Slashdot Mirror


Why Your Clock Radio Is All Abuzz About iPhones

blackbearnh wrote in with a story that's not really about the iPhone, but if your office speakerphones beep like mine does, read on: "If you own an iPhone, you may have noticed that it has a distinct and very annoying effect on clock radios, computer speakers, car radios, and just about anything else with a speaker. The folks at O'Reilly Media aren't immune, so they set out to discover just what is it about iPhones that makes them such bad RF citizens. The iPhones aren't the only bad apples in the cell phone basket and there's not much you can do about the problem. We're really in an interesting time in that there has never been so many high-powered personal transmitters just wandering loose in the world."

397 comments

  1. Psh by waffledoodle · · Score: 5, Funny

    As I understand it, all Apple products have a distortion field.

    1. Re:Psh by theaveng · · Score: 0

      This happened with both my Motorola analog and my Virgin Mobile (Nokia) digital cellphones:

      I lay my phone in a little slot next to the car radio. From time to time I hear "digital noise" like a buzzing. I know I'm about 1 second from hearing my phone ring. Sometimes people ask me, "How'd you know I was calling? It didn't even ring." ;-)

      -
      - posted with LYNX, the Commodore 64 web browser (using 2 kbit/s modem)

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    2. Re:Psh by sexconker · · Score: 0

      WHOOSH!

    3. Re:Psh by theaveng · · Score: 1

      P.S.

      Now imagine the same thing if a Whitespace Device starts broadcasting on channel 18 (directly next to WPLH-17). You won't just get noise. You'll get digital breakup of the television's video, like so: http://broadcastengineering.com/hdtv/video-show-congress-white-space-interference-1014/

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    4. Re:Psh by Detritus · · Score: 4, Informative

      You wouldn't get interference if your television receiver wasn't a POS. We know how to design and build receivers that can operate in hostile RF environments, we just choose not to, because it's cheaper to build the POS.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    5. Re:Psh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not so much a "whoosh" than just tagging onto a top level post with uninteresting drivel.

    6. Re:Psh by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I've been able to listen in on cellular voice pagers on my cable TV for years, somewhere between channels 18 and 20 inclusive (analog). Even modern TVs that don't have manual tuner knobs can be made to tune in between the frequencies to get a better lock.

      When they shut down analog TV, I wonder what interesting new signals one will be able to intercept with old TV sets on those frequencies, especially with the TVs that don't mute themselves when they don't get a good video signal.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    7. Re:Psh by wealthychef · · Score: 1
      Even modern TVs that don't have manual tuner knobs can be made to tune in between the frequencies to get a better lock.

      Really? How do I get my TV to tune in between the frequencies? I don't see that in my manual. :-) I'm honestly interested in how that is done.

      --
      Currently hooked on AMP
    8. Re:Psh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a REALITY distortion field. Perhaps that's what's causing Steve Jobs cancer?

    9. Re:Psh by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      yup, the quality of the receiver is exactly the point, i have a Drake HF/shortwave receiver and an Icom HT (vhf & uhf) and both perform superbly with harmonic image rejection and adjacent channel rejection, i also have a cheap AM/FM stereo receiver (made in China) that is a complete piece of crap that can not receive radio stations beyond 10 or 15 miles away and a strong local station about 5 miles away that bleeds over on just about every frequency in the entire FM band (87.9 to 108 )...

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    10. Re:Psh by theaveng · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except that when an Ipod (or other WSD) is broadcasting on channel 18, not all the signal stays inside channel 18. A lot of it spills-over into WPHL's channel 17. Think of them as the EM equivalent of harmonics of the original signal.

      So you cannot place two broadcasts directly side-by-side and expect it to work. This is not a flaw of design. This is a flaw of nature. "You cannae change the laws of physics" is a favorite joke from Star Trek, but it also happens to be true. A DTV receiver cannot decode WPHL-17's signal when the Ipod/WSD on channel 18 is overflowing its own signal onto the channel.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    11. Re:Psh by tmosley · · Score: 1

      I don't think it has anything to do with the quality. My last cellphone, an LG running on att produced interference on my very nice Bose computer speakers from as far away as 1.5 meters. It does the same for the old TV I have in my bedroom, and both clock radios.

      I also noticed that it can interfere with video camera recording on the sound track. It seems to me that it's more to do with the amount of EM fluctuations than the quality of the sound equipment.

    12. Re:Psh by theaveng · · Score: 1

      >>>When they shut down analog TV, I wonder what interesting new signals one will be able to intercept with old TV sets on those frequencies

      Nothing because those same frequencies will be used to broadcast DTV. Analog and digital television share the same radioband, and your old set will be picking-up the pseudo-random noise of DTV.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    13. Re:Psh by Detritus · · Score: 1

      The FCC requires 47 dB suppression of out-of-band emissions. The following web page has a nice graph of the emission mask:

      OET CLARIFIES EMISSION MASK MEASUREMENTS FOR DTV TRANSMITTERS

      An ATSC receiver can deal with some amount of in-band interference. That's a result of the use of several layers of forward error correction coding to reduce the bit-error-rate at the receiver.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    14. Re:Psh by Mateo13 · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's not the phones, it's the douche bag field emitted by iPhone owners.

    15. Re:Psh by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Really? How do I get my TV to tune in between the frequencies? I don't see that in my manual. :-) I'm honestly interested in how that is done.

      It's not so much "made" to tune between frequencies than it is it wanting to. In my case, it was a matter of switching between the channels on either side repeatedly until it found the desired signal having a stronger lock than one of them, which only happened when the other signal was present: a matter of timing and luck.

      Sometimes the signal was a series of beeps ending in a long beep, other times it included a recorded voice message. I never analyzed the beeps nor attempted to act on any information contained in the voice messages (which occasionally contained call-back numbers). Lock-on was best achieved during a voice message, but it would have to be a long message (most were under 5 seconds).

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    16. Re:Psh by theaveng · · Score: 1

      This happened with both my Motorola analog and my Virgin Mobile (Nokia) digital cellphones:

      I lay my phone in a little slot next to the car radio. From time to time I hear "digital noise" like a buzzing. I know I'm about 1 second from hearing my phone ring. Sometimes people ask me, "How'd you know I was calling? It didn't even ring." ;-)

      -
      - posted with LYNX, the Commodore 64 web browser (using 2 kbit/s modem)

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    17. Re:Psh by theaveng · · Score: 1

      (1) How is the FCC going to enforce that rule on a bunch of Unlicensed devices? We know some cheap Chinese Whitespace Device will probably fail to suppress anything.

      (2) Even with 47 dB suppression of channel 18's "spillover", that's still enough to drown-out a signal on channel 17 that is only -60 or -70 dB at the television receiver. You'll see garbage/pixelization on the screen. Or possibly nothing, given how DTV works (cliff effect).

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    18. Re:Psh by juiceboxfan · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't get interference if your television receiver wasn't a POS. We know how to design and build receivers that can operate in hostile RF environments, we just choose not to, because it's cheaper to build the POS.

      The receivers worked correctly (met minimum specifications) when they were built. Now that the requirements have changed I need to buy a new receiver that will be more expensive because of the tighter tolerances?

      And the old equipment gets sent to a poor country to have the plastic burned away so they can retrieve the metals...
      er... I mean the equipment gets recycled;-)

      That's progress!

      As far as GSM noise goes it's not usually the receiver that picks up the noise. The audio amplifier section was the culprit in an iPod/iPhone product that I worked on in the past. Shielding and filtering of the device is the only way to fix the problem.

    19. Re:Psh by darthdavid · · Score: 1

      The problem here is that your "very nice" Bose speakers are actually pieces of crap that exist solely to drain the money of gullible fools like you.

    20. Re:Psh by tmosley · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Well, fuck you too, buddy.

    21. Re:Psh by vux984 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry buddy, parent poster is needlessly blunt but essentially right.

      There is nothing really wrong with them; they aren't really "crap". Its just that they aren't particularly special. Yet they are marketed (and usually priced) as if they were. The simple reality is that many other brands of speaker perform equally well at a considerably reduced price.

      To put it into slashdot terms, Bose speakers are like Dell's line of gaming PCs. Nothing wrong with them per se; they are certainly functional enough, but they aren't particularly special, and nobody who is serious about gaming and knows hardware is going to be remotely impressed. Meanwhile, compared to a custom rig ordered at newegg or ncix etc the Dell gaming unit cost more and does less.

      Like Bose.

    22. Re:Psh by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Well, I only paid $40 for them at Sams. They were competitively priced, and I have certainly enjoyed them.

      It seems to me that the only way to really avoid having interference is to put a bloody faraday cage around the guts of the speaker, which seems overly extravagant. It's not that big of a hassle.

    23. Re:Psh by theaveng · · Score: 1

      In other words, Bose speakers are to "ordinary" speakers as Lexus is to Toyota. A Lexus is really just a standard Toyota with a +$10,000 markup, in order to bilk people out of their hand-earned cash. It's still the same company, and essentially the same car.

      Same applies to Acura and Honda.

      Or Chrysler and Dodge. (My Dodge Avenger is near-identical to a Chrysler Sebring, except 9000 dollars lower in price.)

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    24. Re:Psh by theaveng · · Score: 1

      I got my Bose PC speakers for free.

      (whistles while walking away). Oh, and they don't sound any better then the cheap no-name brand that came with my PC. You're just buying the label.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
  2. Yes they do! by TheSovereign · · Score: 1, Funny

    Along with the distinct air of Fisher Price

    1. Re:Yes they do! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like Windows XP!

    2. Re:Yes they do! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they look pretty good. The only apple products that do.

      The computers, pre-aluminum did look fisher price
      The iPods are pure Mattel
      The iPhones are... I don't know what, but I don't object to how they look.

  3. Nothing to see here. by HeavyD14 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It just looks like someone has never had a GSM phone before.

    1. Re:Nothing to see here. by Spazztastic · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mod parent up. Cell phones have been doing this since my old Nokia to my new Blackjack II.

      --
      Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    2. Re:Nothing to see here. by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Aircraft COM receivers are particularly sensitive to cellphone interference. If I forget and leave mine on when I fly, I get a very distinctive da-da-daaa da-da-daaa da-da-daaa every few minutes over the radio. From any cell phone.

      --
      "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
    3. Re:Nothing to see here. by g0dsp33d · · Score: 1

      I haven't gotten a chance to test this as my cell doesn't seem to have this problem, but supposedly if you put a magnet around the wires going to your speakers it reduces / removes the buzzing sound. Old USB wires will have a usable magnet in the chubby part near where it plugs in. I'd be interested to know if this works for anyone or if it was just someone's way of earning money on metacafe :-p.

      --
      lol: You see no door there!
    4. Re:Nothing to see here. by gemtech · · Score: 1

      no s$it. I worked with Motorola on hands free car kits, pre-blue tooth. GSM is just a pain in the butt for electrical noise: the packet rate is in the audible frequency range, something under 50Hz.

      --
      Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein
    5. Re:Nothing to see here. by tom17 · · Score: 1

      It's so old they made a song about it last century ffs.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCurWzyu7fM

      Tom...

    6. Re:Nothing to see here. by Bogtha · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, to give some idea of just how non-news this is, I first noticed this effect when Slashdot was called Chips & Dips.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    7. Re:Nothing to see here. by HeavyD14 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, those are called Chokes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_mode_choke

    8. Re:Nothing to see here. by tripdizzle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have never known a cell phone not to have this issue. Perfect example of non-news.

      --
      "A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers." Hayek
    9. Re:Nothing to see here. by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Mod parent up. Cell phones have been doing this since my old Nokia to my new Blackjack II.

      Yup and with some computers you hear static over the speakers before the cell phone rings.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    10. Re:Nothing to see here. by CFTM · · Score: 1

      Is it just limited to GSM? As long as I've had a cell phone (only about 8 years now) I've noticed that 5-10 seconds before the phone begins to ring, if it's near any sort of audio equipment it will produce that distinctive buzz. Although, with the iPhone, it produces it if you just place the phone near the speakers, no phone call required. Here's my simple solution, move the iPhone to a different part of my apartment! Poof no more noise...

      Although if I was a pilot this was drive me nuts...

    11. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's not a magnet. It's ferrite.

    12. Re:Nothing to see here. by norton112200 · · Score: 1

      I've had this problem for years. My friend had an old samsung phone that, everytime if got a text or call, would drive his monitor and speakers crazy with clicking about a second before the phone actually rang...then again, his speakers were notorious for picking up stray signals. It was about a weekly event at dinner time that his family would begin to hear stories from "The Cowboy Trucker" over his computer speakers, who was broadcasting over a CB radio. This is very much a case of improper shielding in electronics...Nice Speakers though.

    13. Re:Nothing to see here. by realisticradical · · Score: 5, Funny

      You've left your cell-phone on when you fly!!! You know that it emits dangerous pilot-killer-rays!

    14. Re:Nothing to see here. by fermion · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is not just GSM phones. My old RAZR had the same problem. At meeting, anytime a phone rings we get all sorts of interference with audio.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    15. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have never known a cell phone not to have this issue. Perfect example of non-news.

      CDMA phones don't.

      If you live in GSM-land, which is most of the world aside from the USA and Canada, you probably can't get one.

    16. Re:Nothing to see here. by tenton · · Score: 1

      That is a cool feature; you get advanced warning (subtle) that the phone is going to ring.

      It used to also give me interference on my CRT, if I left my phone near it, which was the norm. I thought my monitor was dying.

    17. Re:Nothing to see here. by yabos · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's the VOR identifier ;)

    18. Re:Nothing to see here. by inaneframe · · Score: 1

      dun dundundun DUN!

      --
      "Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night." -Asimov
    19. Re:Nothing to see here. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      No joke. Watch CNBC sometime and you can hear everyones CrackBerry going off during the whole show. They finally starting keeping them off set, but many times guests still have them on.

    20. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Links are occasionally helpful.

    21. Re:Nothing to see here. by pas256 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Can slashdot seriously pick up the quality of its posts? It's becoming an epidemic of stupid, time wasting posts. I want the old slashdot back!

    22. Re:Nothing to see here. by sricetx · · Score: 1

      GSM cell phones have this audio interference problem, and I think TDMA phones do. CDMA phones do not exhibit this behavior (at least the Virgin Mobile prepaid phone I had a few years ago didn't, and it used the Sprint CDMA network).

    23. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      As long as it isn't da-da-da daaa-daaa-daaa da-da-da. :-)

    24. Re:Nothing to see here. by JWSmythe · · Score: 3, Insightful

          I don't know how this ever made it to any news source. I'm trying to remember how long ago the first time I noticed it. It's been at least 10 years. My first phone that did it was an old Nextel.

         

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    25. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you live in GSM-land, which is most of the world aside from the USA and Canada, you probably can't get one.

      Not true anymore. In many (most?) countries where GSM is in use the operators have by now also started 3G networks. And UMTS/W-CDMA, the designated 3G successor of GSM, also uses a CDMA air interface. So almost everywhere you should be able to get phones which do not exhibit that feature - just like the iPhone 3G. Of course, basically all these phones are then dual mode GSM/UMTS phones, so if they are logged into the network using GSM (since UMTS is not available), then you will still hear it...

    26. Re:Nothing to see here. by lysergic.acid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      no, don't mod parent up, because he clearly didn't RTFA, which is quite informative and provides a lot of insight into this issue, actually:

      To be fair, the iPhone isn't the first phone that's been reported to have interference issues.
      [...]
      Rodman: We've seen it, well heard it really, quite a bit with GSM and TDMA phones. The source of this is the phone's transmitter, and what it's doing is sending its digital data broken up into very brief packets. Even when it's live, it's only transmitting about 10% of the time. But it's about 200 times a second. So what we're hearing is not so much the data itself, but the envelope, the shape of the packets as they turn on and off. And because we hear the higher frequencies much more clearly and they can interfere more easily than that basic frequency, while we wouldn't hear a 200 cycle tone, that's pretty low, when you interrupt something at that rate, it's kind of like putting a card into a bicycle wheel, you turn it from a gentle waving into a buzz, and it's the edges of that buzz we're so sensitive to.
      [...]
      Rodman believes that the iPhone may be getting singled out because it has such visibility in the marketplace right now.

      so TFA isn't picking on the iPhone here, and in fact the article even defends the iPhone, putting the blame of this phenomenon on other devices:

      At the end of the day, however, Rodman believes that the problem may lie, not in your iPhone dear Brutus, but in your clock radio.

