I'm so sick of this crap. This must be what it was like for Microsoft when everyone hated them just because they were on top.
The iPhone has already won, give up the 'iPhone sucks' posts already. Or try to use it outside of NY and SF and realize that the call quality actually isn't bad, the reception doesn't suck, and you can make a call whenever you want.
I have a 2G iPhone with OSes 1, 2 and 3 and yes, call quality is pretty bad - on par with a mediocre featurephone and certainly far worse than top-notch phones like the BlackBerry.
One thing iPhone fanboys can't understand is that the iPhone isn't the best at everything. It's got great internet, multimedia and games (and apps, if you use those), but if you're looking for a phone or messaging devices, other phones will serve you better.
The call quality on the iPhone seems much better than on previous smartphones I've used (almost exclusively Treos), and callers complain about my voice quality far less then they used to. I can't compare to Blackberries since I haven't owned any. I'm willing to believe that Palm's handset design was poor, although I did own every Sprint model that came out for several years (300, 600, 650, 700) and you'd think they'd have fixed it if call quality was that bad.
My understanding is that 3G (UMTS/HSDPA) and EDGE/GSM are two different networks running in parallel. If the 3G network is overloaded with iPhones, then older/cheaper phones that only use 2.5G should (in my understanding) work better. This theory could be tested if iPhone owners tried disabling 3G, but I don't know if that's a widely-tested theory.
I don't know if the overloaded 3G network is the entire problem with the iPhone - maybe it's combined with a poor ability to handle an overcrowded network. I can say that I live in Western NY (Rochester) and do not see any of the problems people/articles report. I drop calls maybe once every two weeks, I've only missed calls due to reception problems and have never had problems with missing/failed text messages. (I have had some occasional Visual Voicemail issues, however.)
I have, however, had all those problems when going to conferences in much larger cities, and those conferences have had very high proportions of iPhone users.
It's a tricky problem, because Apple chooses their partner carriers and their reputation is coupled to the carrier's experience. Apple wants to sell as many phones as possible, but that seems to quickly overload the carrier network in many areas and leaves an impression of the device not working well. I wonder if this would be less of a problem if Apple chose to only sell unlocked phones and not partner with carriers, but then the iPhone wouldn't be the success it is today.
My iPhone is great in Boston and the greater Boston area. When I went down to NYC I was getting dropped calls, lack of signal, etc... The issues seem to be location dependent, and are therefore more an issue of AT&T infrastructure and not the iPhone itself.
It's still frustrating, but it's important to realize that the issues you're having in NYC/SF/etc... are not iPhone issues, but AT&T 3G capacity issues.
On the other hand, I switched to an iPhone being a previous AT&T customer in Arizona. I have had more issues with dropped calls and unreceived calls than I had with my previous phone. In fact, people have started to call me multiple times just in case the first time I didn't answer was a fluke.
No, it's not AT&T. My old Razr outperforms both the iPhone I (wife's) and iPhone II (son's) in terms of being able to make or receive a call with a weak-signal. I simply suspect the transceiver is not as sensitive (don't know about iPhone III, however).
10 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 32.2 ms ] threadThe iPhone has already won, give up the 'iPhone sucks' posts already. Or try to use it outside of NY and SF and realize that the call quality actually isn't bad, the reception doesn't suck, and you can make a call whenever you want.
If it was 1997 I'd actually might read an article published on a CNET website, but it's not so I made this superfluous comment instead.
One thing iPhone fanboys can't understand is that the iPhone isn't the best at everything. It's got great internet, multimedia and games (and apps, if you use those), but if you're looking for a phone or messaging devices, other phones will serve you better.
My understanding is that 3G (UMTS/HSDPA) and EDGE/GSM are two different networks running in parallel. If the 3G network is overloaded with iPhones, then older/cheaper phones that only use 2.5G should (in my understanding) work better. This theory could be tested if iPhone owners tried disabling 3G, but I don't know if that's a widely-tested theory.
I don't know if the overloaded 3G network is the entire problem with the iPhone - maybe it's combined with a poor ability to handle an overcrowded network. I can say that I live in Western NY (Rochester) and do not see any of the problems people/articles report. I drop calls maybe once every two weeks, I've only missed calls due to reception problems and have never had problems with missing/failed text messages. (I have had some occasional Visual Voicemail issues, however.)
I have, however, had all those problems when going to conferences in much larger cities, and those conferences have had very high proportions of iPhone users.
It's a tricky problem, because Apple chooses their partner carriers and their reputation is coupled to the carrier's experience. Apple wants to sell as many phones as possible, but that seems to quickly overload the carrier network in many areas and leaves an impression of the device not working well. I wonder if this would be less of a problem if Apple chose to only sell unlocked phones and not partner with carriers, but then the iPhone wouldn't be the success it is today.
It's still frustrating, but it's important to realize that the issues you're having in NYC/SF/etc... are not iPhone issues, but AT&T 3G capacity issues.