Think about what you said for just a second. IF you believe Apple, they are telling you that the iPhone was NOT scrutinized.
Once again, think about what you are saying. The number of bars displayed does not matter. The actual signal strength is what matters...that and the ability of the device to utilize the signal strength. Changing the number of bars displayed will not change dropped calls.
You put "fix" in quotes in the comment I responded to. It's clear that it wouldn't take weeks for adjust the ways bars are represented I read "fix" to include the actual fix coming to the reception issue, not just the misdirection stated in the PR statement. I think we maybe on the same page here.
Just a thought and I'm not sure if this would be technically possible but someone should put together an iPhone "reception summit". Take five people with "good" iPhones and five who say they have "bad" iPhones, swap sim cards and see what happens...
You put "fix" in quotes in the comment I responded to. It's clear that it wouldn't take weeks for adjust the ways bars are represented I read "fix" to include the actual fix coming to the reception issue, not just the misdirection stated in the PR statement. I think we maybe on the same page here.
So I guess that means you didn't ask the only people who can answer your question.
Let's analyze this. Who would I ask? Why would I ask? Why do you take anything factual for Apple and deem it a lie but than PR letter you deem as the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" without considering the why Apple's PR stated what they stated. And where is the "published spec" from AT&T?
In #381 above you asked, "Why is ATT&T algorithm any better? Because they said so?"
Of course few if any AI posters would have the engineering experience to be able to answer that, but more relevant here is that we're discussing Apple's recent adoption of the AT&T algo (see paragraph 6 here at Apple's site where they explain this for you.
So the logical choice for getting an answer to why Apple thinks AT&T's algo is an improvement over the erroneous one they had been using would be Apple.
Quote:
Why would I ask?
It's your question. If you don't know why you asked it I doubt anyone here can help you.
Quote:
Why do you take anything factual for Apple and deem it a lie but than PR letter you deem as the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" without considering the why Apple's PR stated what they stated.
Since I wrote nothing of the sort, you're in a better position than I to answer that. That's all yours.
Quote:
And where is the "published spec" from AT&T?
You may have something there: it may well be that AT&T doesn't publish the spec, and instead requires that developers merely guess what it is.
"Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong."
LOL!
"U P O N I N V E S T I G A T I O N, W E ' R E S T U N N E D T O F I N D"
more like, we the public are STUNNED TO FIND that Apple suppossedly hadn't figured this out for 3 years????? REALLY???? lol
Apple is (one of) the most innovative technological companies on the planet and with the most incredible software available.
they really want us to believe that they actually missed this calculation issue?? on a product that is a phone.
REALLY???? WTF???? SAD! FAIL!
they're really grasping for an excuse and it doesn't look good. in other words, they don't have an excuse all these calcualtions and excuses are just to distract and no admit that they released a bad designed product.
i suppose they're hoping most kool aid drinkers will accept this distorted reality excuse.
Nonsense. You are just reaching for inflammatory rhetoric. Reasoned thought will not support your diatribe.
shapesNform post seems to support rationaltroll's assertion - back when it was being tested by Walt Mossberg, Apple knew there was a bug but did not do anything about it till now. And BTW, this is hardly inflammatory rhetoric - it's just one person's opinion. Why do you feel the need to vociferously defend every criticism against Apple? Even they have come out and admitted that in part they have made a mistake here.
As an aside, Arstechnica points out that "Apple actually bumped up its bar display as part of the release of iPhone OS 2.1, casting further doubt on Apple's apparent stunned-ness at the situation. "Improved accuracy of the 3G signal strength display" was one of the main listed features when 2.1 came out in September of 2008." http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...not-signal.ars
Remember, nearly 3/4 of iPhone sales are to those landfillers, existing customers throwing out their ols one to get the new one. Relatively few first-time buyers.
That "relatively few" is absolutely more than any competitors similar product launch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll
Microsoft
How did they get rid of the X-box 360 red ring of death?
shapesNform post seems to support rationaltroll's assertion - back when it was being tested by Walt Mossberg, Apple knew there was a bug but did not do anything about it till now.