      Rodman: There is confusion about what is responsible for this. Is it that there's one really bad model of cell phone out there that's causing the problems? Or is it that things are receiving it that shouldn't? I'm strongly of the believe that things are receiving it that shouldn't. Devices should be designed in a way that they're more resilient to stray transmitters that come along.

      TFA then goes on to explain that the reason we get these noises in so many electronic devices is because of "Part 15" of the FCC rules, which was put in place to produce cheap consumer electronics, with the trade-off being that consumers have to live with any interference that comes into their electronic devices.

      lastly, it should be pointed out that advanced smartphones like the iPhone put out much more of this noise than a regular cellphone (which usually does this only when a call is received) because of the smartphone's regular high bandwidth data transfers. so that is part of the reason the issue is being brought up in conjunction with the iPhone.

    27. Re:Nothing to see here. by penguinboy · · Score: 1

      It's not just GSM. iDEN phones (Nextel) used to do the exact same thing.

    28. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ferrite around an USB or other cable is to reduce *line noise* *from* your device, not EM radiation.
      Coupling of EM is usually due to bad design i.e. too high impedance at certain points, bad layout of the PCB etc.

      Stef

    29. Re:Nothing to see here. by sexconker · · Score: 3, Informative

      SOS for the Morse intolerant.

    30. Re:Nothing to see here. by alta · · Score: 1

      The phone does it any time it starts a communication with the network. With older phones, that was just during calls and network status checks. Then it started doing it with SMS messages... The iphone is constantly communicating, that's why they dictate you have an unlimited plan.

      And yeah, GSM only, and not limited to ATT or iphone. I'd bet the G1's do it.

      http://www.feelingcingular.com/

      For me, I only need to move by blackberry about 4ft away from my computer speakers. (actually, the speaker wires and the speaker.)

      This is the kind of thing I could see f'n with an EKG or flight control system.

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    31. Re:Nothing to see here. by mi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      everyone's CrackBerry going off

      Yep... I'm relying on the subtle noise, that my *berry makes on the computer-speakers as a mail-notifier... It is, actually kind-convenient — quiet enough not to wake-up the baby, but noticeable enough not to miss an e-mail.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    32. Re:Nothing to see here. by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      That is a cool feature; you get advanced warning (subtle) that the phone is going to ring.

      I thought that was an intentional "feature" of the phone. I wonder why they never marketed it as such.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    33. Re:Nothing to see here. by orclevegam · · Score: 5, Informative

      As the AC pointed out it's not a magnet, it's a ferrite bead. This is a very common thing, and many cables come with one installed already. Just looking at the monitor sitting on my desk I can see a pair of beads on it's VGA cable (one at each end), and they're very common in most high end speaker systems. For cables that don't have them you can pick them up from various places in the form of snap-on cylinders which can either be directly clamped onto the cable, or alternatively you can wrap the cord around the bead once or twice before clamping it, which will hold it in place on the cable and also serves to improve the filtering slightly.

      They're a very simple passive device that works by disrupting high frequency RF passing through the cord. Since any large (long) conductor can function as an antenna, most cables are really just giant antenna, so adding a ferrite bead is a really cheap and simple way to counteract this. As for interference within a speaker itself (that is, not arriving by way of the speakerwire used to hook it up) there's not much you can do other than putting a Faraday cage around the speaker, or just moving the source of noise farther away from the speaker.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    34. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Supposedly, Polycom's new phones don't buzz. I can't find a good link, but here's some marketing-speak: http://www.nomorebuzz.com/Register.aspx

    35. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How long before Apple submits a patent for "Preemptive Ringing Technology"?

    36. Re:Nothing to see here. by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      Yup, the Moto i880 my work uses for the rotating support phone does this. (my Sanyo PM-8200 personal cell does not).

      Actually, anytime the phone is in use anywhere near my PC speakers I get a rhythmic pulse of EM interference -- annoying as hell for those times I am working from home and get a support call (unplugging the speakers is about the only fix).

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    37. Re:Nothing to see here. by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      I want the old slashdot back!

      You must be new here.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    38. Re:Nothing to see here. by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      The RAZR *is* a GSM phone.

    39. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aircraft COM receivers are particularly sensitive to cellphone interference. If I forget and leave mine on when I fly, I get a very distinctive da-da-daaa da-da-daaa da-da-daaa every few minutes over the radio. From any cell phone.

      The phone's interference is probably getting in through your headset cable, not the COM radio. Try keeping the phone a little farther from the cable going to your headset. If that doesn't work, I'm guessing you're flying some fairly old/unshielded avionics, and I'd recommend turning off that cell before you go IFR. :)

    40. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      everyone's CrackBerry going off

      Yep... I'm relying on the subtle noise, that my *berry makes on the computer-speakers as a mail-notifier... It is, actually kind-convenient — quiet enough not to wake-up the baby, but noticeable enough not to miss an e-mail.

      Several phones these days have a setting called 'vibrate' that is also nearly guaranteed to not wake up any sleeping babies. And, if you just put the phone unencumbered on a flat surface, assuming the vibrator (*snicker*) is strong enough, you'll see your phone shimmy and shake, as well as making your flat surface reverberate, making the vibes a bit louder.

    41. Re:Nothing to see here. by OrangeTide · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed. It is a well known phenomenon. I end up turning my blackberry off or leaving it in the kitchen on game/movie night because it makes all sorts of funny beeps on the surround system. I don't think people realize how powerful the transmitter in a cell phone is, and that it is not unique to iPhone.

      Apple customers tend to be rather picky and vocal about any possible defect with Jobs' perfect little products.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    42. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Switch to a cell phone provider that doesn't use GSM. The issue isn't there. CDMA phones do not have this problem.

    43. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If cellphone signals could take down an airplane, dont you think the terrorists would have figured that out by now?

    44. Re:Nothing to see here. by tomz16 · · Score: 1

      No... not JUST GSM. There were several versions of CDMA RAZR's as well (all were very popular sellers). Google "v3c" for the first one.

    45. Re:Nothing to see here. by FuckTheModerators · · Score: 1

      Yep. The last place I worked, all our Verizon Blackberries (CDMA) did this, most noticeably on speakerphones during conference calls.

    46. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      there's not much you can do other than putting a Faraday cage around the speaker,

      ...how about putting a Faraday cage around the phone instead?

    47. Re:Nothing to see here. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Oh, great. NOW you did it. Go and create a rift in the time/space continuum why don't you! You created a paradox! Now, we're all doomed! Doomed I say!

    48. Re:Nothing to see here. by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      >

      Yup and with some computers you hear static over the speakers before the cell phone rings.

      And you hear it occasionally even if there is no incoming call. Either the phone is touching the base or the base is touching the phone.

      But as others have pointed out, this has always occurred with GSM phones. I've experienced it often enough in the last 8 years.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    49. Re:Nothing to see here. by orclevegam · · Score: 0, Redundant

      there's not much you can do other than putting a Faraday cage around the speaker,

      ...how about putting a Faraday cage around the phone instead?

      That would work of course, but really defeats the purpose of having the phone in the first place. I suspect this was intended as flamebait so I'm not going to respond to any further posts along this vein.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    50. Re:Nothing to see here. by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Saw this with a PC. Set a cell phone on top of the computer, call said cell phone, and the PC would reboot...

      Turns out the PSU was bad, and the call "spike" along the PSU's PG line was JUST enough to cause a reset...

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    51. Re:Nothing to see here. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      My question is: doesn't this violate FCC regulations on electronics?

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    52. Re:Nothing to see here. by slacktide · · Score: 1

      Me too. It's a lot worse in one airplane I fly that has MAC drop-in replacements for old Narcos, than the other plane I fly with newer King radios. On the plus side, as long as I'm withing reasonable distance of a populated area, I often see a 3G connection so long as I'm under 5500 AGL or so.

    53. Re:Nothing to see here. by Gilmoure · · Score: 2, Funny

      I have an iphone but no one's ever called me. Sigh.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    54. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Informative? The RAZR was probably a GSM phone (mine is) if it is T-Mobile or ATT. Verizon RAZRs are CDMA.

    55. Re:Nothing to see here. by billcopc · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not so much the computer as it is the speakers themselves. The long cheap unshielded speaker wires pick up GSM interference, whose lower harmonics result in that distinctive buzzing sound. The speaker wire basically acts as an antenna.

      Digital speakers obviously don't suffer from this phenomenon, but they're hard to find outside of pro-audio circles and the occasional cheapo USB speaker set.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    56. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee I don't know... maybe because you want the phone to be able to transmit and receive radio signals to do things like make phone calls?

    57. Re:Nothing to see here. by greed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yup. And your cell phone in GTA IV is a GSM phone: just before it rings, you get that distortion on the vehicle radio.

      You also get a burst of distortion when you leave the tunnel, as the phone re-syncs to the network. (Which is weird, because both the Holland and Lincoln tunnels have lossy transmission line-based cell repeaters in them. They even have regular radio repeated into the tunnel--but they'll interrupt regular broadcasts for tunnel information.) (And now I don't remember if the GTA IV phone works in the tunnel, which would make it even more weird.)

    58. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want the old slashdot back!

      If it really bothers you that much, go ahead and roll your own, better version of Slashdot. Put on there nothing but the creme de la creme articles that fit your vision of what a tech news-aggregator should be.

      And watch as absolutely nobody goes to it, since starting up a new website in this unbelievably massive Sea of Mediocrity means that yours will be completely ignored. People will still go to Slashdot because they've always gone to Slashdot. Regardless of how poor the story selection is and regardless of how bad the writing/editing is, and regardless of how much they piss off their userbase, people will always come here because the site's big and old and they've been coming here for years.

      Because that's the way the Internet works. User Friendly, [H]ard|OCP, GameSpot, and several others have content that's just as spotty, just as poorly put together, and are just as popular, because they were first to do something when there were a mere handful of sites.

      It's essentially broken, and there's little you can do to change it.

    59. Re:Nothing to see here. by Fahrvergnuugen · · Score: 1

      I tried using chokes directly on my desktop speaker cables with no avail. The speaker's internal amplifier is probably picking up the interference.

      I wish I could find a solution to this, it drives insane!

      --
      Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
    60. Re:Nothing to see here. by Tim+Doran · · Score: 1

      "...there's not much you can do other than putting a Faraday cage around the speaker"

      Bah, too many speakers in my house. Much simpler to put the iPhone in a Faraday cage.

    61. Re:Nothing to see here. by mollymoo · · Score: 1

      The Razr name has been used for a few different models covering just about every market and network on the planet.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    62. Re:Nothing to see here. by Phat_Tony · · Score: 1

      Are you flying around with an old chair in the back of the plane that you picked up off the side of the runway? Because I've heard that is often accompanied by a "da da daaa" sound.

      --
      Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
    63. Re:Nothing to see here. by sponga · · Score: 1

      Yes that is true, I used to set my cellphone right beneath my screen and it would go blurry in the right corner where the phone was at before it would ring.

      When I would have people over I used to try to freak them out that I was psychic.
      Screen would go blurry and I would say "I sense that someone is going to try to call you" *ring* *ring*.
      The girls were always more gullable than the guys.

    64. Re:Nothing to see here. by bendodge · · Score: 1

      I can up that; I would 'hear' my old CRT while wearing headphones for audio editing. It was annoying for audio work in general, but it was kinda handy when some longish plugin was running and I would hear a high-pitched twizzit when the status window closed (the more area of the screen changing the more distinct it was). It was a very quiet, high sound without any distinctive click or pop - just an indistinct sound. I don't know if it was the CRT itself or the VGA cable running next to the speaker wire. Now I have an LCD with DVI and don't get that anymore.

      --
      The government can't save you.
    65. Re:Nothing to see here. by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      You mean it plays Beethoven's fifth?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    66. Re:Nothing to see here. by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't specifically GSM, but TDMA (time division multiple access), which is part of the GSM, iDEN, and D-AMPS standards.

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    67. Re:Nothing to see here. by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      If I forget and leave mine on when I fly, I get a very distinctive da-da-daaa da-da-daaa da-da-daaa every few minutes over the radio.

      That's not a problem with the phone. During certain hours, air traffic control is actually staffed by babies.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    68. Re:Nothing to see here. by jcuervo · · Score: 1

      More magic?

      --
      Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
    69. Re:Nothing to see here. by NoStrings · · Score: 1

      It could be the "Imperial March" from Star Wars.

    70. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RAZR...Old Cingular Network...Now ATT...not GSM

    71. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me me me! I saw it first!

      Here goes:

      W H O O S H ! ! !

    72. Re:Nothing to see here. by darkshadow · · Score: 1

      I used to here CB conversations on my computer speakers.

      --
      -Darkshadow (There was a thing called Heaven; but all the same they used to drink enormous quantities of alcohol.)
    73. Re:Nothing to see here. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      it is not a feature, it is the handshake sequence.
      my pda phone switches the screen on when the handshake sequence begins, so i could know there will be an incoming call or a short message in a second.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    74. Re:Nothing to see here. by tananda · · Score: 1

      In fact, it doesn't even have to ring at all. With my Treo (which, of course, is GSM), it does that any time it does anything with the network. This includes incoming texts, checking email, or even just renegotiating with the nearest tower.

      --
      I used to think Peter Shipley was cool. Then I aged past 16.
    75. Re:Nothing to see here. by snowraver1 · · Score: 1

      Not during the reboot, just magic then.

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    76. Re:Nothing to see here. by chibiace · · Score: 0

      its the phones transmitter. if it was the tower you would get it all the time, then die of cancer a week later.

      --
      he who controls the spice controls the universe
    77. Re:Nothing to see here. by Chairboy · · Score: 1

      I've had the same problem, but I determined quickly that it wasn't actually the COM that was picking up the interference, it was the intercom. When I activate the Pilot Isolate function on my intercom, I no longer hear interference from my phone. It's a useful tool when flying a challenging approach or working Class B airspace or other com heavy flight.

      A suggestion to other pilots, as an experiment, try your pilot isolate function to see if the interference continues. It's not a cure-all, but if it works, it's a useful tool for the right times. Heck, I now fly w/ pilot iso enabled all the time when I'm flying solo, except for when I want to hear my own voice as accompaniment while singing off-pitch melodies or beatboxes to myself over the middle of nowhere.

    78. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Old Cingular network is GSM. ID10T

    79. Re:Nothing to see here. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Yup. CDMA phones (whether Qualcomm cdmaOne, Qualcomm CDMA2000, or UMTS WCDMA) don't cause this problem, as they transmit continuously and use some mathematical tricks to allow multiple devices to transmit on the same frequency at the same time and still allow the receiver to distinguish between them.

      Thus the iPhone 3G in a 3G service area SHOULD be nice and quiet.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    80. Re:Nothing to see here. by dloseke · · Score: 1

      Back when I had a Nextel 7 years ago, it happened on everything to PC speakers, projectors, big screen TV's, etc. In fact, we would know that someone was going to get a call on their Nextel before the phone even rang by at least 1-2 seconds.

    81. Re:Nothing to see here. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nope. RTFA, Part 15 devices (consumer electronics, not the phones) have the following regulations:
      1) Cannot interfere with devices in a "higher priority" classification (such as a licensed transmitter)
      2) Must accept interference from devices in a "higher priority" classification, such as a licensed transmitter. Cell phones are, effectively, licensed transmitter. The user themselves doesn't have the license, but the carrier does.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    82. Re:Nothing to see here. by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      I have an iphone but no one's ever called me. Sigh.

      If you share your number with us I am sure this could be changed. I am not promising that you would actually want to talk with these people ;)

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    83. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah. Bush isn't that smart.

    84. Re:Nothing to see here. by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Which stretch of cable needs the ferrite? The line level cable from source to amp, or the amplified speaker level cable?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    85. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Morse intolerant

      It is my personal opinion that all Morse people should be rounded up and shot.

    86. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you had a PCS/CDMA (think sprint or verizon in the USA) RAZR then your RAZR GSM...

    87. Re:Nothing to see here. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing. I can tell when a GSM cell phone is getting a call in about a 15 meter radius of my desk from the clicking over my PC's speakers.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    88. Re:Nothing to see here. by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      When ONE phone can create a da-da-daaa da-da-daaa da-da-daaa every few minutes in his radio, I imagine dozens of phones in a commercial jet, while not bringing it down directly, would drive the pilot nuts pretty quick.

