No, I don't think Apple is going to do anything about it. They have a long history of not doing anything about defective devices. Than invites class action lawsuits and hard feelings.
Once Apple has your money their interest level is something approaching zero. I do wish I could say otherwise, but history does not support a contrary expectation. It would be refreshing if Apple were to embrace the customers and start earning a reputation of doing right by them, but that would be out of character.
If Apple changed something in the iOS 4.0 which affected the antenna, it is still a design flaw by definition.
Apple might have to go back to an original, safer antenna software design, but who knows how much of a performance hit the iPhone will take in terms of CPU use, call quality, or battery life.
Now you're just muddling the meaning of words, and mixing issues and concepts, so that what you're saying is so meaningless that however this turns out you can claim you were right.
No, I don't think Apple is going to do anything about it. They have a long history of not doing anything about defective devices. If I am proven wrong, please remind me. Nothing would please me more.
Apple has one of the highest (highest in many cases) satisfaction ratings in independent consumer report surveys with computers, mp3 style devices (ipod) and the iPhone. Their market cap overtook Microsoft a few weeks ago. Consumers and investors have confidence in what they're doing. They must be doing SOMETHING right.
The hypothesis was that holding a phone attenuates the signal.
The experiment was done to evaluate this, by finding the exact location when the phone loses signal. That experiment shows definitively that the point is the insulated portion between the two antennae.
It is scientifically established.
This appears to be more than simple attenuation issue. Attenuation, if it occurs is the result of some object or body part being placed between the antenna and the tower. That probably occurs to a greater or lesser extent with all cell phones. What is also involved here is the simultaneous, direct physical contact with the cell phone antenna and the wi-fi/Bluetooth antenna which may result in several different things happening. Probably none of them are beneficial.
For example, hold the iPhone between your thumb and index finger on the upper portion of the phone and then cup your other hand around the lower portion of the phone, but do not permit the hand cupping the lower portion to touch the phone. Then hold the phone so that the upper and lower portions are "bridged" and so on.
Now you're just muddling the meaning of words, and mixing issues and concepts, so that what you're saying is so meaningless that however this turns out you can claim you were right.
Hardware design and software design are two different things.
Hardware design and software design are two different things.
Both can be flawed.
For example, perhaps Apple decided that it wanted to sacrifice significant phone call quality and reliability for marginally-better battery life. That is a design decision, and it's an arguably flawed one at that.
Nobody knows exactly what causes the signal problem, but the best guess is that it's a design flaw, hardware or software. Some are betting hardware with no fix, some are betting software with a fix, some are betting hardware with a software fix.
Apple has one of the highest (highest in many cases) satisfaction ratings in independent consumer report surveys with computers, mp3 style devices (ipod) and the iPhone. Their market cap overtook Microsoft a few weeks ago. Consumers and investors have confidence in what they're doing. They must be doing SOMETHING right.
What you have said has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.
Oh, by the way, the frequently misquoted and misunderstood "market cap" or market capitalization is not correct (I am not picking on you) should be "market valuation". In other words, it represents (as a snapshot in time) the total market value of the outstanding shares of stock. As that figure goes up and down it has no direct impact on the company because this is not money going to the company (which sold the shares of stock quite some time ago). In any event the fact that Apple's market valuation may be greater than that of M$ has no bearing on the past history of Apple in dealing with problems and, base upon the past history, the likelihood of Apple doing anything about present problems.
Whether Apple are "doing something right" (which they are) has nothing to do with what Apple are likely to do to resolve present problems either.
Although I count myself among those who see most of this as hysteria, there is this:
Some have said that "it" cannot be a design flaw unless 100% of users experience it. I don't think that is true. A design flaw can be one that allows intermittent or sporadic problems, not only constant ones.
That having been said, I remain unconvinced that a design flaw is the sole cause for all this hubbub.
The hypothesis was that holding a phone attenuates the signal.
The experiment was done to evaluate this, by finding the exact location when the phone loses signal. That experiment shows definitively that the point is the insulated portion between the two antennae.
It is scientifically established.
That's not science. You don't understand what a hypothesis is. That's not an experiment that means anything. There is no control.
What we have, and only what we have, are observations. Fractured, isolated, incomplete observations.
No hypothesis. No experiment. No proof. and no bloody science.
As an addendum to the original post, you don't need to be under a tower to know you have full strength on the phone. That's what 5 bars means on an iPhone 4, unless you are claiming that Apple falsely represents signal strength in its software.
Yeah, ok.... adding another fallacy... strawman this time.
Here's the trouble. How do you have any idea what you are seeing is accurate? If you want, I can make it so your iPhone 4 reads 5 bars and never reads anything but 5 bars regardless of reception.
I'm not saying Apple is lying to you, or your iPhone is lying to you.
