It's business. Apple has done the same with PCs. Verizon may have the iPhone next year but this is how it goes. Today's enemy is tomorrow's friend.
Frankly Apple should get slammed for this. They've shown a lack of respect for it's users by saying "don't hold it that way" and saying there is no problem.
I'm a fan of Apple but there are times when any company should be held in check. This is a company and not your best friend. They're out for your money and not your heart. If the latter was the case they wouldn't have backed out of Macworld.
This ad touches only indirectly on the hand-sensitivity of ALL phones—not the iPhone by name—in the small print at the bottom. It’s not anything Apple (or Apple users) needs to care much about, I don’t think. ...
Perhaps. The dangers of reading a story about, and not the actual ad.
There is NOT going to be an iPhone on the Verizon network. I hope this settles the issue once and for all.
At this point, I would imagine that the Securities and Exchange Commission is opening an investigation into all of these "rumors" about the iPhone on Verizon. The whole mess was a stock manipulation. Bloomberg was duped. The WSJ was duped. I hope the manipulators get caught.
Not that I care one way or the other but with huge companies, they all accept the fact that business is just business. For example Apple constantly mocked Windows in their ads but actively courted Microsoft for MS Office for Mac as well as licensed Exchange server syncing. It is just advertising, nobody really cares.
I see your point, but they mocked Windows, not Office or Office for Mac. Verizon is mocking the iPhone 4 so I agree that it seems less likely they have any deals with Apple for a Verizon iPhone.
The TV spot, [...] attacked the iPhone's lack of a physical keyboard, inability to multitask with third-party applications, and absence of a camera flash. The latter two issues were addressed with this year's iOS 4 software update.
The iOS software update adds a flash unit to my iPhone?
For example Apple constantly mocked Windows in their ads but actively courted Microsoft for MS Office for Mac as well as licensed Exchange server syncing. It is just advertising, nobody really cares.
Apple did not mock MS Office or even MS. It mocked the Windows OS. They were not courting MS to get Windows.
Verizon is mocking the very hardware/software people seem to think they are getting.
This is mostly Google's idea it seems ... the antenna issue is a non-issue.
All phones have attenuation problems and all carriers have cell tower issues and drop calls, and fluctuating signal strength due to a host of variables.
Apple is not stupid enough to deliver a phone with a faulty antenna system ... not going to happen and there is no real proof that an iPhone 4 is any worse than any other phone given the same conditions of location, atmospheric conditions, cell tower interference and a thousand other things.
There are a lot of pissed ip4 users who might be influenced by an ad like that. I can't believe how some people still defend Apple through all of this though honestly.
Apple did not mock MS Office or even MS. It mocked the Windows OS. They were not courting MS to get Windows.
Verizon is mocking the very hardware/software people seem to think they are getting.
Why would they bash Office considering it's the #1 purchased software on the Mac for the past 20 years? Apple attacked where they could. This is business; exploit your opponents' weaknesses.
BTW they have bashed Dell and others for inferior hardware. Not in ads but in other areas.
This is mostly Google's idea it seems ... the antenna issue is a non-issue.
All phones have attenuation problems and all carriers have cell tower issues and drop calls, and fluctuating signal strength due to a host of variables.
Apple is not stupid enough to deliver a phone with a faulty antenna system ... not going to happen and there is no real proof that an iPhone 4 is any worse than any other phone given the same conditions of location, atmospheric conditions, cell tower interference and a thousand other things.
Buy a Droid if you think the iPhone is a problem.
You can't be serious! First, Jobs said to "not hold the phone that way." Are you kidding me? I should be able to hold my phone any way I'd like...with or without a "bumper." None of my Blackberry or Android devices has EVER had an attenuation problem that Jobs claims every device has. This is complete and utter BS on Apple's part to save face. They've put out a defective product and a massive recall at this point would be disastrous. But it would be the right thing to do.
Apple did know they were reporting bars differently, but NOT wrongly. There is no single ?right? way that all phones display bars. Apple?s choice has come back to bite them, so now they?re changing the display.
Note that the formula that Apple currently uses is VERY similar to what Android uses. And yet Apple is claiming it is "totally wrong."
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
The iPhone isn?t the first phone to be sensitive to transmitting through water. All phones are like that...
However, the iPhone is the first phone since whip antennas to allow direct contact with the antenna. And with whip antennas it was very difficult to be touching the antenna and holding the phone in any natural way. There are two effects going on. Signal blockage (the signal trying to get through flesh), aka signal attenuation, and antenna de-tuning, the interference of the tuning characteristics of the antenna through direct contact. (This is as I undertand it after reading several more technical articles on the issue).
I have no doubt that putting the antenna as far to the outside of the phone is a good thing. It gets the antenna as far as possible from all the noisy electronics and power currents of the phone's circuitry. This is why whip/extendable antennas are actually a better design (but people didn't like that design). But allowing direct contact with the antenna is a bad thing.
