With rumours swirling of a 3G iPhone, I have long wondered why the lack of 3G has received of so much criticism. The few people I know who have used 3G phones report a sorry history of bulky, buggy handsets, dropped calls and little benefit over regular mobile phones. Is 3G a real, glaring omission from the iPhone? Are users pinning their hopes on Apple delivering them from 3G purgatory? Or, is it just a case of the media trying to find something to criticise about the most hyped handset in history?
Performance
Steve Jobs has stated that the iPhone lacks 3G due to poor battery life, and that a 3G iPhone would be released when this issue was resolved. Soon after the iPhone’s release, AnandTech did an in depth analysis of this claim. They found that 3G does indeed use significantly more power than the iPhone’s EDGE network on a device that supports both. The article demonstrates that WiFi actually uses less power than both 3G and EDGE, whilst offering significantly better performance. WiFi’s inclusion in the iPhone, in place of 3G, therefore makes considerable sense. In addition, 3G has the biggest impact on battery life when being used for a phone’s core function; telephone calls. Although a sensible implementation would fall back to GSM for phone calls, this has serious implications for key 3G selling points – making calls whilst transferring data and video calling.
The AnandTech article also touches on another key issue – identifying applications where the bottleneck is the CPU, not the network. Interestingly, the iPhone has a CPU that balances performance with battery life.
The question is now whether users are willing to sacrifice battery life for networking performance? Has Apple made the right compromise on their behalf?
My Feature List is Bigger Than Yours!
The criticism levelled at the iPhone has been a typical list of feature-envy. The lack of 3G, “only” a 2 megapixel camera, no physical keyboard, no GPS, no removable battery and no expandable memory.
Similar criticisms have consistently been levelled at the iPod. With hind sight, it is easy to demonstrate why Apple made the decisions it did with the iPod. A non-removable battery allows for a more durable portable device. Early iPods used smaller physical Hard Drives, which had smaller capacity than their rivals, but also made them more portable. Using a better quality music format, AAC, rather than MP3, mitigated this issue. Instead Apple included FireWire, in place of its competitors’ USB 1.1, allowing for fast transfer of thousands of songs.
For its Portable Music Player, Apple focused on the portability, the music and the player experience. They looked at the whole experience, rather than aim to have the longest feature list simply for bragging rights.
With the iPhone, the 2 megapixel camera is a sensible option. In a small device with limited optics, a larger resolution camera would only give marginally better quality photos, whilst eating up limited storage space. No GPS? Cell tower and WiFi hot spot triangulation are good enough, without additional electronics and greater expense. No Physical keyboard? Sacrificed in favour of a larger screen and robust enclosure.
Apple has consistently foregone a long list of features, in favour of products that focus on doing a limited number of things, very, very, well. When Apple does add new abilities to their products, they are complete solutions, rather than half baked features included just to add to the list.
The Business of 3G
Some of the rumours about the 3G iPhone have come directly from Apple’s mobile network partners. Many network operators have invested huge sums on 3G licenses and deployment. Many seem to be struggling to recover these costs. They have stuck to their traditional business model – subsidised handsets, basic tariffs, supplemented by expensive, “value added services”, such as sports clips, video calling and pseudo-internet services. With business-as-usual, networks are struggling to recoup their investment in 3G.
The iPhone has shown them that there is another way. The handset is not subsidised and is only available with an expensive Pay Monthly tariff but includes unlimited data usage. Apple has also identified the killer application for mobile data services – the full Internet. Despite its “painfully slow” EDGE network, iPhone owners use the internet more than those of any other handset, including other Smart Phones and the beloved Blackberry. Little wonder then, that Apple’s partners are desperate for a 3G iPhone.
Oddly it is not anything about 3G itself that begs for it to be included on the iPhone. Nothing about the technology, with its high dropped call rate, and the under-whelming value added services, is particularly appealing. Instead it is Apple’s redefinition of the mobile phone business model, that makes 3G an appealing technology.
Even more ironic is the fact that iPhone’s expensive tariffs have also received a lot of criticism. And yet, it is precisely that all-you-can-eat data pricing that has led iPhone users to embrace mobile browsing and justify the need for 3G.
Imagine a cheap, subsidised, Pay-As-You-Go iPhone, with a sand boxed internet in place of Mobile Safari and metered data charging. 3G has little appeal in this environment.
3G or 4?
When Apple introduced the iPhone, there was little appeal for 3G and yet, perversely, they have created the killer handset and killer apps that could make 3G a success.
There is also another question raised by the iPhone’s success. If WiFi already performs better than 3G, shouldn’t Apple simply wait for the next generation, WiFi based 4G networks to be built? There can be little question, with the history of mobile networks, that 3G will be replaced sooner rather than later. 3G has been available around the globe for over six years. Limited uptake of 3G suggests that, like High Def DVD, it may be a technology that is leapfrogged by the market place.
Should Apple perhaps ride out the criticism about the lack of 3G support? Or should it popularise the stagnant technology, as only it can, with the combination of the iPhone’s rich mobile internet experience and unlimited data plans?
Despite my lack of enthusiasm for 3G, Apple should probably introduce a 3G iPhone once battery life improves. Unfortunately, with the investment the network operators have made with 3G, they are unlikely to build 4G networks before they have recouped their 3G investment. The window before 4G becomes available is just too great. 3G support will deflect criticism, whilst being an anti-climax for those who see it as some nirvana for mobile internet use.
