I live in Austin, TX, and none of my friends or coworkers iPhone '3G's' or any iPhone '3G' I've seen at either Apple store or at any AT&T store can hold onto a 3G connection to save its life. Meanwhile, all other 3G phones have full reception and don't fall back to 2G when the iPhone '3G' does.
I'm not the biggest fan of lawsuits, but if Apple is going to remain quiet on this, and then release a 'fix' that did nothing for my reception other than make the phone prefer 2G networks even more, maybe this is what needs to happen to get Apple to admit the problem and attempt to fix it.
I've looked at over 20 iPhones, and NONE of them can hold a signal 1/2 as good as the crappiest Samsung or LG 3G phone.
What's even more odd, is that in San Antonio (AT&T's headquarters) my phone performed flawlessly on the highway and in downtown. This would lead some to blame the network, but not me. Other phones perform just fine in areas that the iPhone '3G' struggles. This just shows that, when the signal isn't absolutely pristine and the network isn't overwhelmingly robust, the iPhone '3G' suffers when other phones do not.
Good question. I have no idea. I am looking at the longer term damage in the reputation for Apple than just the iPhone.
I doubt it this certainly is not the first time Apple has gone through this. The last time I can think of is when the notebooks switched to Intel processors and their were reports of all types of problems and lawsuits.
People have seem to have forgotten about all of that.
I'm not the biggest fan of lawsuits, but if Apple is going to remain quiet on this, and then release a 'fix' that did nothing for my reception other than make the phone prefer 2G networks even more, maybe this is what needs to happen to get Apple to admit the problem and attempt to fix it.
I wonder what her lawyers think is the $$ value for the pain and suffering of her faster (but slower) iPhone 3G speeds?
$20k? 6 figures?
Can't wait to hear this one...
That's not the point of a class action lawsuit. If the case is found in her favor then ALL of the people on the class actions suit will be paid. It will likely have very little impact (if any) on hurting Apple's bottom line.
The more important issue here is Apple's reliability. This could cost them greatly in the years to come as the competition is coming out very soon with phones that beat the iPhone feature for feature (IMHO) and have a proven track record as a mobile provider.
Steve is getting what he deserves for being a paranoid CEO and rushing the phone to the market before it was ready.
I doubt it this certainly is not the first time Apple has gone through this. The last time I can think of is when the notebooks switched to Intel processors and their were reports of all types of problems and lawsuits.
People have seem to have forgotten about all of that.
Good call. Just curious, what do you think will happen?
I live in Austin, TX, and none of my friends or coworkers iPhone '3G's' or any iPhone '3G' I've seen at either Apple store or at any AT&T store can hold onto a 3G connection to save its life. Meanwhile, all other 3G phones have full reception and don't fall back to 2G when the iPhone '3G' does.
I'm not the biggest fan of lawsuits, but if Apple is going to remain quiet on this, and then release a 'fix' that did nothing for my reception other than make the phone prefer 2G networks even more, maybe this is what needs to happen to get Apple to admit the problem and attempt to fix it.
I've looked at over 20 iPhones, and NONE of them can hold a signal 1/2 as good as the crappiest Samsung or LG 3G phone.
What's even more odd, is that in San Antonio (AT&T's headquarters) my phone performed flawlessly on the highway and in downtown. This would lead some to blame the network, but not me. Other phones perform just fine in areas that the iPhone '3G' struggles. This just shows that, when the signal isn't absolutely pristine and the network isn't overwhelmingly robust, the iPhone '3G' suffers when other phones do not.
You should come up to DFW - I've got about 8 friends with the 3G and not a single one of them has a problem (We have roads that travel east/west as well - it's a fancy new invention )
Good call. Just curious, what do you think will happen?
I think this is new technology for Apple and they are going through some growing pains. The same as the Intel transition. After Apple worked out the problems they sold more computers than they ever had before.
I think as long as Apple eventually delivers what they promised, people will forgive and forget.
Am I missing something here? When you go to Apple's website the first thing to appear states "Twice as fast. Half the price." -without any asterisk footnoting exceptions. This is also on all their print and TV advertising- with no disclaimers.
Let's say that's all you ever see or read before you buy the iphone 3g.
Twice as fast as what? What is twice as fast - startup, shutdown, opening apps, picture taking, throwing against a brick wall??? Why assume web browsing?
Now, if you do read the fine print, it will tell you what they are talking about and how they came to that conclusion... but then you would know that you aren't guaranteed those speeds everywhere, or all the time, or even at all.
