Apple says iPhone 4 calculates bars wrong, software fix forthcoming - Page 8

+1...

Whether or not you're able to substantiate your discomfort with that reporting by disputing any specific claims of fact in those articles, one fact remains unquestionable: Apple's mishandling of this issue has resulted in a significant hit to their reputation.

lol!

.

Yeah, I'd at least expect "Heck-a-Fail"

.

I see how this could be a software issue with the iPhone reporting the wrong bars and people going crazy (and it probably is) but that still doesn't explain how i can stop data transfer completely by holding my phone like this. how come i can drop calls just by doing this? if it was just an error in reported signal bars it shouldn't stop or slow data transfer!!!! ugh this is no fix for me, it just means ill be seeing less bars on my phone.

I agree that so far Apple is not handling this the way I would want. I am not surprised that there is no answer or resolution, as this type of investigation takes time. Where they went wrong I think is not making an announcement that they are looking into the situation. I think this is all that the practical consumer needed.

However, some of their "mis-handlings" have since proven to be those faked email responses from Steve. That definitely will influence people's opinion negatively going forward, and a lot of people will probably never learn that they were faked.

It's just as likely that they determined signal strength above a certain threshold made little or no difference in call quality, so, having 5 bars represent all signal strengths at or above that threshold allows your phone to give more information regarding changes in signal strength below that threshold with the remaining 5 bars (including 0) .

For example, if signal strength were measured on a scale of 0 to 100, and the values represented by the bars are equally distributed across the possible values, you get:

0 bars = 0 = no signal
1 bars = 1-20
2 bars = 21-40
3 bars = 41-60
4 bars = 61-80
5 bars = 81-100

But, if anything over 60 has equivalent call quality and you change the values to this:

0 bars = 0 = no signal
1 bars = 1-15
2 bars = 16-30
3 bars = 31-45
4 bars = 46-60
5 bars = 61-100

It gives you more information regarding how good you should expect call quality to be at a given location by having each bar below 5 represent finer gradations of signal strength.

I don't know if this is exactly what they were doing and how they were doing it, but it's not a completely off the wall way to approach it.

Considering Apple is WRONG, yes. This isn't about how many bars are displayed, it's about losing the call. Literally I can touch that spot and I will go from 5 bars to "No Service".

Actually, it is either or both!

Guy's that live under bridges get to fish too!

Dictionary\t
troll 2
verb [ intrans. ]
1 fish by trailing a baited line along behind a boat : we trolled for mackerel.
search for something : a group of companies trolling for partnership opportunities.
2 [ trans. ] sing (something) in a happy and carefree way : troll the ancient Yuletide carol.
3 [ trans. ] informal Computing send (an e-mail message or posting on the Internet) intended to provoke a response from the reader by containing errors.
4 [with adverbial of direction ] chiefly Brit. walk; stroll : we all trolled into town.
noun
1 the action of trolling for fish.
a line or bait used in such fishing.
2 informal Computing an e-mail message or posting on the Internet intended to provoke an indignant response in the reader.
DERIVATIVES
troller noun
ORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense stroll, roll ): origin uncertain; compare with Old French troller wander here and there (in search of game) and Middle High German trollen stroll.

Thesaurus\t
noun
the storybook trolls who live under the bridge: goblin, hobgoblin, gnome, demon, monster, bugaboo, ogre.

.

This may sound S/W, If the indicator is tied to send an event to the applications using the Data channel then differing strengths might cause your downloads to change or stop. Try sending data when scanning a Wifi channel similarly if the searching for network starts in background it should stop all data services ideally. If blocking the antennae causes drop in the signal then channel scans will be longer anyway.

I bought a MicroCell about two months ago, but the phone would still drop calls on 3G. I then went and had the phone replaced under Apple Care and the new one was dropping calls, too. Maybe I was just holding the phone wrong

Have the released the "formula" for just iPhone 4 or are they going to release it for the 3GS as well so they can be compared?

I've experienced that from my clients, too. With the iPhone 4, do we have more dropped calls, or are the dropped calls just more noticeable because the antenna design is so different? I haven't seen a controlled test but someone must be working on that.

In any case, I hope the software revision at least makes it more clear what's happening. I found a spot in my house last night where bridging the two metal bands with the lightest touch of one finger made the bars drop from 5 to 1. That's the first time I had seen any of this on my phone. But I could still make, sustain and receive calls with no noticeable loss of quality. So at least getting the signal display to match what's really happening better (a minimal reduction, in my case) would be a step in the right direction for those of you with actual connection problems.

If I were dropping calls, though, I'd just return the thing. My old phone wasn't that bad. Wait until the next revision and then try again.

By the way, I found the part in Apple's letter about making the shorter bars a little taller to be amusingly Orwellian.

Yeah, it is funny!

They should have said: they were "shocked" to discover...

.

http://gizmodo.com/5577812/why-apple...eption-problem

If you have specific issues with any of the claims made in the article, contact the author.

If you can't demonstrate any factual basis for dismissing the specifics of the article but want to complain about it anyway, by all means that's what AI is for.