      And communication interference can be a cause for crashes, like in the 1977 Tenerife airport disaster.

      I would estimate a communication interference at a critical moment is more dangerous to the plane than all the nail clippers that are not allowed on board any more.

    89. Re:Nothing to see here. by deniable · · Score: 1

      Yep, I grabbed an old one of those from work to put around our phone line. We got a local radio station straight through the phone. It was great that you could get the cricket scores from the phone without making a call.

    90. Re:Nothing to see here. by repapetilto · · Score: 1

      have you ever tried turning the speakers off?

    91. Re:Nothing to see here. by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      Yes, I've turned them off, the only thing that makes a difference is to unplug them from the PC and remove them from the room.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    92. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep... I'm relying on the subtle noise, that my *berry makes on the computer-speakers as a mail-notifier... It is, actually kind-convenient -- quiet enough not to wake-up the baby, but noticeable enough not to miss an e-mail.

      Do yourself a huge favor: you can, and should, train your baby to sleep through pretty much anything. Never make any special effort to be quiet around a sleeping infant or toddler.

      (I thought this practice was batshit nuts when I first heard of it, but I came to appreciate it damn fast when the baby-mama in question and I moved in together.)

    93. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Utilization of an Anti-Static bag is truely effective at solving this problem. The metallic properties of the bag actually disperse the frequency that causes the buzzing. Simply place your phone on top of the bag. Voila problem solved. So simple. And there is no effect to the signal strength of your phone. I put my phone into diag mode. Checked the signal strength both without the bag and with the phone on the bag. There was an insignificant loss of signal strength. Power normally used to boost signal was not effected. If you can't find an anti-static bag you can get them at http://www.stopthebuzzin.com/

    94. Re:Nothing to see here. by tcgroat · · Score: 1

      If the device being interfered with has a "CE" mark, that means it's supposed to pass several IEC RF immunity tests. Recent changes have added higher frequencies to the test, to address the operating frequencies of newer cell phones etc. The performance levels for consumer-grade equipment aren't especially high, but are much better than nothing at all. 2W radiated from a cell phone should not exceed the test level (3V/m) at 3m distance from the antenna. So equipment in the next room should be OK, but anything within arm's reach of the phone user is in a much stronger field and likely to be interfered with.

    95. Re:Nothing to see here. by repapetilto · · Score: 1

      Interesting... I just realized I don't know enough about the electronics involved to figure that one out without spending a day on it but someone else should propose a theory

    96. Re:Nothing to see here. by CheshireDragon · · Score: 1

      same here, I was working at Nextel in 2000. It was my first phone as well. I had one i500 and one i720(looked water proof cause of the yellow) They made my old CTX VL700 series monitor flicker a few times before it rang. Made the speakers on my home stereo buzz or that CH CH CH CHHHHHH sound hehe

      --
      "That's right...I said it."
    97. Re:Nothing to see here. by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Except that, at least for me, 95% of the time it buzzes at me it's not in preface to getting a call, and I guess just part of some periodic checkin or something.

      As it is, it drives me bonkers and is one of my bigger reasons for hating cell phones. Before I put my old crappy phone through the washer, I was known to throw it across the room when it would do that, both because of annoyance and because I needed to get it 10 or 15 feet away from any amplified speakers and I was too lazy to get up. If I'm wearing headphones it's also caused me to rip the headphones off my ears to avoid going deaf because it's too loud.

      I despise this interference.

    98. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two words...

      Anger Management

    99. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Powerful? Ha, my 5 watt hand held HAM radio laughs at your puny phone!

    100. Re:Nothing to see here. by laddiebuck · · Score: 1

      Funny, with me it's always a da-da-da-daaaaa. Seriously. I mean, I do get two da's before the daaaaa somtimes, but almost always three.

    101. Re:Nothing to see here. by kauttapiste · · Score: 1

      there's not much you can do other than putting a Faraday cage around the speaker,

      ...how about putting a Faraday cage around the phone instead?

      ...how about nuking it from the orbit? It's the only way to be sure!

    102. Re:Nothing to see here. by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      OK, my mistake. I thought he meant GSM as opposed to digital. I hadn't realised there was more than on digital standard for cell phones as we only really have GSM here in the UK and not CDMA or anything else.

    103. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might consider putting a cage around Faraday ..... no ?

    104. Re:Nothing to see here. by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Indeed - what is this, welcome to 1998?

      I guess it's an amusing downside of the "Apple invented it first" nonsense. Just as we get Iphone fans going "OMG I can access the Interwebs, aren't Apple great!" as if no one had ever done that before, it also means that any problems with phones are assumed to be Apple-only issues.

      I can't wait for someone to tout this as an Apple-only advantage - "The Iphone lets me know I'm going to receive a call even before it rings! Aren't Apple great!"

      I look forward to the article "How the Iphone allows people to talk to people who aren't even in the same room as you"...

    105. Re:Nothing to see here. by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      Sorry for the late reply. Both of them actually. A ferrite bead isn't going to cause problems in most cases, so you can always "play it safe" and just chuck a couple on every cable you have. The only cable I can think of that it might have a negative effect on is possibly the AC cable coming from the wall, but even then I'm not sure. I'm not an EE, I'm just familiar with using the things on my various electronics (I've dabbled in electronics, so I can build a basic circuit, I'm just not professionally trained). There is a bit of math concerning the size and shape of the bead that determines exactly what signals it filters, and all the ones I've seen for power cables have been giant ones, but then again that could also be a function of the thickness of the cable it's wrapped around. Really I'd say just grab a few of the small-medium sized ones and snap them on and see if that helps, they should be really cheap (like maybe 10-25 cents a piece) so no real reason not to try it.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    106. Re:Nothing to see here. by coolsnowmen · · Score: 1

      The ferrite bead is acting as a one turn inductor in the magnetic field which acts as as a EM filter.

      Normally you would place this on the last leg to the transducer (speakers), but really that depends on the amount of amplification, and the filters on the amp itself.

      If you don't put it on the source -> amp line, and the amplification is high, now we have a noise that might be too loud to filter out. If you don't put it on the amp->transducer line then the noise is on an unfiltered path and could easily reach the threshold of hearing.

      It also depends on the length of the wires and the envelope frequency of the noise. When the length of wire is a multiple/fraction of the wavelength than it becomes a better antenna at that frequency.

    107. Re:Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Final Fantasy battle victory music

    108. Re:Nothing to see here. by xaositects · · Score: 1

      no that's from a Morrissey song...

    109. Re:Nothing to see here. by tenton · · Score: 1

      I know when I used to leave my GSM phone near my speakers, the "about to ring" sound was different than the "is the network still there" sound. So it was still a preview that I was about to get a call.

      I solve the issue by putting my phone in a slightly different place. For me, the phone had to be practically next to the speaker (or CRT monitor, but I fixed that with a 24" LCD. }> ).

    110. Re:Nothing to see here. by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Yea, my cell is only 3 Watts. Not that there is a huge difference between 3W and 5W.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    111. Re:Nothing to see here. by RomulusNR · · Score: 1

      This.

      It's really amazing for someone (esp. at O'Reilly) to make a statement that devices that emit EM radiation by both design and intended function are "bad apples". It's like saying your TV is behaving badly by having its screen be altered by nearby television signals.

      Actually, the culprit is more likely the poor shielding in your clock radio or PBX phone or cheap PC speakers (which are not intended to care about open-air RF*) than it is your wireless phone (which specifically is).

      (*Unless they are wireless speakers, of course.)

      --
      Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
    112. Re:Nothing to see here. by grim-one · · Score: 1

      It has the keyword 'iPhone' and a hint of controversy/scandal.

    113. Re:Nothing to see here. by sglines · · Score: 1

      I did that but my employer given Blackberry (GSM) still rattles the speakers whenever contacting the mother ship while my personal (Verizon) Palm Treo doesn't.

    114. Re:Nothing to see here. by Agripa · · Score: 1

      As for interference within a speaker itself (that is, not arriving by way of the speakerwire used to hook it up) there's not much you can do other than putting a Faraday cage around the speaker, or just moving the source of noise farther away from the speaker.

      The problem here is not the speaker itself but instead is the audio amplifier driving it or the signal source. Almost any transmitter using time division multiple access which includes GSM can cause this type of interference in electronics that are not designed and built to be resistant to it which includes shielding and filtering. The problem is the same AM rectification one associated with CB radios, HAM AM transmitters, and occasionally AM broadcast transmitters. In the case of the TDMA noise coming from a speaker, even if the amplifier is shielded the RF can get to it via either the input leads going to the audio source or more likely the output leads going to the speaker which are usually unshielded. AM rectification in any non-linear components (usually diodes or bipolar transistors but field effect transistors can do it also) cause bias changes which can be annoyingly audible at the speaker. In extreme cases, the bias voltage change and rectification can cause oscillation and catastrophic destruction in an audio output stage but this is normally associated with marginally stable power FET designs and their tube predecessors. Sometimes the steps taken in a design to make it more rugged like adding protection diodes makes the AM rectification problem worse.

      While consumer electronics has to meet specifications for emitting harmful RF interference, this does not usually include susceptibility. It is common for the FCC nameplate to state, "(1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation." The later usually means you have no legal recourse against the manufacturer or operator of the transmitter associated with the problem unless they are operating unlawfully in some way.

      I have occasionally worked in areas where TDMA and AM transmitters were forbidden while constant envelope transmitters (FM, PSK, most QAM) were permitted. While it would be nice to make all electronic designs immune to AM RF rectification, it is not always feasible.

    115. Re:Nothing to see here. by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's because the only terrorists that are not an illusion to create FUD, are in your government right now...

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  4. GSM Buzz by russotto · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not just the iPhone. It's any GSM phone. Google "GSM Buzz". Meet the "GSM Devil", which relies on this interference to tell you you're phone is about to ring. http://shop.mopodmania.net/product.sc?categoryId=1&productId=15

    1. Re:GSM Buzz by eln · · Score: 1

      Yes, all GSM phones do this. However, since this article mentions the iPhone, it's automatically posted to the front page of Slashdot.

      Aren't most iPhones still on the AT&T network, what with the whole exclusivity thing? AT&T uses GSM. My Palm Treo on AT&T does the same thing, as did my Razr before it.

    2. Re:GSM Buzz by nine-times · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Correct, lots of cell phones do this. If people are noticing it more with the iPhone, it's probably because people are more likely to want to hook the iPhone into audio equipment than with other cell phones.

    3. Re:GSM Buzz by bloodninja · · Score: 5, Funny

      Meet the "GSM Devil"

      I put on my robe and wizard's hat.

      --
      Lock the wife and the dog in the boot of the car.
      Return one hour later.
      Who's happy to see you?
    4. Re:GSM Buzz by DingerX · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's because the iPhone uses the data network more often. I throw my GSM on the table by my speakers, and it'll buzz once or twice a day for reasons unrelated to incoming messages/calls. But if you have an iPhone that tries to automatically check your email every few minutes and does so across the network, it's going to be a real PITA.

    5. Re:GSM Buzz by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      AT&T or not, all iPhones are GSM.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    6. Re:GSM Buzz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not even just GSM. It's any DIGITAL cell phone. (Which is all of them these days.) I had a Nokia 6800 series 10 years ago that did the same thing whenever it got a call. The iPhone just uses the network a lot more often, so you're more likely to catch it in the act.

    7. Re:GSM Buzz by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I don't know-- I've seen it with multiple of my own phones, phones without data capabilities from both Nokia and Motorola, before I got my iPhone. And I've definitely seen it from GSM phones, without data, when they weren't receiving a call or text message.

      Phones constantly check in with towers even when there's no specific activity, meaning the radio is sending/receiving signals even when you're not talking or sending data. There may be an increase in frequency or intensity of these noises with the iPhone, but not enough that I've noticed or thought it was remarkable.

    8. Re:GSM Buzz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not even just GSM. It's any DIGITAL cell phone. (Which is all of them these days.) I had a Nokia 6800 series 10 years ago that did the same thing

      The Nokia 6800 is/was a GSM phone...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_6800

    9. Re:GSM Buzz by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Roll initiative

    10. Re:GSM Buzz by martinw89 · · Score: 1

      I put on my robe and wizard's hat.

      As long as you don't follow that by locking your wife in your car.

    11. Re:GSM Buzz by bloodninja · · Score: 1

      Of course not. I cast Level three Eroticism.

      --
      Lock the wife and the dog in the boot of the car.
      Return one hour later.
      Who's happy to see you?
    12. Re:GSM Buzz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.hackszine.com/blog/archive/2008/07/buzz_kill_stopping_iphone_gsm.html

    13. Re:GSM Buzz by X_Bones · · Score: 1

      Meet the "GSM Devil", which relies on this interference to tell you you're phone is about to ring.

      ...seriously?

      You mean someone actually said "by God I should NOT have to wait that extra 1.2 seconds to hear my phone ring!" and went off and invented this?

    14. Re:GSM Buzz by Arterion · · Score: 1

      Google "bloodninja".

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
    15. Re:GSM Buzz by martinw89 · · Score: 1

      Yeah I get that part :)

    16. Re:GSM Buzz by pimpimpim · · Score: 1

      Since you can use your iPhone to hook up to your stereo, is it possible to turn it's antenna off? Actually, this could be a reason not to merge the device that you use to play all your audio with your cellphone. It's like recording a feature movie with your cellphone and then getting a call.

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    17. Re:GSM Buzz by nine-times · · Score: 1

      You can put it in airplane mode, which I'm sure would do the trick. But also I believe that any equipment that is specifically designed to be used with the iPhone should be shielded against the interference.

  5. All GSM phones do that! by Nick+Ives · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maybe it's just because you guys aren't used to GSM cellphones but over here in the UK everyone recognises that noise. Anytime you put a mobile next to speakers you get that noise.

    Welcome to the 1990s, America!

    --
    Nick
    1. Re:All GSM phones do that! by rufus+t+firefly · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's just because you guys aren't used to GSM cellphones but over here in the UK everyone recognises that noise. Anytime you put a mobile next to speakers you get that noise.

      Welcome to the 1990s, America!

      Funny how this post got +5, Informative for the same thing you just said, yet your post is sitting at +1, Troll.

      --
      "He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
    2. Re:All GSM phones do that! by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      These people know full well that GSM buzz has been around for years (even in the luddite, technology deprived United States) are merely playing off the iPhone hype (sorry, this statement was redundant.) What I find cool is that the GSM buzz is so well known it has made it's way into the metaverse, by way of the video game Grand Theft Auto IV. If the player is riding in a car and he is about to get a call (in the game) there will be a few bits of buzz right before the ringing is heard. At first I thought it was a quirk in the music being played, but after it happened a few times I knew exactly what they were doing. There you have it, GSM buzz embedded in metaculture.

    3. Re:All GSM phones do that! by russotto · · Score: 3, Funny

      Funny how this post got +5, Informative for the same thing you just said, yet your post is sitting at +1, Troll.

      Slashtip: Including a link to a silly gadget is always worth karma. Bashing the US can go either way.

    4. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To the fuckwits who moderated the parent "troll", Ewe Ess Ay, Ewe Ess Ay.

    5. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      That buzz in GTA drove me mental. Each time I heard it I instinctively looked at my phone assuming I had received a txt! I agree that it was a very cool touch.

      It works in real life too like at house parties, people that have their phones on vibrate sneak a quick look at their phones when the PA gives off the GSM buzz.

      --
      Nick
    6. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      I assume it's because I insinuated that the USA is technologically inferior. I actually didn't realise that the USA has GSM, I assumed it was all CDMA. That was the only explanation that popped into my head as to why the guys at O'Reilly hadn't heard the GSM buzz before.

      --
      Nick
    7. Re:All GSM phones do that! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Funny how this post got +5, Informative for the same thing you just said, yet your post is sitting at +1, Troll.

      That's ok, it wil finally be moderated correctly: -1, Redundant.

    8. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Moridineas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You insinuated that the USA is technologically inferior becase we've been living without the GSM buzz? Huh... :p

      Verizon/Sprint/Alltell are the only big CDMA players left in the US afaik.

    9. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      You assumed it was all CDMA, yet we were somehow experiencing the GSM buzz with our GSM iPhones which... don't connect to a network?