The "masses" never complained about Treo's or BB's because the masses didn't buy them but now we're introducing smartphones to an entirely new demographic of people who aren't the traditional smartphone type and are unwilling to accept any problems (mainly because their old phone was so crappy it "just worked" because it didn't have to do much, well, work).
That seems to be the problem of perhaps its Apple's deep pockets. All the other device makers list the actual theoretical speed of the 3G radios on their spec sheet (eg: 7.2Mbps) wheras Apple only lists twice as fast when I have received speeds 7x as fast as my maximum with EDGE on the iPhone. Yet I haven't heard about them being sued for listing a speed that you can never obtain.
Let's say that's all you ever see or read before you buy the iphone 3g.
Twice as fast as what? What is twice as fast - startup, shutdown, opening apps, picture taking, throwing against a brick wall??? Why assume web browsing?
Now, if you do read the fine print, it will tell you what they are talking about and how they came to that conclusion... but then you would know that you aren't guaranteed those speeds everywhere, or all the time, or even at all.
Angel's advocate
Oh, well crap. I was going to have my iPhone race Usain Bolt and be twice as fast as him! There goes my plan to get rich
First thing here is that I have to wonder who initiated this lawsuit, the client or the lawyer? I ask frankly because complaining about conection speeds seems like a way to generate legal fees more than anything else. Let's face it connection speeds are highly variable no matter what the technology.
For example I can get a strong signal at work but what can only be called slow transfer rates or sluggish networking. At home I get a much weaker signal indication but often much snappier networking. When I drive outside my local 3G area networking becomes much slower. Does this surprise anyone? In any event 3G is almost always 2 - 3 times faster than edge.
Funny thing here is expectations, do people reasonable expect devices using RF technology to work anywhere?I mean this inever expect my cell phones to work when I'm in the moutains nor did I have that expectation for the block house of a factory I work in. No other phones work in such an environment so why the iPhone.
Now I'm not trying to say that the IPhone has been an acceptable experience from the point of view of this consumer. The phone is simply buggy! Here again though I knew what I was getting into simply due to exposure to the SDK. I purchased though because I have confidence in Apples ability to set things right based on what they did with version #1. At some point here there has to be some expectation that consumers have some ability to understand what they are buying. Frankly this law suit makes as much sense as someone buying a shortwave radio and then complaining that reception varies with the weather and time of day.
Apple hasn't been perfect here either as we all know. How ever they seem to recognize the problems that ate real. One of their updates has already fixed problems I've had with excessive crashing in mail. Mail by the way is fast enough no matter what the connection. Plus they have been candid about other fixes that are coming. That to me is a good sign. I do wish that their technical support sight was a little better organized as it took me forever to find a solution to one problem I had. Comparatively does anybody offer a better smart phone offering when supplied software, support and other factors are taken into account? I don't really think so. Frankly I was waiting a bit for Android but that never showed so there really isn't much in they way of modern alternatives. This leads me to the conclusion that this law suit is all about bitting the hand that feeds us. I want Apple to do better with iPhone but this is clearly the wrong avenue to take.
... I am looking at the longer term damage in the reputation for Apple than just the iPhone.
There will be no long term damage as this is not a major issue. Apple, like every other company in this country, gets sued for countless reasons, some of them are even credible and deserve a day in court. However, most of them are frivolous and usually filed by people that know nothing about the product or the technology. Obviously this person is a little "slow" and believed Apple's commercials were talking directly to her rather than the general consumer populace. Unfortunately, as with everything related to Apple, it's been blown way out of proportion.
Don't get me wrong, there are obviously some people who are having legitimate problems with their 3G iPhones. This is natural with devices that are mass produced, there's always going to be a certain percentage of defects. However, I'd venture to guess that very few of the connectivity issues originate from the iPhone, I'm gonna have to say most of the complaints are by people who've never had a 3G phone before and live outside or on the edge of a supposed 3G coverage area.
As far as reputation is concerned...
85% Consumer Satisfaction Rate
Possible record levels of Macs sold this (3 million)
Estimated 5 million iPhones sold this quarter
...Apple's is still intact. The original iPhone was a market changing device that ran on an extensive network. The new iPhone is hauling millions of people onto a network that is still in it's infancy in this country. Let's just hope all this leads to AT&T pushing out larger 3G coverage areas. Maybe then I'll consider taking the plunge and upgrading my 2.5G iPhone?
