Google: Nexus One not supporting 802.11n (for the time being)
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted January 8th 2010 1:20PM
posted January 8th 2010 1:20PM
Contrary to what we saw two days ago (in this boffo teardown as well as on Google's official spec page) the company is now listing the Nexus One as supporting 802.11b/g and not 802.11n -- conforming at least to the specifications on HTC's official specifications, if not to our hopes and dreams. We'll let you know if anything changes -- again!
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
Not really surprising, N uses a ton of power.
@SarnGate
com'on they can manage multitasking and not WiFi n? I think that in the end of january someone can start to hurt the Nexus...
@SarnGate: Actually 802.11n MCS7 modulation consumes ~8-10% LESS power than OFDM (802.11g) on the Broadcom chip powering the Google Nexus One.
To others speculating that the phone doesn't need 802.11n speeds, perhaps - but what about the router? Running in 802.11g compatibility hurts the router radio performance a bit, so this is one less device hold the collective network behind. eg. the original iPhone that supported only 802.11b.
Finally, you will be using 802.11n speeds when streaming youtube or downloading Apps or some tasks like that. Sure it's not bandwidth intensive as a datacenter, but bandwidth usage of these devices is on the rise (ask AT&T for this rising trend - though they're suffering only from the bandwidth consumed on their 3G network)
@sid
Wow, I had an iPhone 2G for a year an a half and never realized that it only had 802.11b
@mex and that's why we will receive more updates to rectify this one. This has been predicted on the nexus one teardown, ripping details: http://bit.ly/nexus-one-updates-mashup-details
Although the Nth issue is something 'not that' too important for the meantime, BIG G should be starting have a remedy for this one.
@sid 802.11n's advantage for mobile devices is not speed (g is plenty fast compared to the internet connection) but range. 802.11n has a longer range than 802.11g. It should also hold a better connection in a noisy environment.
@Ozymandias
Really? That's surprising, my Old HTC Wizard had b/g.
@SarnGate
lol no it doesn't use "a ton of power." Where are you getting your facts from?
where's the dood with the eric schmidt account name? how're you gonna explain this one?
....who cares? It's not like you will be able to use more than 54Mbps on the phone anyway....
@Schmitty338
It's not really about speed. It's about not having to run your N access point in legacy B/G mode which causes a significant performance hit on your other N devices where bandwidth is more of an issue.
@Schmitty338 i was thinking the same thing...
@(Unverified) i didn't know that. but it's not like this would be the ONLY device without N in our homes...
@Schmitty338
Yeah that's what I was thinking. I'd like to know where the 54 Mbps connection is at before I worry about having n on my phone.
@Schmitty338
N isn't only faster; it also has a greater range which is relevant to my interests.
@Schmitty338
Actually the range is a good point...I forgot about that.
I can see the legacy thing being a (slight) issue for some, but the vast majority of people still use b/g, even if they have 1 or more N-enabled device in their home.
Apart from everything, if the chipset can do n then ENABLE IT IDIOTS, I mean really, what next? Are they going to use color displays that only show B&W? And will people defend that?
How about a slideout qwerty keyboard on which only the cursor keys work, that would be a laugh too.
Well, XDA is already going to work with this thing, with custom ROMS and what not. I'm sure N will be activated soon.
@B3astofthe3ast - tell them to fix the friggen 4-faux button issues!
Not really a deal-breaker. I don't think most people plan on running torrents or streaming uncompressed 1080p video to their cellphones.
google is such a deadbeat dad.
Certainly for the best, not many applications need the power of 802.11n right now.
Plus, battery life is far more important.
pURE gEvil
I'm sure it's a simple software hack. The HTC HD2 does not "sport" 802.11n either but is activated by simply changing a registry value.
Um...Engadget.
I still would like a question answered.
Why is it that with my Nexus One...WiFi enabled...loading http://www.engadget.com
It went far faster than your Nexus One did?
I mean...not just a lil bit...but a LOT of bit.
Explanation? If you have one.
Sincerely,
David.
But on to topic...eh, not a big deal. WiFi is still fast as heck on here. But when they do enable it...I already have a N+ router, so I'll be ready.
@iDavey
David,
We most sincerely apologize for not answering your most important of queries. Given the current environment, we erroneously considered coverage of CES to be a more worthy focus than the answering of your completely urgent question.
We really want to answer your question. We do. Since you are our most valued customer, our next blog post will certainly be written to address this most puzzling of inquiries.
Sincerely,
Engadget
@iDavey
Because they used their AT&T SIM from their iPhone with it in the test, and unwittingly compared edge to 3G. :)
@iDavey
The first thing I did when I got my Nexus is load Engadget.com on the browser to see if it was really as slow as the video and it was definitely way faster. Not even close to how slow it was on the video. I don't even have a fast connection, I have slow dsl and I'm using edge on at&t!
