|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Mark CrispinMark Crispin Date: Nov 13, 2007 15:34
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, jerryeveretts wrote:
> Oxford is just spouting his regular Wi-Fi...
What makes it particularly ironic is that if he really uses Wi-Fi more
than cellular, he can get a much better user experience with a Nokia N800.
The Nokia's 800x480 screen may be somewhat short of "the full Internet" of
a laptop with 1024x780 or better, but it's more than twice as good as the
pathetic 320x480 in iPhone.
Nokia even gives you a Skype card good for 3 months of unlimited free
calls in the USA and Canada.
Of course, that doesn't help when there is no Wi-Fi, or the Wi-Fi sucks,
or it's a technical conference where thousands of people are using the
Wi-Fi simultaneously. For that, you have mobile phones; and that is when
having a Verizon 3G phone really shines.
And, since the Nokia N800 talks to any Bluetooth capable mobile phone on
any network, it too can access the Internet via Verizon's 3G network.
Meanwhile, the iPhone geeks are stuck with the local broken Wi-Fi or
AT&T's pathetic 2G network on their little tiny screens. They're not
allowed to use other networks.
|
| Show full article (1.52Kb) |
|
| | 42 Comments |
|
|
Author: OxfordOxford Date: Nov 14, 2007 11:59
Mark Crispin CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:
> What makes it particularly ironic is that if he really uses Wi-Fi more
> than cellular, he can get a much better user experience with a Nokia N800.
> The Nokia's 800x480 screen may be somewhat short of "the full Internet" of
> a laptop with 1024x780 or better, but it's more than twice as good as the
> pathetic 320x480 in iPhone.
can't think of the last time i need to use cells for data, what would be
the point mark? using normal 802.11 is much faster.
but the Nokia screen is very poor at resolution, 800x480 doesn't mean
much if the screen is fuzzy, of poor quality. The iPhone far and away is
clearer than the Nokia at any resolution. It's all to do with Apple uses
better screens and has more control over those screens. Nokia doesn't
have any experience with video screens.
> Nokia even gives you a Skype card good for 3 months of unlimited free
> calls in the USA and Canada.
Yes, and you can use Skype with the iPhone, big deal.
|
| Show full article (2.49Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Todd AllcockTodd Allcock Date: Nov 14, 2007 15:05
At 14 Nov 2007 12:59:30 -0700 Oxford wrote:
> can't think of the last time i need to use cells for data, what would
be
> the point mark? using normal 802.11 is much faster.
Except wherever you have WiFi, you probably have your Macbook, don't you?
Cellular data is for all points in-between home and work.
> but the Nokia screen is very poor at resolution,
Again, come back after you've seen it- two days ago you didn't know what
an N800 was, so clearly you've never used one.
> 800x480 doesn't mean
> much if the screen is fuzzy, of poor quality.
True, but in the N800's case it isn't and isn't.
> The iPhone far and away is
> clearer than the Nokia at any resolution.
That would be so much more convincingif you spoke from experience instead
of rhetoric...
|
| Show full article (2.22Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: jerryeverettsjerryeveretts Date: Nov 14, 2007 17:15
>> Since when is that NOT the case with hotel Wi-Fi?
>
> Since forever, Jerry didn't know how to setup his wifi or was using a
> windows machine. Macs wouldn't have that problem since they set all the
> standards for wifi in the first place.
Ummm... Bullshit? I am using a Macbook Pro. and I was showing full
bars on signal, and it was working albeit very slow. So slow that my
VPN connection to work would time out. Like I said. the connection to
the network was perfect, the hotels connection to the internet was
obviously gimped.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: IMHO IIRCIMHO IIRC Date: Nov 14, 2007 17:58
>>> Since when is that NOT the case with hotel Wi-Fi?
>>
>> Since forever, Jerry didn't know how to setup his wifi or was using a
>> windows machine. Macs wouldn't have that problem since they set all the
>> standards for wifi in the first place.
>
> Ummm... Bullshit? I am using a Macbook Pro. and I was showing full
> bars on signal, and it was working albeit very slow. So slow that my
> VPN connection to work would time out. Like I said. the connection to
> the network was perfect, the hotels connection to the internet was
> obviously gimped.
Too bad Oxtard didn't share how to get a Macbook Pro to make the hotel's
Internet connection work at high speed. lol
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Ness NetNess Net Date: Nov 14, 2007 19:40
>
> But not having WiFi is very rare. Just curious to you live in
> Washington, a kinda "backwater technological" State? If so, now we know
> why you get confused. Move to a more modern area and you'll see what I'm
> talking about.
>
It is always soooo obvious that idiot fanboy Oxford knows little to nothing.
Seattle is now a tech "backwater'??? Facts being spun to support his
bullshit?
Does moron Oxford have a fraction of a clue about Seattle?
That it is in the top 5??
If everywhere wifi isn't available THERE (in Seattle), it just isn't
happening.....
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Mark CrispinMark Crispin Date: Nov 14, 2007 22:17
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Ness Net wrote:
> If everywhere wifi isn't available THERE (in Seattle), it just isn't
> happening.....
There's certainly lots of Wi-Fi in Seattle, but these days most networks
are locked down by a combination of MAC address filtering, WPA (nobody
uses WEP any more) and SSID broadcast disable.
A few coffeehouses have free Wi-Fi (mostly to compete with Starbucks which
charges $30/month for its Wi-Fi), but even these are starting to require
that you buy something, and then they give you today's WPA key or a login
good for an hour's worth of time. There was free Wi-Fi in public areas
(e.g., the ferries) but that is now a fee service too.
It's the same situation in Japan.
|
| |
| 3 Comments |
|
|
Author: SMS æ¯èæ⢠å¤SMS æ¯èæâ¢ å¤ Date: Nov 14, 2007 23:57
Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Ness Net wrote:
>> If everywhere wifi isn't available THERE (in Seattle), it just isn't
>> happening.....
>
> There's certainly lots of Wi-Fi in Seattle, but these days most networks
> are locked down by a combination of MAC address filtering, WPA (nobody
> uses WEP any more) and SSID broadcast disable.
>
> A few coffeehouses have free Wi-Fi (mostly to compete with Starbucks
> which charges $30/month for its Wi-Fi), but even these are starting to
> require that you buy something, and then they give you today's WPA key
> or a login good for an hour's worth of time. There was free Wi-Fi in
> public areas (e.g., the ferries) but that is now a fee service too.
>
> It's the same situation in Japan.
|
| Show full article (1.56Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: LarryLarry Date: Nov 15, 2007 05:13
Mark Crispin CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote in
news:alpine.WNT.0.99999.0711142131530.548@Shimo-
Tomobiki.Panda.COM:
> A few coffeehouses have free Wi-Fi (mostly to compete with
Starbucks
> which charges $30/month for its Wi-Fi), but even these are
starting to
> require that you buy something, and then they give you today's
WPA key
> or a login good for an hour's worth of time. There was free
Wi-Fi in
> public areas (e.g., the ferries) but that is now a fee service
too.
>
>
|
| Show full article (1.14Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: Nov 15, 2007 05:51
=?UTF-8?B?U01TIOaWr+iSguaWh+KAoiDlpI8=?= geemail.com>
wrote in news:473bfb98$0$79896$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:
>
> WiFi for use with phones was actually dealt a blow by Clearwire and
> Sprint, as they scrapped plans for a joint WiMax network. Of course
> this WiMax network wouldn't have been free, but as least it would have
> been able to solve many of the issues with using WiFi for voice.
>
How so?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
