FYI The Singapore iPhone 3G only went on sale on Aug 24. They did it differently (SingTel), the exclusive Telco. Everything is appointment-based. So no interminable queues (well, some queuing, but you have to book an appointment online first, maybe even *pay a deposit* just for the appointment)... There may be periods of those without appointments being able to queue up...
I do like all of the, "I have tested and my results contradict...", you have tested your one iphone on one network, they have tested 2600 iphones on many networks, which is the more powered study?
Also sapporobaby the test and fix attitude that is pervasive is there for one reason alone, you can't know what every problem is going to be no matter how much you do smaller scale tests. Why do you think we have stage 4 drug trials (post-marketing studies), because you don't know all the side effects no matter how many pre-marketing trials you run.
If your argument is "every phone should have been tested in every environment prior to release", then there are parts that go through that, but they tend to go into very expensive things (like you know, aircraft, and even they have post-marketing analysis (usually when one crashes or comes near to it)).
Sorry but in consumer electronics because of the fact that things need to have a control on costs and release time those who adopt early will always be coming across bugs that are missed in the pre-release testing. You want the product when it is perfect, you gotta wait until it is not bleeding edge, because while it is they will still be finding kinks that no amount of pre-market testing was ever going to find.
Also sapporobaby the test and fix attitude that is pervasive is there for one reason alone, you can't know what every problem is going to be no matter how much you do smaller scale tests. Why do you think we have stage 4 drug trials (post-marketing studies), because you don't know all the side effects no matter how many pre-marketing trials you run.
If your argument is "every phone should have been tested in every environment prior to release", then there are parts that go through that, but they tend to go into very expensive things (like you know, aircraft, and even they have post-marketing analysis (usually when one crashes or comes near to it)).
A phone is not a drug being introduced into your body. Surely you can see the difference. The fact is, Apple did not do a substantial real-world test with the iPhone. What don't you get about this? They did static, pre-production testing on limited (most likely AT&T) networks with an untested chip and then passed this off as ready for the world. Obviously they were wrong. Consumer complaints verify my assertions. Sooooo your "drug" argument is comparison is moot.
A phone is not a drug being introduced into your body. Surely you can see the difference. The fact is, Apple did not do a substantial real-world test with the iPhone. What don't you get about this? They did static, pre-production testing on limited (most likely AT&T) networks with an untested chip and then passed this off as ready for the world. Obviously they were wrong. Consumer complaints verify my assertions. Sooooo your "drug" argument is comparison is moot.
To be sure I can, in fact surely safety of a drug ranks more highly than whether you can get your facebook details delivered at 3G speeds. The analogy still stands however, until you release something onto the open market you can't find all the problems with something.
Do you have evidence for how much testing Apple did or are you just having a wild punt there? I doubt they would be so cavalier about it.
To be sure I can, in fact surely safety of a drug ranks more highly than whether you can get your facebook details delivered at 3G speeds. The analogy still stands however, until you release something onto the open market you can't find all the problems with something.
Do you have evidence for how much testing Apple did or are you just having a wild punt there? I doubt they would be so cavalier about it.
It is mentioned in the beginning of this thread the testing that Apple stated. Apple stated that they did pre-production testing. Considering I have access to Nokia headquarters R&D in Espoo, and a few things in Tampere, and about 20 or 30 GSM engineers that are experts on the subject, I will take their word that real world testing would have found these issues that Apple is now trying like hell to fix and hoping will simply go away.
As for your analogy, when was the last time someone ingested a phone and it killed them? Please provide a link. Thanks in advance.
A phone is not a drug being introduced into your body. Surely you can see the difference. The fact is, Apple did not do a substantial real-world test with the iPhone. What don't you get about this? They did static, pre-production testing on limited (most likely AT&T) networks with an untested chip and then passed this off as ready for the world. Obviously they were wrong. Consumer complaints verify my assertions. Sooooo your "drug" argument is comparison is moot.
We don't really know what testing Apple and AT&T did.
One of the problems in working with partners like this is that there is a release date that often must be met. When Apple comes out with its own products it can delay them as much as possible, but when dealing with something like this, it's different.
No doubt they could (should) have had the time to do more testing, but it doesn't always work out that way.
All phone companies have had these problems, but the iPhone is so high profile that everyone knows about it. With most other phones, it's not a public topic of conversation.