@wraith404
LMAO!!!
Maybe their WiFi is crappy? I don't know.
But there is a BIG difference in that speed and what obviously everyone else is getting.
It's not a big deal, cause nobody will let a tech blogs review determine their choice if they really want it...
But it's still putting false info out there. That just doesn't seem right...
@jlarex
Wow.
I have our cable company, Insight, broadband.
Maybe it's just better...but then I noticed over the web a lot of other folks were saying the same thing, so yeah...this is confusing me. Why is there THAT much of a difference between ours and theirs?
Maybe that was still a pre-production model and they just happened to be misinformed.
@Anonymoose
I would've caught the sarcasm and such in your post.
But you know...on my "disappointing" Nexus One loading this page...I just gave up and logged off while trying to read your comment. Sorry.
@iDavey
How it putting "false info" out there...?
They tested it and reported what they got. So what you got a different result. You're only one person. And they're only like 1 person (who tried the device at least).
People can choose to believe what they want. Not everyone is going to have the same experience.
I happen to believe Engadget though. I've used the Droid before and the web experience is no where near as fluid or as enjoyable as the iPhone...that's just a fact. I don't care how great the screen is. It doesn't mean shit if the phone itself is incapable of loading various websites in a decent time span.
Maybe I'm just used to the speed on the iPhone but oh well. I like what I like and I'll stick with it until someone provides something better.
Hopefully Palm will release a new hardware phone around the time that Apple announces the new iPhone...
@iDavey
Who cares about Engadget biased review anyway?
They only talked about subjective things as negatives and left all the objective things like
1-800x480 AMOLED LCD 3.7 1m Response 100.000 contrast Ratio
2-Android 2.1 3D wallpaper/3D photo Galary/etc better OS overall
3-Speech to Text in every app with Text input or emails/sms/etc
4-Open source (No locks or limitation BS)
5-BT Sharing/HD access/No itunes Required
6-Thinner/Slimmer/Better Battery life/bigger LCD but smaller than iphone
7-1GHZ CPU = super fast phone
8-Lag free MULTITASKING thanks to 512Ram/1Ghz cpu
9-Removable Battery/memory
10-5mp Camera with FLASH and 720x480 video
11-Unlocked phone worldwide use when you travel unlike iphone
12-Google Navigation+Full Google Support
13-Trackball mouse with 3 LED light for different type of notification
14-Second microphone for Noise cancellation
15-Better speaker and audio Sound when talking than iphone
16-Full resolution pictures view no Downscale BS like the iphone
17-OPEN SOURCE (Again this is huge)
18-FREE Customaztion and live active widgets
19-it's cheaper than iphone
20-Flash 10 is available for those who want it
etc (will never ends)
PLUS you can get it on Verizon unlike the lame AT&T Network
But again apple paid them and they had to repeat again and again saying how nexus is not impressive and they prefer even the droid over it and i have no idea why did they compare the Nexus one browser versus the iphone browser, There are available browsers for android that is 3 times faster than safari but of course they are trying tooooo hard to make nexus one as bad as possible lol..
@iDavey
I just tried it again comparing it to their video just to make sure I wasn't remembering wrong and sure enough, the nexus fully loaded the page about 4 seconds after the iphone was done(yes, I cleared the browser cache) . I know it's not really a big deal, but I feel it is a little misleading. Seeing that video almost discouraged me from even buying the phone since it made it seem really slow, but I'm glad I changed my mind.
@TheRogueFFAngel
Um...are we speaking on the Droid? No.
Are we speaking upon the Nexus One? Yes.
Could there have been a possibility that the model they were given was still wonky with bugs or something? Yes.
Did they mention that? No.
So what i'm getting at...obviously, something is different between their device (with the QR flag) and mines (non-flag) to warrant such a difference in speed. I could video my Nexus right next to the video of their test...it actually hangs with the iPhone. So that is false information because they could easily use a shipped unit and retest...or let people know that their device obviously wasn't a finished, shipping unit.
Only explanation I could see for it.
And before you get all "you fanboy." This has nothing to do with Android or iPhone. This has everything to do with the fact they should be doing fair coverage and such. It's just no reason that the speed difference is that much. I loaded Engadget, Yahoo, TIPB, and then answered 2 texts in the time it took their Nexus to load Engadget. That's too much of a difference.
@jlarex
So you are saying that it was 4 seconds slower than the iPhone?
@GoogleCEO
I agree with that list.
I'm amazed at the little subtleties of the gallery for instance. Like when you tilt it, the whole gallery tilts with it.
The speed of this is amazing, has not lagged on me since. I've been pushing this phone hard on purpose since day one.
