or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple says iPhone 4 calculates bars wrong, software fix forthcoming
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple says iPhone 4 calculates bars wrong, software fix forthcoming - Page 10

post #361 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Yeah, that's very indicative that this problem is deeper than they are making out. An algorithm fix on a device that nearly 2 million people have simply will not have such a low priority. If it was just a software update they were working on, it would be out within a matter of hours. Or days if it's firmware to test the chances of bricking devices.

A few weeks says to me that they are going to issue a fix after they hire their antenna engineers to advise them on how they should fix the problem and the engineers will probably reply 'well you shoulda hired an antenna engineer before building the phone'.

It says a lot about their QA too if they have been using the same algorithms for 3 years and nobody bothered to check it. It's a pretty fundamental part of a phone operation and this suggests that the phone part of the iPhone was an afterthought. Jobs already said that the iPhone started as an iPad - they did a tablet first and then shrunk it.

*puts on tin foil hat*
YEAH, you're right!
*takes off tin foil hat*

*SIGH* Seriously though, as much as I want to believe Apple 100% on this, it's probably more than just how they calculate the bars, I agree.

At the end of the day at least they have acknowledged the issue and are working to address the problems, hiring antenna engineers as well means they realise they need to do better in that department.

Back to my iPad... *shh don't disturb me*
post #362 of 434
I'm sure other posters have mentioned it before but I really couldn't be f'ed to go through all 10 pages. Notice how the letter is signed as Apple instead of Steve Jobs.

Clearly PR and management are trying to mitigate the confusion/ miscommunication/ damage "Steve's emails" did, their authenticity notwithstanding.

The open letter was worded carefully so as not to give the impression that there's an egomaniacal madman at the helm running about doing whatever the hell he wants, saying there's no problem one minute, hiring antenna engineers the other.
post #363 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Notice how the letter is signed as Apple instead of Steve Jobs.

Clearly PR and management are trying to mitigate the confusion/ miscommunication/ damage "Steve's emails" did, their authenticity notwithstanding.

The open letter was worded carefully so as not to give the impression that there's an egomaniacal madman at the helm running about doing whatever the hell he wants, saying there's no problem one minute, hiring antenna engineers the other.

+1 Insightful
post #364 of 434
Apple could put whatever they wanted to in the signal bar area and some of you sheep would herd. Steve Jobs should change his title from "CEO, Director" to "Shepherd".
post #365 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

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.

The stat you are referring to was only for first weekend sales.
post #366 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Yeah, that's very indicative that this problem is deeper than they are making out. An algorithm fix on a device that nearly 2 million people have simply will not have such a low priority. If it was just a software update they were working on, it would be out within a matter of hours. Or days if it's firmware to test the chances of bricking devices.

A few weeks says to me that they are going to issue a fix after they hire their antenna engineers to advise them on how they should fix the problem and the engineers will probably reply 'well you shoulda hired an antenna engineer before building the phone'.

It says a lot about their QA too if they have been using the same algorithms for 3 years and nobody bothered to check it. It's a pretty fundamental part of a phone operation and this suggests that the phone part of the iPhone was an afterthought. Jobs already said that the iPhone started as an iPad - they did a tablet first and then shrunk it.

I think you are generally correct. But it isn't like the don't have antenna engineers now, or at least it isn't that they have just started looking. At the very worst, I saw Apple postings for Antenna Engineers that were posted Jan 2010. I think we can be pretty sure they had some prior to the original iPhone release.

As for the QA, I don't think it is a matter of the catching it. I think it was an intentionally rigged algorithm. Nothing nefarious, just that (as Anonymouse has proposed) if call/data transfer rates are unaffected at 3 or 4 'true' bars and the user sees no real difference between 3 or 4 or 5 (or 4 and 5) then why not show 5 for these once they hit 'optimal'. The signal might actually be better, but the effective benefits might not be. It would be a little dishonest, but not maliciously so. I think QA was told this was by design, continue testing.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #367 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

However, I disagree that the bars can be considered incorrect as they currently are. They only represent more or less signal, not absolute values like the decibels they are built off of. In other words, if it showed 5 bars for a weaker signal and lower bars for a stronger signal, that would be incorrect.