Perhaps those other phones are loading specially made Mobile Websites. You know the really simplified versions they have to make for 'smart phones' unable to run real browsers.
That was going to be my point as well, of course the Nokia will load a site faster when it is ignoring much of the data to load.
I just went to http://i.dslr.net/tinyspeedtest.html to test out my speed using various methods. What I like about the site is that it lists today's and all time stats for the various connection type. Note: this is just for iPhone users and one can fudge the stats by choosing an incorrect connection type but it does give some information as what one may expect.
Tests were done in on the first floor of a 4 story hotel about 20 feet from the closest exterior wall while being held in my hand. All tests were completed 3x to get the mean average.
My Stats:
EDGE ..210kbps
HSDPA 1.15Mbps
Stats:.. .All Time . . . . .Today
GPRS .. 40kbps/1535ms . . 32kbps/1941ms
EDGE . 143kbps/ 873ms . .144kbps/ 836ms
3G .. .724kbps/ 446ms . .723kbps/ 435ms
WiFi .2.39Mbps/ 163ms . 2.24Mbps/ 164ms
. . . . .(speed/latency)That is an average of 5x faster.
What like Steves demo, comparing a Nokia loading a flash animation, to the iPhone not loading it?
Tell the iPhone to load 1MB and the Nokia to load the same 1MB and have them both connected to 3G w/ the same number of bars and the iPhone will win every single time. As I said before the processor in the iPhone dwarfs the one in the Nokia and will render the page quicker. Unless of course you think my 12" PB should load pages as fast a new MB.
Tell the iPhone to load 1MB and the Nokia to load the same 1MB and have them both connected to 3G w/ the same number of bars and the iPhone will win every single time. As I said before the processor in the iPhone dwarfs the one in the Nokia and will render the page quicker. Unless of course you think my 12" PB should load pages as fast a new MB.
I don't think she'll get anywhere ? simply from where the lines are drawn.
The iPhone hardware itself may well be twice as fast, but I'm guessing that it's AT&T's responsibility to provide a suitable signal, not Apple's.
So Apple will turn around and say 'the hardware's capable'. And AT&T will turn around and say 'we didn't say the iPhone was twice as fast ? Apple did'.
And the complaintant will get spit-roasted between the two suppliers.
Comments
I'm not the biggest fan of lawsuits, but if Apple is going to remain quiet on this, and then release a 'fix' that did nothing for my reception other than make the phone prefer 2G networks even more, maybe this is what needs to happen to get Apple to admit the problem and attempt to fix it.
I've looked at over 20 iPhones, and NONE of them can hold a signal 1/2 as good as the crappiest Samsung or LG 3G phone.
What's even more odd, is that in San Antonio (AT&T's headquarters) my phone performed flawlessly on the highway and in downtown. This would lead some to blame the network, but not me. Other phones perform just fine in areas that the iPhone '3G' struggles. This just shows that, when the signal isn't absolutely pristine and the network isn't overwhelmingly robust, the iPhone '3G' suffers when other phones do not.
True tenobell, but if they warranted being sued, they should be.
No, not as long as they are making the attempt to correct their mistake.
In this case its likely a fairly complicated problem to correct and may take some time.
Good question. I have no idea. I am looking at the longer term damage in the reputation for Apple than just the iPhone.
I doubt it this certainly is not the first time Apple has gone through this. The last time I can think of is when the notebooks switched to Intel processors and their were reports of all types of problems and lawsuits.
People have seem to have forgotten about all of that.
I'm not the biggest fan of lawsuits, but if Apple is going to remain quiet on this, and then release a 'fix' that did nothing for my reception other than make the phone prefer 2G networks even more, maybe this is what needs to happen to get Apple to admit the problem and attempt to fix it.
Apple (AAPL) acknowledged Tuesday that a software update for the iPhone partly fixes the connection snags that have caused a global firestorm for the new iPhone 3G.
I wonder what her lawyers think is the $$ value for the pain and suffering of her faster (but slower) iPhone 3G speeds?
$20k? 6 figures?
Can't wait to hear this one...
That's not the point of a class action lawsuit. If the case is found in her favor then ALL of the people on the class actions suit will be paid. It will likely have very little impact (if any) on hurting Apple's bottom line.
The more important issue here is Apple's reliability. This could cost them greatly in the years to come as the competition is coming out very soon with phones that beat the iPhone feature for feature (IMHO) and have a proven track record as a mobile provider.
