In my repeated testing, the iPhone 3G cannot sustain a network connection under identical conditions and location to the Nokia N95-3. I'm mostly concerned with uploads here, and the device simply cannot stream data for more than 30 seconds, where the N95-3 can go for literally hours.
mmm So a few day ago, I drove around the in which I live while using the Pandora application to stream music at my for at least 30 minutes. It seems to be able to stream data for a lot longer than 30 seconds.
This is the typical pervasive "release and fix" attitude that runs through the industry. Apple didn't get 2% of my money. They got all of it. The problems with the iPhone could have been isolated via better testing. Apple and its "veil of secrecy" screwed itself by not doing a live test with production phones and production software extensively. Great that they did testing with non-production devices and software. This is the result.
I get accused of being an Apple cheerleader for asking obvious questions. But I have to ask anyway.
How do you really know Apple did not sufficiently test the phone? How do you know subsequent testing would have found the current problems?
Especially in light of the fact that all of Apple's other products in some shape or form have suffered from bugs and have been issued software fixes.
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.
I'm not sure their is a way they could test all possible situations. Say for a city like New York where there could be 200,000 iPhones on AT&T's network using more data than every other phone on the network. If AT&T is having problems with density overload how could you really accurately test for that before you are actually in the real situation.
I get accused of being an Apple cheerleader for asking obvious questions. But I have to ask anyway.
How do you really know Apple did not sufficiently test the phone? How do you know subsequent testing would have found the current problems?
Especially in light of the fact that all of Apple's other products in some shape or form have suffered from bugs and have been issued software fixes.
Tenobell, after spending multiple years in the GSM arena via product design (software), product integrations, testing, etc.... not to mention working hand and hand with phone manufacturers and the engineers, I am pretty confident when they say that this could have been avoided because it is so easily provable. Just turn the phone on, make some calls and see if they connect. If they don't you look at the antenna, the chips, the output and receive amplifiers, and other associated hardware. Apple rushed, believed Infineon that their chip was okay, and put it out to market. Now they have a case of the "oh shits" and their veil of secrecy has come home to roost. None of the operators had the iPhone before its launch for more than a few hours to days. This is not product testing.
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.
That's all part of the problem. What we don't know is if Apple could have been fined for not meeting a delivery date. This is pretty common in various industries, and I wouldn't be surprised if something like that was true here as well. A late delivery could cost Apple's partners a big bundle. As long as it seemed to be "good enough", all concerned could have preferred delivery rather than an uncertain date, which could have been weeks, or even months off.
And if part of the problem rests with carriers as well, then there was nothing Apple could have done about that.
mmm So a few day ago, I drove around the in which I live while using the Pandora application to stream music at my for at least 30 minutes. It seems to be able to stream data for a lot longer than 30 seconds.
Yeah, what he's saying doesn't make sense. I've also used Pandora for about an hour. Just that Pandora is annoying in that it is always asking for a thumb up or whatever before it streams the next song, at least for the time I've been using it, unless there's some way of turning that off that I haven't yet looked for.
Tenobell, after spending multiple years in the GSM arena via product design (software), product integrations, testing, etc.... not to mention working hand and hand with phone manufacturers and the engineers, I am pretty confident when they say that this could have been avoided because it is so easily provable. Just turn the phone on, make some calls and see if they connect. If they don't you look at the antenna, the chips, the output and receive amplifiers, and other associated hardware. Apple rushed, believed Infineon that their chip was okay, and put it out to market. Now they have a case of the "oh shits" and their veil of secrecy has come home to roost. None of the operators had the iPhone before its launch for more than a few hours to days. This is not product testing.
The carriers did take test iPhones out into their areas. It's highly likely with a few test phones everything worked fine.
This is an entirely different situation from the reality of having hundreds of thousands of iPhones taxing a 3G network. I cannot see how they could reliably test for that.
The carriers did take test iPhones out into their areas. It's highly likely with a few test phones everything worked fine.
This is an entirely different situation from the reality of having hundreds of thousands of iPhones taxing a 3G network. I cannot see how they could reliably test for that.
There an article published here where several operators stated that they only received the iPhones about 24 hours before they were to be sold. So no, I do not believe they did adequate testing or this would have manifested itself during the testing. This is what seems to escape you. These problems did not happen a month down the line. They happened almost immediately. This alone proves that Apple did not adequately test the production version devices.
There an article published here where several operators stated that they only received the iPhones about 24 hours before they were to be sold. So no, I do not believe they did adequate testing or this would have manifested itself during the testing. This is what seems to escape you. These problems did not happen a month down the line. They happened almost immediately. This alone proves that Apple did not adequately test the production version devices.
That still says nothing about how Apple itself tested the device. So far imdependent tests show the radio working fine. Can you provide a link to the article?
That still says nothing about how Apple itself tested the device. So far imdependent tests show the radio working fine. Can you provide a link to the article?
