or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › NYT: iPhone 4 antenna problems a result of 'weakness' in software
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NYT: iPhone 4 antenna problems a result of 'weakness' in software - Page 2

post #41 of 167
Sounds like all those dropped calls on AT&T's network might not be all AT&T's fault.
post #42 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

I build antennas used in the space business. No margin of error is allow in this type of business. After 40 years doing this type of work I can say I know what I am talking about without any reservations. Basic antenna design principles have been the letter of the law since Marconi and it will not change with software magic to day or in the future.

No disrespect intended since you are obviously a noob, but if you are going to get any street cred around here as an engineer, you need to offer more proof. This place is rife with BSers.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #43 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The source who spoke with the Times also indicated that Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs did not learn of the software problem until after the iPhone 4 shipped. That is in contrast to a report from earlier Thursday by Bloomberg, which alleged that Jobs was personally informed of the issue last year by Ruben Caballero, a senior engineer and antenna expert with Apple.

What contrast? The anonymous "source" says that Jobs did know not about the SOFTWARE problem. Then, the contrast, in the article's words, is that the engineer says he told Jobs about the antenna design, that's a HARDWARE problem.

BS on this whole article and this whole antenna crap. Works just fine, unless you are in a crap area with a bad signal. Hate Apple, fine, don't buy an iPhone.
post #44 of 167
Why isn't the media reporting on this?

Check it out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_RP7Fn1w8Q
post #45 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

I am an antenna engineer and the NYT reporter is not. Software will not and I repeat, will not compensate for loss of incoming signal strength. Any basic antenna engineer knows thattouching an antenna produces attenuation that reduces the strength of the incoming RF signal. I cannot believe a company like Apple could have been so careless or just dumb to think it could get away with a design like this. The idea to prefer styling over good design practices has been violated again for the sake of money.

No, you are not an engineer. You are just another high school dropout. "..touching an antenna produces attenuation that reduces the strength of the incoming RF signal." A real engineer wouldn't ever written that nonsense.
post #46 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

It may not be a software issue, per se, but a hardware issue can be compensated for by software. And it wouldn't necessarily mean compromising other aspects of it's functions. Ideally, there would be no hardware issues, but those who claim hardware issues can never be solved with software fixes are wrong. If the software can control the radio circuitry to allow it to compensate for detuning due to contact with the antenna, then that's a legit fix.

Yep, like creating Gold out of water. or oil out of molasses... I suppose Software can create Adam and Eve too? ... Signal strength is need to over compensate for the noise level. Software can help when there is a decrease in signal strength but it cannot create what it does not receive or maybe it can just create it's own words in lieu of the incoming conversation??
post #47 of 167
Oh, it's all just so very complex!


Starting with two antennas that are completely exposed and amenable to being touched.


Yes, surely this can be fixed in software.


And we're counting on it.
post #48 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

No need to feel sorry.

Just know that, if not for Anonymous, we'd never have things like Watergate.

And we would not have a bunch of idiots adding the suffix -gate to any controversial topic.

Watergate is the name of a hotel, which has nothing to do with all of the controversial issues to which the suffix -gate is often added.
post #49 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Point is people have invested rage and emotion in this issue. Nothing Apple says or does will placate them. Whatever Apple's solution is it won't be accepted by the heavy breathing, spittle spraying, primordially enraged crowd. Their response to any proposed Apple fix will make the Mel Gibson tapes sound calm and rational.

Tell me I'm wrong. I'm right aren't I.

I can't answer for everybody but I would like to believe that the issue can indeed be fixed in software, in which case, I'll sell my 3Gs and move right on up.

The problem is that I'm sceptical. This is sounding like somebody is prepping the public for a kludge which, if you squint at it just the right way, with your mouth held just so, you can almost begin to believe that it might not be quite as bad as we first thought and, possibly, we imagined the whole thing.

I'll withhold judgement until AnandTech have a chance to examine whatever fix Apple supplies.
post #50 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plagen View Post

No, you are not an engineer. You are just another high school dropout. "..touching an antenna produces attenuation that reduces the strength of the incoming RF signal." A real engineer wouldn't ever written that nonsense.

Ok wiseguy, then why is Apple suggesting to use the bumpers?? Or Jobs recommending "Not to holdit that way"?? I guess everybody except you is a HS dropout?? Get an education
post #51 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

Ok wiseguy, then why is Apple suggesting to use the bumpers?? Or Jobs recommending "Not to holdit that way"?? I guess everybody except you is a HS dropout?? Get an education

How come the same thing can happens without touching the antenna as shown below?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_RP7Fn1w8Q
post #52 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

Ok wiseguy, then why is Apple suggesting to use the bumpers?? Or Jobs recommending "Not to holdit that way"?? I guess everybody except you is a HS dropout?? Get an education

Ok, we get it that English is not your first language, but now you are just digging yourself a hole. Which space agency did you say you worked for?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #53 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

It may not be a software issue, per se, but a hardware issue can be compensated for by software. And it wouldn't necessarily mean compromising other aspects of it's functions. Ideally, there would be no hardware issues, but those who claim hardware issues can never be solved with software fixes are wrong. If the software can control the radio circuitry to allow it to compensate for detuning due to contact with the antenna, then that's a legit fix.

But that would not be a software problem affecting all the prior iPhones as suggested in the leak. The iPhone 4 is the first iPhone which permitts direct physical contact with the antenna. The detuning would likely not be a constant in any event.
post #54 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCJ001 View Post

And we would not have a bunch of idiots adding the suffix -gate to any controversial topic.

Watergate is the name of a hotel, which has nothing to do with all of the controversial issues to which the suffix -gate is often added.

Surely, you're not referring to antenna-gate, are you!?
post #55 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

"Verify, then trust."

Old Russian proverb as told by Ronald Reagan.

I think Reagan (in the context of the US-Russian nuclear arsenal reduction) actually said, 'Trust, but verify.'

Similar in meaning, though.....
post #56 of 167
Get a Case ..

My iphone 4 works better then my 3g.. and works at work where VWZ had to install Antennas just so BB would work..
post #57 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plagen View Post

No, you are not an engineer. You are just another high school dropout. "..touching an antenna produces attenuation that reduces the strength of the incoming RF signal." A real engineer wouldn't ever written that nonsense.

Since your arrogance implies that you think you must be a real one, please elucidate for the rest of us heathens.

Thank you, sir. (O/w, please shut up and go away).
post #58 of 167
post #59 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

I am an antenna engineer and the NYT reporter is not. Software will not and I repeat, will not compensate for loss of incoming signal strength. Any basic antenna engineer knows that touching an antenna produces attenuation that reduces the strength of the incoming RF signal. I cannot believe a company like Apple could have been so careless or just dumb to think it could get away with a design like this. The idea to prefer styling over good design practices has been violated again for the sake of money.

And I am Superman. With my amazing powers I can (gingerly of course so I don't crush it) make the iPhone lose all it's bars, drop a call AND make the world spin backwards - reversing the charges on my ATT phone plan and making them pay ME for the privilege of using the iPhone. Look I have an email to prove it - and a cheque for $1 gazillion dollars!

No really, what kind of "antenna engineer" are you exactly, recognizing that different bandwidths of radio frequency need different kinds of antenna to propagate and receive signals correctly. Are you a repair technician, or an actual engineer? Depending on the antenna, the transmitter or transceiver, the method of controlling signal strength and the frequencies used, touching an antenna can, attenuate the signal from the transmitter, strengthen the signal, fry your hand or do nothing at all. And yes anyone with any training in radiofrequency technologies knows this and doesn't silly blanket statements like those you made.

Try the statement instead of "I am the king of Prussia". I will more readily believe that claim based on your statement above.
post #60 of 167
LOL - more stories from so called experts that really don't have a clue and need to shut up so Apple can speak on the issue at hand here...I am so tired of more stories told by folks wanting to just be in the news. Just let the press event happen already so we can get past this already. Jeeps
post #61 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by duaneu2 View Post

It's a hardware problem, it's a software problem...recall, no recall....they're just throwing everything at the wall, aren't they?

And yes. Yes they are.
post #62 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

No need to feel sorry.

Just know that, if not for Anonymous, we'd never have things like Watergate.

Or bloggers.
post #63 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Ok, we get it that English is not your first language, but now you are just digging yourself a hole. Which space agency did you say you worked for?

Just writing fast... what's your language? Swahili?... Look buster, I don't think I need to tell you where I work or what I know to prove anything here. Just pick up a book and educate yourself. First in manners and then to understand about the fundamentals of RF theory.
post #64 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

"Verify, then trust."

Old Russian proverb as told by Ronald Reagan.

No, Reagan said, "Trust, but verify."

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #65 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I think Reagan (in the context of the US-Russian nuclear arsenal reduction) actually said, 'Trust, but verify.'

Similar in meaning, though.....

Sorry, anant. Didn't see your response.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #66 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysBlackmore View Post

And I am Superman. With my amazing powers I can (gingerly of course so I don't crush it) make the iPhone lose all it's bars, drop a call AND make the world spin backwards - reversing the charges on my ATT phone plan and making them pay ME for the privilege of using the iPhone. Look I have an email to prove it - and a cheque for $1 gazillion dollars!

No really, what kind of "antenna engineer" are you exactly, recognizing that different bandwidths of radio frequency need different kinds of antenna to propagate and receive signals correctly. Are you a repair technician, or an actual engineer? Depending on the antenna, the transmitter or transceiver, the method of controlling signal strength and the frequencies used, touching an antenna can, attenuate the signal from the transmitter, strengthen the signal, fry your hand or do nothing at all. And yes anyone with any training in radiofrequency technologies knows this and doesn't silly blanket statements like those you made.

Try the statement instead of "I am the king of Prussia". I will more readily believe that claim based on your statement above.

I is apparent you are a shoe salesman. What an idiot
post #67 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckdutter View Post

So...they are basically saying that for all this time Apple has had substandard software running one of the most complained about problems with the phone. I'm not vindicating AT&T...but it sure must have been nice to stand back and let them take all the blame...

It's funny how this is supposed to give me faith my iPhone is not a dud...but it does the opposite...because for 4 generations of iPhones...they are apparently just now getting around to admitting they have a long-running phone/antennae issue...even if it is software.

I look forward to my iPhone 8 when they finally get around to fixing it.

I do recall reading now and then that apple had faults on it's end that contributed to the dropped calls etc. I recall even apple say something to the effect if they're still learning. ATT was basically training them. RF is a black science and the software is half the equation.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #68 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post

Why isn't the media reporting on this?

Check it out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_RP7Fn1w8Q

Because now that Apple is huuuuge and successful, it's more fun for stupid people to attack them.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #69 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysBlackmore View Post

And I am Superman. With my amazing powers I can (gingerly of course so I don't crush it) make the iPhone lose all it's bars, drop a call AND make the world spin backwards - reversing the charges on my ATT phone plan and making them pay ME for the privilege of using the iPhone. Look I have an email to prove it - and a cheque for $1 gazillion dollars!

No really, what kind of "antenna engineer" are you exactly, recognizing that different bandwidths of radio frequency need different kinds of antenna to propagate and receive signals correctly. Are you a repair technician, or an actual engineer? Depending on the antenna, the transmitter or transceiver, the method of controlling signal strength and the frequencies used, touching an antenna can, attenuate the signal from the transmitter, strengthen the signal, fry your hand or do nothing at all. And yes anyone with any training in radiofrequency technologies knows this and doesn't silly blanket statements like those you made.

Try the statement instead of "I am the king of Prussia". I will more readily believe that claim based on your statement above.


Yes... "I am the king of Prussia" ... as your imagination suggests
post #70 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

Just writing fast... what's your language? Swahili?... Look buster, I don't think I need to tell you where I work or what I know to prove anything here. Just pick up a book and educate yourself. First in manners and then to understand about the fundamentals of RF theory.

Look buster? Most likely the first usage of that colloquial euphemism around these parts in quite a spell.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #71 of 167
at least apple's antennas can still hear an uptick in the price of the stock as opposed to google who seems to be stone cold deaf.

so all you apple nay sayers, take a hike to droid land and see if you like the scenery.
post #72 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

Just writing fast... what's your language? Swahili?... Look buster, I don't think I need to tell you where I work or what I know to prove anything here. Just pick up a book and educate yourself. First in manners and then to understand about the fundamentals of RF theory.

Hi maczones, I have a couple of questions:

1) I have read reports that applying a coating of some kind could help mitigate the antenna problem. Is this true?

2) If you had "carte blanche" to solve the problem, what would you do?
post #73 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

I am an antenna engineer and the NYT reporter is not. Software will not and I repeat, will not compensate for loss of incoming signal strength. Any basic antenna engineer knows that touching an antenna produces attenuation that reduces the strength of the incoming RF signal. I cannot believe a company like Apple could have been so careless or just dumb to think it could get away with a design like this. The idea to prefer styling over good design practices has been violated again for the sake of money.