It is mentioned in the beginning of this thread the testing that Apple stated. Apple stated that they did pre-production testing. Considering I have access to Nokia headquarters R&D in Espoo, and a few things in Tampere, and about 20 or 30 GSM engineers that are experts on the subject, I will take their word that real world testing would have found these issues that Apple is now trying like hell to fix and hoping will simply go away.
As for your analogy, when was the last time someone ingested a phone and it killed them? Please provide a link. Thanks in advance.
And did all of these Nokia people tell you that they never had a problem with a phone after it was released? I doubt it. If they did it would have been disingenuous.
And did all of these Nokia people tell you that they never had a problem with a phone after it was released? I doubt it. If they did it would have been disingenuous.
No, no. They were complaining how stupid Nokia was with the N95. Do you remember that? They released the phone with an under powered battery and non-optimized software. The radios were spot on and worked as they should have but the user part of the phones were tested by another group that did not factor in GPS usage.
Anyway, as I stated earlier, I have no problems with the iPhone software. This is a work in progress but the radios, chipsets, antenna are all things that could have been found out on the quick. I will take the advice and word of a bunch of guys that build these things over a marketing team who's job is to now sell you the fact that Apple may have shit the bed on this by mistake. Solplism posted the info about Apple's test in this thread or a similar one. It stated that they used pre-production model software and devices.
We don't really know what testing Apple and AT&T did.
One of the problems in working with partners like this is that there is a release date that often must be met. When Apple comes out with its own products it can delay them as much as possible, but when dealing with something like this, it's different.
No doubt they could (should) have had the time to do more testing, but it doesn't always work out that way.
All phone companies have had these problems, but the iPhone is so high profile that everyone knows about it. With most other phones, it's not a public topic of conversation.
Just realized I answered your posts backwards.
Anyway, I agree with 99.999999999999999% of what you wrote. My only contention from the beginning until now is that this is not something that could not have been caught from the very beginning. I think Apple simply rushed, took a chance, maybe even took the word of Infineon, and now it came back to bite them.
It is mentioned in the beginning of this thread the testing that Apple stated. Apple stated that they did pre-production testing. Considering I have access to Nokia headquarters R&D in Espoo, and a few things in Tampere, and about 20 or 30 GSM engineers that are experts on the subject, I will take their word that real world testing would have found these issues that Apple is now trying like hell to fix and hoping will simply go away.
As for your analogy, when was the last time someone ingested a phone and it killed them? Please provide a link. Thanks in advance.
I dunno I doubt the batteries would be terribly good for you, and it's kinda big, might be caught up in the oesophagus...
The point is this, on something as serious as medications, where lives are at stake, all the pre-marketing testing in the world doesn't find anything, and things only get found when released to market, so on something of far less importance like consumer electronics the kind of testing which is warranted is not going to find every bug and problem which will crop up in the real world.
I dunno I doubt the batteries would be terribly good for you, and it's kinda big, might be caught up in the oesophagus...
The point is this, on something as serious as medications, where lives are at stake, all the pre-marketing testing in the world doesn't find anything, and things only get found when released to market, so on something of far less importance like consumer electronics the kind of testing which is warranted is not going to find every bug and problem which will crop up in the real world.
I think that foot, followed down with a bit of crow might be cutting of the oxygen to your brain causing you black out and not know what you are talking about in this particular instance.
I think the three words you're looking for are: Game, set, match.
You are repeating the same old losing argument, which also shows you have not idea about how things work in the GSM world. GSM science is pretty exact. Testing usually finds problems before they go to production. If Apple had done just a bit of real world testing, they would have surely found what 10's of thousands of users are finding. Maybe you are a star in the medical world but as far as cellular.....let's just say it is not your strong suit.
I dunno I doubt the batteries would be terribly good for you, and it's kinda big, might be caught up in the oesophagus...
The point is this, on something as serious as medications, where lives are at stake, all the pre-marketing testing in the world doesn't find anything, and things only get found when released to market, so on something of far less importance like consumer electronics the kind of testing which is warranted is not going to find every bug and problem which will crop up in the real world.
This is why in my final year of college when I was killing mice and stuff as part of my research, I said, f*k this...
Now I use teh Mac and try sell teh Mac. No animals were harmed. (As far as Apple tells us anyways...)
I think that foot, followed down with a bit of crow might be cutting of the oxygen to your brain causing you black out and not know what you are talking about in this particular instance.
I think the three words you're looking for are: Game, set, match.