Actually, they told him they were aware of the issue and were working on a change for it, that doesn't exactly tell us when they became aware that it was an issue, but it does sort of undermine the assertion that they did nothing about it till now, unless we interpret now to include some significant portion of the past.
Remember, nearly 3/4 of iPhone sales are to those landfillers, existing customers throwing out their ols one to get the new one. Relatively few first-time buyers.
That "relatively few" is absolutely more than any competitors similar product launch.
You gotta love how the trolls twist the reality of the situtation. Never in my life have I heard anyone vilify repeat and continud business. Apparently 3/4 of all AT&T and iPhone customers are happy enough with the network to remain on AT&T even though it resets their contract for 2 years and almost doubles their ETF.
Out of 1.7M units sold in the first three days (assuming everything equal since I can't break out per country) that is 425,000 new activation simply because of the iPhone 4. Since the US sells a great deal more than any other country and since it's the only carrier for the US (I think all the others are on multiple carriers at this point) we can safely deduce that more new activations happen in the US than any other country. I think we can safely say there have hundreds of thousands of new customers signing on to AT&T in the last 10 days. Can Verizon say that?
On July 22nd we get to see how the AT&T did compared the last year's quarter. Note that last year had about 5 extra days to sell the iPhone.
More than 2.4 million iPhone activations in the second quarter
PS: I love how he claims that old iPhones will simply go into landfills. I recieved $275 for my 3GS a week after I had my iPhone 4, and I priced it low to sell within a couple hours.
PS: I love how he claims that old iPhones will simply go into landfills. I recieved $275 for my 3GS a week after I had my iPhone 4, and I priced it low to sell within a couple hours.
Well, there I think the competition has Apple beat-- their new phones go into the landfills, sooner and in larger number (percent sold)!
You put "fix" in quotes in the comment I responded to. It's clear that it wouldn't take weeks for adjust the ways bars are represented I read "fix" to include the actual fix coming to the reception issue, not just the misdirection stated in the PR statement. I think we maybe on the same page here.
The fallacy here is that everyone complaining about the length of time thinks Apple can do this on their own. More likely:
- Time to fix problem: 1 week
- Time to obtain FCC approval: 6 weeks
For all we know, the fix may have been submitted to the FCC weeks ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR
Once again, think about what you are saying. The number of bars displayed does not matter. The actual signal strength is what matters...that and the ability of the device to utilize the signal strength. Changing the number of bars displayed will not change dropped calls.
That's right. And so far, no one has shown in any controlled experiment that more calls are dropped than on other phones. In fact, most reports are that when it is tested (PC World, Anand, CR), there is NO increase in the number of dropped calls.
Most of this uproar is over a cosmetic issue.
Now, I don't have any doubt that there might be a few people whose AT&T signal is so weak that they have marginal reception or that there might be a small number of truly defective phones. But all of this tempest about dropped calls is entirely without real evidence.
We are on a family plan and only 2 iPhones are used as phones,
in 2007, the 3rd iPhone 1 was used for development/JailBreaking
In 2008 the new iPhone 3G replaced my active iPhone 1 which I gave to my granddaughter instead of buying her a new portable Nintendo (her option)
In 2009, I used the 3GS, gave the 3G to my daughter (both active) and she gave her iPhone 1 to her son in lieu of buying him a Nintendo portable (his option)
In 2010, I have the iP4 and had planned to give my 3GS to my daughter to replace her 3G... which she would give to my other grandson in lieu of a Nintendo portable,
In a week or so, I will receive 4 more iP4s-- I am deciding now what to do with them and leaning toward this mix:
Development
1 iP1
1 iP3GS
1 iP4
Active -- used as phones
1 iP4 me
1 iP4 my daughter
Inactive -- used as iPod Touches Nintendo equivalent
1 iP4 14-year-old granddaughter
1 iP3G 11-year-old-grandson
1 iP4 10-year-old grandson-- he always gets hand-me-downs, so we will start a new tradition of a hand-me-up
That will leave 2 of the three original iPhone 1s-- one of these has a dead area (no touches) on the bottom of the screen-- just happened about 4 months ago (masssive hecka-fail).