I'm saying you don't know. If you don't verify, test, calibrate... you just don't know.
But under a tower, you do know. Eliminate the variables you can.
What you have said has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.
Oh, by the way, the frequently misquoted and misunderstood "market cap" or market capitalization is not correct should be "market valuation". In other words, it represents (as a snapshot in time) the total market value of the outstanding shares of stock. As that figure goes up and down it has no direct impact on the company because this is not money going to the company (which sold the shares of stock quite some time ago). In any event the fact that Apple's market valuation may be greater than that of M$ has no bearing on the past history of Apple in dealing with problems and, base upon the past history, the likelihood of Apple doing anything about present problems.
Whether Apple are "doing something right" (which they are) has nothing to do with what Apple are likely to do to resolve present problems either.
Cheers
Market Cap is valuation. And it certainly does have a direct impact on a company (ask Chrysler and GM). Rising stock valuation means a company is positioned a lot better for corporate bond purposes as one example.. try offering corporate bonds when your stock is dead in the water or tanking relative to a competitor's. Finally, your company stock doesn't go up if your past history stinks. Investors keep a keen eye on profitability and probability of stock going up, which only happens when consumers are flocking to your product. What business do you run?
Market Cap is valuation. And it certainly does have a direct impact on a company (ask Chrysler and GM). Rising stock valuation means a company is positioned a lot better for corporate bond purposes as one example. Finally, your company stock doesn't go up if your past history stinks. Investors keep a keen eye on profitability and probability of stock going up, which only happens when consumers are flocking to your product. What business do you run?
No. You are 100% completely wrong.
If a company's stock is worthless, that is merely a symptom of other problems that increase the risk factors associated with a bond offering. There is no direct relationship.
So is this a signal reception issue or a signal reception INDICATOR issue.
That's a good point, though I doubt it's an indicator issue. THe question is why do we even have bars? What good do they do us? Either we can make a call or we can't, and we act like the bars actually give us meaningful information. Kind of silly. It should be a binary indicator, either it's there or it isn't.
So is this a signal reception issue or a signal reception INDICATOR issue.
It was always my understanding that as 3G relies on simultaneous communication with multiple towers that the indicator (bars) presents an average.
You can be showing 1 or 2 "bars" but have full reception from one tower and low reception from others.
The people spread across the web who seem to be complaining the most about this "issue" are people who DON'T HAVE iPhone 4's.
So when your hand is touching this area and the signal INDICATOR drops, what happens when you make a call?
Does it work or do you get "call failed" errors?
It isn't just a signal indicator error, at least not for me. Data and voice fail completely often to "no service", whether I had 1,2,3,4 or 5 bars, and it means NO service.
That's a good point, though I doubt it's an indicator issue. THe question is why do we even have bars? What good do they do us? Either we can make a call or we can't, and we act like the bars actually give us meaningful information. Kind of silly. It should be a binary indicator, either it's there or it isn't.
If I recall, there's actually a code you can put in that will modify your sim to show signal strength in db, rather than bars.
*3001#12345#*
Quote:
- Open the iPhone's dialer keypad
- Enter *3001#12345#*
- Press the Call button
You can't 'undo' this after doing it though. It will move with your sim. Be warned. You can click on the decibel rating and it will toggle between the two but I never figured how to disable the decibel rating altogether.
If I recall, there's actually a code you can put in that will modify your sim to show signal strength in db, rather than bars. I can't remember what it is though.
For a long time I had mine set that way, but finally realized that the precise information was even less useful than the abstracted representation.
Easier to just type the code in on the phone
I do know that the 'test mode' followed me from my old 2G to my 3G when they moved my sim from one to the other. Some claim they were able to turn it off by doing a restore, but since the old sim in the new phone still showed the decibel rating, I don't believe a restore would reset it either. In any case, it's harmless and a quick tap on the decible rating will return it to a regular 0-5 bar display.
I did have an Apple genius once ask me if it was jail broken as a result, but when I explained what it was, they let it pass.
Comments
No, I don't think Apple is going to do anything about it. They have a long history of not doing anything about defective devices. Than invites class action lawsuits and hard feelings.
Once Apple has your money their interest level is something approaching zero. I do wish I could say otherwise, but history does not support a contrary expectation. It would be refreshing if Apple were to embrace the customers and start earning a reputation of doing right by them, but that would be out of character.
History would tend to disagree with you.
From 2009: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...tion_rate.html
From 2008: http://technologizer.com/2008/09/30/...-satisfaction/
From 2007: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/orchant/ip...are-unreal/523
If Apple changed something in the iOS 4.0 which affected the antenna, it is still a design flaw by definition.
