Slashdot Mirror


iOS Update May Tackle iPhone 4's Antenna Problems

DJRumpy was one of several readers to point out rumors that Apple will soon be deploying an update to iOS 4 to combat the iPhone 4 antenna problems we discussed last week. This could be good news for users of the 1.7 million iPhone 4s purchased during the first three days of its release. (And no, Daily Mail, Steve didn't announce a recall, though there's speculation that this problem could be a boon for Android.) An anonymous reader notes an analysis of a teardown of the phone, which found that its parts collectively cost about $188, with the most expensive part — the LCD screen — costing $28.50 by itself. In other Apple news, Germany has demanded that the company "immediately make clear" what data it collects from customers, and what use it makes of that data (perhaps spurred by Google's Wi-Fi sniffing debacle).

282 comments

  1. Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How a software update will fix an human-caused short circuit.

    1. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It won't but it will change the refresh rate of the antenna signal strength meter so you won't notice the signal going down anymore.

    2. Re:Interested to know... by clone53421 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The fix is expected to address a issue in iOS 4 related to radio frequency calibration of the baseband. Readers who saw the original forum discussions say that the issue is believed to occur when switching frequencies; because the lag is allegedly not calibrated correctly, it results in the device reporting "no service" rather than switching to the frequency with the best signal to noise ratio.

      iOS 4 introduced some enhancements to how the baseband selects which frequencies to use, so it makes sense that the error may have crept into those changes. Additionally, this explains why iOS 4 has also caused similar problems for iPhone 3GS users.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    3. Re:Interested to know... by timster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's all speculation at this point. But the best speculation possible is based on reports that the iPhone 4 was designed to look for towers with lower congestion, even if they might have a weaker signal. If this is the case (and I don't personally know) it's possible that this feature is simply too aggressive, or not aggressive enough about switching back to the strong tower when attenuation occurs.

      Speculation, as I said. I don't think anyone really knows for sure.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    4. Re:Interested to know... by yakumo.unr · · Score: 4, Informative
    5. Re:Interested to know... by logjon · · Score: 0

      That was my first thought too.

      --
      The stories and info posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
      Only fools would take it as fact.
    6. Re:Interested to know... by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perhaps they'll enable the built-in Tazer and zap any users who grab it the wrong way.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    7. Re:Interested to know... by jsveiga · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It won't but it will change the refresh rate of the antenna signal strength meter so you won't notice the signal going down anymore.

      ...so when the call quality gets bad, you'll be able to blame the network, not Apple.

      ...and on the transmit side, the software will pump up more average power than what the network power control requests, so your battery life will get worse, and overall network (WCDMA) performance will be degraded for all users in the neighborhood.

    8. Re:Interested to know... by sznupi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Now you're exaggerating. It will be just an easy to access (user friendliness, remember!) tutorial showing the only proper way to hold a mobile phone.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    9. Re:Interested to know... by DJRumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

      The information I saw stated that they change the antenna priority from 'strongest signal' to 'most reliable', whatever that means. This change was introduced in iOS4. The same issues have also been reported in iPhone 3G and 3GS, which would seem to reinforce the idea that this may be software related. Although having the antenna's outside the case may exaggerate the issue, it does not appear to be the primary factor.

      iPhone 3G: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsfgAXmK0b4

      iPhone 3GS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9ztRup6cLs

      General YouTube results:

      http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...gnal+ios4&aq=f

      Additionally, here is the link that I first found reporting the antenna priority change:

      http://www.electronista.com/articles...rly.next.week/

      It will be interesting to see how Apple handles this. I recall they had similar issues with frequencies on the first generation iPhone.

      If the issue was strictly related to the external antenna's, we wouldn't be seeing this issue pop up once 3G and 3GS users upgraded to iOS4.

    10. Re:Interested to know... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Funny

      The most interesting part of the new "A4" is its concealed chamber of iBot(tm) nanites. These tiny robots feature a robust and elegant objective C API and GrandCentral support, for efficient parallel activity, whether it be reconfiguring antennas or synthesizing V-series nerve agents in the blood vessels of those who jailbreak their devices.

    11. Re:Interested to know... by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Odd. The link on electronista is now gone. This is the relevant text from that link:

      "A software origin for the hand position bug, nicknamed the "death grip" for its tendency to kill the cellular signal if the antennas are bridged, would explain how some have replicated the problem on the iPhone 3G and the 3GS. As iOS 4 changed the antenna's priority from the strongest possible signal to the most reliable, it may have changed that behavior for all phones, not just the iPhone 4.

      Owners of the 3G MicroCell also support this through their lack of trouble; since the femtocell is always the most powerful cellular signal when nearby, iPhones always stay connected. The same behavior may likewise explain why some without MicroCells haven't had success replicating the problem, as any attenuation of the signal might not be enough to confuse the phone if the user is close to a good cell site."

    12. Re:Interested to know... by jsveiga · · Score: 4, Informative

      ... the iPhone 4 was designed to look for towers with lower congestion, even if they might have a weaker signal.

      That sounds strange. Only while in idle mode (no calls in place) a GSM/UMTS phone has some autonomy to select the cell site to which it will "listen" to.

      If the iPhone follows the UMTS standards, while in a call it reports received signal information from neighboring cell sites (or towers) to the network, and the network then decides which cell site(s) the phone will use (or switch to, what is called handoff). The phone has to obey the network's decision, so the only way that the phone software could affect the cell site choices would be to send "fake" (or wrong) received signal information back to the network (which would violate the GSM/UMTS standard).

    13. Re:Interested to know... by Ryvar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's *possible* that the very slight short circuit of a user's palm is playing havoc with the frequency calibration system. This would also neatly explain why people are more often reporting that the signal gradually falls off over several seconds rather than instantly.

      If that's the case, then Apple *might* be able to retool the frequency calibration code to ignore the mild short circuit.

      In all likelihood, the answer is probably to ship all future iPhone 4s with a very thin layer of clear resin (nail polish works wonders on the existing ones)over the external metallic surfaces.

      --Ryvar

    14. Re:Interested to know... by djupedal · · Score: 5, Informative

      The phone is not in charge of decisions at that level, sorry.

      That's like each a commuter on a train deciding when the train will leave the station....

      Loads are governed by the cell network hardware. Some phones are in cars, moving thru rapidly and they may leapfrog...some are still and they may get priority. For those networks that 'breathe' (expand and contract based on load), it would be especially hazardous if the devices could negotiate which cell on their own....not going to happen :)

    15. Re:Interested to know... by s4ltyd0g · · Score: 1

      I suspect the placebo effect.

      Whatever it does, it will most likely eat more battery. So it's one tradeoff for another.

    16. Re:Interested to know... by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

      Access the built-in compass and warn the user to face Mecca^H^H^H^H^HCupertino while placing iPhone calls.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    17. Re:Interested to know... by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 0

      I'm assuming they temporarily cut off the antenna not in use, or multiplex the signals... both capable in software.

    18. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will remove the "telephone feature" from the iPhone, just like Sony removed home-brew from the PS3.

      Enjoy.

    19. Re:Interested to know... by blair1q · · Score: 1

      It's all speculation at this point. But the best speculation possible is based on reports that

      Isn't that what they said just before they tossed six dozen Dunlops into a hopper and pumped them a mile under the ocean as a "junk shot"?

    20. Re:Interested to know... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Boost output power to compensate for lower signal. Simple solution, really - if you don't care about slashing your battery life...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    21. Re:Interested to know... by Pojut · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have, Lois! It's beautiful!

    22. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rewiring a high voltage to the frame when a bad connection is detected, causing the user to stop stupidly holding the phone in his hand, I suppose.

    23. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And I suppose you have taken classes in waves & fields to justify your claimed expertise on this subject?

      The problem is, according to the theory, that the two antennae are short-circuited by your sweaty palm, resulting in a different overall antenna length, thus shifting its best frequency response to a different frequency than the one for which Apple tuned its reception.

      As such, both antennae are always in use, and if they are short-circuited, "temporarily cutting off the antenna not in use" is not only impossible but would not change the problem: the antennae are effectively one due to the short-circuit. Cutting one of them off wouldn't fix the short-circuit.

