It's Apple's own fault there's so much wireless traffic in the room. Cut out all of the live blogger's feeds to the outside world and all will be well again. And that can be done by WEBCASTING the keynotes like they used to.
We all want to know what's going on, so If Apple lets us in via a webcast, we have no need for the live bloggers.
I suppose, if your beat is longer than two minutes. The headline is a little hyperbolic, but a typical crash or other tech problem in a Jobs presentation is normally bypassed in seconds and done so smoothly that it's almost not noticeable. It is very unusual for him to be sidetracked with a tech problem for more than two minutes.
Yes, unfortunately they were unprepared for a situation that's grown to become a real problem. I agree that Apple should provide the bandwidth for the bloggers or confiscate all MiFi-type devices or simply go back to a live broadcast. Hey, if Leo Laporte can do it with few problems, why can't Apple?
Which demonstrates that there is nothing like a wire. Long live EtherNet.
And I'm sure the visual call will use little bandwidth. Can you imagine. Apple has an iPhone without video chat. That's the backup plan if 90% have these problems. It could be a real nightmare. Hope not but it could.
Couldn't they just have used an enhanced MicroCell which would have isolated them from complete reliance on WiFi?
I don't think they would be smart to use any "work-arounds" to get the demo running.
As soon as people found out [and you know they would find out] there would be a free-for-all of Steve-bashing... for his "lying" about the capabilities of the device & software. Asserting that Steve was admitting it wouldn't work in "real world" conditions.
I can just imagine all the "sleight-of-hand" slurs, and Android fans claiming how their phones wouldn't need to "cheat" during a public demo.
You know thats the kind of world we live in...
Remember how lots of Mac fans had a good laugh when Microsoft was demoing Xbox360 games - before the actual consoles were available - and people were posting photos of the PowerPC Macs (hidden out of obvious sight) which were actually running the software?
[Because Microsoft was seeding custom-firmware PowerPC Macs to Xbox360 developers to use as the initial development platform.]
Live bloggers are going to want to post come what may, so why not just provide a free public WiFi access point in the auditorium rather than having everyone set up their own using a MiFi device?
Short of installing metal detectors at the doors and preventing people take ANY electronic devices in (laptops, phones, cameras, PDAs, etc.), which would be utterly impractical and self-defeating at a techie developer conference where the press were invited, there is no way to stop people blogging, so why bother trying?
Can't the iPhone run a network through the 30pin connector? That might be safer for demos.
But anyway I didn't think it detracted from the presentation. Steve recovered quickly and they had plenty of other demos of the screen, the NY Times was not the whole thing.
Yes, unfortunately they were unprepared for a situation that's grown to become a real problem. I agree that Apple should provide the bandwidth for the bloggers or confiscate all MiFi-type devices or simply go back to a live broadcast. Hey, if Leo Laporte can do it with few problems, why can't Apple?
They used to do live video streaming, though that was before I started paying attention to Apple's keynotes, I heard about it from Apple fan acquaintances of mine. My local college took the satellite feed and put it on their cable system, I think home C-Band systems could have tuned to it. I thought they quit doing live streaming because they wanted to take some time to polish the video.
I'm wondering if there is any "solution" at all to the wifi meltdown. Think about the number of people in the audience and then multiply that number by 1.5. That's likely the number of wireless devices all broadcasting in the same spectrum. Just what is the device count limit before all traffic grinds to a halt? Even QOS doesn't help when a few thousand other devices are drowning each other out.
The number of devices at the Moscone center may not have reached that level. I honestly don't know. But it does seem like a possibility.
As soon as people found out [and you know they would find out] there would be a free-for-all of Steve-bashing... for his "lying" about the capabilities of the device & software. Asserting that Steve was admitting it wouldn't work in "real world" conditions.
Since when is giving a new product demonstration in a room lit up with hundreds of other ad-hoc networks the "real world"?
People can and will find plenty of reasons to bash Steve/Apple keynotes, but this unique worst-case situation is hardly reason to compromise the demos for the sake of 'purity'. If in the future they pipe Ethernet back up the video cable bundle then I don't think the rest of the (sane) world will hold it against them.
