDPA
4 (by not a lot) Safari on a iPhone over EDGE.
Opera mini really does fly. Very cut down, as you say.
Interesting.
Zod said:
Tycho said:
Zod said:
Fidgits said:
the Nokia N95 looks pretty good - probably does everything you need, but no where as stylish as the iphone..
the ordinary one is let down by shockingly poor battery life. The new black 8GB version is fantastic. The battery lasts for days rather than hours and the satnav gets a lock in a minute or so, instead of fifteen minutes.Conditioning the battery really helps with the N95 as well.
I did a few little browser tests ... not scientific in any way, just a shufty to see how it responded.
Nokia 770 - tried connecting up to a web page (bbc news) via WiFi at home (albeit a cruddy 512k service), and it rendered quite quickly.
Then replaced the WiFi connection with the 3G connection of my N73. It was only a teeny bit slower.
But back directly on topic, I'd suggest the HTC Touch or Touch Dual as an alternative to the iPhone. Outside of the Touchflo interface its standard windoze mobile, but overall they're a good bit of kit.
Hopefully i'll be able to pick up a dual at some point today, then stick as large an SDHC card in it that I can find.
Nokia 770 - tried connecting up to a web page (bbc news) via WiFi at home (albeit a cruddy 512k service), and it rendered quite quickly.
Then replaced the WiFi connection with the 3G connection of my N73. It was only a teeny bit slower.
But back directly on topic, I'd suggest the HTC Touch or Touch Dual as an alternative to the iPhone. Outside of the Touchflo interface its standard windoze mobile, but overall they're a good bit of kit.
Hopefully i'll be able to pick up a dual at some point today, then stick as large an SDHC card in it that I can find.
off_again said:
Don said:
It does lots of stuff you may or may not want - but the thing you absolutely but positively want is mobile internet - and it doesn't do it. Oh sure - its got WiFi - but then you have to be in a hotspot. The LG device has 3G which means you can use it in a much wider area. GPRS (which they both have) is frankly shit.
Ah, common misconception. In the case of the iPhone the browser is simply excellent. I have yet to come across a 'mobile' browser which is so well supported and as quick as it is (Safari). It renders pages brilliantly and is comfortable to use, even when sat at home on WiFi. It really is the type of device you can just pick up and browse the web, something that you cannot necessarily say for other phone devices; where browsing is usually a forced experience and bloody difficult to do!I have said it before, but I used to have a Nokia E70 with 3G and the wife has an iPhone. A direct back-to-back comparison between the Nokia and the iPhone proved that the Apple was able to download, display a standard web page (in my case the BBC news site) faster than the supposedly quicker Nokia. The claims from the mobile networks are just that - claims. 3G and broadband speed? Yeah right, pull the other one its god hoofing great bells on it! Also, the power of the device, its ability to process the data and ultimate how quickly it can render the page is actually more important than the speed of download. I have just upgraded my Nokia E70 to an E90 - the communicator one - its around 3 times quicker for standard tasks and is HSDPA enabled but for some reason coverage is a little limited around me. Again, back-to-back tests for a faster Nokia using 3G against an iPhone on EDGE showed that the iPhone still has it licked. Even on WiFi (8Mbps service) had the iPhone working quicker! Come on, data speeds? Pull the other one - proof is in the eating, not on the tech-specs.
Don said:
And the data tariffs! My word - what a total rip!
Er, think you mean call tariffs. The iPhone on O2 is unlimited data included in the package (and access to The Cloud WiFi for free). And yes, they were a little excessive. However, they have just dropped them:http://www.o2.co.uk/iphone/o2tariffsforiphone
£35 a month gives you 600 minutes, 500 texts, unlimited data and access to The Cloud. Actually, thats pretty competitive.
I will give you that the iPhone is not for everyone. I would have one if I could, but cant due to corporate push-email requirement. Its a good phone and works well, but it isnt for everyone. Some love it, some don't - that's fine. Try one out and see, but its not a perfect phone for everyone - its good, but not perfect.
This means its "unlimited data" is accessible only in WiFi hotspots (admittedly fast) or via GPRS - at 32kpbs. What have I misconcieved about that?
If I can only have the net in a particular location - I may as well have it on a PC. The whole point (to me) about an iPhone-a-like is that the device is highly portable and can access the net wherever you happen to be. To me - needing to be in a "hotspot" just means I will never have access the time I actually need it!
However good the iPhone's web browser is (its Safari so it should be fine) if it won't hit the net at the times I want it to its useless to me.
BTW: I have a GPRS enabled phone and have used the net on it. Its great - but only on web-sites deliberately designed for mobile access. What I want is a device that means I can hit any website wherever I happen to be. Sadly the iPhone just doesn't do it....yet.
I'll bet "iPhone2" has a GPS in it and 3G mobile boredband
I'm also willing to bet that a host of iPhoneALikes hit the market in the next few months that all do more and cost less but weren't first. I'm waiting for the right one of those...
Tycho said:
Zod said:
Tycho said:
Zod said:
Fidgits said:
the Nokia N95 looks pretty good - probably does everything you need, but no where as stylish as the iphone..
the ordinary one is let down by shockingly poor battery life. The new black 8GB version is fantastic. The battery lasts for days rather than hours and the satnav gets a lock in a minute or so, instead of fifteen minutes.Conditioning the battery really helps with the N95 as well.
I suppose it may've been just a bad batch or something that's since been resolved.
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff