4G Phone? That's What YOU Think.

Think that new 4G smart phone you just bought for an exorbitant amount of money is the latest and greatest in download speeds? You're dead wrong.

For the last few months Sprint, Verizon & T-Mobile has been advertising the power of 4G speed on their networks as the new breakthrough in mobile technology. Telus also followed suit here in Canada, and today it was leaked that Bell Mobility will jump on the 4G advertising bandwagon.

But does anyone really know what the difference is between 3G and 4G connectivity speeds? Apparently there isn't one.

The International Telecommunications Union initially defined 4G as a reference to Long Term Evolution mobile standards (LTE for short). LTE meant a new version of wireless technology that could potentially offer speeds of 100 Mbps. So far, no commercial wireless network on the planet has deployed such a technology. And, as far as I know, no wireless communications company has even managed to develop such a technology that would work in a stable fashion on a consumer level.

The initial definition of LTE (100 Mbps) is considerably faster than the HSPA networks that are currently used by Bell, Telus & Rogers. Their HSPA networks generally tops out at 7.2 Mbps. Even improved HSPA networks known as HSPA+ only reach top speeds of 21 Mbps.

So if Bell, Telus & Rogers all top out at 7.2 Mbps, how can they possibly call themselves 4G?

In December, the International Telecommunications Union have changed the criteria or definition of 3G and 4G. Now 100 Mbps speed is no longer a definition of 4G. 4G is now considered any technology that shows a "substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities" over existing 3G networks.

As an example, Bell Mobility now refers to 3G as being any speeds slower than 3Mbps. And, since Bell's network can theoretically offer speeds up to 7.2 Mbps, (which IS a significant improvement over 3Mbps) presto! Bell is now a 4G network!

So the interesting part to watch for is how this will play out in the long term. Since all the 3G phones currently on the Bell and Telus network should theoretically be able to use the max network speed of 7.2Mbps (which can be less depending on location or network traffic), will Bell issue "4G" phones that operate in the same way so that everyone still has a phone that works at the same speed, (which would allow them to simply market their entire network as the latest and greatest 4G network) or will they attempt to choke bandwidth to keep existing 3G phones slower to encourage customers to upgrade to new 4G marketed handsets?

There is an old saying "Caveat Emptor". Or in English "let the buyer beware". I don't think there is any other product that this warning is most suited for than Telecomm Services.

Bell, Telus & Rogers vs. iPhone Reception Problems

So I took a bit of a break from the blogging to get in a nice long Christmas Holiday and to catch up on some left behind work through January. I am back now, and will be posting regularly again. (Keep checking for the soon to be released Ultimate Guide to the Las Vegas Strip).

However, while I was away, I was monitoring the site traffic and still going through emails from readers. A common topic seemed to be complaints about iPhone reception problems.

Most of the email was from people who had iPhone 3 G(s) phones. A couple were from iPhone 4 owners, and a few others did not specify their models.

As for why there were fewer iPhone 4 complaints, I don't know if its because that specific model works better, or if there are just less people that currently own that version.

At any rate, I have some updated news.

The main complaints seem to be specifically with reception issues: dropped calls even when the phone indicates good reception, getting poor reception even when in large cities, or not getting any reception at all. These problems have been experienced by people currently on ALL of the big 3 networks. Telus, Bell and Rogers are all suffering the same issues.

My first initial thought was the problems lied with the networks. This may be partially true, as both Telus and Bell operate the iPhones on new networks (not the same network that most of their other handsets run on). A Telus technician admitted to me directly that the technology was new for Telus and that they were experiencing constant problems with it, and had no clue how or when it would be fixed. Therefore, I am assuming Bell is in the same boat, as both companies share the same network across Canada.

However, this line of thinking would not account for the iPhone users on the Rogers network who were experiencing the same issues. Rogers has had a GSM network for years, and was well established long before the iPhone entered the market.

So what gives? This led me to believe that Apple was actually the problem. This theory seemed to be proven by the numerous and highly publicized reception issues upon the release of the iPhone 4. I spoke with some Apple Techs, and while they would not admit that they were experiencing widespread problems with the reception of any version of their iPhones, they encouraged me to bring the phone in for inspection and/or repair. I have not yet done this, as my iPhone has mysteriously been working better lately. Not 100% mind you, but much better than it once was. (Firmware upgrade, perhaps?)

Since Apple clammed up and wouldn't give me any direct answers, I dug deeper. I happened to fortuitously meet a couple of Technicians who work for Texas Instruments. What most people don't know is that Texas Instruments (or TI) make a large percentage of components that go into cell phones and smart phones. One of the most notable being the touch screen components and the backlighting for the LCD screens. They make various other pieces as well.

Upon my conversations with the TI techs, I discovered that the issues are not such a secret in the telecomm world. The issues are well known within the industry, and at least in the opinion of the TI techs, the problems lies with a company called Qualcomm.

Qualcomm is the company that essentially makes the networking of the iPhone possible. They deal with the reception of all the handsets. And, at least according to my contacts, do a very poor job of it. My best understanding of what was explained to me is that the antenna in the phones are very poor. Not the placement of the antenna that Apple claimed during the iPhone 4 debacle, but the actual hardware itself.

It is possible that the newest versions of the iPhone 4 have had this problem corrected- I am not sure. And it may also be possible that updating the firmware on your current iPhone may help to reduce issues you experience, but for all intents and purposes, unless you get a new handset all together, you may just be stuck with the frustrations no matter what.

So there you have it. It seems to be everyone is a bit to blame: Telus & Bell for their networks, Apple, for refusing to admit that they may have a shoddy piece of hardware in their product, and Qualcomm for making the product.

But at this point in time, no one seems to want to take the blame, and the consumer is stuck in the middle.

My advice (which pains me to say this as I really like Apple products and find most of them better than average on the reliability scale) is to determine what you need or want most from your phone. If you want muti-functionality most, then try to update your firmware or upgrade your handset. If you want a smartphone with reliability first and the multi-function and ease of use is less important, then get a Blackberry.

Hope that helps everyone.

Rainn