Here's the link http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/24/...h-a-non-issue/

I imagine you've seen this. My contention is that Steve Jobs never meant "Avoid holding it that way" as his complete answer. The follow-up clarified his first reply. Paraphrasing, Apple said to avoid covering the lower portion of the iPhone if you experience reception problems. It should be obvious that SJ was referring to weak signals. We all know that blocking a radio signal can interfere with reception, especially if the signal is near the low end. What SJ probably wasn't aware of when he commented was the problem Apple discovered with the false indication of a weak signal being a strong signal.

I apologize if my interpretation differs from yours. But all of these negative stories that have proliferated the blogs have become tiresome. Don't get me wrong. I want Apple to fix any and all problems with the iPhone since I hope to get one thru Verizon. I know...wishful thinking.

Really? Only 300 posts on this thread so far? When I saw the headline I was sure the entire Apple-Is-Evil crowd would go berserk and descend on this thread in numbers to jam the AI server. Guess this counts as a win for Apple.

From the link:

Seems to me your comment is only about bars being displayed.

Where you used to go from 5 bars to no service, you will now go from 1 or 2 bars to no service. Apple is fixing the perceptual problem of completely dropping service in an erroneously reported 5 bar service area. It is less surprising to have a call fail with 1 bar service vs 5 bar service.

What really matters is how well the phone works in comparison to other phones in the same location.

Certainly not here.

A couple of days ago, my class/lab did a count on one forum in which in the first 240 blogs, 30 of them were posted by two of the most vocal anti-Apple/Mac members and who didn't own the iPhone 4. Much of the negativism came from the same non-user.

What was equally interesting was the fact that with one exception, in all the reported 'expert reviews' there wasn't a mention or it was not a concern re 'dropped calls' while observing a drop in bars. Only later in the days did there appear to be issues re dropped calls. But again, the most vocal appeared to be coming primarily from those who did not have an iPhone 4 and even more surprising, any other iPhone.

I have found a website and forum for people interested in Appley things on which the members treat each other with respect, do not name-call, they collaborate on getting facts straight, and bring useful expertise and insights to the matters under discussion. Civility and intelligence are the rule of the day. I would love to tell you where it is, but that would only lead the hordes of trolls which bedevil other sites to it. Membership is restricted and rules are rigorously enforced. It's heaven. I may never post anywhere else again.

That wasn't your original contention. It wasn't a matter of interpretation. You said:

Now, in this post, you acknowledge it was real and not fake but try to cover up your error by saying it is a matter of interpretation. That is either dishonest or delusional.

Would love to join you.

Careful. Last time people started talking about alternative forums, we ended up with AppleNova and the Great Splintering.
(or was it ai.org first?)


RIP LoCash

I found one like that too, it was called "MacRumours" but then after a few years it turned into a poo-soaked heck-hole of juvenile ranting. Then I found another great site called "AppleInsider" and I thought I had lucked out again, but sure enough a few years later ... same thing.

Some don't even last that long. There is one called the AppleBlog that was fantastic for about a week after it opened. Even Ars is full of juvenile ravings and fan-boy articles now although they still have good long reviews.

MacNN is probably still the best bet for reasoned, factual, logical (but unfortunately short), articles with a minimum of raving comments.

Thanks for pointing that out. The sarcastic "Don't hold it like that" statement that first hit the headlines probably made me delusional. What irritated me was the incomplete story of what Apple actually acknowledged. I should have said "misleading" instead of "fake."

I suspect Apple found, and is fixing a real issue -- the most widespread issue, the loss of bars.

I suspect that Apple intends that their announcement will deflect some of the wild criticism, and buy them some time to determine if the other reported issues are prevalent, and to determine a course of action to resolve them.

For discussion purposes, let's assume, worst case, that there is a design flaw with the antenna, which requires a redesign to fix.

If that were the case, the iP4 would need to be redesigned, tested, etc. and re-submitted to the FCC for re-approval. That could take months.

At that point, when they understand the issue and its resolution, Apple could initiate a recall/replacement process and/or give the consumer an option for some type of compensation.

Valid problems/defects or not, Apple needs to take a very measured approach to resolving the "issue".

As others have said, we'll know in 3-4 weeks... meanwhile: Obladi Oblada!

Their is way too much at stake, here, than to brush it under the rug.

.

Helllllooo!!! Comments like the one above, should be the highest rated, and people like juan370Z and the Engadget team who also have some phones with no issue, and phones with the issue, should do some more thorough testing.

If some phone in fact does not have this problem, then it is not a construction error, but a production error on some of the phones. Only people who has more than one iPhone 4, where one has reception issues and one does not should be allowed to talk on this issue, the rest is just noise!

If it in fact should turn out to be a construction error, then I made this hardware upgrade suggestion to Apple:





Best regards
Kim Neeper Rasmussen

Ultimate Photorealism

The irony of Apple's statement is that it essentially puts the spotlight back on AT&T's network. Basically they're saying that our phone doesn't have a problem, you're just getting a crappy signal from AT&T.

