1. burnsaa's Avatar
    So does anyone remember the WSJ interview with Steve after the first iPhone came out where he says "When we looked at 3G, the chipsets are not quite mature, in the sense that they're not low-enough power for what we were looking for. They were not integrated enough, so they took up too much physical space. We cared a lot about battery life and we cared a lot about physical size. Down the road, I'm sure some of those tradeoffs will become more favorable towards 3G but as of now we think we made a pretty good doggone decision.". Im just thinking if they "cared" so much about battery life and physical size then did they just stop caring because if they plan on putting 3G and the rumored GPS wouldnt that make for less battery life and or bigger physical size if they added a bigger battery? To me it seems like they just wanted to build the first one and sell a bunch then wait a year and come out with pretty much the same product just include something it could have had before and then sell a bunch more. I dont actually blame him I mean its a fairly good business tactic but I guess it just kind of sucks being an early adopter I guess.

    I could be totally wrong though (hoping for this) and the 3G chip that apple is using could be alot smaller and use less battery than other 3G chips out there. Does anyone have any specs like size or power usage for the 3G chip that apple is rumored to put into the upcoming iphone?
    05-31-2008 05:18 PM
  2. IndyJonez's Avatar
    I doubt apple will dissapoint.

    The current iphone (which I do not own, but have played with in-store on several occasions) seems about the perfect size but I wouldn't mind if they had to bulge it out a bit to get all the other goodies in.
    05-31-2008 05:41 PM
  3. cmaier's Avatar
    As a former chip designer, take my word for it: a year is a long time. The chipsets available now have far better power/performance tradeoffs than did the ones available a year ago. This is particularly so in that a year ago the 3G chips were still quite immature. There are/were also issues relating to certain chips by Qualcom being banned in the US due to a patent dispute with Broadcom, etc.

    Adding a litttle more thickness to the center of the next version of the phone wouldn't bother me; the current version is a little tough to hold onto. Though it does fit nicely into the pocket. Hmmm.
    05-31-2008 06:23 PM
  4. xintelinsanex's Avatar
    Well there was indication the 3G iphone is thicker right? To accomadate a GPS module and a 3G chip? Maybe it serves another purpose... a bigger battery to compensate for increased battery life.
    05-31-2008 07:16 PM
  5. neolite's Avatar
    Also, although unverified, I think that waiting 1-2 mins for a page to load on EDGE, which happens quite often for me in low signal, uses a lot more power with retransmissions and such than just a few secs of high power 3g to get the data across.
    05-31-2008 10:38 PM
  6. burnsaa's Avatar
    Ya I read an article were a guy compared the iPhone and the blackjacks battery life. But the point of the article was about how the iPhone was better off without 3G. But in the article he tested the blackjack and found that the battery lasted longer when using short bursts of data with 3G rather than edge I believe they tested it with pulling email so that will be something to look forward to.
    05-31-2008 11:55 PM
  7. burnsaa's Avatar
    Well there was indication the 3G iphone is thicker right? To accomadate a GPS module and a 3G chip? Maybe it serves another purpose... a bigger battery to compensate for increased battery life.
    Right but I found it interesting that Steve says they "cared a lot about physical size" but I guess they just dont care anymore.
    05-31-2008 11:59 PM
  8. marcol's Avatar
    Ya I read an article were a guy compared the iPhone and the blackjacks battery life. But the point of the article was about how the iPhone was better off without 3G. But in the article he tested the blackjack and found that the battery lasted longer when using short bursts of data with 3G rather than edge I believe they tested it with pulling email so that will be something to look forward to.
    You mean this one? The difference was pretty marginal:


    Still, even a little better is better than worse. In those AnandTech tests Blackjack battery life for web browsing and YouTube were a bit down for 3G compared to EDGE, but what really sucked was call time:


    It's pretty easy to see Jobs' argument when you look at those data. Hopefully that's an area where the new chips show a big improvement.
    06-01-2008 06:59 AM
  9. marcol's Avatar
    As a former chip designer, take my word for it: a year is a long time.
    Do yo think the new chips will be that much smaller? According to AnandTech the GSM/EDGE/3G implementation in the Blackjack took a fair bit more space than the GSM/EDGE implementation in the iPhone:
    http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3036

    [purple = iPhone, red = Blackjack]

    How would an implementation based on the Infineon SGold3H that's rumoured to be in the knew iPhone compare?
    06-01-2008 07:25 AM
  10. xintelinsanex's Avatar
    Well Apple managed to work with Intel on miniaturizing their chips for the air so I'm sure apple worked on shrinking the new chips for the 3G iPhone.
    06-01-2008 10:21 AM
  11. neolite's Avatar
    I think that a big customer like Apple would be able to push manufacturers to reach the specs that they were looking for as well.
    06-01-2008 12:14 PM
  12. WatersWest's Avatar
    I currently have the 1st gen Blackjack. Believe me, in mixed use which includes mostly standby, some browsing, and some e-mail, my phone's battery life in Edge-only mode is close to 2x what it is with 3G activated. There isn't just a little difference, there is a HUGE difference. It seems like, with 3G on, even standby-only time is greatly decreased. When I first got the phone, I left it in 3G all the time, and always had to carry the spare battery, because I never made it through a day, lasting between 5-7 hours total. In Edge-only mode, I get about a day & 1/2, lasting somewhere between 15 & 20 hours. Also, the Blackjack has an optional "extended" battery, which is an 1800 mah battery versus the standard 1300 mah battery. Though is ads a little extra thickness to the phone, the tradeoff is well worth it. Therefore, I would definitely be ok with a slightly thicker 2nd iPhone, so long as it provided a larger-capacity battery and the ability to turn 3G off when not in use.
    06-01-2008 12:46 PM
  13. burnsaa's Avatar
    Ya I'm hoping apple will come up with a way to only use the 3G chip when its only really needed. But my point was they didn't want to make it too thick but now they are adding
    1. 3G chipset
    2. GPS?
    3. Bigger battery?

    It just seems weird that apple would go from smaller to bigger I mean have they ever done that with an iPod or with one if their laptops. I dont know maybe a little thicker might be better my wife keeps dropping hers all the time
    06-01-2008 06:21 PM
  14. nsquared's Avatar
    Hopefully Steve will have a major announcement along with the iPhone regarding all these issues. Lord knows he's famous for thinking of things that most people were not expecting. I would expect GPS with above average battery life in the new iPhone. I don't think he would announce GPS and then say "Oh, but your battery will die faster."
    06-01-2008 07:21 PM
  15. xintelinsanex's Avatar
    Hopefully Steve will have a major announcement along with the iPhone regarding all these issues. Lord knows he's famous for thinking of things that most people were not expecting. I would expect GPS with above average battery life in the new iPhone. I don't think he would announce GPS and then say "Oh, but your battery will die faster."
    Haha that would be hilarious if he did say that the battery would die faster. I think the new iPhone might have a large capacity, 1800 mah, but it will be the same size, Apple loves to shrink things.
    06-01-2008 11:13 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD