or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Repeat tests show iPhone 3G doesn't suffer from faulty hardware
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Repeat tests show iPhone 3G doesn't suffer from faulty hardware - Page 4

post #121 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

That 100 million is in the EU, where did you get that out of 900 million figure from?

These aren't my numbers. go back several posts to find the one that posted them.
post #122 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

This is why I am having a problem with the study regarding 3G penetration subscriptions.

Finland has only about 5.2 million people but they will have 113% penetration.

http://wirelessfederation.com/news/t...-mark-finland/

That's why I question all the numbers when they talk about high adoption rates. This seems to be assuming that everyone has two phones with two accounts. How often would that be true?
post #123 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Boy, are you late in the conversation. As I updated the number to 100 million as of May 2008 and included the reference http://www.unwiredview.com/2008/06/2...s-100-million/, which states in part,

"The report says that out of the total 910.8 million mobile subscribers (in Europe) at the end of May, there were 101.5 million 3G subscriptions. Only devices that were actively used for either voice or data services (or both) were counted."

I would like to know what their definition of Europe is here, as we can all agree that there aren't nearly 910 million people in any european configuration that I can imagine.

If they include Russia east of the Ural mountains, that doesn't help, as there is almost no 3G available in Russia.

So are they saying that everyone including all children, have two phones and two accounts? This is very unlikely. Somehow the count is doing something that is fishy, or they are not measuring just Europe proper.

This seems to match the obviously screwed up numbers that Sapporo posted earlier for Finland.
post #124 of 147
Since I know people on other 3G AT&T phones that have noticed no ill effects from the emergence of the iPhone 3G and there are many who state that the 2.0.2 update resolved nothing I am inclined to think that Apple addressed the power request in the new update but that it isn't the whole story with the wonky 3G signal.
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/08/28...ts-your-fault/
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 #125 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'm sorry to say I haven't followed the whole thread. so forgive if I'm covering old territory, but could that mean even if a phone is capable of 3G that the phone may just use GSM if a data plan is not enabled?

I have no idea how it's done, but surely the iPhone doesn't NEED a 3G plan, or any data plan at all. As far as I know, neither does any other 3G enabled phone.

It just looks that either the assumption that all phones there have 3G is wrong, or that the fact that the phone is capable of it doesn't mean that the subscription is giving it.

All I can see is that there are numbers being published that are cockeyed. Somehow they are counting usage for the same people several times over, or the numbers are just wrong.

We need an explanation of exactly how they get numbers that are much greater than the known populations in these countries.
post #126 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Since I know people on other 3G AT&T phones that have noticed no ill effects from the emergence of the iPhone 3G and there are many who state that the 2.0.2 update resolved nothing I am inclined to think that Apple addressed the power request in the new update but that it isn't the whole story with the wonky 3G signal.
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/08/28...ts-your-fault/

In the past week plus, my service has gotten markedly better. I mean a large amount, not just a little bit.
post #127 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

We need an explanation of exactly how they get numbers that are much greater than the known populations in these countries.

Companies, especially smaller ones, are using cell phones instead of landlines for business related tasks and internet access?
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 #128 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Companies, especially smaller ones, are using cell phones instead of landlines for business related tasks and internet access?

What, 300 million?
post #129 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

What, 300 million?

We already know that many people pick up pre-paid SIMs when traveling across borders so this is just another possible explanation to account for more cellular numbers than a 100% of a countries population.
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 #130 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'm sorry to say I haven't followed the whole thread. so forgive if I'm covering old territory, but could that mean even if a phone is capable of 3G that the phone may just use GSM if a data plan is not enabled?

Interesting question.

I can not speak of other places. Just Germany and Finland. In both countries data comes with the sim card. They warn you about its usage but it is there. The phone automatically connects to a 3G network.
post #131 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I have no idea how it's done, but surely the iPhone doesn't NEED a 3G plan, or any data plan at all. As far as I know, neither does any other 3G enabled phone.

Sorry if this further confuses things, but don't iPhone users in Japan require 3g for voice? I believe they use CDMA instead of GSM for regular mobile (voice) service. Corrections welcome if this is wrong.
post #132 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by barjohn View Post

They really need to fix this article to make it accurate. The engineers DID NOT say all of the hardware and software worked properly. They only said the ANTENNA worked properly. There is a big difference. The editor is stretching what they said to encompass things they did not say.

Not correct; read the article(s). They tested TRP and TIS, i.e, both the transmitter and receiver parts of the radio chain (of which the antenna is just a component).

Quote:
Originally Posted by djdj View Post

A few interesting bits of information:

1. The report only concludes that the antenna isn't at fault. It isn't that hard to design an antenna, so we can probably assume that Apple got that part right.

Not correct; read the article(s). See above. Furthermore, designing an antenna is hard in general, and for a phone it's a serious challenge, particularly with the small form factor and the number of frequency bands to be covered in an incredibly small volume (from a wavelength point-of-view). Certainly the performance at other bands will be different (maybe worse, maybe better), but I somehow doubt that Apple decided to skew the performance in favor of Europe...


Quote:
Originally Posted by djdj View Post

A few interesting bits of information:

4. The chart showing sensitivity lists the units as deciBels (which is normal for signal reception). But deciBels are logarithmic, so a difference of 2dB is actually significant. When taken into consideration that a difference of 3dB is an approximate doubling of signal power, a 2dB difference actually can mean a difference between picking up and not picking up a signal under some circumstances.

2 dB is nothing compared to normal variations in a radio channel. I mean, the way one holds a phone can easily influence the signal strength 10 dB deterministically!

What they measured using a reverberation chamber (a standard measurement method, by the way) using a base station emulator is a reasonably non-biased comparison of phones. BUT, of course, with only three iPhone samples (and one Nokia and one Sony Ericsson) one can always argue that the results are non-representative (which could be true). But for the moment, that's the best we have for the tested frequencies.
post #133 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux View Post

Sorry if this further confuses things, but don't iPhone users in Japan require 3g for voice? I believe they use CDMA instead of GSM for regular mobile (voice) service. Corrections welcome if this is wrong.

I have no idea, though the iPhone doesn't use CDMA.

Regular GSM is used for voice when not using 3G.
post #134 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by frunobulax View Post

Not correct; read the article(s). They tested TRP and TIS, i.e, both the transmitter and receiver parts of the radio chain (of which the antenna is just a component).



Not correct; read the article(s). See above. Furthermore, designing an antenna is hard in general, and for a phone it's a serious challenge, particularly with the small form factor and the number of frequency bands to be covered in an incredibly small volume (from a wavelength point-of-view). Certainly the performance at other bands will be different (maybe worse, maybe better), but I somehow doubt that Apple decided to skew the performance in favor of Europe...




2 dB is nothing compared to normal variations in a radio channel. I mean, the way one holds a phone can easily influence the signal strength 10 dB deterministically!

What they measured using a reverberation chamber (a standard measurement method, by the way) using a base station emulator is a reasonably non-biased comparison of phones. BUT, of course, with only three iPhone samples (and one Nokia and one Sony Ericsson) one can always argue that the results are non-representative (which could be true). But for the moment, that's the best we have for the tested frequencies.

This is the first intelligent post on the question of signal strength and phone parameters here so far.

The rest of the responses have shown a notable lack of understanding of the issues and procedures used, as well as the design difficulties. Having designed front ends to FM station monitors for my company years back, I can assure people that this is complex, and that antenna design is a very difficult procedure.

Also, relating to that is the publics desire to not have a visible antenna at all. This has made good design much harder. When they moved from pull-out antennas to stubs, reception quality declined noticably. When they moved from stubs to internal antennas, it declined again.

In other words, the signals reaching the receivers, and being transmitted from them, is much weaker than it was years ago, compounding the design difficulties.
post #135 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I have no idea, though the iPhone doesn't use CDMA.

Regular GSM is used for voice when not using 3G.

Well technically the iPhone does use CDMA. You are confusing the Qualcomm product, with the technology, UTMS is based on w-cdma
post #136 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's why I question all the numbers when they talk about high adoption rates. This seems to be assuming that everyone has two phones with two accounts. How often would that be true?

Well it may not always be two phones.

A couple of ways this happen is

1. companies giving their employee a phone and not allowing them to use it for personal calls.
2. companies giving their employees a black berry and only allowing it for data.
3. companies giving their employees an embedded device of some kind (say a POS system) with data
post #137 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Well technically the iPhone does use CDMA. You are confusing the Qualcomm product, with the technology, UTMS is based on w-cdma

I know that. W-CDMA is not CDMA. It's different. He meant CDMA vs GSM.
post #138 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Well it may not always be two phones.

A couple of ways this happen is

1. companies giving their employee a phone and not allowing them to use it for personal calls.
2. companies giving their employees a black berry and only allowing it for data.
3. companies giving their employees an embedded device of some kind (say a POS system) with data

The first two don't work, because the number given is over 300 million larger than the population. You are saying that business in Europe are giving 300 million phones to their employees? That would mean that almost every adult has a phone from their employer. Not likely at all. Maybe a few tens of millions at most.

The third shouldn't count as a cell phone, should it? Even assuming that it's happening. Also not likely that a couple of hundred million of these rare devices are being distributed.

No, something odd about these numbers all round. Just like the ones for Finland, where there are almost 50% more 3G cell accounts being reported than total population in the country. That includes babies! While we give our kids phones at earlier ages, that would be a bit much. Likely 4 million people there are old enough for a cell.
post #139 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I know that. W-CDMA is not CDMA. It's different. He meant CDMA vs GSM.

So are you referring to the Qualcomm mobile product called CDMA, or the radio technology CDMA?
post #140 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

So are you referring to the Qualcomm mobile product called CDMA, or the radio technology CDMA?

I'm talking about old fashioned non wideband CDMA, as used for years here and elsewhere. Code division multiple access. Not cdmaOne, or CDMA2000.
post #141 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

The first two don't work, because the number given is over 300 million larger than the population. You are saying that business in Europe are giving 300 million phones to their employees? That would mean that almost every adult has a phone from their employer. Not likely at all. Maybe a few tens of millions at most.

The third shouldn't count as a cell phone, should it? Even assuming that it's happening. Also not likely that a couple of hundred million of these rare devices are being distributed.

No, something odd about these numbers all round. Just like the ones for Finland, where there are almost 50% more 3G cell accounts being reported than total population in the country. That includes babies! While we give our kids phones at earlier ages, that would be a bit much. Likely 4 million people there are old enough for a cell.

Yes the embedded connections are considered cellphones, and they are counted as active connections by the network providers.

And yes the first two do work, as companies do, do this.

The question is, how are they counting the population of Europe, it seems higher than it should be.

Also, in Europe there is a large number of pre-pay connections, which a certain number could be from vistors to Europe, a while back we had eight active connections for four of us in the family, and the network providers might not drop them from being active connections for six months after the last top-up.

Also, some providers here, when you upgrade your phone, they give you a pre-pay connection for your old phone, thus another connection.
post #142 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'm talking about old fashioned non wideband CDMA, as used for years here and elsewhere. Code division multiple access. Not cdmaOne, or CDMA2000.

Code Division Multiple Access is a radio technology, the radio technology used to develop cmdaOne, or CDMA2000, and w-cdma
post #143 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Yes the embedded connections are considered cellphones, and they are counted as active connections by the network providers.

Well then, those aren't cell phones no matter what they may be considered to be. We had pagers here for many years, but they weren't cell phones. They shouldn't be included in numbers about cell phones.

Quote:
And yes the first two do work, as companies do, do this.

You missed part of what I was saying. I didn't say that companies didn't do this. I said that they did. I said that the *numbers* didn't work, because there couldn't be more than a few tens of millions being given cell phones by their employers. It's very unlikely that employers there are much different from those here. They only spend the money on things like this for employees who actually need the service. If 30 million employees in europe are being given cells by their employers, I'd say that was on the top of the number.

Quote:
The question is, how are they counting the population of Europe, it seems higher than it should be.

That's one of the questions I brought up. Who are these Europeans? It looks that they over counted by about 300 million in the cell phone numbers. I can;t see over 910 million cells in Europe proper. Even with the double counting errors etc, it still seems to be too much by a long shot.

Quote:
Also, in Europe there is a large number of pre-pay connections, which a certain number could be from vistors to Europe, a while back we had eight active connections for four of us in the family, and the network providers might not drop them from being active connections for six months after the last top-up.

If they are counting visitors, then that isn't part of a true, correct count. But then, how many would that be?

Quote:
Also, some providers here, when you upgrade your phone, they give you a pre-pay connection for your old phone, thus another connection.

Then that would be another meaningless number.

As I said, the numbers are fishy.
post #144 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Well then, those aren't cell phones no matter what they may be considered to be. We had pagers here for many years, but they weren't cell phones. They shouldn't be included in numbers about cell phones.

They are pagers, they were (well they were where I came from) running on a different network. If you have an embedded device (or a data only device) that has a SIM card in it (I will use the majority of the world in this example and not the Qualcomm networks) it will be counted by the likes of Vodafone etc as a connection

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You missed part of what I was saying. I didn't say that companies didn't do this. I said that they did. I said that the *numbers* didn't work, because there couldn't be more than a few tens of millions being given cell phones by their employers. It's very unlikely that employers there are much different from those here. They only spend the money on things like this for employees who actually need the service. If 30 million employees in europe are being given cells by their employers, I'd say that was on the top of the number.

I know what you are saying, but how about this.

If you are working for a place that requires you to have a cellphone, but you are not allowed to use that phone for personal calls. So you need another phone. Two connections.