You are repeating the same old losing argument, which also shows you have not idea about how things work in the GSM world. GSM science is pretty exact. Testing usually finds problems before they go to production. If Apple had done just a bit of real world testing, they would have surely found what 10's of thousands of users are finding. Maybe you are a star in the medical world but as far as cellular.....let's just say it is not your strong suit.
P.S. Three more words: Check and mate.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL "cellular" --- get the pun ??? It *could* refer to Medical/Bio AND mobile tech....
Back OT - - - network issues. I was eager to get an iPhone 3G until Starbucks (where I make my office) switched WiFi service from T-Mobile to ATT. Now, am less eager. ATT WiFi seems to drop network connections as a means of load control. At certain times of day, I get 10-12 network disconnects per hour. Level 2 tech admitted they have a software problem with their network administration.
Maybe we should focus our attention on the network.
Back OT - - - network issues. I was eager to get an iPhone 3G until Starbucks (where I make my office) switched WiFi service from T-Mobile to ATT. Now, am less eager. ATT WiFi seems to drop network connections as a means of load control. At certain times of day, I get 10-12 network disconnects per hour. Level 2 tech admitted they have a software problem with their network administration.
Maybe we should focus our attention on the network.
I find Wi-Fi hotspots have some major weak points. Sometimes, it just won't give an IP address to the iPhone... Sometimes in cafes, usually the router is down and needs a reboot, but of course your nice but minimum-wage Barista perhaps won't have an idea about this...
As you mentioned, Wi-Fi is very important for remote working/social/life Internet stuff. If I sit down, order some nice food and drinks, and the Wi-Fi isn't up to scratch, I get pretty dissapointed.
To actually drop connections as load control is a terrible, terrible strategy. What *exactly* does the FCC do in the USA? Besides force everybody to put "FCC" logos on their devices???? (Slightly facetious here, but you get my drift)
Maybe we should focus our attention on the network.
Apple needs to be able to have some quality assurance from the network providers, I believe, if y'all don't mind me reiterating here.
Apple makes sure every iPhone 3G black is a distinct shade of black, not slightly grey, not too dull, nor too shiny.
What procedures would they need to advance to make sure these network providers, so critical now to the perception of the Apple brand and its products, deliver as promised?
My iPod touch is almost worthless here. However, I am online with a MacBook Pro about 10 hours a day. Just seeing the ATT WiFi problem as another facet of the entire ATT issue.
To be sure there are network issues. Orange in France got caught throttling back it's network speeds leading users to think it was the iPhone. Apple, in my opinion is guilty of leaving itself open to doubt about the iPhone by not eliminating all easily provable doubts via simple testing on several networks.
I am told that Starbucks is having words with ATT WiFi on the QA topic.
A bunch of the on-site issues come my way since I am sort of an informal in-store IT support tech. Lots of customer frustration. Does not make for a happy customer experience.
Comments
Also sapporobaby the test and fix attitude that is pervasive is there for one reason alone, you can't know what every problem is going to be no matter how much you do smaller scale tests. Why do you think we have stage 4 drug trials (post-marketing studies), because you don't know all the side effects no matter how many pre-marketing trials you run.
If your argument is "every phone should have been tested in every environment prior to release", then there are parts that go through that, but they tend to go into very expensive things (like you know, aircraft, and even they have post-marketing analysis (usually when one crashes or comes near to it)).
Sorry but in consumer electronics because of the fact that things need to have a control on costs and release time those who adopt early will always be coming across bugs that are missed in the pre-release testing. You want the product when it is perfect, you gotta wait until it is not bleeding edge, because while it is they will still be finding kinks that no amount of pre-market testing was ever going to find.
Also sapporobaby the test and fix attitude that is pervasive is there for one reason alone, you can't know what every problem is going to be no matter how much you do smaller scale tests. Why do you think we have stage 4 drug trials (post-marketing studies), because you don't know all the side effects no matter how many pre-marketing trials you run.
If your argument is "every phone should have been tested in every environment prior to release", then there are parts that go through that, but they tend to go into very expensive things (like you know, aircraft, and even they have post-marketing analysis (usually when one crashes or comes near to it)).
A phone is not a drug being introduced into your body. Surely you can see the difference. The fact is, Apple did not do a substantial real-world test with the iPhone. What don't you get about this? They did static, pre-production testing on limited (most likely AT&T) networks with an untested chip and then passed this off as ready for the world. Obviously they were wrong. Consumer complaints verify my assertions. Sooooo your "drug" argument is comparison is moot.
