Hardware WTF is Sony thinking?

[ViRGE]

Isn't 4G mostly bandwidth improvements? I'd think that cellular latency would still be crappy.

Actually LTE has some significant latency improvements. Verizon's LTE systems get around 100ms with LTE phones, and around 80ms with a data card - you're looking at half (or lower) the latency of most 3G networks. It would be a good improvement for mobile gaming, but again there are significant power issues that won't be resolved in time for the Vita's launch.

 

[slayerdx]

so pretty much if i bought the psvita with at&t, I would have to get a contract... even though I'm pretty much only gonna use it for the GPS?

 

[Deleted member 473940]

so pretty much if i bought the psvita with at&t, I would have to get a contract... even though I'm pretty much only gonna use it for the GPS?

I would think so.
Unless they plan on PAY as you Go 3G, the chances are small for that.

 

[A4NoOb]

It makes perfect sense from a technological standpoint.

For 3G systems virtually everyone else in the world besides North America uses GSM exclusively (NA is mixed GSM and CDMA), so if Sony is only to produce a single Vita then they need to use GSM, reducing their choices to AT&T and T-Mobile. From that, only AT&T uses frequency bands compatible with most of the world. The bands T-Mobile uses are at a higher frequency and fairly unique, so supporting them normally requires a different radio that works on T-Mobile's bands and loses support for several AT&T/world bands in the process.

This is almost exactly what Apple did with the iPhone for years. They produced a single world GSM model which only worked in 3G mode on AT&T (and unofficially worked in 2G mode on T-Mobile). Bringing on Verizon this year required that they produce a new iPhone specifically for that market. I can't imagine Sony wants to take the risk of producing what amounts to an American-only Vita given that they'd sell far fewer Vitas than Apple sells iPhones.

So while it's possible there was some kind of bidding war among carriers, I believe that they're using AT&T because they're the de-facto GSM 3G carrier. Perhaps in 3-4 years when LTE is widely deployed and cheap enough to integrate, Sony can upgrade the Vita to LTE and by extension add support for additional carriers.

Why would it be so hard to design the PSVita with multi-band frequencies? We already have this with a lot of android phones, and the technology isn't difficult to implement. From a technological standpoint it would make more sense for PSV to leave an "unlocked" system for people on various different carriers to join. It's the same legitimate reason why people were deterred away from the iPhone.

 

[BORTZ]

AT&T will probably be really good after the merger with T mobile

LOLOL

Even if sony did go with Verizon, Verizon is only above average for service and shit in the US. Thats why they are good. I dont think they cover other countires very well.

 

[ViRGE]

It makes perfect sense from a technological standpoint.

For 3G systems virtually everyone else in the world besides North America uses GSM exclusively (NA is mixed GSM and CDMA), so if Sony is only to produce a single Vita then they need to use GSM, reducing their choices to AT&T and T-Mobile. From that, only AT&T uses frequency bands compatible with most of the world. The bands T-Mobile uses are at a higher frequency and fairly unique, so supporting them normally requires a different radio that works on T-Mobile's bands and loses support for several AT&T/world bands in the process.

This is almost exactly what Apple did with the iPhone for years. They produced a single world GSM model which only worked in 3G mode on AT&T (and unofficially worked in 2G mode on T-Mobile). Bringing on Verizon this year required that they produce a new iPhone specifically for that market. I can't imagine Sony wants to take the risk of producing what amounts to an American-only Vita given that they'd sell far fewer Vitas than Apple sells iPhones.

So while it's possible there was some kind of bidding war among carriers, I believe that they're using AT&T because they're the de-facto GSM 3G carrier. Perhaps in 3-4 years when LTE is widely deployed and cheap enough to integrate, Sony can upgrade the Vita to LTE and by extension add support for additional carriers.

Why would it be so hard to design the PSVita with multi-band frequencies? We already have this with a lot of android phones, and the technology isn't difficult to implement. From a technological standpoint it would make more sense for PSV to leave an "unlocked" system for people on various different carriers to join. It's the same legitimate reason why people were deterred away from the iPhone.

If you actually look at those Android phones, virtually none of them work on both T-Mobile and AT&T's 3G frequencies. On paper it's possible, in practice it drives up the cost of the device and requires a really complex antenna to make it all work.

T-Mobile is the smallest of the 4 carriers anyhow, both in subscriber numbers and in area covered. When people talk about wanting devices to support more carriers, they really mean they want a CDMA device for use with Verizon.

 

[A4NoOb]

It makes perfect sense from a technological standpoint.

For 3G systems virtually everyone else in the world besides North America uses GSM exclusively (NA is mixed GSM and CDMA), so if Sony is only to produce a single Vita then they need to use GSM, reducing their choices to AT&T and T-Mobile. From that, only AT&T uses frequency bands compatible with most of the world. The bands T-Mobile uses are at a higher frequency and fairly unique, so supporting them normally requires a different radio that works on T-Mobile's bands and loses support for several AT&T/world bands in the process.

This is almost exactly what Apple did with the iPhone for years. They produced a single world GSM model which only worked in 3G mode on AT&T (and unofficially worked in 2G mode on T-Mobile). Bringing on Verizon this year required that they produce a new iPhone specifically for that market. I can't imagine Sony wants to take the risk of producing what amounts to an American-only Vita given that they'd sell far fewer Vitas than Apple sells iPhones.

So while it's possible there was some kind of bidding war among carriers, I believe that they're using AT&T because they're the de-facto GSM 3G carrier. Perhaps in 3-4 years when LTE is widely deployed and cheap enough to integrate, Sony can upgrade the Vita to LTE and by extension add support for additional carriers.