Apple did say they tested the device. They used non-production software and a non-production device. It was posted in this forum. That is where I go the info from. This is my point all along. They did not test the devices you are using or at least they never said so. They used static data in their tests then sold the device based on this. I can not find the link right now but I will see if I can.
Apple did say they tested the device. They used non-production software and a non-production device. It was posted in this forum. That is where I go the info from. This is my point all along. They did not test the devices you are using or at least they never said so. They used static data in their tests then sold the device based on this. I can not find the link right now but I will see if I can.
But since we are now getting several reports that the device functions correctly in tests, perhaps there is nothing wrong. Even devices that were reported to have this problem have been tested as functioning properly.
But since we are now getting several reports that the device functions correctly in tests, perhaps there is nothing wrong. Even devices that were reported to have this problem have been tested as functioning properly.
Perhaps it is the networks after all.
I would keep my fingers crossed on this. At the end of the day, I hope this is the case even though a new iPhone would be nice.
Network optimization is not hard to do, as it is done all the time. It can be expensive though if completely new code is written. By the way, where is Infineon in all of this? THey have been quiet lately.
It would be interesting to see the next chips used in the next iPhone.
I would keep my fingers crossed on this. At the end of the day, I hope this is the case even though a new iPhone would be nice.
Network optimization is not hard to do, as it is done all the time. It can be expensive though if completely new code is written. By the way, where is Infineon in all of this? THey have been quiet lately.
It would be interesting to see the next chips used in the next iPhone.
Infineon denied the rumor that their chips were at fault.
I'll tell you something though. I've mentioned it before. My internet reception in my home sucked the first few days. Then suddenly, it became much better. Now, that was a day after the 2.0.2 update. did that have something to do with it? Did AT&T do something at about the same time? If so, were they deliberately related?
I don't know, of course, but reception is much better. Occasionally I will have a problem with one app, but the others will receive fine. Strange. Usually I will get a message that the server is not responding. Now, where do I get that anywhere else? Hmmm!
Oh yes, with Appleinsider's server. On a much too frequent basis. It rarely happens on any other server.
It is interesting how writers make a leap from the engineers saying the ANTENNAs are OK to all of the hardware and software is OK. They were very careful to only make claims about the antennas. There is a lot more to the reception issues than the antennas.
All of us experiencing these issues know that there is something wrong with the phone. Is it hardware or software? We don't know. Walk into any AT&T store and look at the iPhones on display. They have either switched them to EDGE or enabled WiFi. If they are on 3G they have maybe one bar. Run the test mode and you will see the dbm signal at around -101dbm. Check out the other 3G phones all sitting at 4-5 bars. Are bars the same, no, but they aren't that different.
Comments
This study is unfortunately wrong.
In my repeated testing, the iPhone 3G cannot sustain a network connection under identical conditions and location to the Nokia N95-3. I'm mostly concerned with uploads here, and the device simply cannot stream data for more than 30 seconds, where the N95-3 can go for literally hours.
mmm So a few day ago, I drove around the in which I live while using the Pandora application to stream music at my for at least 30 minutes. It seems to be able to stream data for a lot longer than 30 seconds.
This is the typical pervasive "release and fix" attitude that runs through the industry. Apple didn't get 2% of my money. They got all of it. The problems with the iPhone could have been isolated via better testing. Apple and its "veil of secrecy" screwed itself by not doing a live test with production phones and production software extensively. Great that they did testing with non-production devices and software. This is the result.
I get accused of being an Apple cheerleader for asking obvious questions. But I have to ask anyway.
How do you really know Apple did not sufficiently test the phone? How do you know subsequent testing would have found the current problems?
Especially in light of the fact that all of Apple's other products in some shape or form have suffered from bugs and have been issued software fixes.
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.
I'm not sure their is a way they could test all possible situations. Say for a city like New York where there could be 200,000 iPhones on AT&T's network using more data than every other phone on the network. If AT&T is having problems with density overload how could you really accurately test for that before you are actually in the real situation.
I get accused of being an Apple cheerleader for asking obvious questions. But I have to ask anyway.
How do you really know Apple did not sufficiently test the phone? How do you know subsequent testing would have found the current problems?
Especially in light of the fact that all of Apple's other products in some shape or form have suffered from bugs and have been issued software fixes.
Tenobell, after spending multiple years in the GSM arena via product design (software), product integrations, testing, etc.... not to mention working hand and hand with phone manufacturers and the engineers, I am pretty confident when they say that this could have been avoided because it is so easily provable. Just turn the phone on, make some calls and see if they connect. If they don't you look at the antenna, the chips, the output and receive amplifiers, and other associated hardware. Apple rushed, believed Infineon that their chip was okay, and put it out to market. Now they have a case of the "oh shits" and their veil of secrecy has come home to roost. None of the operators had the iPhone before its launch for more than a few hours to days. This is not product testing.
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.
That's all part of the problem. What we don't know is if Apple could have been fined for not meeting a delivery date. This is pretty common in various industries, and I wouldn't be surprised if something like that was true here as well. A late delivery could cost Apple's partners a big bundle. As long as it seemed to be "good enough", all concerned could have preferred delivery rather than an uncertain date, which could have been weeks, or even months off.