A phone is not a drug being introduced into your body. Surely you can see the difference. The fact is, Apple did not do a substantial real-world test with the iPhone. What don't you get about this? They did static, pre-production testing on limited (most likely AT&T) networks with an untested chip and then passed this off as ready for the world. Obviously they were wrong. Consumer complaints verify my assertions. Sooooo your "drug" argument is comparison is moot.
To be sure I can, in fact surely safety of a drug ranks more highly than whether you can get your facebook details delivered at 3G speeds. The analogy still stands however, until you release something onto the open market you can't find all the problems with something.
Do you have evidence for how much testing Apple did or are you just having a wild punt there? I doubt they would be so cavalier about it.
To be sure I can, in fact surely safety of a drug ranks more highly than whether you can get your facebook details delivered at 3G speeds. The analogy still stands however, until you release something onto the open market you can't find all the problems with something.
Do you have evidence for how much testing Apple did or are you just having a wild punt there? I doubt they would be so cavalier about it.
It is mentioned in the beginning of this thread the testing that Apple stated. Apple stated that they did pre-production testing. Considering I have access to Nokia headquarters R&D in Espoo, and a few things in Tampere, and about 20 or 30 GSM engineers that are experts on the subject, I will take their word that real world testing would have found these issues that Apple is now trying like hell to fix and hoping will simply go away.
As for your analogy, when was the last time someone ingested a phone and it killed them? Please provide a link. Thanks in advance.
A phone is not a drug being introduced into your body. Surely you can see the difference. The fact is, Apple did not do a substantial real-world test with the iPhone. What don't you get about this? They did static, pre-production testing on limited (most likely AT&T) networks with an untested chip and then passed this off as ready for the world. Obviously they were wrong. Consumer complaints verify my assertions. Sooooo your "drug" argument is comparison is moot.
We don't really know what testing Apple and AT&T did.
One of the problems in working with partners like this is that there is a release date that often must be met. When Apple comes out with its own products it can delay them as much as possible, but when dealing with something like this, it's different.
No doubt they could (should) have had the time to do more testing, but it doesn't always work out that way.
All phone companies have had these problems, but the iPhone is so high profile that everyone knows about it. With most other phones, it's not a public topic of conversation.
It is mentioned in the beginning of this thread the testing that Apple stated. Apple stated that they did pre-production testing. Considering I have access to Nokia headquarters R&D in Espoo, and a few things in Tampere, and about 20 or 30 GSM engineers that are experts on the subject, I will take their word that real world testing would have found these issues that Apple is now trying like hell to fix and hoping will simply go away.
As for your analogy, when was the last time someone ingested a phone and it killed them? Please provide a link. Thanks in advance.
And did all of these Nokia people tell you that they never had a problem with a phone after it was released? I doubt it. If they did it would have been disingenuous.
And did all of these Nokia people tell you that they never had a problem with a phone after it was released? I doubt it. If they did it would have been disingenuous.
No, no. They were complaining how stupid Nokia was with the N95. Do you remember that? They released the phone with an under powered battery and non-optimized software. The radios were spot on and worked as they should have but the user part of the phones were tested by another group that did not factor in GPS usage.
Anyway, as I stated earlier, I have no problems with the iPhone software. This is a work in progress but the radios, chipsets, antenna are all things that could have been found out on the quick. I will take the advice and word of a bunch of guys that build these things over a marketing team who's job is to now sell you the fact that Apple may have shit the bed on this by mistake. Solplism posted the info about Apple's test in this thread or a similar one. It stated that they used pre-production model software and devices.
We don't really know what testing Apple and AT&T did.
One of the problems in working with partners like this is that there is a release date that often must be met. When Apple comes out with its own products it can delay them as much as possible, but when dealing with something like this, it's different.
No doubt they could (should) have had the time to do more testing, but it doesn't always work out that way.
All phone companies have had these problems, but the iPhone is so high profile that everyone knows about it. With most other phones, it's not a public topic of conversation.
Just realized I answered your posts backwards.
Anyway, I agree with 99.999999999999999% of what you wrote. My only contention from the beginning until now is that this is not something that could not have been caught from the very beginning. I think Apple simply rushed, took a chance, maybe even took the word of Infineon, and now it came back to bite them.
It is mentioned in the beginning of this thread the testing that Apple stated. Apple stated that they did pre-production testing. Considering I have access to Nokia headquarters R&D in Espoo, and a few things in Tampere, and about 20 or 30 GSM engineers that are experts on the subject, I will take their word that real world testing would have found these issues that Apple is now trying like hell to fix and hoping will simply go away.