The other works but has some cracks in the glass where it was hit with a baseball bat... go figure, attractive granddaughter!
Likely, I will sell or give these to one of the repair shops to be used for parts.
BTW, the batteries in all of the iPhones work fine.
So, we have used our 3 oldest iPhones for over 3 years and now have a total of 6 iPhones-- none have entered landfills.
We have saved several hundreds of dollars (est. $400 plus games) on Nintendo portables and cartridges which, likely, would be in landfills.
One of the hidden benefits of this is that any app or game that you buy for the iPhone will work on at least 5 individual iOS devices-- so, all our iPhones have all the apps/games.
I am quite satisfied with the "investment" we have made in the iPhones-- it has been lower cost, more satisfying, greener... and it has taught the grandkids [mostly] to appreciate and take care of a quality device.
The fallacy here is that everyone complaining about the length of time thinks Apple can do this on their own. More likely:
- Time to fix problem: 1 week
- Time to obtain FCC approval: 6 weeks
The FCC angle is a new one but it sounds reasonable to me. Are you suggesting that Apple needs to increase the RF output of the iPhone 4 when in a low signal area and/or the impedance from touching the 3G-Spot increases to a certain point?
The FCC angle is a new one but it sounds reasonable to me. Are you suggesting that Apple needs to increase the RF output of the iPhone 4 when in a low signal area and/or the impedance from touching the 3G-Spot increases to a certain point?
FCC is not the only regulatory body. I am sure there are others in other countries where this product is available. It's a pretty narrow view to take.
Comments
Think about what you said for just a second. IF you believe Apple, they are telling you that the iPhone was NOT scrutinized.
Once again, think about what you are saying. The number of bars displayed does not matter. The actual signal strength is what matters...that and the ability of the device to utilize the signal strength. Changing the number of bars displayed will not change dropped calls.
You put "fix" in quotes in the comment I responded to. It's clear that it wouldn't take weeks for adjust the ways bars are represented I read "fix" to include the actual fix coming to the reception issue, not just the misdirection stated in the PR statement. I think we maybe on the same page here.
You put "fix" in quotes in the comment I responded to. It's clear that it wouldn't take weeks for adjust the ways bars are represented I read "fix" to include the actual fix coming to the reception issue, not just the misdirection stated in the PR statement. I think we maybe on the same page here.
I think so, too.
Cheers
Why is ATT&T algorithm any better? Because they said so?
I don't know why Apple says it's better. What did they say when you asked them?
I don't know why Apple says it's better. What did they say when you asked them?
So now you're back to trolling again, huh?
So now you'er back to trolling again, huh?
So I guess that means you didn't ask the only people who can answer your question.
So I guess that means you didn't ask the only people who can answer your question.
Let's analyze this. Who would I ask? Why would I ask? Why do you take anything factual for Apple and deem it a lie but than PR letter you deem as the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" without considering the why Apple's PR stated what they stated. And where is the "published spec" from AT&T?
Let's analyze this. Who would I ask?
Kindly allow me to refresh your memory:
In #381 above you asked, "Why is ATT&T algorithm any better? Because they said so?"
Of course few if any AI posters would have the engineering experience to be able to answer that, but more relevant here is that we're discussing Apple's recent adoption of the AT&T algo (see paragraph 6 here at Apple's site where they explain this for you.
So the logical choice for getting an answer to why Apple thinks AT&T's algo is an improvement over the erroneous one they had been using would be Apple.
Why would I ask?
It's your question. If you don't know why you asked it I doubt anyone here can help you.
Why do you take anything factual for Apple and deem it a lie but than PR letter you deem as the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" without considering the why Apple's PR stated what they stated.
Since I wrote nothing of the sort, you're in a better position than I to answer that. That's all yours.
And where is the "published spec" from AT&T?
You may have something there: it may well be that AT&T doesn't publish the spec, and instead requires that developers merely guess what it is.
Let us know what you find out on that.
LOL!