Steve is getting what he deserves for being a paranoid CEO and rushing the phone to the market before it was ready.
I doubt it this certainly is not the first time Apple has gone through this. The last time I can think of is when the notebooks switched to Intel processors and their were reports of all types of problems and lawsuits.
People have seem to have forgotten about all of that.
Good call. Just curious, what do you think will happen?
I live in Austin, TX, and none of my friends or coworkers iPhone '3G's' or any iPhone '3G' I've seen at either Apple store or at any AT&T store can hold onto a 3G connection to save its life. Meanwhile, all other 3G phones have full reception and don't fall back to 2G when the iPhone '3G' does.
I'm not the biggest fan of lawsuits, but if Apple is going to remain quiet on this, and then release a 'fix' that did nothing for my reception other than make the phone prefer 2G networks even more, maybe this is what needs to happen to get Apple to admit the problem and attempt to fix it.
I've looked at over 20 iPhones, and NONE of them can hold a signal 1/2 as good as the crappiest Samsung or LG 3G phone.
What's even more odd, is that in San Antonio (AT&T's headquarters) my phone performed flawlessly on the highway and in downtown. This would lead some to blame the network, but not me. Other phones perform just fine in areas that the iPhone '3G' struggles. This just shows that, when the signal isn't absolutely pristine and the network isn't overwhelmingly robust, the iPhone '3G' suffers when other phones do not.
You should come up to DFW - I've got about 8 friends with the 3G and not a single one of them has a problem
Good call. Just curious, what do you think will happen?
I think this is new technology for Apple and they are going through some growing pains. The same as the Intel transition. After Apple worked out the problems they sold more computers than they ever had before.
I think as long as Apple eventually delivers what they promised, people will forgive and forget.
Am I missing something here? When you go to Apple's website the first thing to appear states "Twice as fast. Half the price." -without any asterisk footnoting exceptions. This is also on all their print and TV advertising- with no disclaimers.
Let's say that's all you ever see or read before you buy the iphone 3g.
Twice as fast as what? What is twice as fast - startup, shutdown, opening apps, picture taking, throwing against a brick wall??? Why assume web browsing?
Now, if you do read the fine print, it will tell you what they are talking about and how they came to that conclusion... but then you would know that you aren't guaranteed those speeds everywhere, or all the time, or even at all.
Angel's advocate
The "masses" never complained about Treo's or BB's because the masses didn't buy them but now we're introducing smartphones to an entirely new demographic of people who aren't the traditional smartphone type and are unwilling to accept any problems (mainly because their old phone was so crappy it "just worked" because it didn't have to do much, well, work).
That seems to be the problem of perhaps its Apple's deep pockets. All the other device makers list the actual theoretical speed of the 3G radios on their spec sheet (eg: 7.2Mbps) wheras Apple only lists twice as fast when I have received speeds 7x as fast as my maximum with EDGE on the iPhone. Yet I haven't heard about them being sued for listing a speed that you can never obtain.
Let's say that's all you ever see or read before you buy the iphone 3g.
Twice as fast as what? What is twice as fast - startup, shutdown, opening apps, picture taking, throwing against a brick wall??? Why assume web browsing?
Now, if you do read the fine print, it will tell you what they are talking about and how they came to that conclusion... but then you would know that you aren't guaranteed those speeds everywhere, or all the time, or even at all.
Angel's advocate
Oh, well crap. I was going to have my iPhone race Usain Bolt and be twice as fast as him! There goes my plan to get rich
For example I can get a strong signal at work but what can only be called slow transfer rates or sluggish networking. At home I get a much weaker signal indication but often much snappier networking. When I drive outside my local 3G area networking becomes much slower. Does this surprise anyone? In any event 3G is almost always 2 - 3 times faster than edge.
Funny thing here is expectations, do people reasonable expect devices using RF technology to work anywhere?I mean this inever expect my cell phones to work when I'm in the moutains nor did I have that expectation for the block house of a factory I work in. No other phones work in such an environment so why the iPhone.
Now I'm not trying to say that the IPhone has been an acceptable experience from the point of view of this consumer. The phone is simply buggy! Here again though I knew what I was getting into simply due to exposure to the SDK. I purchased though because I have confidence in Apples ability to set things right based on what they did with version #1. At some point here there has to be some expectation that consumers have some ability to understand what they are buying. Frankly this law suit makes as much sense as someone buying a shortwave radio and then complaining that reception varies with the weather and time of day.
