| woody14619 |
2012-03-05 20:44 |
Re: AT&T may be killing off 2G (RIP N900)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stlpaul
(Post 1174828)
the gain in performance is much greater than the loss in power savings, IMO.
|
For large data transfers like web surfing, yes. But if you want to do something with minimal data requirements but long operational times (IM for example) then it's far superior. Leaving 3G on all day vs using 2G is a huge battery drain. This is like saying why not ban all mopeds now that we have SUVs, since they're always better than a moped since they're more powerful and go faster. The difference is that the moped gets 60 mpg where the SUV gets 25 to 30 at best. In many instances the moped is the better choice, and will get you much farther on the same amount of fuel.
Also: HSPA signaling is much shorter range. There's also the fact that 3G coverage is far less than GSM coverage is currently. There are lots of places I can get cell signal just fine but don't get 3G. Being able to get data over 2G, even at a crawl, is better than nothing when I need data in the boonies. :)
If this does happen, it also means the average cost of a device goes up. Adding 2G data service to a device costs next to nothing, since it already needs the chips and design work to make GSM calls. Adding 3G or 4G means additional chipsets and more antenna clusters in the device for picking up the other bands. That adds complexity and cost to a device. Kiss goodbye any cheep candy-bar device that has any type of data capability. This also means picture messaging (MMS) goes away for cheep devices as well, since MMS needs data to get it's content/attachments. |