Apple might have to go back to an original, safer antenna software design, but who knows how much of a performance hit the iPhone will take in terms of CPU use, call quality, or battery life.
Now you're just muddling the meaning of words, and mixing issues and concepts, so that what you're saying is so meaningless that however this turns out you can claim you were right.
No, I don't think Apple is going to do anything about it. They have a long history of not doing anything about defective devices. If I am proven wrong, please remind me. Nothing would please me more.
Apple has one of the highest (highest in many cases) satisfaction ratings in independent consumer report surveys with computers, mp3 style devices (ipod) and the iPhone. Their market cap overtook Microsoft a few weeks ago. Consumers and investors have confidence in what they're doing. They must be doing SOMETHING right.
You don't understand the scientific method.
The hypothesis was that holding a phone attenuates the signal.
The experiment was done to evaluate this, by finding the exact location when the phone loses signal. That experiment shows definitively that the point is the insulated portion between the two antennae.
It is scientifically established.
This appears to be more than simple attenuation issue. Attenuation, if it occurs is the result of some object or body part being placed between the antenna and the tower. That probably occurs to a greater or lesser extent with all cell phones. What is also involved here is the simultaneous, direct physical contact with the cell phone antenna and the wi-fi/Bluetooth antenna which may result in several different things happening. Probably none of them are beneficial.
For example, hold the iPhone between your thumb and index finger on the upper portion of the phone and then cup your other hand around the lower portion of the phone, but do not permit the hand cupping the lower portion to touch the phone. Then hold the phone so that the upper and lower portions are "bridged" and so on.
Now you're just muddling the meaning of words, and mixing issues and concepts, so that what you're saying is so meaningless that however this turns out you can claim you were right.
Hardware design and software design are two different things.
Both can be flawed.
Hardware design and software design are two different things.
Both can be flawed.
For example, perhaps Apple decided that it wanted to sacrifice significant phone call quality and reliability for marginally-better battery life. That is a design decision, and it's an arguably flawed one at that.
Nobody knows exactly what causes the signal problem, but the best guess is that it's a design flaw, hardware or software. Some are betting hardware with no fix, some are betting software with a fix, some are betting hardware with a software fix.
We'll find out Apple's response soon.
Apple has one of the highest (highest in many cases) satisfaction ratings in independent consumer report surveys with computers, mp3 style devices (ipod) and the iPhone. Their market cap overtook Microsoft a few weeks ago. Consumers and investors have confidence in what they're doing. They must be doing SOMETHING right.
What you have said has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.
Oh, by the way, the frequently misquoted and misunderstood "market cap" or market capitalization is not correct (I am not picking on you) should be "market valuation". In other words, it represents (as a snapshot in time) the total market value of the outstanding shares of stock. As that figure goes up and down it has no direct impact on the company because this is not money going to the company (which sold the shares of stock quite some time ago). In any event the fact that Apple's market valuation may be greater than that of M$ has no bearing on the past history of Apple in dealing with problems and, base upon the past history, the likelihood of Apple doing anything about present problems.
Whether Apple are "doing something right" (which they are) has nothing to do with what Apple are likely to do to resolve present problems either.
Cheers
Some have said that "it" cannot be a design flaw unless 100% of users experience it. I don't think that is true. A design flaw can be one that allows intermittent or sporadic problems, not only constant ones.
That having been said, I remain unconvinced that a design flaw is the sole cause for all this hubbub.
You don't understand the scientific method.
The hypothesis was that holding a phone attenuates the signal.
The experiment was done to evaluate this, by finding the exact location when the phone loses signal. That experiment shows definitively that the point is the insulated portion between the two antennae.
It is scientifically established.
That's not science. You don't understand what a hypothesis is. That's not an experiment that means anything. There is no control.
What we have, and only what we have, are observations. Fractured, isolated, incomplete observations.
No hypothesis. No experiment. No proof. and no bloody science.
That's not science. You don't understand what a hypothesis is. That's not an experiment that means anything. There is no control.
What we have, and only what we have, are observations. Fractured, isolated, incomplete observations.
No hypothesis. No experiment. No proof. and no bloody science.
No, science today is "I saw it on the internet so it must be true." You're so last century.
As an addendum to the original post, you don't need to be under a tower to know you have full strength on the phone. That's what 5 bars means on an iPhone 4, unless you are claiming that Apple falsely represents signal strength in its software.
Yeah, ok.... adding another fallacy... strawman this time.
Here's the trouble. How do you have any idea what you are seeing is accurate? If you want, I can make it so your iPhone 4 reads 5 bars and never reads anything but 5 bars regardless of reception.
I'm not saying Apple is lying to you, or your iPhone is lying to you.
I'm saying you don't know. If you don't verify, test, calibrate... you just don't know.
But under a tower, you do know. Eliminate the variables you can.