    24. Re:Interested to know... by mrops · · Score: 5, Funny

      It will boost the transmit power so high that the user will feel a little tingle of an electric shock if the antenna is shorted by this obvious inappropriate use of this godly device.

      In related news, apple fanboys have chopped of their thumbs as it is obviously a flaw in human design.

      Religious leaders were heard blaming god for designing man in his faulty image while evolutionist think that humans will eventually evolve so that this antenna problem mitigates itself.

    25. Re:Interested to know... by twidarkling · · Score: 1

      That's like each a commuter on a train deciding when the train will leave the station....

      A commuter can't make it leave early, but sticking your arm in the door will certainly make it late, since safety features won't allow the train to move with an open door. Is it possible that this metaphor also applies to the iPhone? It somehow "sticks its arm" in the handoff?

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    26. Re:Interested to know... by darth+dickinson · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Standards aren't Variables don't.

    27. Re:Interested to know... by Idbar · · Score: 1, Informative

      Well, my 3G has never been a good cellphone. They may as well disable the phone antenna, and get rid of both, customers complaining and Nokia suing. That's win-win!

    28. Re:Interested to know... by Stick32 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Easy... You get the icon to always display 3-5 bars. Then everyone can go back to blaming AT&T's network for dropped calls, as usual...

    29. Re:Interested to know... by mini+me · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hence the "Stay tuned" comment from a recent Jobs email.

    30. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watch out, for some people informative+funny = troll!

    31. Re:Interested to know... by SirMasterboy · · Score: 1

      It's not really a hardware issue.

      My 3Gs after updating to iOS4 has the same "bug" as the iPhone 4. If i grip my hand around the phone I lose almost all my bars and sometimes it goes into "searching".

      When I downgraded back to 3.1.3, the problem went away. It has to do with how the phone decides which signals to use.

    32. Re:Interested to know... by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Some phones are in cars

      Da-doom, da-doom. (Ksssh!)
      Da-doom, da-doom.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    33. Re:Interested to know... by Pieroxy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Standards aren't Variables don't.

      Are you high?

    34. Re:Interested to know... by pluther · · Score: 0

      Man, if they had one of those, every person who's ever worked tech support will be working on figuring out how to remotely activate it...

      --
      If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
    35. Re:Interested to know... by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      What does that even mean?

    36. Re:Interested to know... by Americano · · Score: 1

      Offtopic, and purely speculation, but it's not uncommon for classical guitar players to grow their fingernails out longer to use when plucking guitar strings. It's typically seen on the right hand, as that's the more common dominant hand, but if he's left-handed, it could explain the length of his fingernails.

    37. Re:Interested to know... by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 0

      ok... i don't own an iphone and didn't read about the problem first. i have taken signal processing classes... i've built multiplexed analog to digital signal processing devices before, and short-circuits there would often result in cascade failures from constantly re-syncing the signals. that was my first guess as to what happened.

    38. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems that the problem is that holding the phone in a certain way short-circuits the antennae, effectively combining them into one longer antenna. As a result, the effective frequency of the antenna is changed and the frequencies it was supposed to work well at are now received only weakly.

      By changing channels (i.e. to a different frequency - farther from its designed sweet spot and closer to the new sweet spot of the short-circuited antenna) the phone should be able to mostly work around this situation. However the new version of iOS apparently included changes to the channel-selection algorithm to favor channels which are fairly open (unused) over channels which are being used fairly heavily but have much better signal strength / signal-to-noise. They likely figured this would even out the loads on their network and result in less network congestion, giving the users better audio quality, fewer dropped calls, etc.

      Result: rather than saying "wow, signal-to-noise sucks on this channel... maybe I should try a different one", the phone's automatic channel selector algo says "wow, hardly anybody is using this channel! wonder why I'm getting such a terrible signal quality on it?" Well, duh...

    39. Re:Interested to know... by donny77 · · Score: 1

      It's not a short. It's attenuation. A short would happen 100% of the time. I have personally confirmed that in some areas with really strong signal I can not get the bars to drop. Other places, with weaker signal I can.

    40. Re:Interested to know... by devjj · · Score: 0, Troll

      And you know all this... how?

    41. Re:Interested to know... by marsu_k · · Score: 1

      Yes, we all know you like Gary Numan.

    42. Re:Interested to know... by Firehed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Zapping your finger is probably the easiest way to get you to stop shorting out the antenna... and you'll probably learn pretty quickly to not to do it in the first place. Definitely a hack, but a solution nonetheless.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    43. Re:Interested to know... by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 0
      very important evidence. ^^

      technically it's a short causing attenuation... but not a "short" as in general electronics parlance where it implies power is redirected to it's source. i was initially confused at the nature of the problem as it was presented as a "short".

    44. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that would be an interesting social experiment. Enable Mecca mode, and watch as users individually figure out it works just a bit better if they face a certain way, then watch a room full of iPhonies at a conference facing one way.

    45. Re:Interested to know... by Teun · · Score: 1

      That doesn't address a lack in sensitivity/reception.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    46. Re:Interested to know... by erroneus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, I was going to say most of what you said so now I don't need to. I thought the conclusion was rather obvious. Apple should issue a recall, but since Apple doesn't make mistakes, a recall isn't necessary.

    47. Re:Interested to know... by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Yes, we all know you like Gary Numan.

      XD OK, OK, really, seriously, I am sorry. I think I stretched things too far there.

      Maybe it's time for a change. I'll think it over.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    48. Re:Interested to know... by sexconker · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is a short. By bridging the bezels you alter the electrical length, and thus the resonant frequency, of the antenna. It happens 100% of the time you bridge the bezels. Whether or not you lose reception a little bit or all the way depends on the many other factors that affect your reception normally.

    49. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      There's a Zap for that!

    50. Re:Interested to know... by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 0

      this confusion needs to be clipped. speaking about an electronic device, a "short" would be assumed to be a misdirection of power from the battery or internal logic circuits. so claiming this is a "short" is both correct and negatively misleading. something PR firms for the competition will surely continue to shout from their soap boxes.

    51. Re:Interested to know... by coaxial · · Score: 1

      overall network (WCDMA) performance will be degraded for all users in the neighborhood.

      Good thing the iPhone uses UMTS.

    52. Re:Interested to know... by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Where is the app for that? (tm)

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    53. Re:Interested to know... by twidarkling · · Score: 1

      Hey, if you didn't understand what I was saying, you just had to ask someone to explain it to you. No need to get all hostile. Geez, someone's a little hot under the colander.

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    54. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Standards aren't standard. Variables don't vary.

    55. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      A short refers to any unintended low resistance connection between points that are supposed to be at different potential. Assuming anything beyond that is foolish.

    56. Re:Interested to know... by jsveiga · · Score: 1

      overall network (WCDMA) performance will be degraded for all users in the neighborhood.

      Good thing the iPhone uses UMTS.

      and UMTS uses WCDMA.

      What we are used to call UMTS is GSM + WCDMA (the standard can go farther, but the bread-and-butter is GSM + WCDMA now).

      GSM uses TDMA (which is not the "old" TDMA, which technically is called IS-136, and IS-54 when it was part AMPS, part TDMA).

      The WCDMA used by UMTS (when your phone is in "3G" or "3.5G") isn't your grandpa's CDMA either, which technically was CDMA2000, and IS-95 before it).

      I specifically said WCDMA because it is a characteristic of WCDMA (and CDMA) to be much more sensitive to uplink power control than GSM when it comes to degrading overall network performance - when your UMTS phone in (W)CDMA mode transmits with more power than it needs to, that is "noise" for everyone else's phone signal in the same (W)CDMA carrier trying to reach the cellsite.

      That effect is not as relevant when your UMTS phone is in GSM mode, because you are not sharing the same frequency (at the same time) with others near you. In (W)CDMA, many phones share the same frequency at the same time, each one being separated by a XORed code, crudely speaking (black magic involved).

      If your phone in GSM transmits with more power than it should, you just get worse battery life (and a remote possibility of interfering with someone using anoter cellsite far away).

      If your phone (or a lot of phones) in WCDMA transmits with more power than it should, it hurts network capacity.