"U P O N I N V E S T I G A T I O N, W E ' R E S T U N N E D T O F I N D"
more like, we the public are STUNNED TO FIND that Apple suppossedly hadn't figured this out for 3 years????? REALLY???? lol
Apple is (one of) the most innovative technological companies on the planet and with the most incredible software available.
they really want us to believe that they actually missed this calculation issue?? on a product that is a phone.
REALLY???? WTF???? SAD! FAIL!
they're really grasping for an excuse and it doesn't look good. in other words, they don't have an excuse all these calcualtions and excuses are just to distract and no admit that they released a bad designed product.
i suppose they're hoping most kool aid drinkers will accept this distorted reality excuse.
Nonsense. You are just reaching for inflammatory rhetoric. Reasoned thought will not support your diatribe.
shapesNform post seems to support rationaltroll's assertion - back when it was being tested by Walt Mossberg, Apple knew there was a bug but did not do anything about it till now. And BTW, this is hardly inflammatory rhetoric - it's just one person's opinion. Why do you feel the need to vociferously defend every criticism against Apple? Even they have come out and admitted that in part they have made a mistake here.
As an aside, Arstechnica points out that "Apple actually bumped up its bar display as part of the release of iPhone OS 2.1, casting further doubt on Apple's apparent stunned-ness at the situation. "Improved accuracy of the 3G signal strength display" was one of the main listed features when 2.1 came out in September of 2008." http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...not-signal.ars
Remember, nearly 3/4 of iPhone sales are to those landfillers, existing customers throwing out their ols one to get the new one. Relatively few first-time buyers.
That "relatively few" is absolutely more than any competitors similar product launch.
Microsoft
How did they get rid of the X-box 360 red ring of death?
By removing the red LED's.
Across 80 odd countries?
Which one is the best?
AT&T isn't the only network with iPhones.
"Why is ATT&T algorithm any better? Because they said so?"
shapesNform post seems to support rationaltroll's assertion - back when it was being tested by Walt Mossberg, Apple knew there was a bug but did not do anything about it till now.
Actually, they told him they were aware of the issue and were working on a change for it, that doesn't exactly tell us when they became aware that it was an issue, but it does sort of undermine the assertion that they did nothing about it till now, unless we interpret now to include some significant portion of the past.
Remember, nearly 3/4 of iPhone sales are to those landfillers, existing customers throwing out their ols one to get the new one. Relatively few first-time buyers.
That "relatively few" is absolutely more than any competitors similar product launch.
You gotta love how the trolls twist the reality of the situtation. Never in my life have I heard anyone vilify repeat and continud business. Apparently 3/4 of all AT&T and iPhone customers are happy enough with the network to remain on AT&T even though it resets their contract for 2 years and almost doubles their ETF.
Out of 1.7M units sold in the first three days (assuming everything equal since I can't break out per country) that is 425,000 new activation simply because of the iPhone 4. Since the US sells a great deal more than any other country and since it's the only carrier for the US (I think all the others are on multiple carriers at this point) we can safely deduce that more new activations happen in the US than any other country. I think we can safely say there have hundreds of thousands of new customers signing on to AT&T in the last 10 days. Can Verizon say that?
On July 22nd we get to see how the AT&T did compared the last year's quarter. Note that last year had about 5 extra days to sell the iPhone.
- 1.4 million net gain
- More than 2.4 million iPhone activations in the second quarter
PS: I love how he claims that old iPhones will simply go into landfills. I recieved $275 for my 3GS a week after I had my iPhone 4, and I priced it low to sell within a couple hours.PS: I love how he claims that old iPhones will simply go into landfills. I recieved $275 for my 3GS a week after I had my iPhone 4, and I priced it low to sell within a couple hours.
Well, there I think the competition has Apple beat-- their new phones go into the landfills, sooner and in larger number (percent sold)!
/trollscreen
.
Well, there I think the competition has Apple beat-- their new phones go into the landfills, sooner and in larger number (percent sold)!
Damn Apple for giving rich updates for 3 years and at the same time as their other phones!
Even if Apple's iPhone went to landfills in the same rate they'd still lose that race because of the size of Android phones.