Apple hasn't been perfect here either as we all know. How ever they seem to recognize the problems that ate real. One of their updates has already fixed problems I've had with excessive crashing in mail. Mail by the way is fast enough no matter what the connection. Plus they have been candid about other fixes that are coming. That to me is a good sign. I do wish that their technical support sight was a little better organized as it took me forever to find a solution to one problem I had. Comparatively does anybody offer a better smart phone offering when supplied software, support and other factors are taken into account? I don't really think so. Frankly I was waiting a bit for Android but that never showed so there really isn't much in they way of modern alternatives. This leads me to the conclusion that this law suit is all about bitting the hand that feeds us. I want Apple to do better with iPhone but this is clearly the wrong avenue to take.
Dave
I'm in Birmingham, AL and love my 3G. It is much faster than the original iPhone and I have not had a dropped call.
Ralph
Birmingham, AL
suspicious post.
... I am looking at the longer term damage in the reputation for Apple than just the iPhone.
There will be no long term damage as this is not a major issue. Apple, like every other company in this country, gets sued for countless reasons, some of them are even credible and deserve a day in court. However, most of them are frivolous and usually filed by people that know nothing about the product or the technology. Obviously this person is a little "slow" and believed Apple's commercials were talking directly to her rather than the general consumer populace. Unfortunately, as with everything related to Apple, it's been blown way out of proportion.
Don't get me wrong, there are obviously some people who are having legitimate problems with their 3G iPhones. This is natural with devices that are mass produced, there's always going to be a certain percentage of defects. However, I'd venture to guess that very few of the connectivity issues originate from the iPhone, I'm gonna have to say most of the complaints are by people who've never had a 3G phone before and live outside or on the edge of a supposed 3G coverage area.
As far as reputation is concerned...
85% Consumer Satisfaction Rate
Possible record levels of Macs sold this (3 million)
Estimated 5 million iPhones sold this quarter
...Apple's is still intact. The original iPhone was a market changing device that ran on an extensive network. The new iPhone is hauling millions of people onto a network that is still in it's infancy in this country. Let's just hope all this leads to AT&T pushing out larger 3G coverage areas. Maybe then I'll consider taking the plunge and upgrading my 2.5G iPhone?
Perhaps those other phones are loading specially made Mobile Websites. You know the really simplified versions they have to make for 'smart phones' unable to run real browsers.
That was going to be my point as well, of course the Nokia will load a site faster when it is ignoring much of the data to load.
Tests were done in on the first floor of a 4 story hotel about 20 feet from the closest exterior wall while being held in my hand. All tests were completed 3x to get the mean average.
My Stats:
EDGE ..210kbps
HSDPA 1.15Mbps
Stats:.. .All Time . . . . .Today
GPRS .. 40kbps/1535ms . . 32kbps/1941ms
EDGE . 143kbps/ 873ms . .144kbps/ 836ms
3G .. .724kbps/ 446ms . .723kbps/ 435ms
WiFi .2.39Mbps/ 163ms . 2.24Mbps/ 164ms
. . . . .(speed/latency)That is an average of 5x faster.
That was going to be my point as well, of course the Nokia will load a site faster when it is ignoring much of the data to load.
What like Steves demo, comparing a Nokia loading a flash animation, to the iPhone not loading it?
What like Steves demo, comparing a Nokia loading a flash animation, to the iPhone not loading it?
Tell the iPhone to load 1MB and the Nokia to load the same 1MB and have them both connected to 3G w/ the same number of bars and the iPhone will win every single time. As I said before the processor in the iPhone dwarfs the one in the Nokia and will render the page quicker. Unless of course you think my 12" PB should load pages as fast a new MB.
Tell the iPhone to load 1MB and the Nokia to load the same 1MB and have them both connected to 3G w/ the same number of bars and the iPhone will win every single time. As I said before the processor in the iPhone dwarfs the one in the Nokia and will render the page quicker. Unless of course you think my 12" PB should load pages as fast a new MB.
Which Nokia?
The iPhone hardware itself may well be twice as fast, but I'm guessing that it's AT&T's responsibility to provide a suitable signal, not Apple's.
So Apple will turn around and say 'the hardware's capable'. And AT&T will turn around and say 'we didn't say the iPhone was twice as fast ? Apple did'.
And the complaintant will get spit-roasted between the two suppliers.
That's the way it always works...