    57. Re:Interested to know... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Are you sure it's reception that's the problem? One test I've seen (update 4) indicates that you can still get downloads, but the upload and ping go completely away. Theoretically boosting transmit power should help that issue.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    58. Re:Interested to know... by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

      Jobs' assistant: Sir. We have now sold 50 million iPhones to key people around the world.
      Shall we activate the secret mind control application now?
      Jobs: Why bother?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    59. Re:Interested to know... by node+3 · · Score: 1

      How a software update will fix an human-caused short circuit.

      Because it's not a human-caused short circuit.

      Hands attenuate the signal. This happens on every single cell phone. iOS 4 apparently doesn't handle this well, and instead of reacting in a way that maintains the connection, it drops it altogether. This is speculation, of course, but we should know the answers to all this soon enough.

    60. Re:Interested to know... by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 0

      assuming anything, ever is somewhat foolish... make an ass out of u and me, etc... but when someone tells you "there is problem with shorts in the new iphone" is it foolish to assume the short would be regarding the electronic circuitry and not the antenna? intentionally misleading people is also foolish.

    61. Re:Interested to know... by node+3 · · Score: 1

      It seems that the problem is that holding the phone in a certain way short-circuits the antennae, effectively combining them into one longer antenna.

      In the very post you just replied to, it's pointed out that this also happens on the iPhone 3GS with iOS 4. The iPhone 3GS doesn't have an external antenna to "short".

      It's not a short, it's the attenuation of the signal by having your hand over the antenna. This happens on all phones. What remains to be seen is if the updates corrects this. If it corrects the older iPhones, but not iPhone 4, then it makes the "shorting antenna" scenario more likely, but as it stands, it's sufficiently explained by other factors (which you addressed in the rest of your post).

    62. Re:Interested to know... by sortius_nod · · Score: 1

      I'm starting to think it's the network the US use, as I do not have the same problems here in Australia. I suppose we'll all know in a few weeks if this software update is out.

    63. Re:Interested to know... by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      I've heard similar reports from people in Mexico in the AI forums. Someone reported a phone with this problem could not be forced to reproduce the issue when they took it to Mexico.

    64. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Standards aren't Variables don't.

      Are you high?

      And if so, +5 Volt, +12 Volt, or something completely different? Inquiring MAX232s want to know.

      Captcha: shorted :-D

    65. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are several other factors to consider:

      • The impact of the extra capacitance caused by the human hand touching the antenna in the first place (which effectively shortens the antenna).
      • The impact of the entire arm of the person acting like a (poor) radiator.
      • The interference caused by the Wi-Fi transmitter screaming straight into the other radio.

      That third one actually could be improved by not using the radios at the same time, though that certainly isn't a great solution.

      I would suspect that the first one is the primary cause, and also explains why folks experience the same thing with iPhone 3G/3GS (and with every other cell phone on the market, assuming their signal strength indicators change quickly enough for you to actually test for this).

    66. Re:Interested to know... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I'm starting to think it's the network the US use, as I do not have the same problems here in Australia.

      If you are in Melbourne I would argue that the weather is not conducive to sweaty palms (to say the least). Maybe in the summer...

    67. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * The interference caused by the Wi-Fi transmitter screaming straight into the other radio.

      That third one actually could be improved by not using the radios at the same time, though that certainly isn't a great solution.

      exactly what i was thinking... but that would effectively make bluetooth headsets useless... i've also been told i'm completely wrong and don't care to research further.

    68. Re:Interested to know... by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      The software update will call the local apple store and pass through your GPS position. They'll send a grunt to come over and coat the antennas with some transparent nail polish, effectively isolating them.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    69. Re:Interested to know... by Xest · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Would the patents Nokia is currently suing Apple over cover those parts of the GSM/UMTS standard?

      Could this be the problem? That because Apple has refused to pay the patent fee that it's having to either try and work around the patents, or because it's out on it's own having no support from the developers of the standard because it hasn't licensed them?

    70. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except it isn't a short circuit, this only happens when you wrap your hand around the entire bottom half of the phone - what I like to call the spastic grip.

      Yes, I have one and I have a 3G as well, and I can say that not once have I been able to get the signal to go down by shorting the antenna's on the left as the bottom right seperator is fake, as the Apple release vid shows only 2 antenna's making up the entire case.

      I've had nothing but ridicule because of everyone reading the news then deciding to pounce on the only person they know with an iPhone 4, but all agree that you have to be a bit of a mong to hold the phone in the way that causes signal loss.

      So if you're normal you'll be fine, but if you're a regular Slashdotter - don't bother as you'll suffer signal loss.

    71. Re:Interested to know... by Fahrvergnuugen · · Score: 1

      But if you test it with a multimeter, you will find that there is already continuity between the two antenna halves...

      --
      Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
    72. Re:Interested to know... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      But if you test it with a multimeter, you will find that there is already continuity between the two antenna halves...

      That continuity would be your multimeter, silly.

    73. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically, this is a short across an antenna causing attenuation at the intended operating frequencies because the antenna's "sweet spot" (best frequency response range) has been shifted due to the short changing the effective length of the antenna. The antenna acts like a bandpass filter. It picks up certain frequencies better than others. Changing its length will move its peak response.

      Of course, it would require having some experience or training in electronics engineering (and in particular, radio communications - RF waves and EM fields - propagation, interference, etc.) to know this, so it's not surprising that the average Slashdotter gets it wrong.

      a "short" as in general electronics parlance where it implies power is redirected to it's source.

      Dispose of your entire notion of a "short". It is false and misleading; hence your confusion when you heard the word "short".

      If you understand what a short is, you can understand what it does under all sorts of conditions. If, however, you only understand what a short does in certain circuit conditions, you do not understand what the short fundamentally is, nor will you be able to understand what a short will do in a different type of circuit than what you were used to.

      A short is a point at which the potentials (relative voltage) of two or more conductors - which should, under proper operating circumstances, be independent of each other - are instead locked together at a single potential (via a conductive path of essentially zero resistance between them).

      For load-carrying conductors, a short is rather like welding the gas and brake pedals together on your car (or the brake and clutch pedals, for ye olde timers). They are locked together: the more force you apply to one or the other, the more overall load you put on the whole configuration, and if you attempt to force the pedals to move independently you will eventually exceed the load-carrying capacity of one, the other, or the short between them.

      For resonant circuits such as RF tuners and antennae, however, it's more like tying two guitar strings together in the middle. The whole thing will resonate at a completely different frequency and the strings will now just dampen each other at their original resonant frequencies.

    74. Re:Interested to know... by tokul · · Score: 1

      It's all speculation at this point.

      "Hold your phone different way". It is not software. youtube is full of videos reproducing it. Thumb on left side, signal goes down.

    75. Re:Interested to know... by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 0
      i agree with you completely... i'm just saying that if someone told me "my VCR shorted out" that i would assume that the device's electronic circuits were damaged due to power misdirection rather than the the device's analog outputs became cross-wired, degrading the media signal.

      you don't agree that my conclusion is warranted or at least has a logical basis supporting it?

    76. Re:Interested to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only as logical as "I was ignorant but had an opinion anyway" is logical...

    77. Re:Interested to know... by NateTech · · Score: 1

      Bottom line: Qualcomm is making a fuckload of money changing standards every 5 minutes. :-)

      --
      +++OK ATH
    78. Re:Interested to know... by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 0

      someone asked how a software update could ever "fix an human-caused short circuit"... as you are pointing out, the implied nature of a generic "short-circuit" could be almost anything, many of which a software solution could fix... generally by turning off certain logic pathways or retuning them to not create interference... many others, including as it seems the true nature of the problem with the iphone described above, a software solution might not be able to completely "fix", but it could definitely detect the problem and make available an API for developers to also incorporate in their applications... perhaps youtube would switch to the lowest resolution, or stop the video and report "video transmission is not capable because your antennae is in direct contact with something. don't hold your phone here: [pic of phone with arrow to bottom left]"

    79. Re:Interested to know... by Teun · · Score: 1
      Hmm, I haven't seen the real thing but wnet by the reports of signal strength bars going down, that's reception problems.