Yes, I agree that "incorrect" isn't the right adjective. I think they made a conscious decision to have them represent something like potential call quality rather than signal strength. So, I don't think there is actually a "bug" in the display of these, the bars just didn't mean what people thought they meant.

In this regard, I find their letter somewhat disingenuous. Perhaps the PR department was actually "stunned", but I doubt very much that the engineering teams who work on this were even mildly surprised.

Quote:
All Apple has really stated is they will optimize them so 5 bars doesn't run the gamut to -90dB. What they didn't state is why this will take "a few weeks" to complete, which leads me to theorize they are doing some heavy fixes in the firmware, not just making a cosmetic change to represented bars.

Well, you also have to assume that they have been working on various bug fixes since the day iOS4 went gold master. Even if this is the only antenna/reception issue addressed, they'd have to either put out a branch update that included only that change, or tie up all the loose ends on the other stuff before they release an update. Clearly they were aware of this for some time, since they discussed it with Walt Mossberg, so the bar display changes may even be already completed.

It will, however be interesting to see what changes in behavior iP4s exhibit after this update, to deduce what other changes they may have made. I would not be surprised to see the "seam bridging" issue to be, if not eliminated, at least somewhat ameliorated.
post #368 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I think they made a conscious decision to have them represent something like potential call quality rather than signal strength. So, I don't think there is actually a "bug" in the display of these, the bars just didn't mean what people thought they meant.

In this regard, I find their letter somewhat disingenuous. Perhaps the PR department was actually "stunned", but I doubt very much that the engineering teams who work on this were even mildly surprised.

The oddest part here is that ATT publishes a spec for how manufacturers can display bars, and Apple chose to do something entirely different until after it turns out that not following the published spec proves problematic.

And now feigning surprise? Do they really want to announce to the world that they don't read relevant specs?
post #369 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

The oddest part here is that ATT publishes a spec for how manufacturers can display bars, and Apple chose to do something entirely different until after it turns out that not following the published spec proves problematic.

And now feigning surprise? Do they really want to announce to the world that they don't read relevant specs?

Now, I think you are being disingenuous. If they made a conscious decision to have the bars represent something other than signal strength -- i.e., " chose to do something entirely different" -- and there is nothing wrong with doing that, per se, then it doesn't follow that they, "don't read relevant specs."

I mean, ok, you are a troll, but trying to have it both ways in one post is a little much even for you.
post #370 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Yes, I agree that "incorrect" isn't the right adjective. I think they made a conscious decision to have them represent something like potential call quality rather than signal strength. So, I don't think there is actually a "bug" in the display of these, the bars just didn't mean what people thought they meant.

In this regard, I find their letter somewhat disingenuous. Perhaps the PR department was actually "stunned", but I doubt very much that the engineering teams who work on this were even mildly surprised.



Well, you also have to assume that they have been working on various bug fixes since the day iOS4 went gold master. Even if this is the only antenna/reception issue addressed, they'd have to either put out a branch update that included only that change, or tie up all the loose ends on the other stuff before they release an update. Clearly they were aware of this for some time, since they discussed it with Walt Mossberg, so the bar display changes may even be already completed.

It will, however be interesting to see what changes in behavior iP4s exhibit after this update, to deduce what other changes they may have made. I would not be surprised to see the "seam bridging" issue to be, if not eliminated, at least somewhat ameliorated.

The Apple "fix" has nothing to do with actual reception. If the display went away altogether it would not matter because the signal strength is what it is whether displayed or not.

I think Apple were "stunned" that they got caught in this fraud by people who measured actual signal strength in decibels. Let's face it, there is no reason for this "formula" to give the result which it gave other than to fraudulently deceive the user as to the signal strength and, by implication, the quality of the network (connection). AT&T was undoubtedly involved in this fraud as well.

