dlewis23

Thats because your phone is on T-Mobile. IE. GSM. HSPA splits up data and voice so they can both be used at the same time. On CDMA this is not the case unless you have a phone that supports VoRA. In the end it wont really matter once everyone is on LTE since voice will be carried over data.

That's because the 4G phones support VoRA. The 3G phones don't support it.

Only when you are on connected to WIFI or have a 4G phone. Since Verizon uses CDMA the data and voice is not split like HSPA so you can't use both at the same time. If you have a 4g Verizon phone voice is still over the 3G so you have a second connection to use for data. This has been a nagging issue for all CDMA networks.

:::.. Download Test Results ..::: Download Connection is:: 2507 Kbps about 2.5 Mbps (tested with 3 MB) Download Speed is:: 313 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Dallas, TX USA) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/db/m52yoO Test Time:: 2011-03-25 07:12:32 GMT -7 1MB Download in 3.27 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~56 Minutes - 44X faster than 56K Tested from a 3 MB file and took 10.039 seconds to complete Running at 142% of hosts average (Mycingular.net) User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5 [!] And thats testing in concrete roofed factory. Ill get your 4.5 Mbps when I'm not in this building. Testing use one of the apps yesterday gave me this: Well lets see, I can't exactly throw that puppy on a charger in a vehicle because I don't have a vehicle that can exactly charge anything except its own battery because I'm on two wheels. But when I do finally get home, work, wherever I am. I don't throw it on a charger, I will on average go 2 days with out putting it on a charger. I've stretched it to 5 days before with out charging it. "Hell it will take hours to deplete from 20% (with constant use)" Get real! Remember, reviews do say "we found battery life to be good, but not outstanding". Yea keep doing that, and see how long before Verizon just magically puts you on there tethering plan. And if you don't think they know your doing it, you should Google around a bit. Let me give you a little lesson in cameras. Megapixels doesn't mean jack shit. Having higher MP's doesn't mean something can take better pictures. It's all about the sensor and processing. Thats why a SLR of the equal or less MP's will take better pictures then a point and shoot all day long. While the camera in your phone will take better pictures then most, because in the iPhone 4 has a much larger sensor then the one in your phone, the iPhone 4 will take better pictures even tho it has a lower MP. Hows the video on your phone, you gonna tell me its better then the video on the iPhone 4 too?

Only, if when using a CDMA android phone that is connected to WIFI, or a GSM android phone. Since he is on Verizon he can't talk and use 3G data at the same time. Would have thought the upload would have been a little better, but it was in doors. Let us know what the battery life is like when using 4G. Hopefully they can get it to a somewhat decent level.

Really? Really now, thats your response? LOL... First let me state I've never payed more then $7 for an iPhone app, and no more then $10 for an iPad app. IDK where the hell your getting $50 - $100 for apps but I've never spent anything close to that on an app, I don't know anyone who has ever payed more then $20 for an app. And most iPhone apps 99% are less then $10. Now if I wanted to be a complete fucking ass hole to mobile app developers I could jail break my iPhone in about 2 minutes and torrent any app I want like your doing with your little Android apps. As for main functions please elaborate on how they are horrible? Because I have no problem at all with its main functions. Battery life is longer then any other android phone I've seen. In the office where I work there are 2 iPhones, a BB Storm and 3 Android phones, my iPhone 4 lasts longer then all of them. I suggest you go and learn what that beep your hearing is, its the network and is phone independent. I have had maybe 3 dropped calls since june that were caused by my phone, most of the time its caused by the other person with there crappy phone. I'm on AT&T and my 3G speeds will run circles around yours, since Verizon is EVDO AT&T's base 3.6 Mbps HSPA will be faster, but since I'm in a HSPA+ area I get anywhere from 3 - 4.5 Mbps download. Oh and I've had no problem using my iPhone 4 in a elevator, Since AT&T now uses the 800 MHz band in my area for HSPA, it has no problems in doors. As far as exchange goes, you have got to be on one crappy ass exchange environment. Since exchange is server dependent, for the iPhone to be slow sending pics and vids but your droid is instant is a really stupid thing to say. I have an exchange server that I use for work, and a push IMAP that I use for all my personal email, and it sends just as fast on my iPhone as it does with a BB Storm or any of the 3 Android phones in our office. As soon as I push that send button it starts sending on my iPhone, no matter if I'm using exchange or IMAP. Try and come at me with something a little better, because everything you said is totally ass backwards, and shows how much of an android fanboy you really are. So I'm gonna go use my iPhone 4 to make a call, In doors now, and look at my awesome screen, use some of my better apps. Maybe take a picture or two with my better camera and I might send them to a few people using my exchange server not having to wait because its so not slow. And Ill do all this while I'm on that call.