      But as the same antenna is used for both the TX power will of course be affected as well.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    80. Re:Interested to know... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Maybe the bars are a combination of transmit and receive power?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  2. Steve responds by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Germany has demanded that the company "immediately make clear" what data it collects from customers,

    "All of it," replies Steve.

    and what use it makes of that data

    "Good use," replies Steve.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Steve responds by Tisha_AH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes good old Stevie was claiming the problem was with the operators and demanded a modification of the UOS (user operating system).

      Sorry dude but it will be a few years before you can implant all of that Apple hardware directly into our brains.

      When I read his rather terse reply about "well, hold the phone differently" I was surprised. And this is from the company that made its riches by making hardware and software adapt to the users needs.

      Now it's like "the hell with you, we are omnipresent and omnipotent, you will bow down and kiss my ass".

      --
      Tisha Hayes
    2. Re:Steve responds by blair1q · · Score: 1

      And then he adds: "would you like a line-pass for the Apple store?"

    3. Re:Steve responds by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For some time now Apple has not cared about functionality, looks have trumped all. Started around the time of the puck mouse, and then in earnest with OS-X, when they threw out a good deal of UI research that their own HIG discovered.

      These days it is all about shiny. If something looks cooler, it is pushed for, regardless of if that is a good design idea. Another recent example would be internal power supplies in the Time Capsules. They generate too much heat and you see the units failing in large numbers after about a year and a half. Much smarter design would be an external PSU, but that wouldn't look as cool so it wasn't done.

      So this isn't surprising either. Apple decided that the all glass, antenna around the edge design looked cool. They didn't bother to do proper research as it if it would be a problem. I'm not saying that it is obvious, but you'd think in the course of a new antenna you'd consult with a PhD or two on it. The PhD here who does antenna research said "That looks like trouble, people will interfere with the antenna by holding it." For that matter maybe someone did tell them and they said "Who cares, it works well enough and looks cool."

      Apple stopped being the usability king some time ago. That isn't to say they never do anything right or don't make usable devices, just that they are more concerned with looks than usability. If the two collide, looks will win out.

    4. Re:Steve responds by mikael_j · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It sounds to me like you cherry-picked the puck mouse example (also, this is a product from 1998 you're talking about).

      As for OS X, all my experience with it, previous versions of Mac OS, practically every desktop Windows version since 3.x and a boatload of X11 window managers (including but not limited to: PWM, FVWM1/2, Openstep, Enlightenment, Metacity, IceWM, 4DWM, Blackbox, Fluxbox...) tells me that it's better than most if not all of the competitors in many ways (although if you have a very specialized workflow then you may benefit from another UI but as a general desktop OS it's definitely one of the better and sure beats previous incarnations of Mac OS).

      Can't speak for the Time Capsule as I have never even seen one of those IRL but it does sound like you're confusing "shiny" with "easy to handle", the average user (the kind of person who would buy a turnkey backup unit like the Time Capsule) doesn't want extra cables and power bricks, they want something dead simple.

      Finally, the iPhone 4. Yeah, this does seem like a bit of an issue but for all we know they did usability research and found that only 0.003% of all users they tested it on actually held the phone in a way that shorted out the antenna. Still, does seem like a bad bug to let out in the open (but I'm not yet convinced they won't be able to fix it in software, there were a few other glitches with the iPhone 3G that had the anti-Apple crowd screaming "DEFECTIVE HARDWARE UNPOSSIBLE TO FIX IRREPARABLY BORKEN BUY A BLACKBERRY AND ZUNE INSTAED!!1" yet they were fixed in the 3.0.1 release of the OS).

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    5. Re:Steve responds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Google's, we were just holding onto it for them!

    6. Re:Steve responds by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Amen, brother. Now if only the drooling Apple fans would come to that realization...

    7. Re:Steve responds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      One: Consider the ergonomics of the magic mouse, if you consider the puck mouse to be too dated.
      Two: I have yet to see a software update that is capable of physically rerouting copper wires. That's the problem with the antenna, the user can touch the antenna surface and detune it.

    8. Re:Steve responds by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 3, Informative

      but as a general desktop OS it's definitely one of the better

      True.

      and sure beats previous incarnations of Mac OS

      False. OS X's Finder is significantly poorer than Mac Classic's Finder, and that's after a decade of development. (Imagine where the Classic version would be with another decade to perfect it...) The thing, the Classic UI wasn't just a product, it was a *philosophy* with the aforementioned HIG as its Bible... it wasn't just about Macs, it was about usability specifically, how to adapt a software product to a human being.

      (A fundamental point: humans have evolved for millions of years to be the way we are. If humans are naturally better at something, say spatial memory over rote memory, you should make use of it. Meanwhile, nearly all computer UIs still rely on rote memorization to some extent.)

      The real problem is that most people using Macs now never used Mac Classic, so they simply do not know what a truly great UI experience looks like. They're coming from Windows-- sure, OS X is (arguably) still better than Windows. But it's not *nearly* as better as it was in 1998. Not by a long shot.

      (Just like if you say a spatial file browser is great, people say "no it sucked, it was in Windows 95." It sucked because Microsoft screwed up the implementation, not because it's a bad idea.)

      And to clarify before the nitpickers come on: I'm just talking about the UI design. Yes, I know they multitasked poorly. Yes, I know they crashed due to no memory protection. But the UI was brilliant, and still has not been replicated in any other product since.

    9. Re:Steve responds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck are you on about?

    10. Re:Steve responds by inpher · · Score: 0

      Parent certainly does not deserve its Flamebait mod, it is a calm and well reasoned comment that echoes what people like Siracusa of Ars Technica writes (remember FTFF?).

    11. Re:Steve responds by egomaniac · · Score: 1

      OS X is supposedly UNIX but when I want to save things off the internet it will only let me go down one directory.

      Have you even USED Mac OS X?

      First off, "saving things off of the internet" is an application feature, not an OS feature. Second, if we're talking about Safari, it allows you to save files in whatever directory you want. By default it uses "Downloads", but you can either use Save As... or Download Linked File As... and specify a target directory. And if you don't like Safari, you can use Firefox, or Chrome, or hell, Lynx or wget if you like, and use their particular means of specifying target directories.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    12. Re:Steve responds by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      but you'd think in the course of a new antenna you'd consult with a PhD or two on it

      Actually, Apple's ranks are rife with PhD holders. It's entirely possible that your own personal PhD might have made exactly the same decision if s/he had access to the same information that the Apple engineers had.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    13. Re:Steve responds by kamochan · · Score: 1

      Sorry dude but it will be a few years before you can implant all of that Apple hardware directly into our brains.

      "Oh, and one more thing", replies Steve. "Have you seen our new product, the iMplant?"

    14. Re:Steve responds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah yes, having used a handful of different x11 window managers makes you an expert on ui design. I see how you're qualified to state that osx has the best possible ui. Your own preference could not have clouded your statement at all.

    15. Re:Steve responds by donny77 · · Score: 0

      And yet despite your brash comments, Apple's products are widely lauded and successful because of their FUNCTIONALITY and USABILITY. Mobile Safari was the first smart phone browser that could actually reasonably display a non mobile website. iOS was designed with touch interfaces in mind, not just throwing a desktop interface on a touch screen and adding a stylus.

      iPods are lauded for their ease of syncing music through iTunes and the ease of navigation with the click wheel.

      Apple has long been willing to take the less popular choice when there is a trade off if the gain is larger than the loss. I believe this is what happened here. By putting the antennas outside, they improved reception for those that hold the phone a certain way, use a case, or use hands free. of the percentage that are affected, how many will adjust or buy a case? More people will end up with better reception overall with this antenna design.

    16. Re:Steve responds by badran · · Score: 1

      What happened to Opera Mobile and the Nokia S60 Browser in your universe??

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Mobile
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Browser_for_S60

    17. Re:Steve responds by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      And something to note is that the HIG was one of the very first groups to do actual, real, empirical research on how humans interacted with computers. A lot of shit prior to that was simply programmers doing what they thought was good, and trial and error slowly separating out the bad stuff.