      Sorry, but that's a big logic fail....

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    10. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      Read a bit closer. The iPhone is clearly a GSM device. My OP clearly shows understanding of this fact. I assumed that GSM was somehow a new or uncommon thing in America, i.e. it was new enough that the people who work for O'Reilly, a very well known tech publishing firm, hadn't heard of this GSM artefact.

      So this whole thread is just a misunderstanding on my part combined with a cheeky little comment leading sense of humour failure somewhere between me and today's moderators.

      --
      Nick
    11. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      It happens sometimes. Certainly you shouldn't have been modded down.

      Just so you have the full picture, there are two separate GSM providers in the US and, I think, three CDMA providers. All of them have been around for quite a while. I'm quite sure that this article is just a lame attempt to mooch off the iPhone's popularity for ad hits, not any legitimate surprise or concern on the part of the O'Reilly writers.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    12. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Gee, could it be the random insult to everybody in North America? Sounds like a troll to me.

      And it makes no damn sense... even if it was true that there were no GSM phones in the US before the iPhone (it's not), are we being insulted because our cellphones don't interfere with speakers? That has to be the worst insult in history.

    13. Re:All GSM phones do that! by chromatic · · Score: 1

      I'm quite sure that this article is just a lame attempt to mooch off the iPhone's popularity for ad hits...

      There are no paid ads in the article.

      ... not any legitimate surprise or concern on the part of the O'Reilly writers.

      Actually, the idea for the article came from a conference call where we kept getting interference, and it was because two participants had their shiny new iPhones in the room. We've all heard this type of interference before, but never as much as with the iPhone. James decided to talk to the FCC and Apple and whoever else would discuss things in a way that an interested layman could understand.

    14. Re:All GSM phones do that! by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 1

      >>Anytime you put a mobile next to speakers you get that noise.

      My T-Mobile phone was GSM and it didn't do this. It was rare. My AT&T phones did this all the time. T-Mobile typically uses a higher frequency than AT&T (like GSM850/900 ? on AT&T and GSM1800/1900 ? on T-Mobile.) My T-Mobile would sometimes roam onto AT&T towers then it would do this.

      Anyway, my TV which is 15 feet away from my phone picks up the AT&T signals. My alarm clock, 10 feet away from the phone, picks up these signals. You don't have to put them right next to it.

      If you get really annoyed by this, you need to Google RF shield or RF shield pouch. This search will show you items and material you can place around your alarm clock or radio to block a lot of RF radiation. As I understand it, some of these are really frequency specific so you could block out the GSM signals while still allowing the FM signals. Many of these items are made to drop your phone into, however placing your alarm clock into such material should decrease these irritating noises.

      BTW -- In the US, most electrical items state right in the manual that they MUST receive all interference. I always have wondered why this is.

    15. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      Yup, the two GSM providers are AT&T and T-Mobile (formerly three, Cingular/new AT&T, T-Mobile/VoiceStream and the original AT&T Wireless). There's two national CDMA providers (Sprint and Verizon), one national iDEN provider (Sprint Nextel), and a handful of regional CDMA providers (MetroPCS, Cricket, Alltel, USCellular among others) and Cincinnati Bell is the only sizeable regional GSM provider

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    16. Re:All GSM phones do that! by flahwho · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised he got modded up saying that it was the 90's. You DOLT! We're 8 years in to the new millennium!

    17. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      That is why you don't want GSM anywhere near audio equipment, or at least, turn it off. I've seen it trip up podcasters that forget to turn their GSM phone off when recording.

      I haven't had that kind of interference from my CDMA phones, though I don't understand why.

    18. Re:All GSM phones do that! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Don't both Europe and the US bow to Japan as the high-tech overlords?

      'Cause they don't use GSM. Just sayin'. :)

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    19. Re:All GSM phones do that! by bmwEnthusiast · · Score: 1

      I remember my first web dev job. I got a 21' monitor replaced because my phone would make the screen shake when it was set to closely. (found that out later) Phones have been emitting these death rays for years! Now because its an iPhone suddenly its newsworthy? Yikes!

    20. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is most of America uses CDMA which does not cause this annoying interference (and in general is a better technology). More people are noticing it because of the Jobs Hype Machine.

    21. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      CDMA operates by using mathematical tricks to allow multiple phones to transmit at the same time on the same frequency and only interfere with each other slightly. As a result a CDMA phone in a call is always transmitting.

      GSM, iDEN, and D-AMPS (long dead, formerly simply called "TDMA") all use a TDMA access scheme, where each phone is assigned a timeslot it can transmit in. Thus the transmitter keeps keying on and off, and this on/off keying is what gets translated into a low-duty-cycle square wave tone that you hear.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    22. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      There are no paid ads in the article.

      Please don't insult my intelligence. You sell books, and there are a bunch of book recommendations right in the sidebar. Increased traffic benefits you monetarily. It doesn't have to be in the form of getting a fraction of a cent per hit from Google for that to be the case.

      Actually, the idea for the article came from a conference call where we kept getting interference, and it was because two participants had their shiny new iPhones in the room. We've all heard this type of interference before, but never as much as with the iPhone. James decided to talk to the FCC and Apple and whoever else would discuss things in a way that an interested layman could understand.

      Except that it's not presented as "this is what every GSM phone does", it is presented as "this is what iPhones [the hottest new cell phone out there which everybody is abuzz about, come see us talk about it] do".

      I'm not criticizing terribly much, here, but it's pretty obviously capitalizing on the iPhone's current popularity rather than simply being a straight informative article.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    23. Re:All GSM phones do that! by chromatic · · Score: 1

      Please don't insult my intelligence.

      Are you now pretending you didn't imply that the only reason we published this article was for, and I quote you directly, "ad hits"?

      Except that it's not presented as "this is what every GSM phone does", it is presented as "this is what iPhones [the hottest new cell phone out there which everybody is abuzz about, come see us talk about it] do".

      From the article:

      To be fair, the iPhone isn't the first phone that's been reported to have interference issues....

      But Rodman also thinks that beyond just plain visibility, the iPhone also causes problems because there's so much high bandwidth data transfer occuring so regularly with an iPhone.

    24. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Are you now pretending you didn't imply that the only reason we published this article was for, and I quote you directly, "ad hits"?

      Those links on the side advertising iPhone: The Missing Manual ($24.99), Building Internet Firewalls ($49.95) and Essential System Administration ($54.95) are all advertisements, even if they're for your own product and are therefore "free".

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    25. Re:All GSM phones do that! by chromatic · · Score: 1

      Indeed they are. Are you so offended that still believe that the only (or even primary) reason James spent several hours organizing interviews, editing the audio, and trying to navigate the black holes of information that are the FCC and Apple's media contacts was to get a few eyeballs on little book covers? Frankly, I'd be ashamed if I couldn't write a stupid little opinion piece in 20 minutes that raised this much discussion at least on Digg -- if I cared about ad impressions, that is.

    26. Re:All GSM phones do that! by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      I'm not offended. I am a bit annoyed that people are starting to talk about "iPhones" instead of "cell phones" for no other reason than that iPhones happen to be popular at the moment. But it's hardly surprising.

      But yes, I believe 100% that the only reason that article got written was to bring in money one way or another. Why do you run that site otherwise? It's to make people aware of your product and enhance your reputation, so that you can sell more books and bring in more money. I suppose it's possible that you run it as a charity, but that strikes me as really unlikely, and doesn't fit the evidence.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    27. Re:All GSM phones do that! by chromatic · · Score: 1

      Why do you run that site otherwise?

      If making money were our only concern, we'd probably run a porn site instead. Do you know how to make a small fortune in publishing? Start with a large one.

    28. Re:All GSM phones do that! by laddiebuck · · Score: 1

      It typically states that it must be *capable* of receiving all interference, and not interfere back. It's a quality and nondisruption thing. It's OK to put a shield around them.

  6. Americans should write to the FCC and complain by viridari · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Apple is responsible for making sure that its devices do not interfere with other electronic devices. Enforcement has been rather slack. But I doubt many are complaining.

    The environmentalists have gotten Apple to wake up and pay more attention to how green their practices are. Now the rest of us should wake Apple up and make sure they play well with others, especially with regards to harmful RFI.

    1. Re:Americans should write to the FCC and complain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A phone is a *transmitter*! (It is also a receiver of course.) It's not "I've hotwired my microwave so I can use it with the door open" interference; it's "When I shine my flashlight at the TV, the picture looks washed out" interference. The flashlight's not broken. It's *intended* to put out light.

      (Hey, look! I made it through this entire post without saying you're an idiot! Aw, crap. Never mind.)

    2. Re:Americans should write to the FCC and complain by viridari · · Score: 1

      Yes but the transmitter device is only permitted to transmit on specific frequencies. When it is splattering the rest of the spectrum with RFI, it's not functioning in a correct manner.

      This is like back in the 1970's (yes I'm old enough to remember) when the guy with the souped-up CB radio next door could be heard loud & clear through your TV set.

    3. Re:Americans should write to the FCC and complain by timster · · Score: 2, Informative

      You don't quite understand the cause of the problem -- it's not that phones are transmitting on the wrong frequency or "splattering" the spectrum. It's that devices like unshielded speakers are prone to pick up interference like this from all across the spectrum, including the GSM bands.

      Cell phone transmitters are much more heavily regulated than consumer electronics like clock radios.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
  7. the cause could be put into the summary by mapkinase · · Score: 1

    The source of this is the phone's transmitter, and what it's doing is sending its digital data broken up into very brief packets. Even when it's live, it's only transmitting about 10% of the time. But it's about 200 times a second. So what we're hearing is not so much the data itself, but the envelope, the shape of the packets as they turn on and off. And because we hear the higher frequencies much more clearly and they can interfere more easily than that basic frequency, while we wouldn't hear a 200 cycle tone, that's pretty low, when you interrupt something at that rate, it's kind of like putting a card into a bicycle wheel, you turn it from a gentle waving into a buzz, and it's the edges of that buzz we're so sensitive to.

    Yeas, it is that short.

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    1. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by russotto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or, in other words, a 217Hz signal is amplitude modulated onto the GSM signal. Some electronic devices (like amplifiers) incidentally demodulate the 217 Hz and convert that to sound. 217Hz is well within the human audible range, thus... dutuh, dutuh, dutuh, dutuh, dutzzzzzzzz.....

      (since it's a 217 hz square wave you get lots of harmonics as well)

    2. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...and if you're really good you can tell the difference between a 2.5G location update, an incoming call, a GRPS attach/detach and 3G noises.

      Yes, alright, 'Getting out a bit more' is on my plan, I just didn't get around to it yet.

    3. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by catmistake · · Score: 1

      Well, nice explanation for a cause, but, not a good reason. The true reason iPhones and other GSM phones cause interference in cheap, unshielded, ungrounded electronics is that cheap electronics are unshielded and not properly grounded. If you walked into a professional recording studio and hung out by the console, or were sitting behind a sound board at a respectable venue, there will be no dutuh, dutuh, dutuh, dutuh, dutzzzzzzzz every few minutes coming across the mains. But if you're like most consumers and nearly all guitar players, your equipment is understandably ungrounded, and your cabling is as cheap as possible (unshielded, unbalanced), you're gonna get that.

      In short, it isn't iPhone that's the bad RF citizen, its all your cheap electronics.

    4. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can do that? I bow before your greatness.

      Awesome. I'm truly jealous.

    5. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by eth1 · · Score: 1

      In my experience it's been improperly- or un-shielded line level interconnects that pick this interference up, and not the receiver/amp itself. Once I switched to optical interconnects, the problem went away.

    6. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by hedleyroos · · Score: 1

      3G causes no interference FWIW.

    7. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, turn on 3G, end of problem.

    8. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      ...and if you're really good you can tell the difference between a 2.5G location update, an incoming call, a GRPS attach/detach and 3G noises.

      Hey, just like listening to a Modem connect, and being able to state exactly how fast it is. And here, I figured a skill like that would never be useful again. As soon as I get a GSM phone, you've just picked my next hobby!

      Yes, it'll be a sad hobby.

    9. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by Ross+D+Anderson · · Score: 1

      Hence this song nearly a decade ago! http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xphxPPQXJKw

    10. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's almost like being psychic --- I know when my iphone is going to ring.

      Instead of a 6th sense, it's a 3Gth sense...

    11. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by labnet · · Score: 2, Informative

      So the poster is correct. It is a 217Hz RF pulse with about 500uS pulse width.
      Cell phones use an electric field antenna which produces a high near field electric field that decays at 1/r cubed, and a propagating electromagnetic field that decays at 1/r.
      It is most likely the near field electric field (capacitively coupled) that is consequently demodulated by any non linear components in your speaker amplifiers as the PA (Power Amplifier) in the phone changes power level.
      Even though the electronics industry is one of the most regulated in the world with a zillion tests, there is no mandatory test for effects on electronics from near field coupling of transmitters such as mobile phones.
      I had a product many years ago that passed all the regulatory tests, but would fail when put right up to a mobile phone. Adding a 47pF cap to the clk line an external EEPROM solved the problem.

      --
      46137
    12. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by adavies42 · · Score: 1

      I have some friends who can, together, sing a standard US dial tone.

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
    13. Re:the cause could be put into the summary by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      He should buy a $599 iClockRadio, right?

      Steve Jobs! You magnificent bastard!

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  8. Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...because the world never heard of a Blackberry before. This isn't news.

  9. One more by Xerolooper · · Score: 2, Funny

    Reason not to get an iPhone

    --
    "The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget." -Thomas Szasz
    1. Re:One more by Duradin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      One more reason not to get a cell phone

      Fixed that for you. Cell phones were doing this long before the iPhone.

    2. Re:One more by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Hmm, the anti-Apple mods must be out in force today and apparently they can't handle the fact that other phones, including phones that preceded the iPhone, have this exact same behavior.

    3. Re:One more by Xerolooper · · Score: 1

      I'm impressed they modded me funny. I was being trite. Which apparently conveys better than sarcasm on line. I got that it happens with all of them not to mention many other devices. It was even a problem before cell phones were around so much so that many devices they cause interference to have a label stating they are required to accept the interference.

      --
      "The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget." -Thomas Szasz
    4. Re:One more by Duradin · · Score: 1

      You were slamming apple, so that's A-OK with them.

  10. Do those people think Apple reinvented... by sznupi · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...everything regarding cellphones? Including, in this case, sometimes annoying side effects?

    This is nothing new...especially if, on any other phone, you have also kept semi-constant GPRS connection.

    PS. Rearranging speaker cables/etc. eliminates the problem anyway...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:Do those people think Apple reinvented... by MadCow42 · · Score: 1

      Blackberries are particularly bad too. Same challenges: GPRS, constant data traffic, etc.

      --
      I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
    2. Re:Do those people think Apple reinvented... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      When I'm watching TV I can always tell when someone's phone in the room is going to ring, as there is a loud, audible buzz in my Trinitron.

      At least my Sony TV doesn't have a rootkit... that I know of. But it is suceptable to cell phone interference, and not Apple but everyone. I don't even know anyone with an iPhone.

  11. Nextel by selfabuse · · Score: 1

    It can't be nearly as bad as the nextels I've had. Put that thing next to a speaker, have it ring and then tell me that you don't think it's giving you brain cancer.

    1. Re:Nextel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can't be nearly as bad as the nextels I've had. Put that thing next to a speaker, have it ring and then tell me that you don't think it's giving you brain cancer.

      "Hi, I'm selfabuse. I don't understand basic principles of physics, and I vote."

  12. Huh... by danomac · · Score: 1

    My phone is constantly beside my computer speakers on my desk or by my clock radio when I'm sleeping. I haven't heard anything from either...

    Maybe it's because the computer speakers are so old that they're actually still shielded (unlike most today?) Dunno about the clock radio though, but it's pretty old too... has to be at least 5-6 years now.

    1. Re:Huh... by awyeah · · Score: 1

      You probably don't have a GSM handset.

      --
      Why, no, I haven't meta-moderated lately. Thanks for asking!
    2. Re:Huh... by russotto · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe it's because the computer speakers are so old that they're actually still shielded (unlike most today?)

      Yes, speakers which are magnetically shielded to prevent affecting CRTs will also likely reject the GSM buzz.

      The clock radio would only pick up the GSM buzz if the speaker was on (radio or buzzer); when it's off, no problem.