/trollscreen
You put "fix" in quotes in the comment I responded to. It's clear that it wouldn't take weeks for adjust the ways bars are represented I read "fix" to include the actual fix coming to the reception issue, not just the misdirection stated in the PR statement. I think we maybe on the same page here.
The fallacy here is that everyone complaining about the length of time thinks Apple can do this on their own. More likely:
- Time to fix problem: 1 week
- Time to obtain FCC approval: 6 weeks
For all we know, the fix may have been submitted to the FCC weeks ago.
Once again, think about what you are saying. The number of bars displayed does not matter. The actual signal strength is what matters...that and the ability of the device to utilize the signal strength. Changing the number of bars displayed will not change dropped calls.
That's right. And so far, no one has shown in any controlled experiment that more calls are dropped than on other phones. In fact, most reports are that when it is tested (PC World, Anand, CR), there is NO increase in the number of dropped calls.
Most of this uproar is over a cosmetic issue.
Now, I don't have any doubt that there might be a few people whose AT&T signal is so weak that they have marginal reception or that there might be a small number of truly defective phones. But all of this tempest about dropped calls is entirely without real evidence.
we bought the following iPhones
-- 2007 3 iPhone 1
-- 2008 1 iPhone 3G
-- 2009 1 iPhone 3GS
-- 2010 1 iPhone 4
-- 2010 4 iPhone 4 on order
We are on a family plan and only 2 iPhones are used as phones,
in 2007, the 3rd iPhone 1 was used for development/JailBreaking
In 2008 the new iPhone 3G replaced my active iPhone 1 which I gave to my granddaughter instead of buying her a new portable Nintendo (her option)
In 2009, I used the 3GS, gave the 3G to my daughter (both active) and she gave her iPhone 1 to her son in lieu of buying him a Nintendo portable (his option)
In 2010, I have the iP4 and had planned to give my 3GS to my daughter to replace her 3G... which she would give to my other grandson in lieu of a Nintendo portable,
In a week or so, I will receive 4 more iP4s-- I am deciding now what to do with them and leaning toward this mix:
Development
1 iP1
1 iP3GS
1 iP4
Active -- used as phones
1 iP4 me
1 iP4 my daughter
Inactive -- used as iPod Touches Nintendo equivalent
1 iP4 14-year-old granddaughter
1 iP3G 11-year-old-grandson
1 iP4 10-year-old grandson-- he always gets hand-me-downs, so we will start a new tradition of a hand-me-up
That will leave 2 of the three original iPhone 1s-- one of these has a dead area (no touches) on the bottom of the screen-- just happened about 4 months ago (masssive hecka-fail).
The other works but has some cracks in the glass where it was hit with a baseball bat... go figure, attractive granddaughter!
Likely, I will sell or give these to one of the repair shops to be used for parts.
BTW, the batteries in all of the iPhones work fine.
So, we have used our 3 oldest iPhones for over 3 years and now have a total of 6 iPhones-- none have entered landfills.
We have saved several hundreds of dollars (est. $400 plus games) on Nintendo portables and cartridges which, likely, would be in landfills.
One of the hidden benefits of this is that any app or game that you buy for the iPhone will work on at least 5 individual iOS devices-- so, all our iPhones have all the apps/games.
I am quite satisfied with the "investment" we have made in the iPhones-- it has been lower cost, more satisfying, greener... and it has taught the grandkids [mostly] to appreciate and take care of a quality device.
.
The fallacy here is that everyone complaining about the length of time thinks Apple can do this on their own. More likely:
- Time to fix problem: 1 week
- Time to obtain FCC approval: 6 weeks
The FCC angle is a new one but it sounds reasonable to me. Are you suggesting that Apple needs to increase the RF output of the iPhone 4 when in a low signal area and/or the impedance from touching the 3G-Spot increases to a certain point?
The FCC angle is a new one but it sounds reasonable to me. Are you suggesting that Apple needs to increase the RF output of the iPhone 4 when in a low signal area and/or the impedance from touching the 3G-Spot increases to a certain point?
FCC is not the only regulatory body. I am sure there are others in other countries where this product is available. It's a pretty narrow view to take.