      The HIG did some real testing. They'd sit people down and see what worked, what didn't. They'd run trials on different ideas. One thing that came out of it, for example, was not using red for close buttons. Red makes sense, since red means stop is most cultures. However the HIG found that people are drawn to red like a magnet, they want to click on it. So, no red close buttons in Classic. Yet OS-X has that, and I've seen no research invalidating the earlier studies the HIG did. Seems like they just had to have coloured buttons up there for looks, not for real usability.

      Interestingly enough, MS is doing more of this these days than Apple it seems. They have a fairly brutal process where programmers have to watch people try and use their products. A user is given a set of tasks to do, with no interaction from the dev staff, who have to watch it on monitors. They get to see and hear all the frustration and problems the user has. One can argue how effective they are using what they find, but they are at least doing research.

      Despite being a long time DOS/Windows guy (back when I had to choose PC or Mac as a kid, I chose PC because of games) I really liked the Classic interface. I disliked the underlying OS, especially after Windows 2000 came out, but the UI was extremely refined. Simple, understated, easy to use.

      OS-X, in particular the early dock, is just a POS. Completely about the shiny tech demo, not about usability. Frankly if you want to see a dock like interface done right, look at Windows 7. The OS-X dock was made to look cool, not to be clear and easy to use. It was far inferior to the interfaces it replaced in Classic. However people liked it, because it looked cool in the store and on video. They were attracted to the shiny, they didn't consider usability.

      Classic wasn't made to look good, it was made to be easy to use. Usability trumped basically everything, and that is how it should be IMO.

    18. Re:Steve responds by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Time Capsule is actually about the easiest thing I've used, and is one thing that I'm tremendously jealous about in the windows world.

      For those who don't know, Time Capsule is both a piece of hardware, and the Time Machine software built into the OS. When you plug in an external hard drive, the OS asks if you'd like to use it as a backup drive. If you say yes: You're done. Any time you plug that hard drive into your system, it automatically creates an incremental backup silently in the background, with minimal performance hit. You can then basically travel backwards in time to any previous version of a file in a straightforward, easy-to-use interface. Due to the incremental nature, the system stores far, far more than you would expect. It's super easy and just works.

      Sure, automatic incremental backups have happened before. And version control is a very old concept. But nobody has done it as easy as Apple has here. It doesn't pop-up in a taskbar, it doesn't fail because it was expecting the drive at 3am, it doesn't jam full of uncompleted changes to save. It's the easiest backup system I have ever used, and I have used a lot.

      I can't speak for hardware durability, as I haven't seen numbers on failure rates. But I'll be damned if Time Capsule and Time Machine didn't significantly raise the quality and painlessness bar for backups.

    19. Re:Steve responds by mikael_j · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OS-X, in particular the early dock, is just a POS. Completely about the shiny tech demo, not about usability. Frankly if you want to see a dock like interface done right, look at Windows 7. The OS-X dock was made to look cool, not to be clear and easy to use. It was far inferior to the interfaces it replaced in Classic. However people liked it, because it looked cool in the store and on video. They were attracted to the shiny, they didn't consider usability.

      I guess I and lots of people I know (yay, anecdote!) are exceptions to this then. The OS X dock was dead simple to grasp, just looking at it made sense quickly ("Apps without a marker under aren't running, those with a marker under are running, apps not already in the dock get added to the far-right of the dock while running", that's about it) but the win7 taskbar/dock just seems like an over-engineered mess to me (this has also been the most common complaint about win7 from friends of mine who have upgraded to win7 with several of them asking me if I knew the easiest way to make it "behave like windows 2000" and another question being "how do I know if a program is running or not?").

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    20. Re:Steve responds by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      It sounds to me like you cherry-picked the puck mouse example (also, this is a product from 1998 you're talking about).

      Apple's laptops are prone to overheating too (just google macbook video overheat) - mine doesn't have these issues, but a students of mine did and many others have too. That said - I've never had an apple mouse that even remotely pleasant to use - even their new one. It looks cool, but its not even remotely ergonomic.

    21. Re:Steve responds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      apps without a marker aren't running, those with a marked around them are running. apps not alaready in the taskbar get added to the far-right of the taskbar while running. You have some stupid friends if they can figure out the dock in osx but not the taskbar in win7.

    22. Re:Steve responds by Fahrvergnuugen · · Score: 1

      I would never trade OSX's column browser view for the Classic Finder's spatial view. I find it to be MUCH more efficient.

      --
      Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
    23. Re:Steve responds by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I would never trade OSX's column browser view for the Classic Finder's spatial view. I find it to be MUCH more efficient.

      Fine.

      But the two are not mutually-exclusive. Other than you, who says you can only have one view implemented at a time? (Hell, Classic had several spatial views and one non-spatial view by OS 9, all working side-by-side.) You're arguing against a total strawman right now, one you pulled out of your ass.

      In fact, there's really *no* way to use a spatial file browser at the moment-- GNOME's comes pretty close in the default configuration. So if anything, my need for a spatial interface (of which there are zero) overrides your desire of a column-based interface (of which there are tons.)

      Also, usability research shows empirically that the column-based browsing mode is inferior to the spatial mode. It requires tons of rote memorization to accomplish tasks you could use spatial memory for in Mac Classic. You are welcome to like it better, but the majority of people will not. That's scientific fact.

      The funny thing is that the geeks that make software for everybody else are the only people on Earth who like rote memorization, which is why the interfaces they produce (like the column browser, made by NeXT geeks with no access to Apple's usability labs) are almost universally hated among the populace. The sooner developers *realize* this, the better off we'll all be! The problem is, at the moment, we're actually going backwards.

      (Actually, as another poster mentioned, Microsoft is doing a better job at usability right now than Apple is. The Office 2007 interface shows that they're willing to take risks to move the field forward-- which is huge! You may not like the ribbon interface, but like the spatial interface of old, it's measurably better than the other way.)

  3. Didn't Jobs say.. by recoiledsnake · · Score: 2, Interesting

    All phones have sensitive areas," Jobs wrote. "Just avoid holding it in this way."

    Now the iPhone won't have a sensitive area? Huh?

    --
    This space for rent.
    1. Re:Didn't Jobs say.. by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Funny story. When this news broke, I actually took my own phone and looked at the signal strength difference while leaving it set on the table and when I'm holding it. Sure enough, when holding it, it drops a bar, but because it never produced a noticeable degradation in voice quality or anything else. The impact may be noticeable depending on your carrier, but I've never noticed it to be a problem with Verizon in my area. If it's an issue with how the signal is displayed like Apple is claiming, it's not really a big deal.

      In order to test to what extent holding the phone produces an actual loss of signal strength, it would be necessary to place a large number of calls while the device is not being held and record the number of dropped calls and to compare that against the number of dropped calls recorded while the device is being held in the hand. I'd wager that there are likely to be more dropped calls while holding it, based off of the technical information I've heard regarding the way the antenna was designed, but I don't believe the difference will be overly large.

    2. Re:Didn't Jobs say.. by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      I can cover all edges of my env3 and I do not see any signal strength drop on the display...

    3. Re:Didn't Jobs say.. by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      All phones have sensitive areas," Jobs wrote. "Just avoid holding it in this way."

      Now the iPhone won't have a sensitive area? Huh?

      Yeah, my phone has an area like that...

      Lucky for me, it sticks out the top of the phone, instead of wrapping around the side. Hooray for circa-2005 engineering! :)

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    4. Re:Didn't Jobs say.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'll still have sensitive areas....just different ones.

    5. Re:Didn't Jobs say.. by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      Does the env3 show bars or an actual signal number? The problem with bars is that they can be calibrated in a non-linear way. For example, on a scale of 0-100 in signal strength, 50-100 might be 5 bars since the manufacturer decided that anything over 50 is considered good enough to be perfect when making calls. When you cover your env3 edges (and it might not be the edges where the antenna is located) you could be losing 20-30 points of signal strength that is never reflected on the bars graphic.