Do the advantages of the placement of the iPhone's antenna outweigh the distadvantage of allowing direct contact? Perhaps in most situations, but I think the jury is still out on that. But I think if Apple had put the antenna just inside of an external plastic (or some other radio-transparent material) shell, which is what their bumpers do, the reception would be even BETTER than it is. But then Apple wouldn't be able to claim the iPhone is smaller than it's predecessor...god forbide!
Personally, I don't think it was a coincidence that Apple got into the iPhone case business with their bumpers when they released the iPhone 4.
While all phones exhibit some attenuation, the iPhone 4 is the only hone on the market today with an exposed uninsulated antenna, exacerbating the problem as compared to competing phones such as the 3GS, nexus one, and the evo 4g.
While it may not completely kill your reception in all situations, the signal drop can be enough, in some instances, to make the voice or data unusable where a 3GS will still function (regardless of how it is held).
No one is arguing that signal attenuation to any degree is unique to the iPhone 4. It's the degree of signal attenuation that is unique to the iPhone 4.
There are a lot of pissed ip4 users who might be influenced by an ad like that. I can't believe how some people still defend Apple through all of this though honestly.
Might have something to do with the phone working great.
It's fair to call them on their mistakes, and there definitely is a 'two steps forward, one step back' sort of thing going on with the antenna in the iPhone 4, but those two steps forward are great and the one step back isn't going to be a big deal for a lot of people. So should this have been considered before releasing the phone? Yep! Is it anything near as big a deal as the media has been representing? Absolutely not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
of course they want to, but it is pretty funny how they advertise that their dual antenna phone won't suffer from the same issues, especially when Apple said ALL phones suffer from it.
Well, what Apple said isn't really important here. First, while all phones can be smothered to a degree, bridging the antennae on the iPhone 4 causes a greater loss than smothering on most other phones (~-20 dB as opposed to ~-10). Second, if Motorola devoted extra space in the device to a more reliable antenna system then that could actually result in this product outperforming other phones in this regard by a fair degree (we'll have to see once it circulates a while in the masses). Third, in an advertisement, what is true isn't so important as what people perceive.
Comments
This is just so lame....
Jerks.
No iPhone for Verizon...
It's business. Apple has done the same with PCs. Verizon may have the iPhone next year but this is how it goes. Today's enemy is tomorrow's friend.
Frankly Apple should get slammed for this. They've shown a lack of respect for it's users by saying "don't hold it that way" and saying there is no problem.
I'm a fan of Apple but there are times when any company should be held in check. This is a company and not your best friend. They're out for your money and not your heart. If the latter was the case they wouldn't have backed out of Macworld.
This ad touches only indirectly on the hand-sensitivity of ALL phones—not the iPhone by name—in the small print at the bottom. It’s not anything Apple (or Apple users) needs to care much about, I don’t think. ...
Perhaps. The dangers of reading a story about, and not the actual ad.
At this point, I would imagine that the Securities and Exchange Commission is opening an investigation into all of these "rumors" about the iPhone on Verizon. The whole mess was a stock manipulation. Bloomberg was duped. The WSJ was duped. I hope the manipulators get caught.
You just might end up stepping in number 2.
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/07/06/video...ime-with-real/
Not that I care one way or the other but with huge companies, they all accept the fact that business is just business. For example Apple constantly mocked Windows in their ads but actively courted Microsoft for MS Office for Mac as well as licensed Exchange server syncing. It is just advertising, nobody really cares.
I see your point, but they mocked Windows, not Office or Office for Mac. Verizon is mocking the iPhone 4 so I agree that it seems less likely they have any deals with Apple for a Verizon iPhone.
The TV spot, [...] attacked the iPhone's lack of a physical keyboard, inability to multitask with third-party applications, and absence of a camera flash. The latter two issues were addressed with this year's iOS 4 software update.
The iOS software update adds a flash unit to my iPhone?
Cool!
Is the droid X shipping? Has it been verified that there is no reduction in signal regardless of how you hold it?
It has been confirmed that the Droid X can still make calls even when one finger is touching it.
For example Apple constantly mocked Windows in their ads but actively courted Microsoft for MS Office for Mac as well as licensed Exchange server syncing. It is just advertising, nobody really cares.
Apple did not mock MS Office or even MS. It mocked the Windows OS. They were not courting MS to get Windows.
Verizon is mocking the very hardware/software people seem to think they are getting.
All phones have attenuation problems and all carriers have cell tower issues and drop calls, and fluctuating signal strength due to a host of variables.
Apple is not stupid enough to deliver a phone with a faulty antenna system ... not going to happen and there is no real proof that an iPhone 4 is any worse than any other phone given the same conditions of location, atmospheric conditions, cell tower interference and a thousand other things.
Buy a Droid if you think the iPhone is a problem.