Why would it be so hard to design the PSVita with multi-band frequencies? We already have this with a lot of android phones, and the technology isn't difficult to implement. From a technological standpoint it would make more sense for PSV to leave an "unlocked" system for people on various different carriers to join. It's the same legitimate reason why people were deterred away from the iPhone.

If you actually look at those Android phones, virtually none of them work on both T-Mobile and AT&T's 3G frequencies. On paper it's possible, in practice it drives up the cost of the device and requires a really complex antenna to make it all work.

T-Mobile is the smallest of the 4 carriers anyhow, both in subscriber numbers and in area covered. When people talk about wanting devices to support more carriers, they really mean they want a CDMA device for use with Verizon.

The cost of a quad band antenna isn't as expensive as you make it out to be. IIRC many BB and Nokia phones offer quad frequency support and are relatively cheap. I can envision how Sony knew this powerhouse of a product was going to be exploited for users. If they were going to design a gaming console with the power to easily rival tablets, then I don't see why they can't help their consumer base and make the 3G connectivity more available. Even more to the point, they should have foreseen the rapid growth of LTE networks and make a 4G compatible device. I guess in the future (give it a year), Sony will release 4G PSVitas, but they should have thought of it from the get-go.

This is where people suspect AT&T bribes got the better of Sony. It is not a technological decision but rather a business one. I'm not trying to criticize Sony for being "greedy" but for being stupid. If they wanted to make money, then this would be one of the worst times to partner with AT&T. It was much different for the iPhone since it was one of the earlier smartphones to pilot against the teenage market. This was a breakthrough, and AT&T was the spearheading company to support the product. Now it is a much different story. Not only is the consumer happiness with AT&T dismal, but the market shares among all carriers are about even. It will be the same reason why iPhone will slowly be overtaken in shares is already overtaken in market shares. People like choice- simple as that.

 

[Discover]

Well I prefer 3G but you never know, AT&T may be quite optimized for the console itself.

 

[ViRGE]

The cost of a quad band antenna isn't as expensive as you make it out to be. IIRC many BB and Nokia phones offer quad frequency support and are relatively cheap. I can envision how Sony knew this powerhouse of a product was going to be exploited for users. If they were going to design a gaming console with the power to easily rival tablets, then I don't see why they can't help their consumer base and make the 3G connectivity more available. Even more to the point, they should have foreseen the rapid growth of LTE networks and make a 4G compatible device. I guess in the future (give it a year), Sony will release 4G PSVitas, but they should have thought of it from the get-go.

This is where people suspect AT&T bribes got the better of Sony. It is not a technological decision but rather a business one. I'm not trying to criticize Sony for being "greedy" but for being stupid. If they wanted to make money, then this would be one of the worst times to partner with AT&T. It was much different for the iPhone since it was one of the earlier smartphones to pilot against the teenage market. This was a breakthrough, and AT&T was the spearheading company to support the product. Now it is a much different story. Not only is the consumer happiness with AT&T dismal, but the market shares among all carriers are about even. It will be the same reason why iPhone will slowly be overtaken in shares is already overtaken in market shares. People like choice- simple as that.

Just to be clear, while quad band doesn't have a formal definition, for most UMTS phones it normally refers to 850 (North America, Oceania), 900 (Europe), 1900 (America again), and 2100Mhz (Europe, Asia, Africa). T-Mobile is 1700MHz. For a world phone that's also T-Mobile compatible, it would be a penta band phone, which is quite rare. Most T-Mobile compatible phones use 1700/2100 (and sometimes 900). So most quad band phones you've seen wouldn't actually work on T-Mobile on 3G.

As for LTE, I can't imagine they haven't thought about it; the latency benefits alone make it worth consideration. But like I said before, it's just not ready. Adding LTE would easily drive up the cost of the console by $50 (LTE radios are still comparatively expensive), not to mention its size. Even then it would only work in one or two regions because several different bands are being used for LTE. To date none of the LTE chipsets that will be available by the end of the year would support all the bands necessary for world operation. Practical handheld LTE is an end-of-2012 technology at the earliest. Given that it takes Sony 3 years on average to do a significant hardware refresh, I'd guess we're looking at 2014 for LTE support (if they do it at all).

 

[trumpet-205]

You also need to be aware that here in US CDMA carrier likes Verizon and Sprint only allow one handset (MEID) to be attached to a phone account at any time (lack of CSIM). CSIM is a GSM version of SIM card. Only up until recently did Verizon start rolling out CSIM for their 4G, but it is no where near mainstream yet.

As for GSM vs CDMA debate, it all comes down to reception. At equal reception, they perform equally well.

 

[gibberish]

Well I prefer 3G but you never know, AT&T may be quite optimized for the console itself.

AT&T is a phone company that offers 3G. It's not another type of mobile internet.

 

[Pyrofyr]

Indeed, AT&T was a bad choice, given their service in the North East. Even in the SE they are pretty good, but not always so great. Lots of down spots in the 3G, even in public places. I can go some parts of my campus and get bad/no reception.

Overall, it's 'whatever', will have to wait and see reports of 3G stability in the area before I commit myself to one or the other.

 

[Ergo]

Can someone clarify that you will *need* a service contract w/ AT&T to use the 3G version? I only ask because I assumed (perhaps foolishly) that the 3G was like that in the Kindle: 'free', w/ the purchase price. If that is the case, well, that sucks, because I am not going to get *another* provider just to use the 3G Vita.

 

[clegion]

Well I hope I can buy it without contract at the 300 buck price , It feels strange buying a handheld with contract (Note I never bought anything on contract)