    6. Re:Didn't Jobs say.. by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Graphic, yes... not a number, so good point. I know the antenna may not be in the sides, but I'm not sure where else it would be hehe. Probably in the screen, right below the bars, so that if I cover it I can no longer see the signal strength ;)

    7. Re:Didn't Jobs say.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it won't be any different, because the problem is caused by doufuses who hold the phone in an uncool manner. And everyone knows that people who by Apple products must be cool.
      So in reality it's not a bug...it's a feature.

  4. IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by JSBiff · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I call name collision. Please refer to the iPhone/iPad operating system as something other than IOS because Cisco used it first.

    1. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      They'll probably argue that the lowercase i makes it seperable somehow. Perhaps you need to say "IOS" like "eye-oss" and iOS like "Eye-Oh-Ess" to distinguish in regular language.

    2. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cisco licensed the use of the trademark.

    4. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Jose · · Score: 1

      if you notice, they are calling Apple's version iOS not IOS(note the lower case 'i' character, which is Apple's thing)...and of course, they did get permission.

      --
      The basic sleazeware produced in a drunken fury by a bunch of UCBerkeley grad students was still the core of BIND. --PV
    5. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      Don't forget Nintendo's IOS microkernel operating system (from the Wii), of unknown expansion (possibly "I/O System", but it also does security), which is presumed to have been developed by RouteFree^WBroadOn^WiGware. TLA collisions suck.

    6. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It isn't IOS it's iOS.

      See what I did there?

      And if you think it matters that a networking hardware company named their firmware something 'first' you are seriously delusional. Like Cisco is going to get any traction against Apple and iPhone/iPad. You saw the part where Apple sold 1,700,000 of these things in 3 days, right?

      Why not just go stand in front of a freight train and claim that you got there 'first'?

    7. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by gnasher719 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I call name collision. Please refer to the iPhone/iPad operating system as something other than IOS because Cisco used it first.

      We are all glad that you noticed so quickly. However, the name of the iPhone and iPad operating system _is_ iOS and Apple is paying Cisco license fees for the use of the name. So since Cisco agrees with Apple's use of the name, I think that settles the matter. And all of this was known weeks ago :-(

    8. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      They're clearly all fanbois over there.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    9. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      With trademarks, it absolutely matters. However, others have provided references that Apple licensed the mark from Cisco, so I guess that's that.

    10. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by malakai · · Score: 1, Informative

      I second this. This is really annoying. IOS has been Cisco's moniker of choice for their operating system since 1987, when they bought it from Bill Yeager. This is such typical Apple hubris, and only helps cement the dividing line between IT/Developers and Apple. Good luck getting any of us to help your users without a smirk or comment on their fannypack.....

    11. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by PoiBoy · · Score: 1

      Oh, so it's more like i OS, IBM's midrange OS.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    12. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Dracker · · Score: 3, Informative

      Apple licensed the name from Cisco. There's no legal problem.

    13. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I call name collision. Please refer to the iPhone/iPad operating system as something other than IOS because Cisco used it first.

      You're about a month behind. The complaint that's currently fashionable is the antenna issue. In about two weeks it's gonna move on to something else, so try to keep up.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    14. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call name collision. Please refer to the iPhone/iPad operating system as something other than IOS because Cisco used it first.

      We are all glad that you noticed so quickly. However, the name of the iPhone and iPad operating system _is_ iOS and Apple is paying Cisco license fees for the use of the name. So since Cisco agrees with Apple's use of the name, I think that settles the matter. And all of this was known weeks ago :-(

      Since Cisco is also licensing the name "iPhone", I find this amusing.

    15. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Wovel · · Score: 3, Funny

      I officially nominate you for comment of the story.

    16. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Americano · · Score: 1

      Or as an alternative, you could use the power of "context" to figure out what is intended, as we do every day with the numerous homographs already in use in the english language, such as polish, bear, wind, close, lead, and dozens of others.

      Stop freaking out about name collisions, you handle dozens of them every day without batting an eyelash, why is this any different?

    17. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ohnoes! A trademark that's been licensed by Apple from Cisco, and is only known to a few thousand CCIE dweebs around the world is being used by Apple to describe the operating system that's installed on millions of devices used by regular people every day! I'm sure that everybody with an iPhone will immediately assume that when somebody references "iOS" they're talking about a fucking Catalyst, and hilarity will ensue!

      And for the record - in my time in IT, it's been overwhelmingly those neckbeards who love Linux and open source who carry around 2 phones, a palm pilot, a small toolkit, quarters for Mountain Dew and Candy from the vending machine, and the latest "Official World of Warcraft" book in a fanny pack. Apple users can fit their iphone in a pocket and be on about their business.

      Get stuffed.

    18. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      This is different because it could have simply been avoided in the first place. Yes, we infer things from context. The problem is, the context of discussion for devices by Apple, and networking gear from Cisco may have some overlap, for example if you are trying to use an iPad on a wireless network comprised of Cisco gear. Yes, you can differentiate them by being explicit, "The Cisco IOS needs to be updated to the latest version", "The network settings in Apple iOS are not correct, and so you cannot get on the network".

      But wouldn't it be simpler to just name it something else?

      Anyhow, who's freaking out? I simply pointed something out.

    19. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Americano · · Score: 1

      Have you ever done any form of end-user technical support?

      If you're talking to a user about their network problem, are you going to tell them, "Open your iOS 'Settings' application on the iOS iPad, and click the iOS Settings 'Network' button to bring up the information on your iOS Networking." Why would your end user need to know a single thing about the "Cisco iOS Networking settings," or hear about them from you? And more to the point, why would you constantly refer to "iOS" to your users? To them it's an ipad, not an "iOS device".

      The number of times you would need to make this distinction you're worried about are ridiculously rare - perhaps in a memo to your boss, explaining the root cause of an issue where the Apple device's settings and the Cisco device's settings both had to be adjusted - but even then, why would you specify the OS name? Do you refer to laptops as "laptops" or "windows xp laptops"?

      I look forward to reading about your concerns regarding bears live-bearing baby bears in a biology textbook, or polished Polish soldiers polishing boots in a history textbook.

    20. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      I imagine that millions of people use Cisco products or services, including everyday. They provide modems and other services to Virgin Media, a UK cable/broadband/TV company with millions of customers, for example.

      These people may not have heard of Cisco's IOS, but how many Iphone users have heard of "IOS"? Can we call them "dweebs" too?

      Apple users can fit their iphone in a pocket and be on about their business.

      My 5800 fits fine in my pocket. Shame about the size of your Ipad, though. And as for your "geek" stereotype; it's in geek communities like here that Apple has its popularity, just as with Linux. Among normal users, Apple are behind Nokia, Motorola, LG, Samsung, RIM.

  5. Seems like a stretch. by wolrahnaes · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I know modern radio platforms have a lot of software flexibility, but the limited knowledge of antennas I've picked up from messing with long-range WiFi and my ham radio experiments tells me this is not something that can be patched out with an OS upgrade.

    That is unless the OS upgrade comes with a coupon for a free rubber bumper thingy...

    --
    I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    1. Re:Seems like a stretch. by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1, Informative

      Maybe you should actually inform yourself then?

      The fix is expected to address a issue in iOS 4 related to radio frequency calibration of the baseband. Readers who saw the original forum discussions say that the issue is believed to occur when switching frequencies; because the lag is allegedly not calibrated correctly, it results in the device reporting "no service" rather than switching to the frequency with the best signal to noise ratio.

      iOS 4 introduced some enhancements to how the baseband selects which frequencies to use, so it makes sense that the error may have crept into those changes. Additionally, this explains why iOS 4 has also caused similar problems for iPhone 3GS users.

    2. Re:Seems like a stretch. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      They could always just sum the bars from every connected tower and report that number to the end user.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    3. Re:Seems like a stretch. by dnahelicase · · Score: 1

      My old cell phone had a novel approach to this problem. Apparently the engineers believed that there was a software solution that could change the reception of radio waves by an antenna, and instead used what they call an "external antenna." Sure, it looked "so 1990's" to pull the antenna out when placing a call, but it did improve signal strength.

      Of course, everyone said this didn't make a difference, and the first gen iphone was the first phone I ever had without an external antenna, but coincidentally it is the first phone that I seem to have reception problems - though they aren't bad.