Anyone with two spare gray cells left to rub together should be running the BS Flag up on Apple's most recent explanation. It is simply not credible. If the phone is dropping calls because of poor signal strength or any other reason for that matter, the fact that the phone displays five bars instead of three is not the problem.

There are some articles which discuss the conflict between the engineering team and the "design" team. On the iPhone 4 it would appear that form has taken precedence over function. It also appears that Apple have been "hoisted by their own petard" with respect to their "you're holding it wrong claim. Their own TV commercials show people holding it in what is more correctly described as the "conventional way".
post #371 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Yeah, that's very indicative that this problem is deeper than they are making out. An algorithm fix on a device that nearly 2 million people have simply will not have such a low priority. If it was just a software update they were working on, it would be out within a matter of hours. Or days if it's firmware to test the chances of bricking devices.

A few weeks says to me that they are going to issue a fix after they hire their antenna engineers to advise them on how they should fix the problem and the engineers will probably reply 'well you shoulda hired an antenna engineer before building the phone'.

It says a lot about their QA too if they have been using the same algorithms for 3 years and nobody bothered to check it. It's a pretty fundamental part of a phone operation and this suggests that the phone part of the iPhone was an afterthought. Jobs already said that the iPhone started as an iPad - they did a tablet first and then shrunk it.

One thing I find curious is that if you go back and look at Walt Mossbergs review of the iPhone 4 you will find this:

"Yet, in some places where the signal was relatively weak, the iPhone 4 showed no bars, or fewer bars than its predecessor. Apple says that this is a bug it plans to fix, and that it has to do with the way the bars are presented, not the actual ability to make a call. And, in fact, in nearly all of these cases, the iPhone 4 was able to place calls despite the lack of bars."

I'm assuming Walt had the phone at least a week or two before the launch date...If you look at Apple's letter, you find this:

"The iPhone 4 has been the most successful product launch in Apples history. It has been judged by reviewers around the world to be the best smartphone ever, and users have told us that they love it. So we were surprised when we read reports of reception problems, and we immediately began investigating them. Here is what we have learned."

"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."

Wait...you told Walt, it's a bug, before the phone was even launched and now, they are "surprised" to read reports of reception issues?

"We have gone back to our labs and retested everything, and the results are the same the iPhone 4s wireless performance is the best we have ever shipped."

Testing in a lab is great for creating reproducible conditions but I hope they also tested out in the field? With cell signals, I would imagine there are many factors that go into getting good reception...distances to cell towers, 3G and EDGE coverage areas, cell congestion within an area and so on...
post #372 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

The Apple "fix" has nothing to do with actual reception. If the display went away altogether it would not matter because the signal strength is what it is whether displayed or not.

I think Apple were "stunned" that they got caught in this fraud by people who measured actual signal strength in decibels. Let's face it, there is no reason for this "formula" to give the result which it gave other than to fraudulently deceive the user as to the signal strength and, by implication, the quality of the network (connection). AT&T was undoubtedly involved in this fraud as well. ...

I don't think there is any foundation for your accusations. However, as pointed out, it's unlikely that the update will include only a single fix, and we don't really know what effect those updates may have on reception.

You may hate Apple, you may be mad as hell at Apple, but at least try to be rational.
post #373 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Now, I think you are being disingenuous. If they made a conscious decision to have the bars represent something other than signal strength -- i.e., " chose to do something entirely different" -- and there is nothing wrong with doing that, per se, then it doesn't follow that they, "don't read relevant specs."

ATT publishes a spec. Apple didn't follow it until AFTER it became a major problem.

Whether that means they willfully ignored the spec or somehow never managed to read it is something only they can tell us.

But either possibility is not especially flattering for them.
post #374 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

ATT publishes a spec. Apple didn't follow it until AFTER it became a major problem.

Whether that means they willfully ignored the spec or somehow never managed to read it is something only they can tell us.

But either possibility is not especially flattering for them.

