iPhone 3G gets reviewed and it's just OK

Our very own Ben Patterson will review the iPhone 3G once he gets his hands on it, but until then we can chew on what three reviewers are saying about the upcoming iPhone 3G. The Wall Street Journal's Walt Mossberg, The New York Times' David Pogue, and USA Today's Edward Baig got their hands on the new iPhone 3G and have published reviews that gives us more reasons to wait than to upgrade.

A few things have improved in this model, but all three reviewers complained about the iPhone's lack of video recording, MMS, AT&T's 3G coverage, and extra costs associated with AT&T's 3G service contract. As a matter of fact, their complaints far outweigh any "improvements" made on this iPhone 3G version.

Many have anticipated an iPhone that would support AT&T's 3G network, yet both Mossberg and Baig seemed annoyed by the lack of 3G coverage in some areas.

Mossberg says that the iPhone 3G registered strong coverage in his neighborhood, but found that calls regularly broke up on some major streets, and even had to borrow a cheap Verizon phone to complete an important call that was dropped three times on the new iPhone.

Baig, on the other hand, couldn't access the 3G network in parts of his neighborhood. He writes, "Meanwhile, for all the hoopla involving AT&T's speedier, third-generation network, I couldn't access 3G in parts of my northern New Jersey neighborhood and elsewhere. When the fast network isn't available, the phone automatically reverts to the pokier and oft-maligned Edge network."

They all agree that websites loaded faster on the 3G network than on EDGE, but Wi-Fi is "still the the fastest method for downloads." Baig says it took 10 to 30 seconds to load popular websites through 3G, and Mossberg found that checking email and surfing the Web on the 3G network was three to five times faster—but we already knew that.

It may be easier and faster to access websites or check email on the new iPhone 3G, but for how long?

Mossberg thought the iPhone 3G's battery drained much faster on a typical day than the battery on the original iPhone, while Baig found quite the opposite, yet admitted to getting low battery warnings towards the end of day. Either way, it looks like you'll need to charge your phone every night.

Aside from all the 3G network issues, which is the touted feature on this new model, some minor improvements on the phone itself gave reviewers something to be happy about. For example, all three agree that the audio quality improved, the GPS feature was very accurate, and the curvier design felt better in your hand.

Software improvements include a scientific calculator, an address book search box, parental controls, and instant language switching. Multitasking will be easier now that you can delete multiple emails, save photo attachments, and open PowerPoint files, although that may crash your iPhone as Mossberg found out.

The GPS feature, while better than the pseudo GPS feature on its predecessor, is useless according to Pogue because "the antenna is much too small to emulate the turn-by-turn navigation of a G.P.S. unit for a vehicle."

None of the reviewers were able to test the App Store, but all three seem to agree that the biggest attraction will probably be the third-party applications, not the 3G functionality, which is what many have been anticipating.

So should you upgrade?

Pogue says the iPhone 3G is a nice upgrade, "But it’s not so much better that it turns all those original iPhones into has-beens. Indeed, the really big deal is the iPhone 2.0 software and the App Store, neither of which requires buying a new iPhone."

Mossberg agrees, and suggests iPhone owner who are ok with using Wi-Fi for data should "hold off and get the free software upgrade before deciding whether it’s worth getting the new hardware."

So will you still be waiting in line to get one? Let us know in the comments.