Your all not seriously arguing over who's scrolls/zoom's quicker and smoother? Well I'll play at that game (And Win). My iPhone 4 scrolls, zooms in and out, is more responsive to touch then your Win Phone 7, Android, WebOS what ever else you may be running. I also have the best apps. At least argue over something thats decent to argue over. Mentioning task killer anything, doesn't put this in your favor. Memory management on Android is a serious problem that Google has never really fixed. You should never ever have to open a task manager on a phone. The OS should be smart enough to manage apps on its own. 1. and 2. This is not as much of a valid argument as it once was. The latest round of Android devices (On the higher end) have fixed this for the most part by just throwing raw CPU power at it, its not to iPhone level of smoothness and probably never will be, but neither will Windows Phone 7. 3. While Win Phone 7 is a million times better the Android at gaming and Android is god awful at gaming, You can't really put Win Phone 7 in the same class as the iPhone when it comes to gaming. iOS is far above all the others in this area. I haven't seen anything that comes close to Rage, Real Racing 2, Infinity Blade and others on either of the other platforms. And once the iPhone 5 gets the A5 processor it will take another jump in gaming because it spanks the shit out of everything else that is out there.

There is a difference between Windows Mobile, and Windows Phone 7. Right now there are no viruses for Windows Phone 7. But I would rather go Win Phone 7, over Android any day of the week right now. Androids UI is a complete fucking mess still. At least with Win Phone 7 you get a UI that is consistent for the most part and is somewhat close to iOS in the way the OS is polished off. The overall quality of Apps on Android is far too low.

You know if you condition the battery it will last longer...

Yea, the 27" iMac is the way to go. There is a ton of extra screen space over a 1920x1200 screen. The only thing that sucks with it is its really hard to go back to a small screen. Don't you think you have your dock a little big there? It looks like its at the default size settings. I've also got the same mouse as you too. I couldn't live with out spaces. I use it for everything now. I can't stand having everything on one desktop. It's part of the reason why I hate using Windows now.

As for tuning on Win7, it really can't be done like it can in XP since the stack is auto tuning. I have found the best thing to do is to use TCP Optimizer since some of the settings can be changed and then just download, download, and download some more. But you have to do it from a place that can max your connection all the time. Also use IE8 when doing it. Over time it will get better as the stack adjusts.

You can hear the regular drive? I haven't been able to hear a regular 7200RPM hard drive in a few years, the good ones have gotten so quite. And I have insanely good hearing, and one right in front of my face when every i'm on my computer. What SSD did you end up going with in your mini? I'm gonna go with one when I upgrade my iMac next time around since the 27in ones have a specific rail inside to mount a SSD to. I want to go with one of the OWC SSD's. As for desktop space, you gotta go with higher resolution monitors. If your still using that monitor you were before you gotta upgrade that sometime to either the Dell 27in or the Apple 27in display and get your self some 2560x1440 res. You don't really have to go with Raid or 2 SSD's. You could save the money and get one good SSD (since they are still very expensive) and have 2.5x the drive performance if not more. Since your computer uses the motherboards raid controller it doesn't really give a performance gain on raid 0 unless you invested in a proper raid controller. As for there being a difference with SSD on raid setup there wouldn't be, you would just have to configure the raid with the new drives, as you would with a regular hard drive.

Whats up with the no rear case fan? Your not really getting any air out of the case.

I don't think that will work for what he wants to do. That is just a ethernet port that works over USB. As for what you want to do. You could get a router that has a USB port for plugging in the drive and having it on the network. but it would be only 1 port.

Simple. If one of the servers was running MySQL you would want the MySQL packets to get priority over say an image. No I couldn't. I can only have one transmitting at 100 Mbps, and the over receiving at 100 Mbps. They both can not be receiving or transmitting at 100 Mbps at the same time. You need to lean how full duplex works, it doesn't give you 200 Mbps in one direction, it allows you to have 100 Mbps going in and out at the same time. Stop adding it up. First, they do correlate to each other in that they are maxing the 100 Mbps port in the beginning of the graph. You just don't know what the servers are doing. The large dip in the first graph is just the natural dip in the traffic for the day that happens to most sites. The second server is for backup and a few other things but it can only reach a maximum of about 15 Mbps because the other server is using majority of the bandwidth. They will never have the same flow because they are both doing different things. I will reply to the rest of your post later.

Stop saying split in half because its not true or correct. Just because you have 2 devices connected to a hub/switch/router/whatever doesn't mean they split the bandwidth in half at all. The bandwidth is just shared among them. Here is an example. I have 2 COLO servers connected to a switch and the switch has 100 Mbps of bandwidth. That doesn't mean that each server has 50 Mbps just by them being connected. It all has to do with what each server is doing. I can have one serving files at ~90 Mbps and the other can be serving files at ~10 Mbps. Nothing is ever split in half. Here is a bandwidth graph for both servers for the exact same time. And they are connected to the same switch. They don't just get 50 Mbps of bandwidth. Ever hear of QOS? Also STOP, saying 27 Mbps of bandwidth for a 54G network. Because that also is not correct. CSMA/CA doesn't take the 54 and cut it in half. The reason you don't get 54 Mbps is as I said before because of the environment around you and distance from the router as well as a few other small things. But the number is just not cut in half. It can be lower or higher then 27 Mbps.

