Rumored 'iPhone 6' dummy compared to iPhone 5s as more alleged 3D renders leak online

12345679»

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 168
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by freediverx View Post

    Nothing there disputes what the article said.


     

    Quite a bit of it does, actually.

     

    …but it doesn’t surprise me that Apple would avoid directing their phone's radio transmission at the user's face. ;) 


     

    You’re holding the device to your head. It really doesn’t matter.

  • Reply 162 of 168
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    freediverx wrote: »
    ...EMF could negatively impact health over time.

    Just like turning on a cellphone on a plane could have caused it to crash?

    Note that you used could instead of will. All that means is they haven't been able to prove it… something that isn't impossible but also not easy.

    Your comment doesn't say exactly how much EMF energy is emitted or its duration. Growing up under a power line is different from using a hair dryer in the morning
  • Reply 163 of 168
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    And I’ve never understood that. Is glass radio transparent, too? Why can’t the front serve for that?


     

    Safety reasons, i.e. not beaming EM radiation directly through the head instead of away via the back.

  • Reply 164 of 168
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

    Safety reasons, i.e. not beaming EM radiation directly through the head instead of away via the back.


     

    Again, it’s non-ionizing. There’s nothing to suggest it does any damage.

  • Reply 165 of 168
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    Again, it’s non-ionizing. There’s nothing to suggest it does any damage.


     

    No, there isn't but that doesn't stop a lot of people being concerned over how much EMR is emitted and a legal requirement to provide SAR figures.

  • Reply 166 of 168
    lorin schultzlorin schultz Posts: 2,706member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    Your comment doesn't say exactly how much EMF energy or duration. Growing up under a power line is different from using a hair dryer in the morning

     

    Right. I'm sceptical of these risk claims just because the strength of the signal relative to naturally occurring phenomena seems utterly insignificant. The planet itself is a huge electromagnet of unimaginable field strength and the sun douses us in so much radiation that it gives X-Ray machines penis envy. If we survive THAT, how can the teeny-weeny tiny little signals emitted by phones and routers pose any kind of threat?

  • Reply 167 of 168
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    I'm sceptical of these risk claims just because the strength of the signal relative to naturally occurring phenomena seems utterly insignificant. The planet itself is a huge electromagnet of unimaginable field strength and the sun douses us in so much radiation that it gives X-Ray machines penis envy. If we survive THAT, how can the teeny-weeny tiny little signals emitted by phones and routers pose any kind of threat?

    1) Fully agree; it's a total non-issue. Strangely enough the winers on the subject are of a certain kind, looking a certain way, similar.

    2) LOL @ "penis envy"
  • Reply 168 of 168

    Duh!!!!! Yes, My third grade education lead me to that conclusion but thanks for reminding me....:no:

Sign In or Register to comment.