Steve Jobs keynotes are industry media blowouts - so why in heavens name don't they just webcast them instead of making all of us hang around watching multiple "live blogging feeds" to get the instant information? Maybe if Jobs has more demo disappointments they'll just webcast and ban audience WiFi.
Steve Jobs keynotes are industry media blowouts - so why in heavens name don't they just webcast them instead...
Given that these will become the 'official history' of that event, Apple prefers to run them through an editing process to clean up the production. It's their prerogative.
(Microsoft, on the other hand, simply turns Ballmer loose and you can see where that leads...)
During the side by side demo, the new iPhone 4 with the new antenna wasn?t able to pick up Wi-Fi to load NYTimes web site, while the old 3GS was able to. In fact, it looked as if the 3GS was much better able to pick up a signal.
Now, it could be that there was something wrong with that pre-release IOS 4 which is causing the problem with the new phone but I think not. I think they haven?t optimized the antenna yet or the new antenna doesn?t work as well as advertised.
Steve Jobs keynotes are industry media blowouts - so why in heavens name don't they just webcast them instead of making all of us hang around watching multiple "live blogging feeds" to get the instant information? Maybe if Jobs has more demo disappointments they'll just webcast and ban audience WiFi.
It was done that way for many years. Stevenotes frequently set records for the number of simultaneous video streams of a live event. I don't think anything else has come even remotely close in terms of bandwidth at any given instant in time.
Unfortunately, this lead to problems with stability and all it did was piss everyone off because the stream was so unstable.
During the side by side demo, the new iPhone 4 with the new antenna wasn?t able to pick up Wi-Fi to load NYTimes web site, while the old 3GS was able to. In fact, it looked as if the 3GS was much better able to pick up a signal.
Now, it could be that there was something wrong with that pre-release IOS 4 which is causing the problem with the new phone but I think not. I think they haven?t optimized the antenna yet or the new antenna doesn?t work as well as advertised.
That's unfounded conjecture.
Anyone with even the slightest amount of wireless experience will quickly tell you that, with an overloaded spectrum, it is a crap shoot which device works and which device doesn't, even with identical hardware and software.
Anyone with even the slightest amount of wireless experience will quickly tell you that, with an overloaded spectrum, it is a crap shoot which device works and which device doesn't, even with identical hardware and software.
Normally I would agree with that but the fact is that he tried it 3 times and the results were the same which leads me to believe that the new antenna’s less sensitive. He tried loading the NT Time page twice on the original demo model, he then switched to the backup demo units and got the same result. The 3GS was able to load most of the page while the new iPhone 4 just kept saying it could not get a connection.
I never imagined such a concentrated amount of wifi in one space. These types of hyper tech scenarios give a new testing ground for technology, the likes of which most manufacturers couldn't easily create before releasing a product. We've now seen part of the new iPhone 4 tested in an extreme situation.
What got me the most was the bloggers who didn't turn off there wifi when asked and then continued to blog about how they're still going, such a juvenile attitude. Then you add those who where using internet for gaming, web browsing and what else, downloading a movie off itunes or placing an Ebay bid? If a person isn't interested enough to give the speaker your full attention, why show up at all. No wonder I see an increasing number of articles about multitasking and A.D.D. behavior problems as a result of technology.
I agree with the suggestion that Apple should resume the live webcast.
But also -- couldn't they have reserved one WiFi channel for internal use only? Just tell all atendees that they are prohibited from using Channel 4, for instance, and that they need to prepare their WiFi devices accordingly before their arrival at Moscone.
Even if some don't comply, and if Apple doesn't want to go Nazi about it, the selected channel would still be much clearer as most of the attendees would have followed the instruction.
What got me the most was the bloggers who didn't turn off there wifi when asked and then continued to blog about how they're still going, such a juvenile attitude.
I'm torn on that one. I followed the Ars and Engadget live blogging (so I'm part of the problem) and found them quite compelling. At the January event I held off and instead followed MacRumors' spoiler-free page (watching the official Apple-produced video hours later). I personally prefer the live blogging.
The problem is determining who decides which live bloggers should be allowed to stay connected.
