@clipse

AT&T is not offering VOIP in the same sense. The issue is that this is to supplement coverage within your home (something that in the vast majority of cases should already exist). It should also be reliable, and unlimited within the home.

Vonage is reliable.

T-Mobile's @home is reliable (according to what I have heard).

I can't say anything for Sprint's Airave as I've never heard anything more about it beyond its existance.

AT&T's femtocell offering is, from the vast majority of reports here, not reliable.

The other issue being raised is that you are already paying for coverage. This is why people feel the service should be free (not an extra $20 every month or so). You are not paying to get unlimited calling within your home (like T-Mobile @home). Your service is not dedicated to your home (like Vonage). You are paying for an accessory that is supposed to improve your cellular phone experience within your home. This is why the issue is being raised as there is no other benefit beyond the "improved" service within the home.

I'll say this much of my thought... which is going to mirror the thought of many. In my own home (an appartment in Canada), I have 4 bars of coverage. At my aunt and uncle's place well north of where I reside, my carrier's coverage drops to 2 bars and is still very usable for both browsing and calling. At my workplace, to the south of me, I get 4 bars. The 2 hour bus-ride to my girlfriend's, I get 1 bar along the more rural parts of the highway. At my girlfriend's, I get 3 bars. All these are with no help whatsoever from a fem-to-cell option or a wi-fi calling option, because my service carrier here in Canada does not offer these. In fact, the only place I frequent that does not have decent coverage is my dad's cottage... but then again, that is so remote that the competition does not have coverage for a good hour's drive in any direction.

There is something to be said for building a decent network right from the get-go. This is not it.

Word, odds are pretty good that if you are using the GPS AND surfing the web AND in a phone call... you're pretty likely to be in the car and about to have an accident so that really doesn't matter.

I'll be honest, I use a Storm (1st Gen) and after hearing a ton of horror stories of iPhone issues - everything from over-heating batteries to horrible battery life to incredibly fragile touch screens - I can't say I would be too thrilled to trade in my CDMA 1x-EVDO Blackberry Storm for an iPhone 3Gs even though my service provider up here in Canada now offers the iPhone.

Can I run GPS and be on the phone at the same time? yeah, I can, that's how EMS finds me in an emergency. If I'd opened a map before commencing the call, I can browse what's on that map while in the call. But I'm usually one to make myself aware of what's around before I start making plans on the phone.

Can I browse the web and run GPS? yeah I can. That's sorta how Blackberry Maps works... or Google Maps... or any other mapping software...

Would I WANT to combine all three? not really, no. Do I need to combine all three? Again, not really, no. Nine times out of ten I have access to someone else's device to do this, that 10th time I usually really don't have a need for it anyways. So please tell me how being able to browse and be on the phone and do GPS all at the same time is such an immense benefit that I need to change myself over to an HSPA network? Especially when it's one like Rogers up here in Canada or AT&T down there in the USA that is simply so spotty and horrifically underpowered that it's a joke?

Actually, they are adding on the HSPA/UMTS netowrk (note, NOT GSM) for a number of reasons.

1. Both these providers stand to earn a lot with people coming in from other countries with their HSPA/UMTS devices and roaming on their networks (something only Rogers could do previously).

2. The Olympics are coming, ergo the world will be going to Vancouver B.C. point number one comes into play right here, and actually goes even farther because even more people will be able to roam their networks (believe it or not, other parts of the world use CDMA, so there are some world-travelling customers that Rogers can't touch).

3. With the advent of HSPA+, faster data speeds are now available. With Telus and Bell apparently launching this sort of network right off the bat, and nation-wide as opposed to just within Toronto and Vancouver and Calgary and Ottawa and maybe Halifax, they will instantly have the largest AND fastest highspeed network (right now, Rogers' HSPA+ network covers the Greater Toronto Area, and that's it).

4. More and more devices are available for UMTS and HSPA, while not nearly as many are making the switch over to CDMA. Those that are making the switch over to CDMA are almost all losing some feature or another, or gaining size slightly over their GSM counterpart. An excellent example of this is both Wi-Fi and FM Radio features. While these are available in a few GSM/HSPA devices, they are nearly non-existent in CDMA phones and smartphones. In fact, on Telus and Bell, Wi-Fi only made its appearance in approximately 7-12 devices (I can't recall the exact number at this point in time). All have been smartphones. Almost all have been with Windows Mobile, only a couple have been from Palm (now including the palm pre). FM Radio has been in even fewer devices... not that it's all that important, to be honest.