Dude. Stop. Go back and read what I said again because your digging your self a very big hole. I have no clue why you brought that up. I never mentioned anything about full/half duplex anything. Cell phones don't use 2.4 Ghz. Thats a cordless phone in your house. And no one uses 802.11 A networks anymore, for various reason but mainly because they just suck and the range is much shorter.

I wouldn't take anything seriously you read there. He can only figure out how to get 24 Mbps when coping a file over a wired 10/100 LAN but then basically blames it on his 4200 RPM notebook drive that can write at about 25 MB/s which is 200 Mbps. A 100 Mbps Lan will transfer at about 98 Mbps in the real world. Just because something uses "half the bandwidth immediately" doesn't mean it slows down the network to any degree you will notice. Remember once it does it "check" its all done and now full bandwidth is available. Just because bandwidth is shared, that doesn't give you less of anything till one of those users starts to use something. USB is shared, but that doesn't mean if you have 10 devices plugged in each device only has 1/10 of the bandwidth. It all depends on who/what is using how much of the available bandwidth. The reason why you get about 1/2 the actual speed of a B or G network is not because of anything being shared its because of the environment around the router. Walls and other Electronic devices/signals impede the WIFI signal thus slowing it down. If you take your computer and put it right next to the router you will get much closer to the 54 Mbps G max.

It does not work like that at all. It doesn't matter if you have 1 or 10 devices connected its bandwidth will not cut in half for each additional device. This also is not really true, WPA and WPA2 will not really slow down anything you will ever notice. You will lose potential bandwidth by moving 10 inches away from your router then you will by turn on encryption.

If you want redundancy then yes. If you want performance + redundancy then Raid 10. If you just want to save money and have performance buy a SSD and put just your OS and Programs on it use a second drive for everything else.

Raid 1 doesn't increase performance, it only mirrors the drives its for redundancy. Raid 0 would give a performance increase both in read and write speeds. Using the MB raid controller can in some cases slow the drives down because its using the CPU to do the mirroring. Going for Raid 10 would be the fastest for both read and write, but you would need 3 drives. If you go for Raid 0 keep in mind. If either of the drives fail or the raid it self fails you will loose all your data on the drive.

If you look here http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/10/smartphone-buyers-guide-the-best-phones-for-atandt-verizon-spr/ Its Verizon's best phone, but you shouldn't be getting 2.1, it should come with 2.2, or update once you get it to 2.2. Its a good phone, but if you get one of the AMOLED ones the screen is hard to read out doors. Other then that its pretty good and the camera in it is ok. But... If you scroll to the bottom list on engadget you will notice this "the best of the best is still Apple's iPhone 4". And thats no lie

No it does make since to remove it from Windows Update, your just not understanding why it does. But if you go here http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=1001aaf1-749f-49f4-8010-297bd6ca33a0&displaylang=en You can get the last service pack issued.

Dude, come on. Did you even fucking comprehend what I wrote? You might want to read it again to make sure. First its nothing about server room. Of course they don't erase all that code they wrote, that has nothing to do with the update system. It has nothing to do with bandwidth, and it has nothing to do with multiple servers for multiple platforms. They are still updating Windows XP, Vista, and 7 because lots of people still use them and they are still relevant. But guess what, one day the update system wont work for them too, just like with Windows 2000, Me, 98, 95, 3.1 and every other OS that came before Windows 2000. Every OS has a EOL. Windows 2000 was in July of this year, Windows ME was in July of 06. And guess what Windows Vista has a EOL for support dated for April 2012, Windows XP has one for April 2014, and Windows 7 believe it or not has a EOL for main stream support of April 2015. It has absolutely nothing to do with capacity. Since the update system is tied together for all OS's, to do modern upgrades to the system you have to let the old go. Again take Xbox live example I gave the same rules apply. They couldn't do the upgrades they wanted or add all the new features they wanted while the first gen xbox was still able to use xbox live. One of the big things was the amount of friends you could have, they couldn't raise the limit for live on the 360 because the original xbox had a limit in place. They don't have to chuck all OS's, Since Vista, XP and 7 are newer they wouldn't have the same sets of limits that Windows 2000 does. Your just pissed because they stopped updates, and are at the same point people were at when Apple removed PPC support from Snow Leopard. You can't expect them to keep fucking updates up for a 10 year old fucking OS. Especially when only 0.2% of computers use that OS. It's time to upgrade, a decade for a OS is like 100 human years if not more. There is a very good reason why Google is doing forced OS updates/upgrades in the background of Chrome OS...

Its not really to make a buck. its to get people to upgrade there old crap. It costs them a lot of money to keep updating these older OS's and keep the update services online for them. Also since the windows update system is a "all in one" type of thing meaning each OS uses the same basic system, they can't really make many big changes to it while a old OS is still being updated. Just like with Xbox Live, it was the same basic system that ran on the first xbox as the 360. They couldn't make any big changes to it because it would screw up the original xbox, so they just ended xbox live service for original xbox. The same principal applies. To make there systems new and modern they have to get rid of the old. Microsoft has screwed up there update system in the past so much, and pissed a lot of people off, that they have to get rid of the old so they can put more resources towards the new. They can't afford to have another IE6 where 10 years later people are still using it as there main browser.