    3. Re:Huh... by danomac · · Score: 1

      When I go for lunch I'm going to try it, just for the hell of it. I'm curious now. ;)

    4. Re:Huh... by danomac · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure Rogers uses GSM networks.

    5. Re:Huh... by awyeah · · Score: 1

      I believe you're correct. I think it's Rogers that's GSM... and I want to say Bell Mobility that uses CDMA? I can't remember all the providers in Canada...

      --
      Why, no, I haven't meta-moderated lately. Thanks for asking!
    6. Re:Huh... by chelsel · · Score: 1

      When I was choosing new computer speakers at CompUSA I actually held my GSM phone next to all the speakers to see which ones were shielded the best. I ended up selecting the Creative GigaWorks T20 as being very well shielded for a good price.

    7. Re:Huh... by whathappenedtomonday · · Score: 1

      when it's off, no problem.

      You might be on to something here, because now that you mention it: this solution seems to address all the pesky tech probs I had recently.

      --
      I hope I didn't brain my damage.
    8. Re:Huh... by mini+me · · Score: 1

      They have rolled out UMTS in, I believe, all the cities. It does not exhibit the same buzzing behavior. So, if you live in a Canadian city, you may not be using GSM at all.

    9. Re:Huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. When I'm oncall I make sure my GSM cell is at least 3 feet away from my bedroom clock radio. Otherwise I get the "GSM buzz"

    10. Re:Huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have magnetically shielded active speakers and they pick up GSM buzz if I put my phone near them. Maybe speaker shielding is not the same as RF shielding?

    11. Re:Huh... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's because the computer speakers are so old that they're actually still shielded (unlike most today?)

      Why are older speakers more likely to be shielded? I would think that the increasing prevalence of EM noise would make it more important that newer speakers are shielded.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    12. Re:Huh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, my clock-radio emits this sound, even when the alarm and radio are off. Also, the light fixture in the ceiling of my kitchen will make this sound.

    13. Re:Huh... by danomac · · Score: 1

      Older speakers were normally shielded to prevent discoloration on the CRTs used. My speakers are made by Altec Lansing around 1997-1998. They still work, so I just never bothered replacing them.

      LCDs don't have that problem.

  13. Surprisingly consumers weren't concerned by CranberryKing · · Score: 1

    when even Nokia's internal policy is that all their employees must use headsets. Even the worms that repaired Fry's body knew better.

  14. Scary EM interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's scary the way a mobile phone can be heard on my computer speakers. It seems reasonable that it can't be healthy to have them close to my body either. Even when carrying one or using one I try to keep it as far away from my two favourite organs as possible.

    1. Re:Scary EM interference by CmdrGravy · · Score: 0, Troll

      Wow, you too are some sort of Hi Fi speaker then. One that has achieved at least enough sentinence to post on Slashdot. Well done, Sir, er, entity. On behalf of all those poor dumb speaker entities throughout the world you should not slack in your crusade.

    2. Re:Scary EM interference by profplump · · Score: 1

      Yes, because when a device designed to convert electromagnetic waves into audio waves does, um, exactly what it's designed to do that's a sure sign that something terrible is happening.

      And I don't know about you, but my body shares about 87% of the components of a typical audio system, so I expect more or less the same effect on my body as on my cheap audio system.

      --

      Seriously your speaker system is *supposed* to make electrical noise into audio noise. That's the definition of a speaker.

      And unless your entire audio signal path is shielded you shouldn't be terribly impressed that the wiring picks up nearby electromagnetic radiation. Compare the length of your cell phone antenna to the length of the unshielded wiring in your speaker system and consider if that orders-of-magnitude difference in length might be enough to overcome the sub-optimal tuning of the speaker signal wire as an antenna and allow it to pickup the cellular signal at sufficient strength to be audible.

  15. My Nokia 3610 did this also. by bigtallmofo · · Score: 4, Funny

    As others have said, this really is a GSM issue and not an iPhone issue. The sound I hear from my computer speakers with my iPhone is identical to what I heard from my Nokia 3610 which is about as un-iPhone as a phone can get without being better described as a rock.

    Seriously - the interference sound is identical.

    My only concern really is what is this doing to my neurons, rods, cones and assorted other presumably sensitive body parts. I don't care about a goofy sound coming from my computer speakers every once in a while.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:My Nokia 3610 did this also. by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      If I recall correctly, it's below the ionization threshold, so mostly it'll heat those parts up a bit. If those parts are particularly susceptible to electric or magnetic fields, perhaps a bit more.

    2. Re:My Nokia 3610 did this also. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My only concern really is what is this doing to my neurons, rods, cones and assorted other presumably sensitive body parts. I don't care about a goofy sound coming from my computer speakers every once in a while.

      What about what that sound is doing to your ears!?!?!?!?!?!

    3. Re:My Nokia 3610 did this also. by TheSync · · Score: 1

      As others have said, this really is a GSM issue and not an iPhone issue.

      I used to have a Blackberry (and almost everyone in my company did) and it seemed to be much worse than the iPhone. Unfortunately, I can't offer a scientific reason why.

      At every speaking event, someone would come up to the podium with a Blackberry in their pocket, and halfway through their presentation the mics would pick up "RATTA-TAT-TAT RATTA-TAT-TAT" of the RF.

      iPhones seem to have to be within closer presence to mics or amplified speakers than Blackberries to be picked up by them.

    4. Re:My Nokia 3610 did this also. by iamnotaclown · · Score: 1

      My only concern really is what is this doing to my neurons, rods, cones and assorted other presumably sensitive body parts. I don't care about a goofy sound coming from my computer speakers every once in a while.

      That's why I keep my phone in my pocket!

      Wait a sec...

  16. FCC Rules Part 15 by doas777 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    whatever happend to the label on the bottom of everything, which states that:
    "This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) the device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) the device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesirable operation."

    obviously the folks that made my PC speakers obeyed those rules, so why is apple getting away with breaking condition 1?

    1. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

      Maybe they don't consider it harmful. But it is annoying as hell.

    2. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by leighklotz · · Score: 5, Informative

      whatever happend to the label on the bottom of everything, which states that:

      "This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) the device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) the device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesirable operation."

      obviously the folks that made my PC speakers obeyed those rules, so why is apple getting away with breaking condition 1?

      The iPhone isn't operating under Part 15. It's licensed. Your cell provider holds the license from the FCC. They paid a lot of money for it; remember the spectrum auctions that raised billions. It's your speakers that have to live with the licensed world, not the other way around.

      The same is true for broadcast radio, TV, police, fire, ambulance, business radios, taxi dispatchers, amateur radio, military, and even foreign licensed broadcast systems. Your speakers have to live with it.

      You might try (1) using twisted pair instead of zip line to your speakers and (2) using ferrite bead clamps, a few turns wrapped around both ends of the speaker cable. But it probably won't help, as it's likely your speakers internal amplifier is picking up the signals directly, as they're cheaply made (see TOA) and poorly shielded.

    3. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by BigForbis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Cell phones do not fall under part 15 of the FCC's rules. Therefore they don't have to follow this. I believe cell phones fall under part 22 or part 24 (but I could be wrong about this).

      --
      Remember, 50% of people are below average...
    4. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      I've wondered that in the past as well. I always assumed it depends on how you define "harmful."

      It's not like cellphones cause pace makers to mis-fire, CPUs to make miscalculations, storage devices to become corrupt, etc. They emit a frequency that get's picked up (and played) by speakers.

      If you classify harmful as "undesirable operation" then yes, it's harmful. But if "undesirable operation" is in a separate category as "harmful" then I guess it's a no harm / no foul as far as the legal-ese goes.

    5. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by dpaton.net · · Score: 1

      Because transmitters, like the iPhone, and like every other cellphone, are held to a different standard.

      Also, the "interference" is only harmful if you have a cheap, poorly shielded device. The signals that are causing the problem are fundamental to the operation of the GSM network. The sources of RF are more numerous now, including from cellphones and computers with lame lexan cases, but I wouldn't automatically call it interference.

      --
      This is not a sig. this is a duck. quack.
    6. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so why is apple getting away with breaking condition 1?

      Maybe the interference is not considered harmful. And if it would be, then GSM phones would have to be forbidden in general. After all this buzz has nothing to do with the iPhone in particular, but is a "feature" of every GSM phone since GSM was introduced in 1992.

    7. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      Because a cell phone is not a Part 15 device. Read Title 47, Part 15 some time - interesting stuff. Cell phones fall under at least parts 22 and 24, and possibly others.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    8. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by Tuoqui · · Score: 1

      Part of the problem is that the speakers arent shielding their wires from the EMI properly and they're picking up your cell phone's transmissions and receptions as an antenna would.

      If you put some ferrite beads on the wire to your speaker it kills the GSM buzz and such because it takes a slightly bigger signal (like that from your TV, Radio or Computer) to push through it as compared to the background noise from a cell phone being probed for activity pre-ring.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      +2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
    9. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by Hobart · · Score: 1

      Your speakers have to live with it.

      You might try (1) using twisted pair instead of zip line to your speakers and (2) using ferrite bead clamps, a few turns wrapped around both ends of the speaker cable. But it probably won't help, as it's likely your speakers internal amplifier is picking up the signals directly, as they're cheaply made (see TOA) and poorly shielded.

      What will twisted pair do ? Doesn't twisted pair only protect against interference when you have a balanced line with opposite voltages going down each wire?

      --
      o/~ Join us now and share the software ...
    10. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by wramsdel · · Score: 3, Informative

      Leighklotz is exactly right, but it gets even worse. Even a Part 15 device, using similar modulation to the GSM phone, could likely cause interference to your speakers. I have a DECT phone, compliant with FCC Part 15, sitting next to my computer speakers, and it creates a nice buzz when it's searching for the base. That's not the phone's fault, I'm sure they're transmitting all their energy in the allowed band, but nonetheless my speakers are rectifying that RF energy and amplifying the resulting envelope. The "device may not cause harmful interference" part of the Part 15 regulations refers specifically to spurious emissions outside the permitted band(s) of operation. Unfortunately, inexpensively made or carelessly designed electronics, which constitute the bulk of consumer offerings, often don't include much protection from interference. Regardless of whether the interfering device is operating properly or not, these devices will suffer.

    11. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by eth1 · · Score: 1

      The interference won't be powerful enough to interfere with the speaker cable (unless maybe it's a REALLY small speaker). It's the un-amplified analog lines that feed the amp that pick it up. Use shielded interconnects, or even optical SPDIF, and the problem should go away. Probably won't help your clock radio, though :)

    12. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by fatboy · · Score: 1

      If the device is not a radio receiver, such as computer speakers, it does not receive any protection because it is not a part 15 device. It's not a radio receiver, but is acting like one.

      --
      --fatboy
    13. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FCC Part 15 covers unintentional radio frequency emitters. Under the FCC guidelines, Part 15 devices are anything with a clock frequency greater than 10KHz. With minor exceptions, those devices should not produce signals above a predefined level at a predefined distance. Some devices such as RFID chips, baby monitors, cordless phones (not wireless or cell phones) and wireless network devices, are permitted to radiate a small levels of RF signals on specific frequencies provide that their use is discontinued anytime anyone with a licenced device complains about interferance.
      Devices that are licenced under the other sections of the FCC regulations are permitted to produce radio emissions only on frequencies they are licienced for. On all other frequencies they are no different than an FCC Part 15 device. To insure compliance with this the licienced devices have to be tested and type accepted by the FCC.
      If you complain to the FCC about your IPhone interfering with your speaker, the FCC will make you stop using the speaker unless you can show the IPhone is emitting on an unlicienced frequency.
      Personally, I find it a shame that licienced services and devices are not protected, from complaints like the original poster's. The FCC has no regulations that require part 15 devices to be insensitive to emissions from licienced devices. Without those regulations, consumers are buying cheap junk sensitive to any and all radio signals. These cheap products are built with no EMI protections. Rather than complaining to the manufacturer about their cheap junk, consumers complain to (or about) the user of a licienced device who is following the rules and the law. In the end it is the licienced user who is perceived as the bad guy while the asshat who sold the cheap consumer junk is not held to account.

    14. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      Because you're too poor/little to take them to court over it. Welcome your new, corporate overlords.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    15. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

      It's not even a GSM issue. It's a TDMA encoding issue. Old IS-136 phones and Nextel (iDEN) phones cause interference as well. Because the signal is in a repeating sequence it forms a buzz or click. CDMA phones don't have a set transmit pattern so the sounds don't form repeating waves and interfere. IS-136, GSM and iDEN all use TDMA encoding. GSM causes more of a buzz. IS-136 and iDEN cause more static bursting and popping. My old AT&T IS-136 phone used to make my old CRT shake violently whenever it resynched itself with the cell tower.

    16. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by leighklotz · · Score: 1

      The interference won't be powerful enough to interfere with the speaker cable (unless maybe it's a REALLY small speaker). It's the un-amplified analog lines that feed the amp that pick it up. Use shielded interconnects, or even optical SPDIF, and the problem should go away. Probably won't help your clock radio, though :)

      The lines are acting as an antenna, coupling the RF energy in, probably in common mode, to the amplifier inside the speaker. Of course you're right that an un-amplified speaker wouldn't have this problem, unless the RF is coupled back into the device that's driving the speaker.

      In all of these cases, using ferrite clamps of the appropriate mix will help to cut down on common mode RF travelling into the amplified speaker or into the amplifier of the driving device.

      Using twisted pair (you can buy really thick gauge wire twisted pair from the usual speaker people, even Radio Shack) will eliminate differential mode pickup of noise.

      Using shielded interconnects will do the same as the twisted pair, but you'll still need ferrites on the outside to eliminate common-mode currents.

      Optical is much better of course, but it still won't do anything about radiated RF being picked up inside the speaker enclosure by inadequately shielded electronics inside. For that, you need to buy better speakers. Better speakers will be more expensive, but sadly, more expensive speakers are not necessarily better.

    17. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by leighklotz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your speakers have to live with it.

      You might try (1) using twisted pair instead of zip line to your speakers and (2) using ferrite bead clamps, a few turns wrapped around both ends of the speaker cable. But it probably won't help, as it's likely your speakers internal amplifier is picking up the signals directly, as they're cheaply made (see TOA) and poorly shielded.

      What will twisted pair do ? Doesn't twisted pair only protect against interference when you have a balanced line with opposite voltages going down each wire?

      Read this, page 2:

      If the cable is an unshielded pair (loudspeaker cable, for example), RF will be induced approximately equally on both conductors (but, depending what the input circuit of the equipment looks
      like at RF, current flow into the equipment may not be equal on both conductors). This can also
      produce a differential voltage at the input (or output) terminals.
      Output Wiring is Important Too! It is well known, for example, that RF interference is often coupled into the output stage of audio equipment -- for example, the power amplifiers that feed loud-speakers or headphones. There is always feedback around that output stage, so RF present at the
      output will follow the feedback network to the input of a gain stage, where it will be detected and
      amplified. This problem is made much worse when parallel wire cable (zip cord) is used to feed
      the loudspeakers or headphones, and can usually be solved simply by replacing the zip cord with a
      twisted pair of POC (plain ordinary copper). [Pseudo-scientific advertising hype for exotic cables
      notwithstanding, it was shown nearly 30 years ago that #12 copper twisted pair (or #10 for very
      long runs) is a nearly ideal loudspeaker cable.]... As we will discuss later, the twisting of a pair greatly reduces the
      level of RF that the wiring couples to circuitry.

    18. Re:FCC Rules Part 15 by Agripa · · Score: 1

      The interference won't be powerful enough to interfere with the speaker cable (unless maybe it's a REALLY small speaker). It's the un-amplified analog lines that feed the amp that pick it up. Use shielded interconnects, or even optical SPDIF, and the problem should go away. Probably won't help your clock radio, though :)

      While audio line level signals are often shielded because of the low signal level and higher impedance making them resistant to RF interference, the wires between the audio amplifier and the speaker seldom are. Audio amplifier output stages can rectify AM RF that is picked up by the speaker wires so the problem is not the RF interfering with the speaker cable or the speaker itself but the output stages of the audio amplifier instead.

  17. if you mean iPhone it's because it gets crappy rec by Oo.et.oO · · Score: 1

    my iphone gets much less reception than my pearl does. so i get little to no gsm buzz. my pearl would buzz any speaker within a meter or so.