Nonsense. You are just reaching for inflammatory rhetoric. Reasoned thought will not support your diatribe.
post #375 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Nonsense. You are just reaching for inflammatory rhetoric. Reasoned thought will not support your diatribe.

Quote:
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.
...
To fix this, we are adopting AT&Ts recently recommended formula for calculating how many bars to display for a given signal strength.

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010...pleletter.html
post #376 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I don't think there is any foundation for your accusations. However, as pointed out, it's unlikely that the update will include only a single fix, and we don't really know what effect those updates may have on reception.

You may hate Apple, you may be mad as hell at Apple, but at least try to be rational.

Let's be rational. There is no other explanation. To even suggest otherwise is to deny reality. This was not a "mistake" or error and has nothing whatsoever to do with the problems people are experiencing. Get real!
post #377 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

I'm sure other posters have mentioned it before but I really couldn't be f'ed to go through all 10 pages. Notice how the letter is signed as Apple instead of Steve Jobs.

So? Jobs doesn't sign every letter coming out of Apple - or even all the important ones. In fact, very few Apple press releases are signed by Jobs. You're conspiracy theories need some work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

A few weeks says to me that they are going to issue a fix after they hire their antenna engineers to advise them on how they should fix the problem and the engineers will probably reply 'well you shoulda hired an antenna engineer before building the phone'.

YASCT (Yet another silly conspiracy theory).

First, the ads for engineers appeared last week. It will take at least a week for resumes to come in, at least another week to evaluate them, another week to interview. (All of those are very optimistic). Then, even assuming that they find someone they like and make them an acceptable offer, most people give 2 weeks' notice on their existing jobs. So those jobs won't be filled for at least 5 weeks AT BEST. Then, it takes time for the engineer to become familiar with the product and testing protocols in use at Apple, the software code being used, then develop new code and properly test it, so any contributions they might make are MONTHS away, not weeks.

Second, if Apple needed more expertise than they have in house on this issue, hiring people is not the solution. They would have retained a consulting firm that specializes in the subject and given them a high-priority contract. That would get the needed results much faster than hiring employees to do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shapesNforms View Post

Wait...you told Walt, it's a bug, before the phone was even launched and now, they are "surprised" to read reports of reception issues?

There's no inconsistency. Read what they told Mossberg. They told him that there was a problem with the reported number of bars, but that it wouldn't affect reception. it was only after the phone shipped that they learned of alleged reception problems.

Note also that this debunks the "Apple intentionally inflated the number of bars" conspiracy theory. They told Mossberg that it was a bug and would be fixed - so there was no intentional over-stating of the number of bars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shapesNforms View Post

Testing in a lab is great for creating reproducible conditions but I hope they also tested out in the field? With cell signals, I would imagine there are many factors that go into getting good reception...distances to cell towers, 3G and EDGE coverage areas, cell congestion within an area and so on...

No doubt they did field testing. Apple has always tested its products in the field and phones would be even more likely to be tested in the field.

Now, it IS possible that they reduced the amount of field testing slightly due to the slimebuckets at Gizmodo. I don't know if that's the case, but it's certainly possible. That would pretty effectively destroy the "Gizmodo didn't do any harm since the phone would eventually be released, anyway" rationalization.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #378 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

The Apple "fix" has nothing to do with actual reception. If the display went away altogether it would not matter because the signal strength is what it is whether displayed or not.

I think Apple were "stunned" that they got caught in this fraud by people who measured actual signal strength in decibels. Let's face it, there is no reason for this "formula" to give the result which it gave other than to fraudulently deceive the user as to the signal strength and, by implication, the quality of the network (connection). AT&T was undoubtedly involved in this fraud as well.

That's is an illogical conclusion. For your theory to be correct we have assume that largest selling single model modern smartphone isn't scrutinized, we have to think that the flagship smartphone isn't scrutinized, we have to think that Apple isn't scrutinized, and we have to think that Apple isn't aware of this scrutiny that falls upon them. There is no way in hell I can suspend that much reality. If this was a movie I'd have walked out by now.