      I just want to know what engineer thought that putting an antenna on the outside of the phone in the exact place where you are supposed to hold it was a good idea. I would expect "touching an antenna while operating it reduces performance" to be in Antennas 101.

    4. Re:Seems like a stretch. by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      They could always just sum the bars from every connected tower and report that number to the end user.

      Or they could give their signal strength meter a total of ten bars - then even in poor reception areas it would probably have at least two or three bars - better than other phones!

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    5. Re:Seems like a stretch. by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Weird I can think of literally hundreds of ways it could be done through software. I am not sure if any of them are relevant since we are all just guessing as to the actual cause of the problem....

    6. Re:Seems like a stretch. by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Please do enlighten me.

    7. Re:Seems like a stretch. by wolrahnaes · · Score: 1

      I did read that, but it only makes sense for a subset of those experiencing the problem.

      If you have AT&T service in both 850 and 1900 MHz bands, the problems with both reception and transmission caused by the cell antenna being partially shorted by your hand to the other antenna could very well be reduced by switching to the other band. In that case, a baseband bug affecting changes between bands would certainly have an effect.

      However, if you only have usable service on one band, typically the 850 band when indoors, you're limited to just channel changing. Unless you're right on the edge of a usable signal, this is unlikely to amount to much.

      This is a hardware problem, as when the parts of the band are electrically connected the size of the antenna changes as well as now having two transmitters attached to what is effectively the same antenna. Software can work around some of the problems this causes, but it can't change the fact that you've gone from an antenna that is optimized for the frequencies it transmits on to one that isn't.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    8. Re:Seems like a stretch. by abhi_beckert · · Score: 1

      Your WiFi and ham radio systems always run their transmitter at full power.

      On a mobile phone, full power delivers terrible battery life. Especially because the transmitter needs to be powered on even while the device is in standby mode and everything else (display, cpu, wifi, 3g, etc) is shut down.

      Most radios go for max possible signal strength, but a phone only wants "good enough for a reliable phone call". This is controlled using an extremely complicated algorithm, which is implemented in software so it can be improved on later.

    9. Re:Seems like a stretch. by TedRiot · · Score: 1

      And in iPhone 5 they could make it go to 11. Which is one more.

  6. Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    AppleInsider article by Daniel Eran Dilger.

    Oh dear.

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

      Daniel Eran Dilger's articles were banned from digg because those articles were extremely biased. Seems slashdot's editorial standards have dropped so much so that it seems digg is better than slashdot now!.

  7. Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Irrespective of the possibility of fixing the issue in software (on which subject I expect there will be no shortage of ill-informed opining here), Dilger's not what you'd call a trustworthy source.

    1. Re:Mod parent up! by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Irrespective of the possibility of fixing the issue in software (on which subject I expect there will be no shortage of ill-informed opining here), Dilger's not what you'd call a trustworthy source.

      Because the people who broke this "story" are such a trustworthy bunch with no scores to settle ? This whole thing is a non-story and only useful as link bait for the tech "press" while the iphone 4 is hot.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    2. Re:Mod parent up! by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Overrated mods, really ? It's not at all relevant that the site that has faced police action and possible criminal charges after the stolen prototype sage are pushing this story to the point where they are getting interviewed about it in The NY Times ? (Best part of that article: the Gizmodo editor actually has better reception with his iPhone 4 than before.) Well excuse me for pointing out that when you say "consider the source" that works both ways.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
  8. I already solved the antenna problems by kuzb · · Score: 3, Funny

    Names for the fix may vary. I call the fix "Nexus One". You might call it "Evo 4G", or any number of other names. Regardless of what you call it, I'm sure it will work equally well!

    --
    BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    1. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by pslam · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Except of course that both those handsets also suffer from signal attenuation when held (go Google for it). As do all handsets.

    2. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by kuzb · · Score: 1

      Except my calls don't drop. And you don't see people complaining about it on other platforms. The only people bringing this point up are the iphone owners who are trying to justify this obvious design defect.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    3. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by pslam · · Score: 1

      This is called a vocal minority and/or hysteria. The only difference between this and other platforms is the location of the antenna was pointed out. Do you know where the antenna is on a Nexus One? Guess what would happen if that was pointed out.

    4. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by blair1q · · Score: 4, Informative

      As do all handsets

      This is not true. Handsets used to have thest things called "antennae" that stuck out of the body of the unit.

      They actually got better reception when held because the human body holding the handset made the other half of a dipole.

      In new designs with the "antenna" buried in the phone, the human body just couples ground to itself and becomes a thicker shield.

    5. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      You make a very good point. When I take my G1 apart, short circuit the antenna and make a call, the signal drops as well. The key difference is with phones designed with functionality trumping aesthetics the antenna is typically not put in a user-accessible location. Apple just had to have something new to add as a bullet point on their spec sheet. How this got through QA is beyond me.

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    6. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by pslam · · Score: 1

      Funny, I also have a G1, and if I pick it up it loses a few bars of signal, as does every handset I've ever owned since 1999. Again, the only difference is most folks until now never thought about it.

    7. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by jareth-0205 · · Score: 2, Funny

      How this got through QA is beyond me.

      It looks good.

    8. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by Kenja · · Score: 2, Informative

      Funny, cause my Motorola Droid has a plastic case and my skin never comes in contact with the antena.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    9. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by milkman_matt · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      "Names for the fix may vary. I call the fix "Nexus One"."

      Even meant as a joke, you're right. AT&T drops my calls like I'm on the Unlimited Dropped Call plan. I've lost a call twice on a 2 mile drive just the other day. I'm convinced that AT&T could drop a call made with 2 tin cans and a string and it's infuriating and I've had enough.

      You'd think with an influx of millions of new customers due to the iPhone, and the fact that they charge and extra ($30?) charge for iPhone users, they may try to sink some of that cash into strengthening their networks to support their customers. Instead people are told that a 30% dropped call rate is 'acceptable'. Even if they picked up 1M iPhone customers, that's $30M/mo that they didn't have before. What're they doing with this cash?

      I left AT&T about 6 or 7 years ago for Verizon, was impressed with the iPhone after the price became reasonable, and begrudgingly switched back. I wish I hadn't. The service has sucked ever since, and I'm going to leave them a second time for the same reason (and this is in two different states.) If the Incredibles weren't back-ordered for so long AT&T would have have lost me again already.

      So actually, you're right. The solution for me is going to be one of the Verizon Droid phones.

    10. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Oh, certainly, if I grabbed the antenna on the Nexus One, I suppose the same thing would happen.

      That said, I would rashly assume that HTC didn't place the antenna on the Nexus One somewhere where I might actually be holding the phone.

    11. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by LBArrettAnderson · · Score: 1

      This is an entirely different issue for two reasons: 1.) You can cause the iPhone to lose signal by touching it with the tip of your finger, and 2.) the location on the iPhone happens to be a place that people *naturally* hold their phone. It isn't the same thing as covering the antenna with your hand. Otherwise the problem would still exist even with the rubber bumper.

    12. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by Tridus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well yeah, but that was back in the dark ages when cell phones were expected to reliably act as phones.

      These days they're a fashion accessory. If it actually works as a phone is kind of a side point as long as you can have loads of garbage apps.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    13. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      And you don't see people complaining about it on other platforms. The only people bringing this point up are the iphone owners who are trying to justify this obvious design defect.

      http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/android/thread?tid=34ae2c179184c33e&hl=en
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deCkjeHYT-g

    14. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by Simmeh · · Score: 1

      I never had this problem with my 2002 Windows phone! ;)

    15. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 0, Troll

      Funny, cause my Motorola Droid has a plastic case and my skin never comes in contact with the antena.

      That's because that is irrelevant. My old Nokia 3310 used to drop a bar of reception when I picked it up. Of course it didn't drop calls because I was on a decent network.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    16. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by catmistake · · Score: 1

      Regardless of what you call it, I'm sure it will work equally well!

      There's so much truth in that! nexus one reception issues eve reception issues I don't see how the story should be anything other than about Gizmodo, desperately compromising their journalistic integrity, or lack thereof

    17. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      I call the fix "Nexus One"

      Good for you. I wish I can say the same. T-Mobile penalizes me by being an existing customer and charges me an extra $100. Not to mention, Google won't sell it to me since I chose to have my wife's and daughter's phone on my plan.