And if part of the problem rests with carriers as well, then there was nothing Apple could have done about that.
mmm So a few day ago, I drove around the in which I live while using the Pandora application to stream music at my for at least 30 minutes. It seems to be able to stream data for a lot longer than 30 seconds.
Yeah, what he's saying doesn't make sense. I've also used Pandora for about an hour. Just that Pandora is annoying in that it is always asking for a thumb up or whatever before it streams the next song, at least for the time I've been using it, unless there's some way of turning that off that I haven't yet looked for.
Tenobell, after spending multiple years in the GSM arena via product design (software), product integrations, testing, etc.... not to mention working hand and hand with phone manufacturers and the engineers, I am pretty confident when they say that this could have been avoided because it is so easily provable. Just turn the phone on, make some calls and see if they connect. If they don't you look at the antenna, the chips, the output and receive amplifiers, and other associated hardware. Apple rushed, believed Infineon that their chip was okay, and put it out to market. Now they have a case of the "oh shits" and their veil of secrecy has come home to roost. None of the operators had the iPhone before its launch for more than a few hours to days. This is not product testing.
The carriers did take test iPhones out into their areas. It's highly likely with a few test phones everything worked fine.
This is an entirely different situation from the reality of having hundreds of thousands of iPhones taxing a 3G network. I cannot see how they could reliably test for that.
The carriers did take test iPhones out into their areas. It's highly likely with a few test phones everything worked fine.
This is an entirely different situation from the reality of having hundreds of thousands of iPhones taxing a 3G network. I cannot see how they could reliably test for that.
There an article published here where several operators stated that they only received the iPhones about 24 hours before they were to be sold. So no, I do not believe they did adequate testing or this would have manifested itself during the testing. This is what seems to escape you. These problems did not happen a month down the line. They happened almost immediately. This alone proves that Apple did not adequately test the production version devices.
There an article published here where several operators stated that they only received the iPhones about 24 hours before they were to be sold. So no, I do not believe they did adequate testing or this would have manifested itself during the testing. This is what seems to escape you. These problems did not happen a month down the line. They happened almost immediately. This alone proves that Apple did not adequately test the production version devices.
That still says nothing about how Apple itself tested the device. So far imdependent tests show the radio working fine. Can you provide a link to the article?
That still says nothing about how Apple itself tested the device. So far imdependent tests show the radio working fine. Can you provide a link to the article?
Apple did say they tested the device. They used non-production software and a non-production device. It was posted in this forum. That is where I go the info from. This is my point all along. They did not test the devices you are using or at least they never said so. They used static data in their tests then sold the device based on this. I can not find the link right now but I will see if I can.
Apple did say they tested the device. They used non-production software and a non-production device. It was posted in this forum. That is where I go the info from. This is my point all along. They did not test the devices you are using or at least they never said so. They used static data in their tests then sold the device based on this. I can not find the link right now but I will see if I can.
But since we are now getting several reports that the device functions correctly in tests, perhaps there is nothing wrong. Even devices that were reported to have this problem have been tested as functioning properly.
Perhaps it is the networks after all.
But since we are now getting several reports that the device functions correctly in tests, perhaps there is nothing wrong. Even devices that were reported to have this problem have been tested as functioning properly.
Perhaps it is the networks after all.
I would keep my fingers crossed on this. At the end of the day, I hope this is the case even though a new iPhone would be nice.
Network optimization is not hard to do, as it is done all the time. It can be expensive though if completely new code is written. By the way, where is Infineon in all of this? THey have been quiet lately.
It would be interesting to see the next chips used in the next iPhone.
I would keep my fingers crossed on this. At the end of the day, I hope this is the case even though a new iPhone would be nice.
Network optimization is not hard to do, as it is done all the time. It can be expensive though if completely new code is written. By the way, where is Infineon in all of this? THey have been quiet lately.
It would be interesting to see the next chips used in the next iPhone.
Infineon denied the rumor that their chips were at fault.
I'll tell you something though. I've mentioned it before. My internet reception in my home sucked the first few days. Then suddenly, it became much better. Now, that was a day after the 2.0.2 update. did that have something to do with it? Did AT&T do something at about the same time? If so, were they deliberately related?
I don't know, of course, but reception is much better. Occasionally I will have a problem with one app, but the others will receive fine. Strange. Usually I will get a message that the server is not responding. Now, where do I get that anywhere else? Hmmm!
Oh yes, with Appleinsider's server. On a much too frequent basis. It rarely happens on any other server.
So, does that tell us anything?
All of us experiencing these issues know that there is something wrong with the phone. Is it hardware or software? We don't know. Walk into any AT&T store and look at the iPhones on display. They have either switched them to EDGE or enabled WiFi. If they are on 3G they have maybe one bar. Run the test mode and you will see the dbm signal at around -101dbm. Check out the other 3G phones all sitting at 4-5 bars. Are bars the same, no, but they aren't that different.