iPhone 3G S much faster than Pre & G1

In message <8oi245ht62fvti7pa2vm3utc6v3h8i48pk@4ax.com> John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:15:48 -0700, DevilsPGD <DeathToSpam@crazyhat.net>
>wrote in <2i3245tanmkuq63iolfeu277sbrefnt50e@4ax.com>:
>
>>In message <Xns9C3374590DD88noonehomecom@74.209.131.13> Larry
>><noone@home.com> was claimed to have wrote:
>>
>>>DevilsPGD <DeathToSpam@crazyhat.net> wrote in
>>>news:2ck045h859dl02n0u2rtbcvvjl1psdf4d4@4ax.com :
>>>
>>>> I can do about 70Mb/s sustained across my WiFi, speedtest.net from the
>>>> browser reports about 12Mb/s across the same WiFi, so 9Mb/s seems to be
>>>> the iPhone's independent limit.
>>>
>>>I find that simply AMAZING, seeing as how the iPhone is an 802.11b/g device
>>>who's absolute maximum dream speed is 54Mbps!
>>>
>>>http://compnetworking.about.com/od/w...stis80211g.htm
>>>
>>>It does NOT support the proprietary Linksys or Netgear 802.11g 108Mbps
>>>extensions, which makes this speed test you tout simply a lie!
>>
>>How so?
>>
>>I didn't say the iPhone is getting 70Mb/s, just that I can do about
>>70Mb/s across the WiFi in general (from my laptop) -- Sorry if that
>>wasn't clear.
>
>To get 70Mb/s throughput you need at least 140 Mbps raw speed, only
>possible with a fairly short 802.11n connection.

Sounds about right, I rarely use my laptop at home these days and when I
do, I mainly use my laptop in the same room or next room to my wifi
access point (or in other cities)

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:31:43 -0700, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:13:39 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>wrote in <Rh60m.354$j84.334@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>:
>
>>DevilsPGD wrote:
>>
>>> It's a couple orders of magnatude faster then that (which largely shows
>>> off how slow the iPhone 3G 2.x was, but that's another story)
>>
>>The iPhone 3G wasn't limited by the 3G network, it was limited by the
>>processor, so even on WiFi it wasn't all that fast. The browser didn't
>>help either.
>>
>>The iPhone 3GS looks like a very good product. As I said ...
>
>We really don't care what you said, because you don't have any real
>experience with either phone.

Why is this even being discussed HERE? Verizon Wireless does not
offer the iPhone so who gives a shit how slow/fast the phone uses data
when VZW customers don't have that phone as an option?

Please take VZW out of your headers in this matter!

Mr. Smith wrote:

> Why is this even being discussed HERE?

1) Verizon subscribers could be considering switching carriers and
getting an iPhone.

2) Verizon will likely get a CDMA iPhone shortly after the AT&T
exclusivity clause expires.

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message news:JFd0m.400$j84.133@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
> Mr. Smith wrote:
>
>> Why is this even being discussed HERE?
>
> 1) Verizon subscribers could be considering switching carriers and
> getting an iPhone.
>
> 2) Verizon will likely get a CDMA iPhone shortly after the AT&T
> exclusivity clause expires.
>

3. Fanbois don't give a damn who they annoy with their blather....

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:36:59 -0700, SMS wrote:

> Mr. Smith wrote:
>
> 2) Verizon will likely get a CDMA iPhone shortly after the AT&T
> exclusivity clause expires.

The exclusivity agreement between ATT and Apple goes to 2012. The iPhone
will be obsolete long before that, regardless of upgrades.

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:36:59 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>Mr. Smith wrote:
>
>> Why is this even being discussed HERE?
>
>1) Verizon subscribers could be considering switching carriers and
>getting an iPhone.

Then they should to to an AT&T group to discuss it, not here

>2) Verizon will likely get a CDMA iPhone shortly after the AT&T
>exclusivity clause expires.

Yeah, like that will EVER happen.