5. Call Quality is apparently better over UMTS. I won't agree when it comes to GSM, because I've made calls over GSM before and it's been a wee bit worse than call quality over the CDMA handsets I use on a regular basis.

I am sure there are many more reasons why they are making the switch, but these are the biggest reasons around. The network is not "Data Only", as it will support voice, but there will be no underlying GSM network to attempt to support it.

I think the only bad thing about this (other than SOME blind people possibly having a hard time activating the software in the first place) is that it is incredibly slow. But then again, for it to work properly, I suppose that is sorta necessary. To fix the other issue, perhaps the program could be designed so that it automatically maps to a hardware button, or activates after a 10-second press-and-hold on any part of the touch screen.

For each person who thinks this is impractical or stupid, think again. I'll be honest in saying that I don't know many blind people. In fact, my profession is kinda limited against the blind (that's the down side of photography). But they are human beings just like the rest of us. If a new technology came about that would give a blind person the ability to compose and take a picture with their camera or camera phone, I'd be all for it. Why not make cellular devices all the more accessible to them? Heck, there are some blind people who are able to type just as fast as me on a keyboard, they're able to text simply because they know the layout of the querty keyboard (I'm surprised no one has ever noticed the little ridges on the home keys). Even on a regular cell phone, the key layout is easy enough for people to learn to text without looking, the same has been done for the blind.

I think people need to stop looking strictly at the limits of a disability... any disability... and start looking at how to overcome those limits to better incorporate those people... not alienate them.

actually, that is being serious. I've been places a rogers phone couldn't get a scrap of a signal to dial 911 and yet my Bell (and now my Telus) phones always got decent service, if not full strength signal.

because the original is on a service provider that I wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole?

this was an add by Bell (hence the large "Bell" logo that the guy was standing next to while using his Palm Pre). Palm doesn't really seem to have so much of a "Canada" division so much as a "North America" division, so we will probably never see the Palm-esque Pre adds up here north of the 49th parallel.

That said, I will say this. It actually falls much more in line with Bell's own commercials, which all start off with someone doing something with their Bell service (be it internet, satellite TV, or mobile), then expanding out to show them next to a massive Bell logo (I suppose to signify "this happens when you're with Bell"). So while it is incredibly similar to an iPhone commercial, it is not a copy in my own opinion.

lol Uncontrol :P

Don't get me wrong, I totally respect the iPhone, I believe in it's potential :) it is a great device :) I just don't see why some people seem to exalt it over all other devices. I love choice, I love selection. I love that Windows Mobile does what it does and does it relatively well. I love that Blackberry is such a solid system (in more ways than one). I love that the iPhone is so media-central. I hate that people see one device as the end-all-be-all :P

Uncontrol, if you're patient enough (which I'd hope you are), Blackberry is launching a Mac version of the Blackberry Manager software. Even then, if it is only for syncing reasons and not necessarily due to updates (which you would need to do regardless the device), there are still other official options from Blackberry.

That said, it's totally your call what device you go for.

I don't know what's with all the apple fanboys on this site. Are they that afraid that something could actually challenge their oh so high and mighty iPhone 3Gs that has been dedicated to the worst possible wireless companies (at least in North America) possible, be it for their network stability or their merciless gouging?

I will say this first and foremost: anyone in the business world goes to a blackberry long before they even glance at a very un-secure (and incredibly fragile) iPhone. So to iJames and iLoveApple, if either of you use your iPhone 3Gs or iPhone 3G for business... have fun with the security protocols there mes amies (and I'm completely aware of how I spelled that thank you). If your battery fries (which is likely in the 3Gs if you didn't do your update... and still possible if you did), have fun without your phone awaiting your replacement while I just get a new battery. I could tear into it more but I'll pass thanks.

I, myself, actually like this device. As Eric up there just said, the first gen Storm wasn't as bad as first reported (yes, there were flaws... why do you think there's 3 versions of the iPhone in 3 years?). A couple firmware updates fixed the biggest issues pretty quickly (yes, I did call 6 months "pretty quickly"). And what's more, not only is it on a stronger network (Telus / Bell up here in Canada, Verizon down there in the USA), but a more widely spread network too with a great deal more 3G access.

The device is greatly improved, and from all what I've seen, if it's running like this on the old OS build, not what it will launch with, then it is going to be one sweet device. I, for one, can hardly wait for the launch.