Simultaneous talk & data...?

jstafford1 said:
forwardity said:
When VZW launches their LTE network will the Droid 2 automatically gain the ability to do data and voice simultaneously?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

No the Droid 2 is still CDMA only. The first Droid that might be 4g capable for Verizon might be the Droid pro.
Click to expand...


i wouldn't get your hopes up because verizon already announced that the only LTE devices that will be out this year will be 2 LTE USB modems and no plans to release a 4G phone until 1st quarter of 2011.
 
dan j said:
scoder said:
It's not that they are adding it, it just comes with the technology. Verizon would not be able to just add something to each CDMA tower to enable data while on a call because that signal technology just can't "multitask" (every time I think of that word I think DRRROOOIIIDDDD. Damn you Verizon marketing).

ATT and VZW are both moving to LTE, don't think someone has explained that yet in this thread. This poses a new question: Will you be able to roam on ATT's network if you don't have a VZW signal?
Click to expand...
It's not a happy coincidence that they're including the simultaneous data/talk with LTE. Verizon certainly has the ability to not include it when they switch to LTE, or they could even charge for it. They're going to include it because there are a lot of folks who wish they could multi-task instead of having to hang up the phone to do something. Which, unfortunately, is just like dial-up internet.

If someone said "I'm on dial-up, and I have an incredibly awesome hard line that never hangs up," I don't think anyone would say they were "leading the way". On this they're not, which stinks, but I'm still glad to be on Verizon.
Click to expand...


Actually, my feeling is different in regards to what you think they are doing. GSM standard is actually one that the Europeans designed as their implementation for better Cellular service. Whereas the US had, prior to CDMA, TDMA analog system. If you look at this:

IS-95 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This talks about CDMAOne, the 2G implementation that Qualcomm created which is the basis of the current CDMA2000 (CDMA 3G) technology that majority of North America uses, but not currently used worldwide. The GSM standard was adopted by many countries, from what I recall, due to a lack of ingrained infrastructure like how AT&T/Verizon(GTE) had with most of North America, the GSM standard was easily adopted to provide phone service. (Also the fact most of the European countries and Asian countries have lots of cities that are historical in nature and did not build up a telephone infrastructure the way America has since its invention the way America has. And no, this is not American elitism at work, just simply the US had less history in comparison to other countries and had the technology on hand to build cities with it versus retrofitting many more cities that didn't have it.)

The reason AT&T and T-Mobile GSM sucks so horribly is the simple fact that in the US, we never adopted the GSM technology until AFTER its popular adoption in the other countries. And what has hurt us more is simply the fact that CDMA was developed at the same time as the GSM, but was adopted early and infrastructure put in to support it.

If you bother to listen to the Customer Service stuff for T-mobile and AT&T with regards to coverage, they are working to put up more towers to do so, however, that is dependent on how strong of a market in certain areas are and where they can put up towers to cover those areas. GSM has a much stronger presence in the Euro/Asian countries because they were able to setup towers and such much easier for their cities and designs, where as the US relied heavily on the TDMA infrastructure first and CDMA, while expensive, was an easier conversion over than the GSM.

Also, Verizon does make one additional proviso over what GSM providers in the US don't provide... Backup support. Case in point, power outage in my area due to the Fires knocking out power in Santa Barbara (3 major power lines coming in, 2 of them happen to be in the fire area), Verizon put in battery backups to carry their towers, the GSM providers did not. People who were not on traditional land lines or with Verizon suffered the most due to lack of power.

At this point the issue is less about technological leads, but simply what is going to functionally work for the situation. While again, it would be nice to talk and web browse at the same time, and the LTE network should allow Verizon and Sprint to do so now, the other thing that comes into play is also the tried and true debates like VHS vs Beta, and Blu-Ray versus HD-DVD... Some technologies people don't rush into because of how one is better than the other, but eventually one will win out. And mind you, AT&T isn't 4G quite yet either. They are still using the GSM standard still, even with the iPhone 4.
 
keiichi25 said:
dan j said:
scoder said:
It's not that they are adding it, it just comes with the technology. Verizon would not be able to just add something to each CDMA tower to enable data while on a call because that signal technology just can't "multitask" (every time I think of that word I think DRRROOOIIIDDDD. Damn you Verizon marketing).

ATT and VZW are both moving to LTE, don't think someone has explained that yet in this thread. This poses a new question: Will you be able to roam on ATT's network if you don't have a VZW signal?
Click to expand...
It's not a happy coincidence that they're including the simultaneous data/talk with LTE. Verizon certainly has the ability to not include it when they switch to LTE, or they could even charge for it. They're going to include it because there are a lot of folks who wish they could multi-task instead of having to hang up the phone to do something. Which, unfortunately, is just like dial-up internet.

If someone said "I'm on dial-up, and I have an incredibly awesome hard line that never hangs up," I don't think anyone would say they were "leading the way". On this they're not, which stinks, but I'm still glad to be on Verizon.
Click to expand...


Actually, my feeling is different in regards to what you think they are doing. GSM standard is actually one that the Europeans designed as their implementation for better Cellular service. Whereas the US had, prior to CDMA, TDMA analog system. If you look at this:

IS-95 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This talks about CDMAOne, the 2G implementation that Qualcomm created which is the basis of the current CDMA2000 (CDMA 3G) technology that majority of North America uses, but not currently used worldwide. The GSM standard was adopted by many countries, from what I recall, due to a lack of ingrained infrastructure like how AT&T/Verizon(GTE) had with most of North America, the GSM standard was easily adopted to provide phone service. (Also the fact most of the European countries and Asian countries have lots of cities that are historical in nature and did not build up a telephone infrastructure the way America has since its invention the way America has. And no, this is not American elitism at work, just simply the US had less history in comparison to other countries and had the technology on hand to build cities with it versus retrofitting many more cities that didn't have it.)

