T-Mobile G1 Faster Than iPhone 3G 304
An anonymous reader writes "CNET UK have run some very simple in-house tests comparing the T-Mobile G1's 3G connection against the iPhone 3G's. Result? The G1 loaded Web pages almost twice as fast as the iPhone's. Of course, the test only applies to the CNET UK offices if you're being scientific about it, as stated, but it's still impressive nevertheless."
The thing is still ugly (Score:1, Insightful)
I'd buy it if not for that awkward looking track ball
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:somebody read it (Score:2, Insightful)
That doesn't stop them concluding
Re:somebody read it (Score:5, Insightful)
Great for the G1 and all... but seriously? CNET, you fail at comparisons. Different sites? For the love of the experimental method, why?
And there's absolutely no way to conclude that the G1's processor or browser beats the iPhone's on this test alone... maybe O2 just really, really sucks? Who knows?
If you really want to do a comparison... just unlock the damned thing and put in SIM cards from the same network!
Re:somebody read it (Score:2, Insightful)
If they think it's the proc/browser speed why not just test over the same wifi network?
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
Better than what? The average phone is the RAZR, so in THAT standpoint the iPhone is better than the average.
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:2, Insightful)
I will be moderated troll/flamebait as always in this kind of threads but I don't care.
So, could you tell me which ones are the good non-overpriced ones?
Imho:
Nano - non-good.
Classic - non-good.
Touch - somewhat good, but there are better and more price worthy players out there.
iPhone - insane price.
Mac mini - are you kidding?
Macbook - somewhat good but over-priced.
Macbook Pro - Good but really over-priced.
iMac - Good and decent price at release for 24" ones, only product worth it's price if you're not an übergamer and actually need the screen.
Mac Pro - Over-priced (don't give me this "omg just compare it to another machine of similar spec"-bullshit. I don't give a shit, I would never configure a machine that bad. I could get much better performance for less.)
Airport Express - Rather cool if it could play audio even outside iTunes, but I don't think it can so overpriced.
Airport Extreme - Very overpriced.
AppleTV - Why?
Re:somebody read it (Score:3, Insightful)
because the ability to get a page fast over a low bandwidth connection is important to most perspective buyers (ability to deal with compressed pages, pipelining etc) and at the end of the day if you live in the UK you will get iphones & G1s on their respective connections.
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:3, Insightful)
Other than the lightsaber app, that's pretty standard on most high-end phones. I pay a lot less for my Nokia N95 8GB, and on features alone it beats the iPhone. Naturally, it can't compete on interface, but it's not as bad as people tend to report. In some ways I prefer the interface even - buttons have their advantages.
You all fail at controlled experiments. (Score:3, Insightful)
Almost everybody here is comparing phones on different networks. The only way you can say anything useful about the phones is if they're using the SAME NETWORK.
"3G" is not a bandwidth value. Neither is "Edge". For both of these, data transfer rate depends mainly on how far you are from the cell company's antenna, and how many walls and trees are between you and it.
Unless those factors are identical for both phones, your comparison says nothing about the speed of the phones, and nothing useful about how the phones will behave for someone else. The only person here who's made a sensible comparison is dnwq, who said
If you really want to do a comparison... just unlock the damned thing and put in SIM cards from the same network!
Re:somebody read it (Score:3, Insightful)
they hosed up the experimental method right off the bat with the extremely limited scope of their test. 3 web pages?
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:4, Insightful)
You forgot what it is that Apple sells. You just listed a bunch of parts.
Apple sells an integrated interface to as many digital devices as they've come up with components for. Music, video, TV, the computer, phone, and whatever else I'm not recalling.
That's what people are paying for.
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, you're not really paying for resources and capabilities with an Apple product.
Apple has become a design-oriented company. They try to make sure everything looks and feels consistent. They make things as intuitive as possible, even if that means sacrificing some functionality. They don't add unusable junk to their products just so they can have the largest feature count. They spend real money on good industrial designers who make products that are nice to hold and look at. I think it's worth a price premium to get something that, even if it doesn't 'just work' as the ads suggest, has clearly been thought about for a good long time by people who know about creating a well rounded product.
I honestly don't care if the G1 is faster than my iPhone, just like it didn't bother me much that my old iBook's G3 processor was MUCH slower than the processors in Windows laptops of the era. You might not understand why people purchase Apple's stuff, but at least understand that those of us who do are not retards who don't carefully consider the pros and cons before spending $600 on a cellphone.
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:2, Insightful)
Sounds to me like you'll be an Apple fanboy once you get a new job and start making more money! :)
It's about more than a feature list (Score:4, Insightful)
Other than the lightsaber app, that's pretty standard on most high-end phones. I pay a lot less for my Nokia N95 8GB, and on features alone it beats the iPhone.
My primary phone these days is a Nokia E70 [wikipedia.org]. Nice phone overall and I like it. The features are roughly identical to my wife's iPhone 3G - but only if you are just doing a checkbox feature comparison. Technically it has the "same" stuff but not all of it is usable. In actual usability there is a pretty wide gap for most people. Why? The interface.
The interface on Nokia's S60 [wikipedia.org] phones just sucks in comparison. Yes, a geek like me (and presumably you) can make it work just fine but ONLY a geek like me would bother. Getting an iPhone configured is a breeze by comparison - not to mention using it. It took me hours of navigating obscure menus to get my E70 working "properly" and I've had a series of Nokia phones for 10 years so I'm plenty familiar with their interface. The physical keyboard is nice but the iPhones virtual one works adequately. Particularly galling were:
By comparison, setting up my wife's iPhone took 30 minutes and I had never held one before hers. Is the iPhone perfect? Heck no, but I've spent quality time with plenty of S60, Blackberries and Treos and for 9/10 people I'd recommend the iPhone over any of them if they have a choice. It's just less hassle. Fortunately it seems to have gotten the handset manufacturers off their rear ends so we are seeing a nice wave of innovative new phones coming out.
Re:The thing is still ugly (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree that I would like a 3.5" jack but at the same time I also understand why there isn't one. This is sort of the elegance in design AshtangiMan likes in the iPhone. Everything is done through a single port on the G1 rather than having to place multiple ports on it. If you want to use earphones other than the ones provided or plug it into your car stereo you can get an adapter fairly inexpensively.
I know that's not a perfect solution but then what is? It is six of one (single port with adapters) or half a dozen of the other (multiple ports).
Re:somebody read it (Score:5, Insightful)