  18. gsm only by ketan324 · · Score: 1

    Its just GSM based phones, the RF distortion is not an issue with CDMA based phones.

  19. Symptoms already evident by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

    Put that thing next to a speaker, have it ring and then tell me that you don't think it's giving you brain cancer.

    Heck, I think this statement from the cell phone expert (from TFA) pretty much proves that our phones are rotting our brains:

    Rodman: We're really in an interesting time, radio speaking, in that there hasn't been a time before, certainly in the last five years, maybe the last ten, when there was such an inordinate number of relatively high-powered personal transmitters just wandering loose in the world.

    WTF? "an interesting time, radio speaking"? And the tortured grammar in the summary isn't much better: "We're really in an interesting time in that there has never been so many high-powered personal transmitters just wandering loose in the world."

    'Scuse me, I've got to take this call.

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    1. Re:Symptoms already evident by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Well imagine everyone packed like sardines in a subway train.

      If there isn't a cell/microcell available, all their phones will be transmitting at max power to try to find an available cell.

      I wonder what the RF safety specs say about that scenario.

      --
    2. Re:Symptoms already evident by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      It really should be "...in that there have never been so many...", if we're going to be pedantic. But granted, yours is A/A- material, where the original is C-grade material.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    3. Re:Symptoms already evident by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

      It really should be "...in that there have never been so many...", if we're going to be pedantic. But granted, yours is A/A- material, where the original is C-grade material.

      Hey, don't give me credit/blame... the only-slightly-damaged version came from the story submitter.

      I like to think *I* would have gotten the verb form correct... but then, that may just be the tumor talking.

      --
      Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
  20. Metal foil wallpaper by jhines · · Score: 1

    Look for it to make a comeback. A room papered with the right stuff would be quite quiet RF wise. Velvet optional. :) Work well if you have a room you don't want stuff working in.

  21. Um by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This basically went away with the 3G iPhones. I don't get any GSM interference at all except when the phone switches to EDGE.

  22. Not much you can do? by residieu · · Score: 1

    The iPhones aren't the only bad apples in the cell phone basket and there's not much you can do about the problem.

    Not much you can do? You can always not buy an iPhone. My phone doesn't cause problem for speakers or my clock radio.

    1. Re:Not much you can do? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      The iPhones aren't the only bad apples in the cell phone basket and there's not much you can do about the problem.

      Not much you can do? You can always not buy an iPhone. My phone doesn't cause problem for speakers or my clock radio.

      Well, as the grandparent said, iPhones aren't the only ones that do it.

      I've had cellphones that do it, and some that didn't appear to. Likewise I have some speakers that are immune to the problem while others (as well as my clock radio) suffer from it greatly.

      It's not an iPhone issue but a frequency issue. GSM phones that use GPRS or Edge cause it which covers a LOT of phones. And the iPhone 3G defaults to GPRS when it has a low 3G signal.

  23. There is a relatively easy fix for this by AdamWeeden · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yes, this is a pain in the butt, but as others have noted, it's nothing new. I've been having this issue since my first AT&T (formerly Cingular), i.e., GSM, phone. There is a trick to fix this though: magnets. Simply loop your speaker wire through a magnet, as this article indicates.

    --
    I was quoted out of context in my autobiography...
    1. Re:There is a relatively easy fix for this by phrostie · · Score: 1

      i'll give it a try, thanks.

      on the other hand i'd bought a little FM transmitter so i can listen to my itunes on my car radio. it has the same problem. can this be fixed also?

    2. Re:There is a relatively easy fix for this by ShadowBlasko · · Score: 1

      So now I just *crack* open the plastic case of my alarm clock.. dig the speaker wire out of the plastic, add some additional wire to the leads so I have enough to actually feed through a magnet, and voila!

      Easy.

      Maybe for home entertainment systems or car systems (I did this ages ago when I had a Nextel phone) but not so easy for integrated speaker apps.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order- Ed Howdershelt Via Tass
    3. Re:There is a relatively easy fix for this by dontmakemethink · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is a pain in the butt, but as others have noted, it's nothing new. I've been having this issue since my first AT&T (formerly Cingular), i.e., GSM, phone. There is a trick to fix this though: magnets. Simply loop your speaker wire through a magnet, as this article indicates.

      Better yet, go buy some audio equipment that doesn't suck. There use to be these things called "stereos" that were designed to reproduce a recording with reasonable fidelity. I have never heard any cel phone interference from any reasonable stereo.

      "Computer speakers" are barely above telephone grade audio reproduction - yes, even the pricey ones with the dinky little box on the floor they call a subwoofer. Musicians work pretty hard to make those recordings, it'd be nice if people would give them a chance to not sound like crap.

      --

      War as we knew it was obsolete
      Nothing could beat complete denial
      - Emily Haines
    4. Re:There is a relatively easy fix for this by rift321 · · Score: 1

      While it's probably not audibly noticeable, the ferrite "filter" will attenuate some signals in the speaker cable, most notably, higher-frequency sounds, the amount depending on the type of magnet. An audiophile with a need to speak on their TDMA-based phone next to their expensive audio setup would probably prefer a passive filter on the input line to the speakers, and an amplifier right before the contacts to the speaker magnets to counteract the attenuated high frequency sounds from the original source.

  24. I really was beginning to wonder... by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I really was beginning to wonder if it was just my imagination. I have everything turned off on my iphone except wifi and edge/voice (No 3G around here). At first I thought the little static tantrums were happening at fixed intervals, so I timed it. No luck. Then I had the iPhone connect to the internet through my computer instead of the router so that I could read the logs. Nothing.

    Sooo... I tried using a few styles of ferrite RF chokes, I tried wrapping cords into air-core chokes, I tried keeping data and sound lines as far away fro the phone as possible. Nothing seems to work, so to be honest I've pretty much just started using the iPhone's internal speaker when I'm listening to pandora or something.

    I'm glad I'm not alone on this, but it kind of sucks. I hate to single out the iPhone, but it's the first phone I've used that did this.

    -b

    p.s. and having one central app store that will occasionally refuse to let you buy anything due to 'problems with the itunes store' sucks ass. Thanks, Apple. Oh and thanks for not letting us record video, run apps in the background, or let apps access onboard music.

    Yeah I woke up crabby today.

    --
    No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    1. Re:I really was beginning to wonder... by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      >> (Score:1, Redundant)

      Believe it or not, it took this mod to remind me that it's Monday (I'm on leave, you see). Don't take it as bitterness, but I have noticed this peculiar trend. Try it with me. Every monday, pay close attention to the moderations. I have found them to be inconsistent if not bizarre, with useless aphorisms modded to +5 and some comments modded down seemingly without reason.

      My hypothesis is that people who received mod points over the weekend are just getting in to work and feel like they need to use them all as fast as they can so that they can win the prize.

      Mod this insightful if you agree, or interesting if you disagree.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
  25. Give me a break... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

    Ok, I hate apple's hype machine as much as anyone, but seriously... this isn't an iPhone thing. I have never seen ANY GSM phone that had power and did not interfere with PC speakers, speakerphones, and car radios.

    1. Re:Give me a break... by Microlith · · Score: 1

      This is a product of the anti-Apple hate machine, not the Apple hype machine.

    2. Re:Give me a break... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      That was my point... In spite of hating apple's hype machine, this is ridiculous.

    3. Re:Give me a break... by LarsG · · Score: 1

      It is a product of the "any article with iPhone in the title will get many hits" effect. Makes no difference whether the article is positive or not.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    4. Re:Give me a break... by EtherMonkey · · Score: 1

      Ok, I hate apple's hype machine as much as anyone, but seriously... this isn't an iPhone thing. [...]

      Actually, the problem is that you are using an iPhone, to wit, an Apple device, in conjunction with unsupported third-party productions. Apple is unable to support or guarantee compatibility with non-Apple products. If you were using your iPhone in the presence of an Apple speaker, clock-radio, telephone or other device there would be no problems.

      The Bose Wave clock radio high end audiophile system, based on alien technology that defies our Earthly knowledge of Physics, is also immune to this and all interference.

      --
      --- A man with a briefcase can steal more money, than any man with a gun. [Don Henley]
  26. Re:if you mean iPhone it's because it gets crappy by fbjon · · Score: 1

    That doesn't make any sense. Poor reception means the phone will transmit with more power in order to get through whatever's between you and the antenna.

    --
    True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
  27. Not on 3G, EDGE only by yabos · · Score: 4, Informative

    The GSM buzzing is all GSM phones but I noticed on my iPhone that using 3G it goes away. From what I've read, the loud noise is caused by rapid turning on/off of the GSM transceiver which creates EM pulses.

    1. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      I think it's the "handshake" process which does it. Don't know why, wouldn't dare speculate, but that initial connection-arranging dance causes the interference.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by LarsG · · Score: 1

      which creates EM pulses.

      You mean, like, radio-waves? Who'd a thunk!

      The buzzing is an artefact of the multiplexing system used (TDMA).

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    3. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by yabos · · Score: 1

      Of course(duh) but it much stronger while on EDGE than 3G. 3G either is less strong or they power on the radio in a different way. It could also be due to the different frequencies but I haven't looked into it myself.

    4. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by MBCook · · Score: 1

      That's the odd thing about this. I have a 3G iPhone and it doesn't do this because it spends all its time on the 3G network. If if did drop back, the GSM buzz would be there.

      But why is this news now? This happened when the phone was released 3-4 months ago. This happened when the LAST VERSION was released over a YEAR ago.

      This is basically blog spam. It shouldn't have made the front page, it's too bad the firehose failed us here.

      PS: Well made devices (like computer speakers that cost over $10) are shielded and filtered to reduce/eliminate this kind of stuff. Of course the $5 generic came-with-the-computer-no-shielding-frayed-cable speakers on my boss's desk do this.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    5. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by MBCook · · Score: 1

      Once the phones are going, they know just how much power they can use to communicate with the tower.

      But when the call is first started (or you get a text, etc) phones generally use a much higher power level (or maybe even full) for the first contact to the tower until it is told just how much lower a level it can use and still be heard by the tower clearly.

      It's that high level that makes the noise. If you set things up right (low shielding speakers, you and the phone were near the edge of it's coverage area) you'd probably hear the noise more.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    6. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by Kerkyon · · Score: 1

      GSM uses TDMA to share spectrum; 3G uses WCDMA.

      CDMA doesn't use time slots (which cause the rapid turning on/off that you describe), so you don't get the buzzy interference.

    7. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by yabos · · Score: 1

      Cool thanks, I guess that solves that.

    8. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by al3 · · Score: 1

      We tested this in my office with my $2 PC speakers and an iPhone. Indeed, on 3G there was no interference with an incoming call, but when it dropped down to EDGE the loud buzzing was present.

    9. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by caladine · · Score: 1

      3G (WCDMA or UMTS, pick your moniker) isn't a TDMA RF scheme like GSM/GPRS/EDGE so the problem doesn't happen.
      The main reason is that WCDMA (as the name implies) is just wideband CDMA (5 MHz vs ~1.25 MHz). Now, CDMA based systems don't cause this problem because the transmit power is spread out over that entire frequency range, rather than the 200 KHz (or so) that GSM systems use per channel.

    10. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by LarsG · · Score: 1

      3G doesn't use TDMA.

      Say you have 100 phones talking to a cell tower. You need some way to multiplex, otherwise one would just have a mess with the phones talking in each other's mouths.

      GSM (and related technologies like edge/gprs, and some other cellphone systems) chose time multiplexing. That is, each phone gets a set of time-slots where it can transmit and all other phones keep silent.

      So the signal from your phone will look like short bursts with silence in between. For GSM that's ~200 bursts per second, which translates to badly shielded loudspeakers picking up a ~200Hz buzzing sound.

      Other cell systems (like umts/hsdpa) use different multiplexing/carrier/encoding, so don't exhibit this problem (or at least, don't exhibit this problem to the same degree that GSM does).

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    11. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by moniker127 · · Score: 1

      It happens on other 3g devices. Blackjacks, blackberries, tilts, pc cards, pretty much anything that uses UMTS or EDGE will buzz. Perhaps they built in shielding for it in the iphone 3g, Dont know.
      I note that it occurs whenever data is transmitted, and that the sound changes depending on the sequence of data being transmitted, so I kind of think of it as the equivalent to the old noises that 56k modems made on the phone line.

    12. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by Agripa · · Score: 1

      CDMA based systems don't cause this problem because the transmit power is spread out over that entire frequency range, rather than the 200 KHz (or so) that GSM systems use per channel.

      The problem is not related to the frequency range that the RF is spread over. If GSM used a spread spectrum like CDMA does but still used TDMA, interference caused by AM rectification of the none constant RF envelope would still take place.

    13. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by caladine · · Score: 1

      True. The point I had intended to drive at (and failed) was that a CDMA signal (using spread spectrum) is virtually indistinguishable from background radiation unless you know exactly what you're looking for. Hence the problem is avoided.
      GSM forces all the transmit power into a narrower spectrum, so the signal is very visible. I missed on the fact that it's the spiking on and off in that same slot that really causes the problem.

    14. Re:Not on 3G, EDGE only by Agripa · · Score: 1

      One advantage of using TDMA is that noise from the transmitter can be ignored in the receiver design since they are not both operating at the same time. True full duplex single band radios use high Q RF filters on the front end of both the transmitter and the receiver to separate the transmit and receive frequencies which is an added complication that TDMA receivers do not require. It is not enough to have the transmitter on a separate frequency from the receiver unless they are in completely different bands as is sometimes done. Broadband noise from the transmitter on the receiver's frequency can easily raise the background noise to unacceptable levels.

      Spread spectrum should help somewhat in a full duplex single band design but it should still take a significant sensitivity hit. It is a subject I have been looking into on and off so to speak. :)

  28. Freaking people out with it by sunami · · Score: 1

    Much better is when I'm around people that don't know about this, and I tell them their phone is about to ring.

  29. It seems to be AT&T more than anything... by tjrw · · Score: 1

    As mentioned many times already, this has nothing to do with the iPhone and everything to do with GSM.

    However, it seems AT&T are much worse. My personal phone is on T-Mobile and my work phone is on AT&T. The work phone produces much more interference. Switching the SIM from that into my phone, I get the same issue. I think AT&T must bump the transmit power to maximum on devices connected to their network. I wonder what this does to battery life!

    1. Re:It seems to be AT&T more than anything... by flatulus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps the AT&T cellsite is further away from your location than the T-Mobile cellsite. Hence, your phone has to "talk louder" for the AT&T cell to hear it.

      No cellular provider would intentionally instruct your cellphone to emit more power than required, because it would be self-defeating. Excess transmit power just means unnecessary interference to nearby cells on the same frequency. The cellular protocols provide a means for controlling the power of a handset up and down as needed to get "just the right amount" of RF energy at the cell tower's receiver.

    2. Re:It seems to be AT&T more than anything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone should know AT&T broadcasts in the 800Mhz band in most of the country except where AT&T Wireless was the provider and Cingular didn't exist. T-Mobile broadcasts at 1.9Ghz everywhere. When you go up the band you need to transmit with more power to have the same effective transmission radius, so AT&T should always be broadcasting at a lower power output.

      I suspect because T-Mobile is higher up the frequency tree they interfere less than a device broadcasting in the low microwave band.

      Before I bought this iMac my AT&T RAZR would scramble the video on my CRT from time to time. When I had AT&T Wireless it never did that until they were sucked in by Cingular.

  30. Suck it up, clock radio owners by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

    Your clock radio comes with the following government message:

    This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC Rules....

    (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.

    It is not our place to question why we are not to reject interference, or what dangers might ensue if were to attempt such a thing. Rather, is our duty under the law to accept interference. So do your part, listen carefully to the buzzing radio, and just be proud to be doing your part as a citizen of this great land.

  31. Motorola iDEN also by corsec67 · · Score: 1

    I bought a Motorola i670 on Sprint because I thought that Sprint was a CDMA carrier, but apparently they use some iDEN handsets, which is very similar to GSM.

    I get the "GSM sound" in my car radio, since I store the phone under the head unit.

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    1. Re:Motorola iDEN also by sssssss27 · · Score: 1

      Sprint is CDMA but they merged with Nextel who had an iDEN network. Sprint Nextel plans to eventually get rid of the iDEN network in favor of their CDMA network. This will probably happen by the time they get their 4G network up and switch exclusively to VoIP as they use VoIP for the push to talk on their CDMA phones.