What you have said has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.
Oh, by the way, the frequently misquoted and misunderstood "market cap" or market capitalization is not correct should be "market valuation". In other words, it represents (as a snapshot in time) the total market value of the outstanding shares of stock. As that figure goes up and down it has no direct impact on the company because this is not money going to the company (which sold the shares of stock quite some time ago). In any event the fact that Apple's market valuation may be greater than that of M$ has no bearing on the past history of Apple in dealing with problems and, base upon the past history, the likelihood of Apple doing anything about present problems.
Whether Apple are "doing something right" (which they are) has nothing to do with what Apple are likely to do to resolve present problems either.
Cheers
Market Cap is valuation. And it certainly does have a direct impact on a company (ask Chrysler and GM). Rising stock valuation means a company is positioned a lot better for corporate bond purposes as one example.. try offering corporate bonds when your stock is dead in the water or tanking relative to a competitor's. Finally, your company stock doesn't go up if your past history stinks. Investors keep a keen eye on profitability and probability of stock going up, which only happens when consumers are flocking to your product. What business do you run?
Market Cap is valuation. And it certainly does have a direct impact on a company (ask Chrysler and GM). Rising stock valuation means a company is positioned a lot better for corporate bond purposes as one example. Finally, your company stock doesn't go up if your past history stinks. Investors keep a keen eye on profitability and probability of stock going up, which only happens when consumers are flocking to your product. What business do you run?
No. You are 100% completely wrong.
If a company's stock is worthless, that is merely a symptom of other problems that increase the risk factors associated with a bond offering. There is no direct relationship.
It was always my understanding that as 3G relies on simultaneous communication with multiple towers that the indicator (bars) presents an average.
You can be showing 1 or 2 "bars" but have full reception from one tower and low reception from others.
The people spread across the web who seem to be complaining the most about this "issue" are people who DON'T HAVE iPhone 4's.
So when your hand is touching this area and the signal INDICATOR drops, what happens when you make a call?
Does it work or do you get "call failed" errors?
So is this a signal reception issue or a signal reception INDICATOR issue.
That's a good point, though I doubt it's an indicator issue. THe question is why do we even have bars? What good do they do us? Either we can make a call or we can't, and we act like the bars actually give us meaningful information. Kind of silly. It should be a binary indicator, either it's there or it isn't.
So is this a signal reception issue or a signal reception INDICATOR issue.
It was always my understanding that as 3G relies on simultaneous communication with multiple towers that the indicator (bars) presents an average.
You can be showing 1 or 2 "bars" but have full reception from one tower and low reception from others.
The people spread across the web who seem to be complaining the most about this "issue" are people who DON'T HAVE iPhone 4's.
So when your hand is touching this area and the signal INDICATOR drops, what happens when you make a call?
Does it work or do you get "call failed" errors?
It isn't just a signal indicator error, at least not for me. Data and voice fail completely often to "no service", whether I had 1,2,3,4 or 5 bars, and it means NO service.
That's a good point, though I doubt it's an indicator issue. THe question is why do we even have bars? What good do they do us? Either we can make a call or we can't, and we act like the bars actually give us meaningful information. Kind of silly. It should be a binary indicator, either it's there or it isn't.
If I recall, there's actually a code you can put in that will modify your sim to show signal strength in db, rather than bars.
*3001#12345#*
- Open the iPhone's dialer keypad
- Enter *3001#12345#*
- Press the Call button
You can't 'undo' this after doing it though. It will move with your sim. Be warned. You can click on the decibel rating and it will toggle between the two but I never figured how to disable the decibel rating altogether.
http://www.cellsignalreception.com/c...-strength.html
-50 dB woud be a perfect signal (very strong)
-100 db would be a very weak signal (probably 1, maybe two bars)
If I recall, there's actually a code you can put in that will modify your sim to show signal strength in db, rather than bars. I can't remember what it is though.
plutil -s SBShowRSSI -v YES com.apple.springboard.plist
For a long time I had mine set that way, but finally realized that the precise information was even less useful than the abstracted representation.
plutil -s SBShowRSSI -v YES com.apple.springboard.plist
For a long time I had mine set that way, but finally realized that the precise information was even less useful than the abstracted representation.
Easier to just type the code in on the phone
I do know that the 'test mode' followed me from my old 2G to my 3G when they moved my sim from one to the other. Some claim they were able to turn it off by doing a restore, but since the old sim in the new phone still showed the decibel rating, I don't believe a restore would reset it either. In any case, it's harmless and a quick tap on the decible rating will return it to a regular 0-5 bar display.
I did have an Apple genius once ask me if it was jail broken as a result, but when I explained what it was, they let it pass.
iPhone 4 antenna problems were predicted on June 10 by Danish professor