As for your analogy, when was the last time someone ingested a phone and it killed them? Please provide a link. Thanks in advance.
I dunno I doubt the batteries would be terribly good for you, and it's kinda big, might be caught up in the oesophagus...
The point is this, on something as serious as medications, where lives are at stake, all the pre-marketing testing in the world doesn't find anything, and things only get found when released to market, so on something of far less importance like consumer electronics the kind of testing which is warranted is not going to find every bug and problem which will crop up in the real world.
I dunno I doubt the batteries would be terribly good for you, and it's kinda big, might be caught up in the oesophagus...
The point is this, on something as serious as medications, where lives are at stake, all the pre-marketing testing in the world doesn't find anything, and things only get found when released to market, so on something of far less importance like consumer electronics the kind of testing which is warranted is not going to find every bug and problem which will crop up in the real world.
I think that foot, followed down with a bit of crow might be cutting of the oxygen to your brain causing you black out and not know what you are talking about in this particular instance.
I think the three words you're looking for are: Game, set, match.
You are repeating the same old losing argument, which also shows you have not idea about how things work in the GSM world. GSM science is pretty exact. Testing usually finds problems before they go to production. If Apple had done just a bit of real world testing, they would have surely found what 10's of thousands of users are finding. Maybe you are a star in the medical world but as far as cellular.....let's just say it is not your strong suit.
P.S. Three more words: Check and mate.
I dunno I doubt the batteries would be terribly good for you, and it's kinda big, might be caught up in the oesophagus...
The point is this, on something as serious as medications, where lives are at stake, all the pre-marketing testing in the world doesn't find anything, and things only get found when released to market, so on something of far less importance like consumer electronics the kind of testing which is warranted is not going to find every bug and problem which will crop up in the real world.
This is why in my final year of college when I was killing mice and stuff as part of my research, I said, f*k this...
Now I use teh Mac and try sell teh Mac.
I think that foot, followed down with a bit of crow might be cutting of the oxygen to your brain causing you black out and not know what you are talking about in this particular instance.
I think the three words you're looking for are: Game, set, match.
You are repeating the same old losing argument, which also shows you have not idea about how things work in the GSM world. GSM science is pretty exact. Testing usually finds problems before they go to production. If Apple had done just a bit of real world testing, they would have surely found what 10's of thousands of users are finding. Maybe you are a star in the medical world but as far as cellular.....let's just say it is not your strong suit.
P.S. Three more words: Check and mate.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL "cellular" --- get the pun ???
Maybe we should focus our attention on the network.
Back OT - - - network issues. I was eager to get an iPhone 3G until Starbucks (where I make my office) switched WiFi service from T-Mobile to ATT. Now, am less eager. ATT WiFi seems to drop network connections as a means of load control. At certain times of day, I get 10-12 network disconnects per hour. Level 2 tech admitted they have a software problem with their network administration.
Maybe we should focus our attention on the network.
I find Wi-Fi hotspots have some major weak points. Sometimes, it just won't give an IP address to the iPhone... Sometimes in cafes, usually the router is down and needs a reboot, but of course your nice but minimum-wage Barista perhaps won't have an idea about this...
As you mentioned, Wi-Fi is very important for remote working/social/life Internet stuff. If I sit down, order some nice food and drinks, and the Wi-Fi isn't up to scratch, I get pretty dissapointed.
To actually drop connections as load control is a terrible, terrible strategy. What *exactly* does the FCC do in the USA? Besides force everybody to put "FCC" logos on their devices???? (Slightly facetious here, but you get my drift)
Maybe we should focus our attention on the network.
Apple needs to be able to have some quality assurance from the network providers, I believe, if y'all don't mind me reiterating here.
Apple makes sure every iPhone 3G black is a distinct shade of black, not slightly grey, not too dull, nor too shiny.
What procedures would they need to advance to make sure these network providers, so critical now to the perception of the Apple brand and its products, deliver as promised?
A bunch of the on-site issues come my way since I am sort of an informal in-store IT support tech. Lots of customer frustration. Does not make for a happy customer experience.
Maybe I should have stayed with the Edge iPhone.
PS : to the credit of Orange, they did not raise the subscription plans : same price for 3G and Edge.
Then why not just go into the settings and turn of 3G so you'll have an Edge/WiFi iPhone again?