  32. A much larger problem, pro audio by TK2K · · Score: 1

    I would like someone to address what I see as a far greater issue. clock radios can be annoying due to the interference caused be cellphones, but there are some cases where the interference can be downright deserters! I am referring to professional audio systems. We have three theaters that I work in, 2 blackboxes and one mainstage. The mainstage 32-channel board is unaffected by cellphones, however the two smaller boards are. Is there any sort of add on that can be used to shield audio cables from cellphones? We run a line level out of the mixer to two powered speakers in one blackbox, and the interference is particularly bad, seeing as the audience is literally right above the line level wire. Any ideas?

    1. Re:A much larger problem, pro audio by flatulus · · Score: 1

      I'll give it a try...

      1) Are your line level runs balanced or unbalanced? Probably unbalanced. If you can convert to balanced, it might help. This may not be practical because the only audio balun transformers I've ever seen are for microphones. But it wouldn't cost much (for the transformers) to give it a try.

      2) Shielding and grounding. Shielding and grounding. Shielding and grounding. (can't have too much)

      3) Silly idea but I bet this would help: Instead of line, try putting a small amplifier (a few watts) at the mixer and run speaker cable under the audience to a direct injection (DI) box with a dummy load near the powered speakers. Feed the output of the DI into the powered speaker. The output of a DI will be line level, but since you're using a low impedance run (speaker wire) between the amplifier behind the mixer and the DI box, any induced voltages from cellphones should be much less of an effect than they would be on a line level run. Of course, remember to apply 2) above to the speaker wire as well, for even better isolation. BTW - you can buy DI boxes for $40 or less from Guitar Center or any online music instrument supplier. And 8 ohms of power resistor will do for a dummy load.

    2. Re:A much larger problem, pro audio by goofy183 · · Score: 1

      If you're using balanced lines and everything is properly grounded (to the same ground) that is about all you can do. If you still have problems I wouldn't qualify either of those boards as 'pro'

    3. Re:A much larger problem, pro audio by goofy183 · · Score: 1

      You should be able to use DIs to convert pretty much any unbalanced run to a balanced run. There are powered DIs that can run off phantom if needed.

    4. Re:A much larger problem, pro audio by Wymsey · · Score: 1

      You need to determine how the RF is getting into the mixer, there are three likely routes: Input cables, output cables and power supply (including the mains lead). Check out www.audiosystemsgroup.com/publish.htm for helpful info. Charlie.

  33. phantom keypresses by jjeffries · · Score: 1

    Forget radio chatter... I'm always putting my cell phone (it's not a jesus-phone) down on my desk, around my keyboard or mouse cables, or resting it on the shelf-like bit on the back side of my IBM clicky keyboards. On more than one occasion I have had incoming calls "type" on the keyboard or "click" the mouse buttons--that could be REALLY BAD depending on what I'm doing at the time.

    If your dentist or pilot tells you to turn off your cell phone... listen to them!

  34. CRT bell by mlush · · Score: 1

    I rather liked the say my (CRT) screen flicked three times when I was about to get an incomming call, (then again only a very few knew the number :-) don't get that now its all LCD

  35. you call out the iphone on this? by alta · · Score: 1

    Every digital phone I've had from Bellsouth Mobility->Cingular->ATT has had the GSM NOISE.

    It's not at ALL an iphone issue, and by naming the iPhone TFA becomes TROLL. I've had this with every Nokia, Motorola and Blackberry I've had in the last 10 years, or at least when the ATT group went GSM.

    Guess what, tMobile is GSM too.

    So well known, there's a dedicated website for it:
    http://www.feelingcingular.com/

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    1. Re:you call out the iphone on this? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I used to have to remember to keep my 10 year old Nokia away from the speakers and the CRT because it would make the CRT do nasty things and the sound coming out of the speakers would be loud enough to hurt.

      The gentle buzz from my iPhone is a big improvement.

  36. huh by oatesy · · Score: 1

    It still seems like it shouldn't be the speaker end of the problem that's blamed. If these speakers are regulated to be cheap with the trade off of allowing some interference i think that these expensive phones should work towards signal transmission that's less prone to interfere. It would be a lot easier to change the transmission style of the phones than to just blame the speakers. I'm not particularly well studied in the field of signals(yet) but to me this seems like a very practical use of resources to stop your phone from interfering like this. I may be ignoring some very obvious reasons why this wouldn't work (standardization of signal types?) but i think the capacity for improvement would lie more on the phone company end.

  37. You beat me to it by jshackney · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was going to chime in along those lines as well. This is hardly news. When the weather is ideal at departure and destination, I usually tell my pax they don't have to turn their phones off. When the weather is bad and I'm going to be shooting the ILS to minimums, the last thing I want to hear is seven or eight phones ticking in my headset from the initial approach fix to the DA.

    Some phones seem to be worse than others and it sounds like the iPhone may validate the FAA's position on cell phones.

    1. Re:You beat me to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More acronyms!!! I demand it!

    2. Re:You beat me to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>> it sounds like the iPhone may validate the FAA's position on cell phones.

      You need to read up on FCC Part 22, which prohibits the use of cell phones above a certain altitude, because it tends to confuse too many cell sites who "see" the phone and try to integrate it into their cell phone network.

  38. Local TV news needs to read by Tmack · · Score: 1

    Seriously, the local TV news crews around here need to RTFA and get a clue and mandate all cell phones turned off during their broadcast (or get better shielded equipment). Its funny hearing the noise on TV the first time (heh, some dumbass is texting during the 1hr they actually work), but just get annoying when it continues throughout the newscast. You would think they would be able to recognize it and fix it quick, but it keeps showing up, specially during remote "live" broadcasts.

    --
    Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
  39. What's happening in Europe? by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The US's Part 15 only applies to RF emitters; devices that don't emit RF at all, like audio amplifiers, don't need Part 15 certification. Part 15 doesn't say anything about sensitivity to interference.

    The European Union, however, does regulate sensitivity to interference under the Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive. So the EU tries to address the problem.

    The EU standards require a test for susceptibility to high power AM, FM, TV and airport-type radar signals. Those were viewed as the worst case when the directive was published. Electronics that's not designed for it is likely to crash when faced with a megawatt airport radar at a few hundred meters. (Remember, with most radars, the peak power is huge but the duty cycle is low.) But the EU directive doesn't address nearby TDMA sources. That's probably something the EU will have to address.

    There's something to be said for spread-spectrum emitters, like WiFi and Sprint PCS phones. They have a broad enough output spectrum that they tend not to interfere with much.

    1. Re:What's happening in Europe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > There's something to be said for spread-spectrum emitters, like WiFi and Sprint PCS phones. They have a broad enough output spectrum that they tend not to interfere with much.

      Rubbish. It is not whether the spectrum is "broad" which matters, but more the shape of the modulation envelope, eg AM is worse than FM, etc.

      Whatever, if the affected equipment was properly designed, it wouldn't be affected by stray RF in the first place.

  40. I get this from my Blackberry... by bennomatic · · Score: 1

    ...and the worst thing about it is I sleep with a white-noise generator turned on. Nothing worse than falling asleep as the phone receives an email, causing the b'beep-b'beep-b'b'b'beep interference on those soothing sounds.

    The good news, of course, is that this interference is subject to the inverse squares law, so while there's audible interference at 3 feet, if I move my bag (with phone in it) 6 feet away from the noise generator, it's fine.

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
  41. really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    when a text message arrives, older nokias beep
    da-da-da daaa-daaa da-da-da

    1. Re:really by jcuervo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "SMS". Cute.

      --
      Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
  42. Spread spectrum by flatulus · · Score: 1

    You said: There's something to be said for spread-spectrum emitters, like WiFi and Sprint PCS phones. But the 3G iPhone is also spread spectrum. It spreads its energy over about 4 MHz, and is fact called Wideband CDMA (older IS-95 CDMA uses a 1.25 MHz bandwidth, IIRC). So much for spread spectrum solving the problem....

    1. Re:Spread spectrum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So much for spread spectrum solving the problem....

      The iPhone 3G is a dual standard GSM/W-CDMA phone. From the linked article I was under the impression that they were talking about the iPhone in GSM mode.

    2. Re:Spread spectrum by LarsG · · Score: 1

      But the 3G iPhone is also spread spectrum

      Did the Jobsian distortion field make you forget that the 3G iPhone is a multi-mode GSM/EDGE/GPRS/UMTS/HSDPA phone?

      The issue is mainly with GSM/EDGE/GPRS, due to it using TDMA for handling multiple access (each single handset gets about 200 timeslots per second, meaning that if you put a handset close to an unshielded speaker or similar you get a ~200Hz buzz signal induced when it is transmitting).

      Set your phone to 3G-only mode, and the buzzing will be a lot less noticeable.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
  43. ringtone of gsm noise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://feelingcingular.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/cingular_gsm_rfi_ringtone.mp3

    1. Re:ringtone of gsm noise by argent · · Score: 1

      Cool, I'll add that to my collection of 300/1200/56k/PEP modem sounds. :)

  44. RFI by Detritus · · Score: 1

    Amateur radio operators have had to deal with similar problems for decades. It isn't the cell phone's fault. The problem is that consumer electronics, your typical Part 15 devices, are designed to be cheap. It isn't difficult to design a device that is resistant to interference, but it costs money. Money that manufacturers wont spend unless you hold a gun to their head and threaten to take their hookers and coke. In general the problem is solved by using a shielded enclosure, shielded cables, and adding filters to any place where things enter or leave the box, like the AC cord. If you hear funny noises from your widget, complain to the manufacturer. If they get enough complaints, they might start using good engineering practices, but I'm not holding my breath.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  45. GSM simluation in octave by manx801 · · Score: 1

    Just FYI, I did a little experiment to try to model the GSM interference using my Motorola phone, a small antenna, and a scope. I then built a model in octave which generates a wav file that sounds similar to the interference from the GSM data packaets. The code and wav file can be found here: http://www.pldr.org/?page_id=161

  46. Do not RTFA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is one case where I'd recommend /.-ers to *not* RTFA. The 'tards only mention iPhones because they know it drives a shitload of pageviews and thus ad revenue.

    As numerous other posters have mentioned: this is not a new problem and it's not limited to iPhones. eg Blackberries do the same thing to our conference room speakerphones.

  47. Ferrites by Animats · · Score: 1

    Ferrites do work for filtering RF spikes. If you have a scope, you can see the effects when you put a ferrite around a lead. More electronics companies need to do this at the factory. A few little ferrite beads in the right spots can fix many interference problems at a few cents per unit.

    The last time I had serious trouble with this, it was because the spikes from a high-powered motor controller were getting into the encoder signals for the motor. Running the power leads for the motor through a ferrite ring five times (five loops, making a toroidial filter) fixed the problem.

    Incidentally, ferrites are not permanent magnets, just inductors.

    1. Re:Ferrites by Wymsey · · Score: 1

      To be effective the resistance (impedance) to RF needs to be high and beads may not be very effective. Clamp-on ferrites would be better and with speaker leads a few turns could be passed through them. The most effective solution I have found for stopping my amateur radio transmissions effecting PC speakers is to use the 6 inch ferrite rods used in transistor radios. These can be bought from the likes of Maplins, Rapid Electronics and Radio Shack. Wind as many turns of the lead as possible along the ferrite rod and use tie wraps to hold the lead tight. By the way anything that suffers from interference from any mobile phone is obviously not fit for purpose and both Ofcom and the FCC will confirm that. Intercoms, baby alarms, wireless doorbells, £1.00 radios, etc, frequently suffer from RFI simply because they are badly designed. Charlie.

  48. It took me a long time to figure this out by mcohrs · · Score: 1

    In my shop, I had one user who was being driven buggy by this buzzing coming from here computer speakers and even her digital desk phone. I tried all sorts of things, even disconnecting speakers from her computer. Plugging in to a long extension cord from the opposite wall helped a little -as did holding your mouth right :). It was only last month that I was able to associate this with her PDA Phone. It does not happen with those folks who use simple CDMA Verizon phones, only the GSM data phones. Thanks for the final piece of the puzzle.

  49. RF + audio = hard by wramsdel · · Score: 1

    I think the bigger story here is that devices like the iPhone are forcing RF (cell phone) and audio (MP3) to live in closer proximity, and the problem's not going to go away. Many of the folks designing docks, speakers, and the like are audio designers, not RF engineers, and may have limited or no experience designing for RF immunity. Components and layout practices that look really straightforward at audio frequencies are often horrendous at radio frequencies, and it's really easy to design a solid audio circuit that is actually a very efficient AM receiver over a broad range of frequencies. That's a recipe for RF interference and degraded audio.

  50. My Palm does it.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Palm Treo that I have with Verizon does that when I'm at work. Either when I'm about to receive a text or a phone call, my speakers go nuts. It could be the speakers to my workstation, or the stereo system in our inner office, or our video editing machine. It makes for some 'interesting' work days.

  51. If you think that's bad... by YoeyYoeyYoey · · Score: 1

    My cell phone (Nokia 6301) sets off my carbon monoxide detector if it's within about 1.5 meters when a call comes in... Slightly more annoying than softly buzzing speakers.

  52. Or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, you can be smart, and buy a set of magnetically shielded speakers. That should cut out most of the interference noise that you get from your cell phone.

    And yes, this has happened for years, and not just with the iPhone.

  53. Electric Guitars by TrashGUY · · Score: 0

    If you want to hear something scary just have a gsm phone around an electric guitar that is plugged in to an amp. Even more scary is crt monitors.

  54. Buzz as a feature by macslut · · Score: 1
    "I thought that was an intentional "feature" of the phone. I wonder why they never marketed it as such."

    Casio made a watch that detected the signal and then vibrated on your wrist. I think I was the only person in the target market for this. I would wear the watch when I would jetski. If my watch vibrated, I could stop pull out my cell phone and take the call. This wasn't much of an feature for someone who could just deal with having their cell phone on vibrate mode. Also, it stopped being useful at all when cell phones started doing all kinds of data.

  55. No it doesn't by GuloGulo · · Score: 1

    Quite informative my hairy behind, it rehashes information I personally looked up the first time I noticed this problem.

    5 years ago.

    The only novel part of the article is the iPhone, and that information is easily discerned with common sense.

    --
    "The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
  56. Buzz In GTA4 by bonkeydcow · · Score: 1

    This is common on blackberry too. So common in fact, that it happens with your in game blackberry in Grand Theft Auto 4. If your phone rings in your car, you will hear the radio distort just before the phone starts to ring.

    So, realistic in fact, it took a few instances of this happening before I noticed it as an effect in the game. Since I was so used to it with my real life blackberry.

  57. Not really iphone's fault by m.dillon · · Score: 1

    If you hear a sound like morse-code in the speakers it's just the cellular phone transmitting something in close proximity to your system.

    The problem isn't the cellular phone, it is simply that your computer's speaker cables and electronics tend to be unshielded. Sometimes the power cable itself is to blame, sometimes its the traces in the amplifier, but mostly it's the speaker cabling.

    In any case, it usually doesn't take more then a $0.10 ferrite bead around the cables in question to remove the problem. That's why you often see ferrite beads built into monitor cables.

    -Matt

  58. Old occurrance... by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

    I've found that the various GSM phones I've had have caused different amounts of noise, I assume based on the strength of the transmitter. With my old phone I sometimes heard it faintly on my car's speakers. And if you've had one of these phones around a CRT the screen gets distorted as well.

    One cool, somewhat unrelated, thing I used to sometimes hear over my computer speakers growing up was a passing truck driver talking on his CB. The guy's voice was quite distinct. The interesting thing was how susceptible PC speakers were, because I don't recall my father's stereo speakers ever picking it up. I can only assume it's because more power was required to drive those speakers.

    Apple products seem to have this tendency to make people notice things that apparently they were oblivious to previously.

  59. RTFA by NixieBunny · · Score: 1

    This is all addressed in the article. Part 15 has nothing to do with the behavior of the cellphone itself - it's governed by Part 22. The phone is doing its job properly, but the authors of Part 15 did a cop-out to allow the production of $10 clock radios. You'd have to spend $12 on a clock radio for it to be well made enough to not emit the GSM buzz.

