@JPXXX

CDMA outdated? GSM is better? What are you smoking??? GSM is actually a TDMA technology. CDMA is VASTLY supperior in terms of signal penitration, packet loss, spectral effeciency and every other measurement you can think of.

Actually, the 3G versions of GSM (UMTS and HSDPA) are in fact CDMA based, as is Wifi and Wimax. TDMA is what GSM uses for the core GSM 2G service. Calls and texts are still sent over TDMA using the 2G GSM system. Outside the 3G coverage area it's GSM TDMA.

It's a vestige. The standard dates all the way back to the 1980's, before CDMA was as developed.

Verizon has made an add campaign that is hurting AT&T because they're going for one thing that Verizon has that AT&T does not. There is no denying that Verizon has a larger 3G network.

The reason is that they started earlier. They were building it in the late 1990's and by now, nearly their entire network has 3G coverage. It uses EVDO and now supports EVDO Rev A and B. AT&T uses a combination of HSDPA and UMTS. In theory these technologies offer slightly better speed (it actually varies quite a bit depending on condition), they have a higher burst speed, but in practice, both AT&T and Verizon do roughly the same. AT&T might be a little bit faster, but marginally.

AT&T was late to the game though. They really did not kick things off until the iPhone came. Part of the reason the first iPhone was not 3G is that they barely had any 3G at all! Since then they've expanded quite a bit. A couple of years ago, it was only within the city limits of major cities like New York, Chicago and Los Angles. If you lived on the city outskirts, no 3G.

Of course, that does not mean you can't still get coverage, but data service on the legacy system is only marginally better than a 56k modem. The old system uses EDGE. You can still make calls, and still download stuff, but it will be very slow.

I've used both. Verizon is a good 800kbps and sometimes better. It ranks at least as good as most DSL service. No complaints there. AT&T is spotty. It's fast when you get a good signal, which is rarely.

You can use either if your primary concern is making telephone calls and sending text messges, but if you plan on using it for data stuff, like video streaming or surfing the net or downloading songs, only use AT&T if you live in a major metropolitan area with good coverage and do not plan on traveling to suburban areas very frequently. Chances are, if you are in the suburbs or on a stretch of interstate highway, you won't get 3G service. If you happen to live in some place like Vermont or North Dakota, you're definitely not going to get 3g for several more years.

AT&T is upgrading their network as fast as they can, but this is what being several years late to the game will get you. They should have realized the importance of data services less than a couple of years ago.

Please for the love of god tell me this comes in a CDMA version. I really am tired of seeing all these great phones in GSM.

Yeah yeah... I know... everyone will say GSM is better and 3G is better than EVDO and that GSM works around the world. That's of no matter to me, becasue it does not have much coverage anywhere near I live and absolutely no high speed coverage within 100 miles of me.

God, please I hope this is not going to skip over CDMA.

I think I need to move :-(

Wow. That's a lot of UFOs. Have the French managed to surrender to any yet?

I suppose that they are trying to figure out where the UFOs are coming from so that they can sign a treaty to collaborate with the UFOs.

Cool idea for the carputer crowd and such, but what exactly is new about this vrs. simply haveing an EVDO modem or even a router with a PCMICA slot and an EVDO card?

Agreed the Motorola's DVR's arent very good, but the Scientific Atlanta ones are even worse if you can believe that!

this is absolutely ridiculous. How can the experiment be compared? The point of the first experiment was that the people being shocked were actors. This had to be kept from the subjects, because otherwise the whole damn thing breaks down. In this case you *clearly* know you're not actually shocking anyone. Look, if you hand me a gun and tell me to shot someone on the street, I'm not going to do it. But if you tell me to shoot someone in a video game, I won't have a second thought

Ug. HTC frustrates me ever so much with their awesome shiny hardware, but using Windows Mobile for their OS. Come on, HTC and get with the program. Can't you make a device with Palm OS, Symbian, Qutopia, ALP. RIM...really ANYTHING but Windows? Seriously, this is like seeing a Rolls Royce with a lawnmower engine in it.

Well.. I guess I could start using Windows for my phone. Of course, I could also stab myself in the eye with a red hot soldering iron.

They've made pacemakers before which don't require battery changes. Powered by plutonium-238 (note: it's an alpha emitter. Well sealed. Tested even against gunshots. No radiation dose to patient). Those actually were widely considered among the best as far as pacemaker power goes. Implant and never have to worry about it. Discontinued due to expense mostly.

I wonder if this would be problematic if the patient didn't move for a while, like was bedridden. Kenetic watches have this problem. Perhaps you could deliver power by means of an inductor?