In some countries the mobile companies (Vodafone is one) are doing deals with business to replace all the desk phones in a business with mobiles. Apply the no personal call rule again, two connections.

A service company using contractors to provide sales for them, they are provided with a portable device with a data connection, no voice. They have their own phone as well, two connections.


Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's one of the questions I brought up. Who are these Europeans? It looks that they over counted by about 300 million in the cell phone numbers. I can;t see over 910 million cells in Europe proper. Even with the double counting errors etc, it still seems to be too much by a long shot.

I don't know, the reports I have read don't split by country.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

If they are counting visitors, then that isn't part of a true, correct count. But then, how many would that be?

Well since it is an anonymous sale, they don't know where they are from
post #145 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

They are pagers, they were (well they were where I came from) running on a different network. If you have an embedded device (or a data only device) that has a SIM card in it (I will use the majority of the world in this example and not the Qualcomm networks) it will be counted by the likes of Vodafone etc as a connection

Well, it's good that we can agree on what they are. But they still aren't cell phones, can't be used that way, and therefore shouldn't be included in the cellphone numbers.

It's as though motorcycles are counted are automobile sales because they have a seat and an engine.

Quote:
I know what you are saying, but how about this.

If you are working for a place that requires you to have a cellphone, but you are not allowed to use that phone for personal calls. So you need another phone. Two connections.

Yes, I accounted for that. The 30 million number I used was for the double count. That meant 30 million towards the total in addition to the 30 million the people would likely have on their own. My wife has that in CitiGroup. She has an iPhone 3G, and a Blackberry from work.

Quote:
In some countries the mobile companies (Vodafone is one) are doing deals with business to replace all the desk phones in a business with mobiles. Apply the no personal call rule again, two connections.

Sure. But I'd like to know just how well they've been doing with that. I'll bet not too well yet. If they've gotten a million users off land lines in business at this point, I'd think it was a lot. Business have central switching services, and equipment, that aren't too well served by cells. Even if they are too small for that, when someone is in the office, they can't be switched over by the small central phone models now used. The person answering the calls would have to do what? Call the cell of the person they need to talk to?

Quote:
A service company using contractors to provide sales for them, they are provided with a portable device with a data connection, no voice. They have their own phone as well, two connections.

A lot of what you're saying may be true, but they are the same people over and again. These are not different categories, they are the same category. All people given a business phone for whatever reason is in the same boat, and is part of the same numbers. 30 million for all these people, maybe, at most.

Quote:
I don't know, the reports I have read don't split by country.

It's too vague.

Quote:
Well since it is an anonymous sale, they don't know where they are from

And so allowances should be made for that, and the number subtracted, but we don't know how many.
post #146 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Well, it's good that we can agree on what they are. But they still aren't cell phones, can't be used that way, and therefore shouldn't be included in the cellphone numbers.

The thing is you have two different reports, coming from two different groups.

1. The carriers will report connections
2. The handset manufactures will report shipment numbers

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Sure. But I'd like to know just how well they've been doing with that. I'll bet not too well yet. If they've gotten a million users off land lines in business at this point, I'd think it was a lot. Business have central switching services, and equipment, that aren't too well served by cells. Even if they are too small for that, when someone is in the office, they can't be switched over by the small central phone models now used. The person answering the calls would have to do what? Call the cell of the person they need to talk to?

I know Vodafone are doing this for home users now.
http://www.vodafone.co.nz/local-zone/#

For businesses I know they were in some cases getting rid of the pbx, and moving that control to the carrier, they provided the short code, and handled the switching etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

And so allowances should be made for that, and the number subtracted, but we don't know how many.

At the end of the day, all these figures are used for is for one carrier to say they have more connections than the other
post #147 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

The thing is you have two different reports, coming from two different groups.

1. The carriers will report connections
2. The handset manufactures will report shipment numbers

It seems they will just co-mingle everything. I'm sure the numbers of what device is selling how many is available, but just too much bother to find.

Quote:
I know Vodafone are doing this for home users now.
http://www.vodafone.co.nz/local-zone/#

We just use call forwarding now. Why would we need an e-mail to do that instead? I'm not sure how they manage it at home.

Quote:
For businesses I know they were in some cases getting rid of the pbx, and moving that control to the carrier, they provided the short code, and handled the switching etc.

They're trying to do that here as well, but it's proven to be a hard sell. Most business don't want all of that in the phone companies hands. Then it's out if their control. With security being so important these days, that is also an issue.

Quote:
At the end of the day, all these figures are used for is for one carrier to say they have more connections than the other

Yup! And for one region to say that they are more advanced than another.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Repeat tests show iPhone 3G doesn't suffer from faulty hardware