The battery cover stays on (unlike a certain other phone)
The battery point blank is superb. I squeezed near 12 hrs...and it wasn't even drained yet. I still had 35% left. The power management on this is top notch to have it going that good.
I don't care if this beats the iPhone or not.
But the fact this is a damn good phone, and they marked it off like it was just bleh (not saying they dissed it...but they did kind of throw it to the side).
I would like to see another review or at least test with a finalized, shipped to your house, unit.
@jlarex
I actually got around the same thing.
And with the cache not cleared, it wasn't even an issue (seeing as most people won't clear their cache...that's my main take on the speed).
Cache cleared, it came within the iPhone. I tried it twice. Once it came a few seconds after, the other it came a few seconds before. So it's kind of off and on.
But with cache cleared the thing loaded in 5-7 seconds top.
@iDavey
I thought they did clearly state it was a preproduction model in the review. Because I remember them saying that they would update it if anything noteworthy was annouced.
@Ezye1313
I remember reading that they said it was a 'final' build.
Maybe I was wrong and my memory is old (happens with age, lol)
If so...then I do apologize for that mishap.
But the point of it is still that I know they didn't mention it in the video. I just finished watching it...they made it seem as if that unit was indicative of the unit you would receive when you ordered it.
@Ezye1313
Well no. A quick look does show that they did say it was a production model.
"Note: The unit we have in hand is -- by all appearances -- a production model, save for the QR code imprint on the back, which is likely an employee-only Easter egg. However, Google is making its official announcement tomorrow, and there could always be differences. If anything changes with the device, or there are revelations about the marketing or sale of the phone, we'll be sure to update the review with new info."
@Ezye1313
Yeah about 4 seconds slower connected to wifi on a roughly 2mb connection. It's only as slow as they show in the video when I'm browsing on edge with at&t.
@iDavey
I think any informed readers are easily able to tell that something funky was going on with the Android sets in that test. Whatever the reason for the slow load time, it has to be safe to assume that those results were atypical. I wish the Engadget reviewers would have realized that something abnormal was going on, and perhaps either reloaded the pages (after re-clearing the caches) or tried a variety of different websites. I'm not sure what was stopping them from testing 5 or 6 different sites instead of just one that obviously wasn't working correctly at the time.
When I saw the test, I couldn't help but be reminded of some issues I've been having at home with my 3GS and a new Netgear router. My iPhone was reporting download speeds of only a few kbps at best. After trying a variety of settings, I switched to a Linksys router and my speeds were excellent. The point is, there could be any number of issues like that causing the test to behave the way that it did and does not reflect the overall performance of the phone.
FWIW, I cleared the browser cache on my 3GS and it loaded the page significantly faster than all of the phones in the test, iPhone included. This is from my home network, where I typically benchmark my connection at 9-10 mbps using the Speedtest.net app (on the Linksys router, of course).
For me, the concern is not so much about the slow page loading on the Nexus One or the Droid since something was clearly awry, but more the choppy scrolling on either of the Android phones, AFTER the page was completely loaded. I think that aspect of the test has not been discussed much as it's been overshadowed completely by the abnormal load times.
@ebgolfin
I noticed that too. That's why I believe that was not a production model. It jsut couldn't have been.
I get no choppy scrolling with my Nexus. I'm not exaggerating when I say it is smooth, silk, and quick on everything. I just don't get what was going on with their unit.
@TheRogueFFAngel
Damn dude you don't know it's better to blame it on Engadget's bias.
@GoogleCEO
Yes Apple pays all the blogs out there, bloody idiot.
@Goona
And CNN too, that's why they have a brainstorm blog dedicated to how wonderful apple is in the eye of the fanboi.
@iDavey
Well, good to hear. As someone who may be interested in the next generation of Android phones (contrary to whatever fanboys say, the N1 is not a generational leap above my 3GS and I can't really consider a fledgling device when mine works as well as it currently does and is due for a likely significant OS upgrade) this at least puts some fears to rest.
I do, however, think that it is a fair assessment that Android based phones NEED to have a hardware advantage to the iPhone in order to match its performance, as the OS is not designed specifically for any particular hardware configuration. To me this makes perfect sense, in the same way that a PC would need to be significantly more powerful than say, an Xbox 360, to match its 3D performance. Software specifically tailored to hardware is always going to have a performance advantage vs. more general purpose solutions given equal specs.
I think this is something that Android fanboys fail to realize when the want to compare the devices spec for spec. You get people that have no real understanding of how this stuff works saying "OMG but it's 1 GHz it has to be bettar!!!" which is frustrating to people trying to take an objective look at the devices. Similarly, simply stating that it has a 5mp camera and thus better is pure silliness. Anyone who knows anything about digital cameras knows that simply upping the megapixel count can potentially degrade image quality if you're still using a small sensor. We need more detailed testing!
@wraith404
Yawn come up with something more clever.