While it seems to make sense that grabbing the actual antenna will negatively impact its performance, its been established that completely covering the right sight which is the 3G side doesn't cause a problem. Seems it should but it doesn't.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #74 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

<snip>

So have you returned your iPhone 4 yet?
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #75 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

I build antennas used in the space business. No margin of error is allow in this type of business. After 40 years doing this type of work I can say I know what I am talking about without any reservations. Basic antenna design principles have been the letter of the law since Marconi and it will not change with software magic to day or in the future.

Do you work on satellite antenna systems, or manned flight systems? Are you tied to the research being done for space communication systems using software configurable radio frequency technology based on the DOD SDR/SCA architecture spec for STRS?

The latest technologies allow for much of the physical layer to be abstracted into software controls and functions, which means that while some attenuation through contact is possible, the software can be programmed to compensate since it controls tuning/detuning, signal transport and data management, as well as transceiver power, latency, jitter, filter params and modulation.

Just sayin'. So instead of relying on non sequiturs and silly statements - put up or shut up. I'm just a lowly research technician for a company that probably supplies a good deal of the equipment you use to build your systems, not AN ANTENNA ENGINEER (trumpets blow and virgins faint - or was that vice versa?).
post #76 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

It may not be a software issue, per se, but a hardware issue can be compensated for by software.

I'm still trying to figure out how in the Googtard universe Apple both simultaneously knew about this flaw a year ago on the one hand and was too stupid to test for it because of the stealth cases they used on the other.

I've never read an explanation that held water for me about how this detuning was different than any other detuning. Antennas are circuits that use standing waves and don't "short" the way a regular circuit might because of that (though "shorting" it to another surface would detune it) at least not if they are working. At least I think so. I've been out of college for 11 years and I was only a astrophysics minor and I have a ham license.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm just refusing to believe Apple could make such a boneheaded mistake. But I've thought all along this was a baseband issue (and I have the tweets to prove it). Maybe I'm wrong.

My guess is they'll give a $30 apple store card to every iPhone 4 owner. If you've got a bumper, you can spend it on something else. If you need one, that will cover it. And then they'll do a baseband update.

4.0.1 did not have a baseband update.
post #77 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoughBoy View Post

Hi maczones, I have a couple of questions:

1) I have read reports that applying a coating of some kind could help mitigate the antenna problem. Is this true?

2) If you had "carte blanche" to solve the problem, what would you do?

If I were King (of Prussia or whereever), and I believed the head of the special film and coatings division of Bayer International (whom I spoke with) I would coat the antenna with urethane, which is one of the hardest and most durable of polymer coatings and should protect it and provide a modicum of insulation.
post #78 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysBlackmore View Post

The latest technologies allow for much of the physical layer to be abstracted into software controls and functions,

Just about every high end ham radio base station has an antenna tuner in it that is software controllable, that takes readings (SWR etc.) and tries to "retune" the antenna. This doesn't make for the optimal perfect radiator, but engineering is about compromises and always has been. It adjusts the capactive and/or inductive reactance in the circuit to try and get the best possible SWR. Sometimes the "best" is still shitty, but it's better than what it would be if it wasn't adjusted.

You don't even have to have the "latest" technologies. I remember radios in the 90s--amateur radios, not military or commercial stuff--that could do that.

I do not know, but would imagine, that cell phones do this same thing.
post #79 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by maczones View Post

I am an antenna engineer and the NYT reporter is not. Software will not and I repeat, will not compensate for loss of incoming signal strength. Any basic antenna engineer knows that touching an antenna produces attenuation that reduces the strength of the incoming RF signal. I cannot believe a company like Apple could have been so careless or just dumb to think it could get away with a design like this. The idea to prefer styling over good design practices has been violated again for the sake of money.

Except of course the NYT reporter spoke to some with direct knowledge of the design of the system and you are just making things up. It is clear from your post you are no kind of engineer, certainly not a trained working RF engineer in 2010.
post #80 of 167
Many of these threads contain complaints about all of the different things that Apple might do to fix the antenna problem, blaming Apple for indecision and confusion about what to do. However, Apple has not had any sort of official comment recently, so these potential solutions are all other people's speculation. Before judging Apple's response (to be good or bad), can we please wait to see what they actually have to say tomorrow?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › NYT: iPhone 4 antenna problems a result of 'weakness' in software