PodcastsGallery iPhone Matters
search


Would You Have Traded iPhone Thickness and Battery Life for 3G?

Posted July 20, 2007 5:00 AM by Gregory Ng
Categories: Poll 

OK. This lack of 3G issue still bugs me. It bugs me because I am still using my Motorola Q on Verizon Wireless over my new iPhone when I really need to find something fast.

Full internet? The real internet on your phone? I’m finding that I really don’t care. I’ll take the stripped down “fake” internet if it meant it was running faster. The iPhone running on EDGE is like having a Porsche 911 that tops off at 40 MPH. Sure, it will get you to your destination but at such a slow pace that you would rather drive the Corolla and max it out at 75MPH. What a tease.

As I reported earlier in the week, Steve Jobs cited battery life/power consumption and the thickness in form factor as 2 main reasons for no-3G capability. I contend that people had no expectations of how thick the iPhone had to be. And an increase in millimeters is negligible. I also contend that even if the battery life was smaller, people would still line up for the iPhone and deal with recharging midday if it meant 3G.

Which leads me to today’s poll. If the iPhone was as thick as the…say…Blackjack and it had reduced battery life would you have still bought it?

Permalink | Email This | Comments (5)

Comments

  1. If they needed to make it a few millimeters thicker to accommodate the 3G components, they could possibly increase the size of the battery as well to provide longer battery life.

    Posted by KBM on July 20, 2007 6:26 AM

  2. That’s not the right question. This question is too skewed to the bias you presented, only giving us the option of refusing the iPhone. The real question should be: Given the choice between EDGE with great battery life and sexy form factor, and 3G with a thicker body and poor battery performance, which would you choose?

    When you’re only offering people a choice to accept or refuse a 3G iPhone, your results are designed to support your personal argument.

    See, I am very happy Apple chose to use the smaller, more integrated and power-efficient chip sets, but I wouldn’t have said no to the iPhone if they hadn’t.

    Posted by fog city dave on July 20, 2007 9:48 AM

  3. The study posted on here a few days ago stated that with 3G the iPhone would lose 3 hours of talk time and over an hour of web browsing time. I paid the money for this phone because I wanted to use it. If I wanted a phone that was dead after only 2 of 3 hours of talking I would have stuck with my Razr. Not only that, but with 3G the iPhone would be either wider or longer. 3G speed would be nice sometimes, but it isnt worth the power and design that would be lost. I would have passed on this phone with 3G and short battery life.

    Posted by chris on July 20, 2007 10:57 AM

  4. replaceable batteries would fix the issue, place the charge port on the battery, charge the battery as you would an ipod, and swap when needed…

    Posted by gjn on July 20, 2007 12:13 PM

  5. I live in Europe and have had several 3G phones, incl Nokia e61 etc.  I found myself turning off 3G.  The increase in batterylife is huge, and with a good EDGE network, the reduction in speed is tolerable.  Edge + WLAN is a great combination.

    Posted by espen on July 22, 2007 6:53 PM

Submit Comments

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Forums | About | Contact | Press | Privacy

©2007 sterndesign, LLC. All rights reserved. All trademarks and copyrights remain the property of their respective owners. Proudly powered by ExpressionEngine. Dedicated hosting by pMachine Hosting