It has been confirmed that the Droid X can still make calls even when one finger is touching it.
So are you saying the test has actually been done, or are you just being snarky? Hard to tell.
Apple did not mock MS Office or even MS. It mocked the Windows OS. They were not courting MS to get Windows.
Verizon is mocking the very hardware/software people seem to think they are getting.
Do people forget how much Apple mocked intel chips?
There are a lot of pissed ip4 users who might be influenced by an ad like that. I can't believe how some people still defend Apple through all of this though honestly.
Agreed!
Apple did not mock MS Office or even MS. It mocked the Windows OS. They were not courting MS to get Windows.
Verizon is mocking the very hardware/software people seem to think they are getting.
Why would they bash Office considering it's the #1 purchased software on the Mac for the past 20 years? Apple attacked where they could. This is business; exploit your opponents' weaknesses.
BTW they have bashed Dell and others for inferior hardware. Not in ads but in other areas.
This is mostly Google's idea it seems ... the antenna issue is a non-issue.
All phones have attenuation problems and all carriers have cell tower issues and drop calls, and fluctuating signal strength due to a host of variables.
Apple is not stupid enough to deliver a phone with a faulty antenna system ... not going to happen and there is no real proof that an iPhone 4 is any worse than any other phone given the same conditions of location, atmospheric conditions, cell tower interference and a thousand other things.
Buy a Droid if you think the iPhone is a problem.
You can't be serious! First, Jobs said to "not hold the phone that way." Are you kidding me? I should be able to hold my phone any way I'd like...with or without a "bumper." None of my Blackberry or Android devices has EVER had an attenuation problem that Jobs claims every device has. This is complete and utter BS on Apple's part to save face. They've put out a defective product and a massive recall at this point would be disastrous. But it would be the right thing to do.
Apple did know they were reporting bars differently, but NOT wrongly. There is no single ?right? way that all phones display bars. Apple?s choice has come back to bite them, so now they?re changing the display.
An interesting comparison of how the current iPhone 4 displays bars vs. how Android compares bars: http://www.macintouch.com/reviews/iphone4/#recept
Note that the formula that Apple currently uses is VERY similar to what Android uses. And yet Apple is claiming it is "totally wrong."
The iPhone isn?t the first phone to be sensitive to transmitting through water. All phones are like that...
However, the iPhone is the first phone since whip antennas to allow direct contact with the antenna. And with whip antennas it was very difficult to be touching the antenna and holding the phone in any natural way. There are two effects going on. Signal blockage (the signal trying to get through flesh), aka signal attenuation, and antenna de-tuning, the interference of the tuning characteristics of the antenna through direct contact. (This is as I undertand it after reading several more technical articles on the issue).
I have no doubt that putting the antenna as far to the outside of the phone is a good thing. It gets the antenna as far as possible from all the noisy electronics and power currents of the phone's circuitry. This is why whip/extendable antennas are actually a better design (but people didn't like that design). But allowing direct contact with the antenna is a bad thing.
Do the advantages of the placement of the iPhone's antenna outweigh the distadvantage of allowing direct contact? Perhaps in most situations, but I think the jury is still out on that. But I think if Apple had put the antenna just inside of an external plastic (or some other radio-transparent material) shell, which is what their bumpers do, the reception would be even BETTER than it is. But then Apple wouldn't be able to claim the iPhone is smaller than it's predecessor...god forbide!
Personally, I don't think it was a coincidence that Apple got into the iPhone case business with their bumpers when they released the iPhone 4.
While it may not completely kill your reception in all situations, the signal drop can be enough, in some instances, to make the voice or data unusable where a 3GS will still function (regardless of how it is held).
No one is arguing that signal attenuation to any degree is unique to the iPhone 4. It's the degree of signal attenuation that is unique to the iPhone 4.
There are a lot of pissed ip4 users who might be influenced by an ad like that. I can't believe how some people still defend Apple through all of this though honestly.
Might have something to do with the phone working great.
It's fair to call them on their mistakes, and there definitely is a 'two steps forward, one step back' sort of thing going on with the antenna in the iPhone 4, but those two steps forward are great and the one step back isn't going to be a big deal for a lot of people. So should this have been considered before releasing the phone? Yep! Is it anything near as big a deal as the media has been representing? Absolutely not.
of course they want to, but it is pretty funny how they advertise that their dual antenna phone won't suffer from the same issues, especially when Apple said ALL phones suffer from it.
Well, what Apple said isn't really important here. First, while all phones can be smothered to a degree, bridging the antennae on the iPhone 4 causes a greater loss than smothering on most other phones (~-20 dB as opposed to ~-10). Second, if Motorola devoted extra space in the device to a more reliable antenna system then that could actually result in this product outperforming other phones in this regard by a fair degree (we'll have to see once it circulates a while in the masses). Third, in an advertisement, what is true isn't so important as what people perceive.