    --
    The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
  60. Aluminum foil by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 1

    I got pretty annoyed quickly when my speakers kept buzzing after I got the iPhone so I looked it up. You could get rid of it by attaching a tin-foil hat to your iPhone, pretty literally. Here's a link to a mini-how-to. Personally, I didn't tape the aluminum foil to my iPhone or anything, but I do have a small patch of aluminum foil that I keep on my desk and put my iPhone onto when I'm at my computer. It cuts out the interference, but it's not a very pretty solution. Someone in this thread said wrapping your speaker wire around magnets will help too, so I'm gonna try it.

    --
    Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
    1. Re:Aluminum foil by Deadplant · · Score: 1

      If that doesn't work try submerging the speakers in water.
      If that still doesn't work then try microwaving the phone on high for 6 minutes.

  61. Thank You - A mystery solved by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

    I have a pair of noise cancelling headphones I wear on the bus. I used to get this weird noise once in a while, especially when the battery was running low. Often enough to pique my curiosity, but not enough to bother me. Now I know what it is.

    --
    None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
  62. Not the phone's fault. by fatboy · · Score: 1

    It's the cheap devices near the phones fault.

    Let's take computer speakers for example. RF from the phone is inducing common mode currents somewhere in the speaker system. That RF is being detected (rectified) and amplified by the speaker system. The speaker system is not supposed to be a radio receiver, but is acting like one. This is not the fault of the phone. It is the fault of the device that is receiving this interference. With proper use of ferrite beads and other filtering techniques, this would not be a problem. I don't see Chinese manufactures doing that anytime soon, due to costs of proper engineering.

    --
    --fatboy
  63. Makes a nice alarm clock by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 1

    The "annoying effect" is perfect for me and my BlackBerry. The buzzing in my clock radio is a sort of annoying mini-alarm which helps to wake me up in the morning. I put the phone in a drawer right under the radio and it automatically turns on in the morning.

    --
    www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
  64. Welcome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...to 1991, O'Reilly and Slashdot!

  65. So this article was posted why? by Sherman+Peabody · · Score: 1

    To tell me that cell phones interfere with radio reception with a gratuitous mention of the iPhone so I would read it.

    With all the stuff going on in the world why does Slashdot waste my time with this?

  66. Here's another trick by melted · · Score: 1

    Find an old CRT monitor, put your GSM phone on the screen when it's on and then call it. Observe the distortions on the screen. Should probably work with CRT TV's also, I haven't tried.

  67. Strange... by Maverick+Hunter+Zero · · Score: 1

    I've had both an original iPhone and an iPhone 3G, and I will say that for a while, the original iPhone buzzed more through my computer speakers than any other phone I'd seen, then one day it I noticed it didn't buzz anymore. My iPhone 3G has never caused speaker interference that I've been aware of, not even in my car stereo. Makes me wonder if all the speakers I'm using now are shielded...

    --
    --Z
  68. grammar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    blackbearnh wrote in with a story that's not really about the iPhone, but if your office speakerphones beep like mine does, read on:

    Make 'speakerphones' singular or use 'do' not 'does'. There are also too many commas and the sentence does not 'flow' well.

    "If you own an iPhone, you may have noticed that it has a distinct and very annoying effect on clock radios, computer speakers, car radios, and just about anything else with a speaker.

    Lose that first comma.

    ...in that there has never been so many high-powered personal transmitters...

    'have' not 'has'

    Writing like a 12 year old makes you appear stupid and people will be less likely to take what you say seriously.

  69. how about anything putting out microwaves by DewDude · · Score: 1

    I love how everyone is focusing on speaker cables and such...or how some phones do it but others don't.

    it's not a simple fact of the speaker itself...but rather it's any kind of analog audio amplifier. Most things these days are tightly cammed onto circuit boards with SMD devices and, well, these things aren't always shielded properly. As a result, when the phone is close enough it causes interference through the analog componets themselves...it's NOT stictly the cable as one might say.

    I took my 1982 Sansui EQ and 1980 Danon amplifier (both old-school 100% analog devices), put my cell phone on top, and naturally, buzzing, static, and everything else associated with cell phone interference...come to think of it, this is not a NEW phenomon, but every cell phone i've owned since 2001 has done it, and i never really questioned what it is, i do know how radios and electronic circuits work afterall, i'm not a mouse jockey who thinks he knows everything

    the point is, it's not cell phones specifically that's the culprit. I have a 2.4ghz digital cordless phone that if i'm in the same room as the cheap computer speakers, IT too picks up a similar noise. My 5.8 ghz digital does it to.

    really, the main factors here is how well the "recieving" hardware is getting this. When i put the ferrite cores on my cables, i didn't notice ANY difference. Yes, it was less because they're not acting as antenna, but it wasn't till I put my audio equipment in a makeshift farraday cage that it obliterated audio.

    this is nothing new, i don't know why people think they have the answers. analog audio devices are going to pick up interference like that, the only thing people can do is maybe engineer these things to have more shielding...becuase even th most advanced phone design in the world is STILL going to ouput microwave, it has to, there's no escaping that. (and for the record, yes, i put an old microwave next to the denon and turned it on, as i moved it closer, nice loud screeching became more apparent...wrap the stereo in alumimum foil and screeching gone.

    so tell me again how a little metal donut on some cable is going to protect all my other "unshielded" stuff? srsly. fail.

  70. I've seen the reverse problem by chiph · · Score: 1

    I was in the pet store, they had a machine that engraved ID tags for your dog or cat. I was apparently too close to the machine, and it's RF caused my iPhone to freak out, making it ring randomly, vibrate, and the display went crazy.

    I had to go far out into the parking lot before I was able to do a restart of the phone. If it'd been just about any other phone, I would have just pulled the battery.

    Chip H.

  71. The author is a hack! by alphad0g · · Score: 1

    To the writer of this article: I think your article is sensationalism. As a commenter above pointed out, this has been going on for years with BB and other AT&T/GSM cell phones. To put iPhone in the title and to suggest that people on con calls are asked "to move their iPhone" is just misleading. Anyone that knows the sound from a con call, would say Blackberry before even imagining iPhone, but most likely would just say "can someone move their cell phone away from the phone". You even quote Polycom as saying they have been working on this for years... so why is iPhone in the title? I will guess you are a new or unknown writer that is trying for his 5 minutes of fame. You got on Slashdot, but now I have little respect for you due to your bogus "journalism".

  72. ATT by trum4n · · Score: 1

    All devices on the AT&T network do this. My old cell did it, but my Verizon now doesn't. The TV station i work at has banned AT&T devices because it goes through the audio mixer and out to the world. AT&T users must check cells at the door.

  73. Magnetic sheilding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When speakers are magnetically shielded that traditionally refers to preventing strong static magnetic fields from leaving the speaker enclosure and thus affecting nearby susceptible devices (like the CRT)

    It does not mean that the electronics and cables are shielded electromagnetic radiation (as well as strong electric or magnetic fields).

  74. It's any digital phone / AIM gadget by MrJerryNormandinSir · · Score: 0

    If that Iphone or Blackberry is causing interference.. guess what it's doing to your brains?

    damn company assigned phone makes digital noise while I'm listening to my Ipod play through my 350W Monsoon in my car.. so I tend to shut the phone off.
    I'd rather not be reachable while I'm driving.

  75. Hi, I'm a Mac! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2, Funny

    And I'm a PC <<bzzzt>>.

    What's that?

    I <<bzzt>> Said <<bzz-zzzt>> C.

    Hey, I think your pager is trying to tell you something...

    <<Bzzztt>>nks. I'll get it mys<<bzzzt>>.

    Maybe he should be using the clock on an iPhone. ;-)

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  76. More related to the carrier than the device by hoppo · · Score: 1

    Among the co-workers in my office, all or most of the major cell phone carriers are represented. The only ones that seem to cause interference in speakers are the AT&T phones. I had a RAZR that caused interference, and my iPhone does as well (although it took a few weeks for it to start). This is (obviously) nothing more than anecdotal evidence, but the only phones I've observed this phenomenon with have all been on AT&T.

    1. Re:More related to the carrier than the device by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      That's been our observation, too. It's so irritating I've been tempted to switch to another company. My AT&T Nokia phone interferes with damned near everything.

  77. Simple solution for iPhone by elistan · · Score: 1

    I've found that powered noise cancelling headphones are particularly bad about picking up the GSM noise. I read somewhere that putting the phone into an anti-static bag, like what RAM comes in, will prevent the interference while still allowing calls through. While I found that it does work, on the iPhone it's an annoying solution because it causes problems seeing and operating the touch screen. Playing around with it, I was surprised to learn that simply placing the iPhone flat on top of the anti-static bag attenuated the interference noise tremendously. It can still be heard, but only very very faintly. Signal strength drops by a bar or two, but calls still go through with ease. This isn't a solution if you use the iPhone dock, but when you're listening to music at your desk at work its an excellent work-around. (This is on my first-gen iPhone, I have no idea if this would work for the curved back 3G iPhone.)

    I release into the public domain the concept of an iPhone case (or car holster) that has anti-static material built into the backing, so that you can connect it to your car stereo or headphones without being bothered by the GSM noise. I'd patent the idea (I don't think there's any prior art on this, is there?) but patents are evil, right?

    1. Re:Simple solution for iPhone by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Checked your battery life lately?

  78. RDF up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you missed the joke dude

  79. Meh. Non-story. by doggo · · Score: 1

    My old SLVR had this problem, and the Sony-Ericsson, before that. I can still experience the cell phone noise if my iPhone is using the EDGE network, but not with 3G. I repeat, no noise with 3G.

  80. wait a damned minute by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, these people are on crack. All cell phones do this to some extent. In my experience, Smartphones are worse, probably because they do more stuff. My daughter's Blackberry Curve is a particularly bad citizen. She can't wear it when she's on her computer without turning down the volume on the computer's speakers or putting the phone on the table across the room. My Treo is the same way to a slightly lesser extent.

    If someone just discovered this phenomenon, and thinks it's limited to iphones, they're a moron. Yes, the iphone tends to stay connected. But so does any phone that's running push activesync or blackberry's push delivery, or running a jabber or messenger service in the background. This really looked like someone tried to manufacture a news item, but couldn't make anything out of what he dug up.

    Caveat: I think the iphone is a brilliant gui running on a crappy phone, and when offered one for free (at work) I turned it down. But this is just silly.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  81. iPhones and Remote Control by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 1

    My iPhone occasionally turns on my kitchen ceiling fan, which has an RF-type remote control. Since my laptop has also done it a time or two, I suspect it has something to do with the WiFi transmitter.

    --
    This ain't rocket surgery.
  82. iPhone and Motorolo V190 enable being a psychic by itsybitsy · · Score: 1

    I noticed this with my old V190 Motorola cell phone and recently with the iPhone. They "alert" me to an incoming call before the phone rings. I became known as a psychic at work since I'd reach for my phone to answer it before it rang!!! ;--)

    It seems to have something to do with shielding during the call set up.

  83. Razors and RAZRs.. by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    My Blackberry 7105 will turn on my Norelco shaver if it is left too close (0-3") to the shaver. It just comes on. I don't notice that it turns it off either.

    GSM in particular seems to have a pretty harsh signal. I've never listened to CDMA signals, but GSM has great stuff going on.

    Interesting, but not entirely unique. Heck, my Explorer's fuel pump is harsh enough to make my AM radio barf up whining instead of program. Even after the fixes and suppressoin kits. Feh.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  84. It's extremely annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have an iPhone and whenever I sit at my bedroom desk my alarm clock radio goes nuts when calls are coming in or when it interacts with my router wirelessly. It distracts me from listening to Rush Limbaugh.

  85. wtf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are you telling me you that you had no idea why in GTA:IV, the radio made that du-dut-du-dut-dut buzzing before niko got a call? are you so deluded you believe that apple paid them to do that as product placement? jebus fucking crist! it's GSM, not the iphone.

    if you tards in the US didn't always have to do everything the WRONG way first, you'd know that. why cant you just use the accepted worldwide standards for once in our lives, instead of coming up with your own incompatible shit. you are the microsoft of countries

  86. It actually might be frequency hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you frequency hop, you cannot simply move to a new frequency. You need to turn off your transmitter, move to new frequency and ramp up the power in a controlled way. If you don't, you tend to get broadband noise.

    Last time I looked, FCC (and just about any other regulatory body) only tests at fixed frequencies.

  87. Oldest !news ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This "story" is over 18 years old and Apple hasn't invented it. There even was a techno song in the middle of the ninetees arranged upon a GSM interference sample.

  88. Anyone knows... by DJRumpy · · Score: 0

    You have to have a stable warp field in order to reach warp 1. God, where's my pocket protector?

  89. Say it with me: G... S... M!!! by wikinerd · · Score: 1

    This thing in EU is everyday reality. Welcome to GSM, America!

  90. RFI by Nonillion · · Score: 1

    Welcome to the world of RFI, most people who buy consumer electronics aren't even aware of RFI. Generally you have to be a radio amateur to know the extreme annoyances of RFI. From powerline, electric fence, TV (plasma) and switching mode battery chargers, the RF spectrum is just awash with this pollution.

    Maybe with the advent of personal RF transmitters, company's will be forced to spend the extra few cents to design consumer electronics with RFI resistance in mind.

    --
    "I bow to no man" - Riddick
  91. How to fix it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have this annoying problem with my speakers, and placing my cellphone far away or buying new speakers isn't acceptable.

    So whats the solution?

    I tried reducing the cable length to the minimum I need (by cutting and soldering it again), but it still happens.

    I haven't seen the ferrite beads anywhere.

    I have read in some posts that people use tinfoil, but how do I do it? Do I have to wrap it around the cable, or glue it to the inner walls of the speakers boxes? Do I have to ground it someway? How do I connect it to ground?

    Has anybody done this successfully?

  92. Bad Design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most of the above replies are just plain wrong.

    The Buzz is heard simply because the affected equipment is poorly designed.

    It is good engineering practice to design equipment which is immune to RF breakthrough.

    Those who understand EMC/EMI have begged Governments to mandate Immunity Standards to prevent this problem, but manufacturers have always lobbied to prevent this happening.

    You can blame a corrupt FCC for this.

  93. Cell phone noise by jkirby · · Score: 1

    I had a three speaker system on my dekstop for years. It was a basic 79 dollar system from Fry's. The speakers always made a terrible sound before the phone rang.

    I upgraded to a more expnsive Bose computer speaker system (three speakers as well). Same noise. I upgraded to a balckberry 8800 and it makes noises all the time. Sometimes it just starts buzzing for a few minutes and then it stops.

    Two months ago I upgraded to a very high end system for my desktop (Onkyo 7.1 surround rceiver, left and right Event 20/20 speakers, center channel Dynaudio with BBC circuitry, two rear bose speakers from an older surround system I once had, and a bose rear center like the rear left and right (no side speakers connected yet)).

    Guess what, not one sound from my phone. Not once. Then, I added a very high end JVC sub-woofer and the noise is back. Louder and more annoying than ever.

    So, I can assume the noise is within the frequency range of lower end. I can adjust the frequency of the sub-woofer, and that may help, but I have not tried it yet.

    Jamey

    --
    Jamey Kirby
  94. How to increase your website hits by shaark78 · · Score: 0

    Rename your article to include the word iPhone
    ???
    Profit!!

  95. CDMA no problem by cdwiegand · · Score: 1

    I had forgotten all about this while I was a Verizon customer. See, their CDMA phones don't have this problem. Once I got an iPhone, it took me a day to recall where I'd heard that sound before. Honestly, I had totally forgotten.

    --
    . Define sqrt(x) as something really evil like (x / rand()), and bury it deep. Watch your coworkers go nuts.
  96. Nothing to do with iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every single cellphone I owned had the same effect on ANY speaker.

    This is nothing more than an idiot bitching about a successful product they now don't like.

  97. Huh? This is new? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

    You mean there are some cellphones that don't do this? I thought it was pretty standard. But I have always been on a GSM network.

  98. edge vs 3G by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find my iphone only causes the noises when it's on edge. When it's using 3G i don't get any noises

  99. Military Aircraft Better (MAB) by ers81239 · · Score: 1

    This must be one of the things that make military gear so expensive. I've flown military aircraft with multiple cell phone calls going on onboard and there isn't any interference at all.

    --
    there are 2 kinds of people. those who divide people into 2 kinds, and those who don't.