If the fix has NOTHING to do with reception, then why is taking "a few weeks" for some visual changes to some bars? It wouldn't and there aren't any other major pressing issues that are requiring them to wait on this fix.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

ATT publishes a spec. Apple didn't follow it until AFTER it became a major problem.

Whether that means they willfully ignored the spec or somehow never managed to read it is something only they can tell us.

But either possibility is not especially flattering for them.

Why is ATT&T algorithm any better? Because they said so? That was an escape, a way to deflect form the real issue(s). There is no "wrong" way to display the bars, just "better" ways which may or may not be synonymous with what we want.

Apple wants their phone to look like it's more powerful than other phones. AT&T wants all the phones on their network to look like it's more powerful than other networks. This is the same as other carriers and networks. We know this because these companies exist! The only variance is how much of the envelope are they will to push to register those bars.

Remember, this is an internal spec for AT&T, not an industry standard. Perhaps we need the FCC and ETSI(?) to make the bars require a certain algorithm or at least regulate the date the bars represent.
  1. Detail the minimum and maximum number of bars
  2. Detail the minimum and maximum dB range for any one bar
  3. Detail the minimum and maximum cycle time before the represented data updates

The first two are probably obvious, but the last one make be a head scratcher at first. The reason for the inclusion is if there was no mandate on the duration between cycles then a vendor could have 5 bars stays longer than they should even though you've dropped to a weak signal.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #379 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That's is an illogical conclusion. For your theory to be correct we have assume that largest selling single model modern smartphone isn't scrutinized, we have to think that the flagship smartphone isn't scrutinized, we have to think that Apple isn't scrutinized, and we have to think that Apple isn't aware of this scrutiny that falls upon them. There is no way in hell I can suspend that much reality. If this was a movie I'd have walked out by now.

If the fix has NOTHING to do with reception, then why is taking "a few weeks" for some visual changes to some bars? It wouldn't and there aren't any other major pressing issues that are requiring them to wait on this fix.

<snip>

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.
post #380 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

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.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #381 of 434
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...
post #382 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

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
post #383 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

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?
post #384 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

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?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #385 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

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.
post #386 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

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?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #387 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

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.

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.

Let us know what you find out on that.
post #388 of 434
"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.

post #389 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

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
post #390 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

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 View Post

Microsoft

How did they get rid of the X-box 360 red ring of death?

By removing the red LED's.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #391 of 434
What are the algorithms of the other networks the iPhone is available on?

Across 80 odd countries?

Which one is the best?

AT&T isn't the only network with iPhones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

"Why is ATT&T algorithm any better? Because they said so?"
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #392 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulk001 View Post

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.
post #393 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll

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.
http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pi...rticleid=26961
  • 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.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #394 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


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

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #395 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

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
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #396 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

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 View Post

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.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #397 of 434
.

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 calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #398 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

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?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #399 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

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.
post #400 of 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

<snip>

Most of this uproar is over a cosmetic issue.

<snip>.

While there may be some cosmetic issues, I believe the dropped calls are real. What makes it difficult for many people to believe is the "mine works fine so there can't really be a problem" syndrome.

I have personally observed a number of iPhone 4 demo units at Apple stores. One of them, in particular, went from 5 bars to 3, then 2 and then none in a matter of seconds when held in the "conventional" manner (as shown in the Apple TV commercials). Several others had no drop in bars at all when held in the same manner in either the left or right hand. This makes me rather suspicious that there is something which is not affecting all of the units.

Apple really should be rounding up a bunch of units from people who say they are experiencing problems and test the darn things out to find out what is going on. There seems little doubt that Apple will continue to sell iPhones at an astonishing rate, but one has to wonder if the company will have the same golden reputation for long if there is a widespread problem and they do nothing about it. That could affect future sales. Remember, there are a great many iPhone purchasers are not Mac users and may not be committed to the company as many of the members of this forum are.

In any event, I believe that there is more than a cosmetic issue involved. Time will tell.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple says iPhone 4 calculates bars wrong, software fix forthcoming