IPhone 4s = overanticipated

[Janx]

While true, that iPod Touch is just SOOOO much more portable. And I'm thinking about getting one of those wifi hot spot devices. Supposedly, that's faster than wifi since it foes all 3G/4G on the tech side.

Don't get me wrong- I'll find a good use for my iPad...Digitech's IPB-10 is looking pretty good.

All I know is, if when both devices are sitting next to me, I use the iPad. But I don't take that with me everywhere (being bulky and I have a manly philosophy that all the stuff I need should fit in my pockets so my hands are free)

As for faster than wifi, the oldest wifi is 802.11a. It ran at 11Mbps.

According to this cnn article from last year, the carriers 4g speed was 12Mbps

Every wifi hub on the planet is running 802.11b or better, so you're wifi chip is going to deliver better than what cellular dataplans can deliver.

This is why I think its funny when folks ponder buying 802.11n hubs and paying extra money for faster internet speed. The oldest wifi hubs are faster than the speed most people get from their ISP. (note, I just got bumped from 6Mps to 12Mbps with U-Verse).

There are other advantages to the newer faster hubs (usually better range, go through walls, security, energy use). But speed itself, not quite what people think.

You may be better off sticking to wifi, asuming you are almost always in a wifi area (like courthouses, offices, etc). It's certainly cheaper if you can.

 

[Janx]

I should probably add:

per another article from may 2011, it looks like actual speeds are about 5Mbps, depending on the provider.

It's also of note that using somebody's hotspot, the wifi network may be running faster, but your chokepoint is that hotspot's ISP.

I had 1 client with a 1Mbps ISP connection, that we had to get them to upgrade to 10mbps.

A big company with wifi all over the place probably has a good pipe, however.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Despite living in a major metropolitan area, I'm usually in areas without WiFi or without a password for the networks that ARE available. Even in my house, I'm often at 1 bar.

 

[Alan Shutko]

I have 802.11n because I want fast transmission of stuff within my network, not because I want faster internet. That's the same reason I hardwired my Xbox and PS3... So they can stream video from my other computers without slowing down anything else. Though I ship big files around, the biggest reason is for my wireless backups.

I do want to get my wife upgraded from her 3G sometime so I can switch my network to 802.11n only and turn off g.

(As a nit, 802.11a was actually faster than b, and went up to 54Mbps just like g. But it has a lower range, and for whatever reason, consumer products didn't support it for quite a while.)

 

[Aeolius]

(As a nit, 802.11a was actually faster than b, and went up to 54Mbps just like g. But it has a lower range, and for whatever reason, consumer products didn't support it for quite a while.)

And 802.22, "Super WiFi" is just around the corner...

 

[ssampier]

....
This is why I think its funny when folks ponder buying 802.11n hubs and paying extra money for faster internet speed. The oldest wifi hubs are faster than the speed most people get from their ISP. (note, I just got bumped from 6Mps to 12Mbps with U-Verse).

There are other advantages to the newer faster hubs (usually better range, go through walls, security, energy use). But speed itself, not quite what people think.

You may be better off sticking to wifi, asuming you are almost always in a wifi area (like courthouses, offices, etc). It's certainly cheaper if you can.

Correct. I try to explain why 802.11n won't make your Internet faster--the LAN is faster but the WAN remains the same speed. I get confused stares, even among tech professionals. It takes a bit of work to explain why "bigger isn't better".

 

[Janx]

Despite living in a major metropolitan area, I'm usually in areas without WiFi or without a password for the networks that ARE available. Even in my house, I'm often at 1 bar.

that effectively puts you in no wifi and virtually no mobile signal. I would question how well a wireless dataplan or one of the portable hotspots would work.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

that effectively puts you in no wifi and virtually no mobile signal. I would question how well a wireless dataplan or one of the portable hotspots would work.

My cellphone reception is hunky-dory. I haven't dropped a call in a non-shielded area in years. (As an example, as I type this, I have 4 bars on my cellphone, but only 1-2 on my iPod Touch.)

But wifi? Hit & miss. There are establishments that provide free wifi, but I'm not always in them. And it's variable by category, too: Sam's Club and Northlakes Community College all provide free wifi; Costco and UT Arlington either do not or require a password (which I don't have).

And if I'm at a client's place of business or house, there are no guarantees they'll grant me access, either.

 

[Janx]

My cellphone reception is hunky-dory. I haven't dropped a call in a non-shielded area in years. (As an example, as I type this, I have 4 bars on my cellphone, but only 1-2 on my iPod Touch.)

But wifi? Hit & miss. There are establishments that provide free wifi, but I'm not always in them. And it's variable by category, too: Sam's Club and Northlakes Community College all provide free wifi; Costco and UT Arlington either do not or require a password (which I don't have).

And if I'm at a client's place of business or house, there are no guarantees they'll grant me access, either.

I got you. I misunderstood, and thought you meant you had 1 bar on your cellphone in most places.


In any case, it means that you hop locations a lot as part of your job, and don't expect to have internet wherever you are. As such, are things changing that you need it (since you considered adding a portable hotspot)?

If having all your data in you iPod is working, I'd probably stick with that. The iPad is bigger to see, but bigger to carry.

I tend to look at those situations, as what functionality are you already carrying that you can merge hardware and reduce. dumbphone + iPod = iPhone = less clutter

dayplanner + iPod = iPad = less clutter

notepad = not sure if iPad better (i'm not yet sold on taking notes in my iPad, it still feels too slow to capture my ideas).

I'm big on less crap to carry. My wife use to tote dumphone + mp3 player + PSP. the iPhone pretty much replaced a couple pounds of crap and fits in her pocket.

I just saw an iPhone case that is actually a flip open wallet to hold credit cards. That's got me sold, because I carry my iPhone with armor + wallet in my pocekt. If I can cut that down...

 

[Janx]

I'm still on an iPhone 3G and it's on it's last legs. It's slow and freezes all the time, despite my cleaning it out a few times and starting from scratch. It takes forever to use GPS based apps. I can't wait for the 4S.

Just as a note, for you and [MENTION=3887]Mallus[/MENTION]. If the problem is battery related, a friend of mine fixed his wife's for $6.

He had a 3gs, and it was shutting down, etc. He found that the battery was getting hot, and actually bulging and warping the motherboard, and back of his case.

So he googled and ordered a battery for $6 and did the surgery himself from directions online.

Might be a way to recover a little bit more shelf-life.

I say this, pondering the concept that if Apply supports your device for 3 years, and batteries are good for about 2 (like the contracts), you might be able to squeeze out another year of life, by doing your own cheap surgery.

For us, I intend to trade my wife's in when she upgrades, to shave some pricing off. I have no doubt part of Apple's refurb process is to replace the batteries, given any 2 year old phone is likely to have a battery on its last legs.