The reason AT&T and T-Mobile GSM sucks so horribly is the simple fact that in the US, we never adopted the GSM technology until AFTER its popular adoption in the other countries. And what has hurt us more is simply the fact that CDMA was developed at the same time as the GSM, but was adopted early and infrastructure put in to support it.

If you bother to listen to the Customer Service stuff for T-mobile and AT&T with regards to coverage, they are working to put up more towers to do so, however, that is dependent on how strong of a market in certain areas are and where they can put up towers to cover those areas. GSM has a much stronger presence in the Euro/Asian countries because they were able to setup towers and such much easier for their cities and designs, where as the US relied heavily on the TDMA infrastructure first and CDMA, while expensive, was an easier conversion over than the GSM.

Also, Verizon does make one additional proviso over what GSM providers in the US don't provide... Backup support. Case in point, power outage in my area due to the Fires knocking out power in Santa Barbara (3 major power lines coming in, 2 of them happen to be in the fire area), Verizon put in battery backups to carry their towers, the GSM providers did not. People who were not on traditional land lines or with Verizon suffered the most due to lack of power.

At this point the issue is less about technological leads, but simply what is going to functionally work for the situation. While again, it would be nice to talk and web browse at the same time, and the LTE network should allow Verizon and Sprint to do so now, the other thing that comes into play is also the tried and true debates like VHS vs Beta, and Blu-Ray versus HD-DVD... Some technologies people don't rush into because of how one is better than the other, but eventually one will win out. And mind you, AT&T isn't 4G quite yet either. They are still using the GSM standard still, even with the iPhone 4.
Click to expand...
I really don't follow your logic/train of thought (maybe I just need another cup of coffee). While it's great that there's other features, and it's great that they scored points when they brought batteries to your tower, and you and I are very happy with the coverage of Verizon's voice or data service, none of that makes up for the fact that it's still lacking a really big feature. Yes, AT&T needs more towers in their higher traffic areas, but most AT&T folks aren't miserable. If they were, AT&T would be out of business. Instead they're in 2nd place.

Those other benefits (like the batteries) are nice, but data and talk is extremely important (to a lot of business and personal users) and Verizon isn't behind the game, it's unable to play. I think they dropped the ball by not continuing the ads showing folks using data & voice at the same time. I'm positive Verizon will. Once they can; because they'll finally have a network feature that's on par with it's competitors.

That's playing catch-up. I'd type more but I need to use the phone - can't do that and surf :p
 
dan j said:
Those other benefits (like the batteries) are nice, but data and talk is extremely important (to a lot of business and personal users) and Verizon isn't behind the game, it's unable to play
Click to expand...

Really? I can't Name 3 people I personally know on VZW that thinks data and voice at the same time are needed....
 
Backnblack said:
dan j said:
Those other benefits (like the batteries) are nice, but data and talk is extremely important (to a lot of business and personal users) and Verizon isn't behind the game, it's unable to play
Click to expand...

Really? I can't Name 3 people I personally know on VZW that thinks data and voice at the same time are needed....
Click to expand...
Sucks for you...
I, for one, would like Voice and Data simultaneously.
 
Backnblack said:
dan j said:
Those other benefits (like the batteries) are nice, but data and talk is extremely important (to a lot of business and personal users) and Verizon isn't behind the game, it's unable to play
Click to expand...

Really? I can't Name 3 people I personally know on VZW that thinks data and voice at the same time are needed....
Click to expand...
Really? I can name 3 folks who won't go to Verizon or Sprint because they can't talk and surf. I can think of lots of people I know who care. Traveling salesmen, teens, parents.
 
Ataranine said:
Backnblack said:
dan j said:
Those other benefits (like the batteries) are nice, but data and talk is extremely important (to a lot of business and personal users) and Verizon isn't behind the game, it's unable to play
Click to expand...

Really? I can't Name 3 people I personally know on VZW that thinks data and voice at the same time are needed....
Click to expand...
Sucks for you...
I, for one, would like Voice and Data simultaneously.
Click to expand...
Yep, we're definitely not alone.
 
I have no need to be able to talk and browse at the same time on my phone...main reason is i rarely make a call on my phone. its basically a texting phone. haha. but if the ability to do both at the same time is availble and wont cost me $400 for a new phone that can do it..then ill gladly accept it
 
Ataranine said:
Backnblack said:
dan j said:
Those other benefits (like the batteries) are nice, but data and talk is extremely important (to a lot of business and personal users) and Verizon isn't behind the game, it's unable to play
Click to expand...

Really? I can't Name 3 people I personally know on VZW that thinks data and voice at the same time are needed....
Click to expand...
Sucks for you...
I, for one, would like Voice and Data simultaneously.
Click to expand...

Why does it suck for me? I have no use for it....
If you need it that bad, head on over to AT&T
 
I'll take the limitation. AT&T service is terrible. My work Blackberry is AT&T and I can't count on both hands how many times I drop calls in a day. Very annoying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Droid 2 Simultaneous Voice/Data
2 3
Replies
43
Views
10K
NiceGuysFinishLast
N
G
Why is Tbolt only "simultaneous voice and data?"
2 3
Replies
30
Views
11K
Larry_ThaGr81
L
L
Couple Issues
Replies
5
Views
1K
takeshi
T
M
Simultaneous Voice/Data Argument
2 3
Replies
35
Views
11K
aristo1963
A
A
I don't understand the Thunderbolt's hype
Replies
8
Views
3K
iNfAMOUS702
I
Back
Top