Quote:
Then you add those who where using internet for gaming, web browsing and what else, downloading a movie off itunes or placing an Ebay bid?
If this is true --and so far it's just apocryphal-- those people should have been ejected from the event. It's one thing if they want to waste their own time, but another if they harm things for everyone else, including the presenter. It's as if they talked loudly on cell phones during the event - the same level of disrespect.
Hopefully this will all become moot if Apple configures wired Internet access for future keynotes.
Comments
It's Apple's own fault there's so much wireless traffic in the room. Cut out all of the live blogger's feeds to the outside world and all will be well again. And that can be done by WEBCASTING the keynotes like they used to.
We all want to know what's going on, so If Apple lets us in via a webcast, we have no need for the live bloggers.
Absolutely right.
I suppose, if your beat is longer than two minutes. The headline is a little hyperbolic, but a typical crash or other tech problem in a Jobs presentation is normally bypassed in seconds and done so smoothly that it's almost not noticeable. It is very unusual for him to be sidetracked with a tech problem for more than two minutes.
Yes, unfortunately they were unprepared for a situation that's grown to become a real problem. I agree that Apple should provide the bandwidth for the bloggers or confiscate all MiFi-type devices or simply go back to a live broadcast. Hey, if Leo Laporte can do it with few problems, why can't Apple?
Which demonstrates that there is nothing like a wire. Long live EtherNet.
And I'm sure the visual call will use little bandwidth. Can you imagine. Apple has an iPhone without video chat. That's the backup plan if 90% have these problems. It could be a real nightmare. Hope not but it could.
Couldn't they just have used an enhanced MicroCell which would have isolated them from complete reliance on WiFi?
I don't think they would be smart to use any "work-arounds" to get the demo running.
As soon as people found out [and you know they would find out] there would be a free-for-all of Steve-bashing... for his "lying" about the capabilities of the device & software. Asserting that Steve was admitting it wouldn't work in "real world" conditions.
I can just imagine all the "sleight-of-hand" slurs, and Android fans claiming how their phones wouldn't need to "cheat" during a public demo.
You know thats the kind of world we live in...
Remember how lots of Mac fans had a good laugh when Microsoft was demoing Xbox360 games - before the actual consoles were available - and people were posting photos of the PowerPC Macs (hidden out of obvious sight) which were actually running the software?
[Because Microsoft was seeding custom-firmware PowerPC Macs to Xbox360 developers to use as the initial development platform.]
Short of installing metal detectors at the doors and preventing people take ANY electronic devices in (laptops, phones, cameras, PDAs, etc.), which would be utterly impractical and self-defeating at a techie developer conference where the press were invited, there is no way to stop people blogging, so why bother trying?
What exactly did 3000 of bloggers do with MiFi stations in there
They can't afford a usb modem for everyone in their mob, can they?
"Try Verizon network ya idiots!"
But anyway I didn't think it detracted from the presentation. Steve recovered quickly and they had plenty of other demos of the screen, the NY Times was not the whole thing.
Yes, unfortunately they were unprepared for a situation that's grown to become a real problem. I agree that Apple should provide the bandwidth for the bloggers or confiscate all MiFi-type devices or simply go back to a live broadcast. Hey, if Leo Laporte can do it with few problems, why can't Apple?
They used to do live video streaming, though that was before I started paying attention to Apple's keynotes, I heard about it from Apple fan acquaintances of mine. My local college took the satellite feed and put it on their cable system, I think home C-Band systems could have tuned to it. I thought they quit doing live streaming because they wanted to take some time to polish the video.
The number of devices at the Moscone center may not have reached that level. I honestly don't know. But it does seem like a possibility.
That begs the questions: What phones do have 802.11n? Are they in both bands?
Asking a question isn't the same thing as begging the question.
As soon as people found out [and you know they would find out] there would be a free-for-all of Steve-bashing... for his "lying" about the capabilities of the device & software. Asserting that Steve was admitting it wouldn't work in "real world" conditions.
Since when is giving a new product demonstration in a room lit up with hundreds of other ad-hoc networks the "real world"?
People can and will find plenty of reasons to bash Steve/Apple keynotes, but this unique worst-case situation is hardly reason to compromise the demos for the sake of 'purity'. If in the future they pipe Ethernet back up the video cable bundle then I don't think the rest of the (sane) world will hold it against them.
Steve Jobs keynotes are industry media blowouts - so why in heavens name don't they just webcast them instead...
Given that these will become the 'official history' of that event, Apple prefers to run them through an editing process to clean up the production. It's their prerogative.
(Microsoft, on the other hand, simply turns Ballmer loose and you can see where that leads...)
Now, it could be that there was something wrong with that pre-release IOS 4 which is causing the problem with the new phone but I think not. I think they haven?t optimized the antenna yet or the new antenna doesn?t work as well as advertised.
Steve Jobs keynotes are industry media blowouts - so why in heavens name don't they just webcast them instead of making all of us hang around watching multiple "live blogging feeds" to get the instant information? Maybe if Jobs has more demo disappointments they'll just webcast and ban audience WiFi.
It was done that way for many years. Stevenotes frequently set records for the number of simultaneous video streams of a live event. I don't think anything else has come even remotely close in terms of bandwidth at any given instant in time.
Unfortunately, this lead to problems with stability and all it did was piss everyone off because the stream was so unstable.
During the side by side demo, the new iPhone 4 with the new antenna wasn?t able to pick up Wi-Fi to load NYTimes web site, while the old 3GS was able to. In fact, it looked as if the 3GS was much better able to pick up a signal.
Now, it could be that there was something wrong with that pre-release IOS 4 which is causing the problem with the new phone but I think not. I think they haven?t optimized the antenna yet or the new antenna doesn?t work as well as advertised.
That's unfounded conjecture.
Anyone with even the slightest amount of wireless experience will quickly tell you that, with an overloaded spectrum, it is a crap shoot which device works and which device doesn't, even with identical hardware and software.
That's unfounded conjecture.
Anyone with even the slightest amount of wireless experience will quickly tell you that, with an overloaded spectrum, it is a crap shoot which device works and which device doesn't, even with identical hardware and software.
Normally I would agree with that but the fact is that he tried it 3 times and the results were the same which leads me to believe that the new antenna’s less sensitive. He tried loading the NT Time page twice on the original demo model, he then switched to the backup demo units and got the same result. The 3GS was able to load most of the page while the new iPhone 4 just kept saying it could not get a connection.
Go watch that video again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmZkr...layer_embedded
What got me the most was the bloggers who didn't turn off there wifi when asked and then continued to blog about how they're still going, such a juvenile attitude. Then you add those who where using internet for gaming, web browsing and what else, downloading a movie off itunes or placing an Ebay bid? If a person isn't interested enough to give the speaker your full attention, why show up at all. No wonder I see an increasing number of articles about multitasking and A.D.D. behavior problems as a result of technology.
But also -- couldn't they have reserved one WiFi channel for internal use only? Just tell all atendees that they are prohibited from using Channel 4, for instance, and that they need to prepare their WiFi devices accordingly before their arrival at Moscone.
Even if some don't comply, and if Apple doesn't want to go Nazi about it, the selected channel would still be much clearer as most of the attendees would have followed the instruction.
What got me the most was the bloggers who didn't turn off there wifi when asked and then continued to blog about how they're still going, such a juvenile attitude.
I'm torn on that one. I followed the Ars and Engadget live blogging (so I'm part of the problem) and found them quite compelling. At the January event I held off and instead followed MacRumors' spoiler-free page (watching the official Apple-produced video hours later). I personally prefer the live blogging.
The problem is determining who decides which live bloggers should be allowed to stay connected.
Then you add those who where using internet for gaming, web browsing and what else, downloading a movie off itunes or placing an Ebay bid?
If this is true --and so far it's just apocryphal-- those people should have been ejected from the event. It's one thing if they want to waste their own time, but another if they harm things for everyone else, including the presenter. It's as if they talked loudly on cell phones during the event - the same level of disrespect.
Hopefully this will all become moot if Apple configures wired Internet access for future keynotes.