Wish we could say the same! We only upgraded 4 of our 20 something iPhones to iPhone 4. So far, the situation is:

3 get great reception. One gets spotty. One has a dead speakerphone, one with a severe crackling when on a call and the last has no reported issues, but she has been in GA all week and I haven't called.

Having ample 3Gs around helped push the network issue quickly through Apple support. They kept saying, take the case off cause it interferes with the antenna, don't hold it at the bottom and I was performing their requested steps while it was laying on the table naked next to a 3Gs with case on performing great. Again, nothing antenna related IMHO, just hardware issue.

I put an end to iPhone 4 upgrades for the time being. We are going to wait for ventilated cases and the frenzy to die down so we get to the typical Apple quality standard.

I just recorded a video accessing 3G data on my iPhone 4 before and after holding it in my left hand. Instead of just looking at the reception indicator, I used speed test apps to see if the 3G signal is affected. It completely lost all 3G reception.

YouTube link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqe0tBuBR20

LOL! No, it's not both! It doesn't make sense to say someone is trolling and have the meaning stem from trolls that live under bridges! Trolling for replies and comments like a boat trolling for fish makes much more sense.

But whatever, who the hell cares anymore. Around here you get called a troll if you offer an opinion that's different than what the majority of people have, and that's just the way it is

That's the whole point of PR. Sun Tsu would have been a business man today.

PS: Jobs intelligently did the same thing with Blu-ray back in 2008. He squarely put the blame on the complex Bu-ray licensing. While that was truthful and easily verifiable, it wasn't the whole truth and surely not the main reason for their lack of adoption of Blu-ray. There were two more important reasons:

1. They could have added AACS support to Mac OS X long ago so users could attach their own BRDs to play protected content, but the blue-laser war gave internet-based media the opportunity it needed and Apple then focused on that.
2. The cost of BRDs for Macs is considerably more costly than pretty much every model of PC sold by competitors since Apple uses 9.5mm Ultra-Slim Slot-Loading drives in all but the Mac Pro. I don't I saw 9.5mm Tray-Loading BRDs until just a year ago, and those are still $500-600 for an upgrade from Dell and HP.

Trolling is for those clearly trying to wreak havoc on the thread. I often disagree with Dick Applebaum but I'd never consider his well thought out and balanced posts trolling even when I don't agree with his PoV.

Your posts tend to jump to conclusions and making sweeping generalizations without being backed up with a solid argument where I can see how others wold call you troll, but as you've seen in the past, I've disagreed with them. I do think you have viable info to share so I do wish you'd check your emotions at the door.

Well, it does make sense if you consider that the image that most people have of internet trolls is that they are similar in character to the troll that lives under the bridge, thus the extension of meaning fits aptly. Language can be a wonderful thing if you don't try to keep it in a straitjacket.

First, a question: Is the 3GS running iOS 4, too?


Couple of possibilities:

-- you have an instance of a defective phone that a replacement would resolve
-- there is a hardware design defect
-- there is a software defect* that can be resolved by an update

* this one can be a toughie, because it could be in the way the drivers recognize signal strength, decide when to hand off to a stronger (slower?) signal, and actually accomplishing the switchover. When you are working at this level, it is kind of a never-land... not quite hardware, not quite software.


If I were to guess, I say, in this order:

-- defective iPhone
-- software defect (or a hardware issue that can be fixed by software)**
-- design defect (or as some say: Hecka-Fail)

** Back in the early days you usually were correct guessing a hardware bug. With the state-of-the-art electronics many former hardware features are partially implemented in software-- one advantage of this is to be able to resolve many "hardware problems" by changing the "software". For example, they could, likely, change the CPU speed (clocking) with a software patch. This could be used to reduce overheating, conserve battery. The Cell radio chips, likely, can be tweaked by software, too.

In the iP4 you have much more compute power than you have in a 10 year old iMac... plus GPU, GPS, radio chips, manometers, etc..

There is a lot of complexity here, and many places to look for problems and solutions-- it takes time to localize the problem, identify resolution, and implement a "fix"

If Apple has done their job, there will very little "hardware" in the iP4 that can't be tweaked to resolve problems.

.

Even I haven't been around for that event in AI history. Maybe you should write up a "history of" and ask the mods to create an About Us link at the top.

Edit: Just check Wiki and found out what I needed to know.

I worded that wrong-- I should have said between 300 and 3,000 or a rate between .01% and .1%.

As to why I'd bet-- I have no experience with this class of device & was trying to get people with experience to give us some reasonable expectations.

Back in the 1970s-1980s, when we owned the computer stores, we set a policy to burn in everything for 24 hours minimum (Apple ][, Mac, IBM P/C, hard drives, etc)...

Various devices had various expected failure rates-- with the burn-in policy, we could isolate our customers from the electronic crib-deaths that were fairly common in that era.

Now, and again, we would need to override our policy because the customer wanted an unopened box!


So, BOT, just SWAGging it would guess that consumer electronics of this class have a normal failure rate of between .01% and .1%.


Help!

,

We're only in the first inning... it's a 9-inning game.

Handled right (especially if there is a real problem), Apple could enhance their reputation!

There may be a real opportunity here...

.

Ahhh... from the article:


....tick....tick.....tick....tick....

.