Hacker News Reader

Comment by mootymoots | Hacker News Reader

sure, the initial sync, like an initial time machine backup, would take an age to sync wirelessly...

I'm thinking post that though, walking into my network and syncing latest updates, even without my prompting

Agreed, I can't think of any good reason not to allow sync over wifi (or over 3g for that matter, if I'm on a flatrate plan).

Because the 3G infrastructure is overloaded as it is without multi-gig downloads?

Downloading the initial sync over 3g isn't something I'd do if I could avoid it, but incremental syncs would be just fine. Even adding an album or two wouldn't take -that- long, and if the network can't handle a few downloads now and then it's just plain broken. Besides, everyone over here in Sweden is selling mobile broadband like there's no tomorrow, so their networks should be up to it.

Ah how I wish the US had Sweden's net/mobile infrastructure.

Carriers here like to complain that people are downloading too much rather than just upgrading the infrastructure to deal with it. I shudder to think what would happen if people started downloading over the air on a serious scale, it's already pretty bad with normal web surfing.

That is a problem (certainly in London anyway)... I say initial sync over wired, continuous over wireless.

I had some thoughts on it recently: http://www.reynoldsftw.com/2010/04/imagine-a-wireless-sync-w...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com