      If that wasn't bad enough, I've heard horror stories surrounding the Nexus One and how Google mishandled it or just plain refused to answer any more support questions on some customer's issue over 3G connectivity. Just Google it...

      The Nexus One doesn't exactly scream good consumer experience, and by the looks of it Google has its own connectivity issues to work out.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    18. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      Problem is, if you looked at normal usage patterns, most people never pulled out the antenna. Of the people who did pull out the antenna, half of them would break it within a year (i.e. forgetting to put it back in, pulling too hard, fiddling with it).

      That, plus the hysteria surrounding EM radiation and brain tumors, and basically most of the phones for the last decade or so have had internal (e.g. bottom-mounted) antennae.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    19. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      Not defending the iPhone problem, but the only place I've seen information about other phones having problems are on the forums of various carriers. Other phones do have problems and people do complain. The second issue with your post is volume. A phone like the Evo might have the same % of complaints as the new iPhone, yet since the iPhone has sold so many many more the raw number of complaints will be higher.

      Finally, I've yet to see any proof of an 'obvious design defect.' If they can't fix it with a software patch, then I'll agree. Until then it's all speculation about what the problem might be since many people don't seem to have any problem while others can reproduce it every time and still others can only sporadically reproduce the issue.

    20. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      Have you used the 'Mark the Spot' app from AT&T? When I moved into a new neighborhood I couldn't go more than 5 minutes on any call without it dropping. I used that app every time it dropped and then one day the drops stopped and I haven't dropped a call in months. At this point I really can't remember the last time I dropped a call.

    21. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by kuzb · · Score: 1

      No, the difference is that until now, how you held your phone wasn't a factor in calls getting dropped. Apple made a shoddy design decision, now they're paying for it.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    22. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by IrrepressibleMonkey · · Score: 1

      And you don't see people complaining about it on other platforms. The only people bringing this point up are the iphone owners who are trying to justify this obvious design defect.

      http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/android/thread?tid=34ae2c179184c33e&hl=en http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deCkjeHYT-g

      You seem to be ignoring the numerous posts pointing out that the Nexus 1 does have a very similar issue that has been reported by significant number of users. I've quoted the Anonymous Coward who previously responded to you, because you may have him filtered out. Check the links out. No thanks required - you're welcome.

    23. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by aldld · · Score: 1

      I've lost a call twice on a 2 mile drive just the other day.

      Maybe they think you deserve that, for talking on your phone while driving.

    24. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by milkman_matt · · Score: 1

      "Maybe they think you deserve that, for talking on your phone while driving."

      Hopefully someday they invent a way to pipe your phone through your car's radio in order to make it safer for you to drive while on a call.

    25. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by abhi_beckert · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's different in the USA, but here in Australia those phones were also running on a more reliable but primitive protocol and frequency.

      Modern phone networks don't have as much range, but they can handle more simultaneous calls, better voice quality, and high speed data.

    26. Re:I already solved the antenna problems by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      How this got through QA is beyond me.

      Steve Jobs is the King David (the original kill the messenger of bad news) of computing - can you imagine announcing a product delay because of a crucial design flaw in the iPhone 4 to Steve?

  9. is this a software problem? by stanlyb · · Score: 0, Troll

    What? Problem with the antenna? A pure hardware problem that will be solved with the next iOS update, i.e. software problem??? Here i am lost, since when we entered the era of quantum phones?

    1. Re:is this a software problem? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 3, Informative

      Except that iOS 4 has caused similar issues with the 3GS models.

      The fix is expected to address a issue in iOS 4 related to radio frequency calibration of the baseband. Readers who saw the original forum discussions say that the issue is believed to occur when switching frequencies; because the lag is allegedly not calibrated correctly, it results in the device reporting "no service" rather than switching to the frequency with the best signal to noise ratio.

      iOS 4 introduced some enhancements to how the baseband selects which frequencies to use, so it makes sense that the error may have crept into those changes. Additionally, this explains why iOS 4 has also caused similar problems for iPhone 3GS users.

    2. Re:is this a software problem? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      A pure hardware problem that will be solved with the next iOS update, i.e. software problem?

      Anything is possible with the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field!

      Here, you seem to be not getting enough iAid. Here, drink this.

    3. Re:is this a software problem? by Idbar · · Score: 1

      As the summary claims: it may fix it.
      For what is worth, I noticed that the Geolocation API through safari doesn't work unless you have the WiFi on. It seems like they either crippled the device or something they may as well fix. Possibly not the only thing to fix from the first release of iOS 4.

    4. Re:is this a software problem? by Tetsujin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What? Problem with the antenna? A pure hardware problem that will be solved with the next iOS update, i.e. software problem??? Here i am lost, since when we entered the era of quantum phones?

      The trick is that software controls the behavior of the hardware. So even if the basic problem remains, a software patch (blasting out more radio power, changing frequencies, whatever) could help reduce the symptoms.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
  10. What it won't fix by countertrolling · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You're in direct contact with the antenna (unless there's a clear plastic shield on it). Anybody feel a small "burning" sensation on their fingertips yet?

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    1. Re:What it won't fix by Americano · · Score: 1

      Nope, but it's a bitch when I pee.

  11. Prices aren't close to right. by Mazin07 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Do these people still not know how cellphones are priced? A 8GB iPhone 3GS is about $530, and prices for the iPhone 4 are expected to be $600 to $700. The $199 price quoted in TFA is only after you agree to a ~$2000 contract.

    1. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

      The $199 price quoted in TFA is only after you agree to a ~$2000 contract

      Except that's whargarbl in the other direction, it's only 2k if you count the basic phone plan, but by this point pretty much any consumer buying an iphone is either switching from some other form of cell phone or would probably at least get a basic cell phone if they didn't end up with a smart phone of some kind. Thus, at $25/mo for the iphone data plan, the phone counting contract is $199 + (2yrs*12mo/yr*$25/mo)=$199+$600=$800.

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    2. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Mazin07 · · Score: 1

      It's not fair to assume that the consumer is already being shafted and thus discount the base cost. I'm using an unlocked iPhone without data plan for about $15/month but it doesn't make sense to say that, for only $25/month more, I can get a subsidized AT&T iPhone.

    3. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The price quoted in the summary is a break down of what the individual parts cost. Not how much the phone retails for. Maybe you should read the summary.

    4. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Late+Adopter · · Score: 1

      No offense, but that's what's known as a "sucker price". Vegas hotels do the same thing. The only reason they charge that much is to try and price discriminate against people who don't have a choice or don't know how to get a better deal. I guarantee you that the amount AT+T is actually subsidizing is not that high (granted, volume plays a factor). For a fairer picture, try looking at European markets where the phone has to be sold non-discriminantly in the absence of a plan.

    5. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are retail prices. TFA is taking about the Bill of Materials cost of the phone, as in, 'the price of each component of the product added together, sometimes including assembly cost'. TOTALLY different.

    6. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by SirMasterboy · · Score: 1

      I have the iPhone on ATT and I pay them $49 a month on my plan.

      $25 - data
      $5 - text
      $20 - voice
      Subtotal = $50
      Subtract 15% work discount - $7.5
      Subtotal = $42.5
      Add in 13% taxes - $6.5

      Grand Total = $49 a month for my iPhone.

      $49 x 24 = $1176 for the 2 year contract.

      You can put in the $199 price of the phone for some, but it was essentially free since I sold my old iPhone for $400 which covered it's original cost and the cost of the new iPhone.

    7. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      No, it's what's known as the "actual price". The 'subsidy' for the phone is really just a monthly payment play rolled into your contract price. If you get a SIM-only contract it will be much cheaper than one that comes with a phone (except in America).

      Did you really think the iPhone *actually* costs $199?

    8. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Late+Adopter · · Score: 1

      Did you really think the iPhone *actually* costs $199?

      Do you think AT+T *actually* pays $530 minus $199?

    9. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      Well, they'll get wholesale price which is going to be a bit less than $530, but probably not much less, and certainly way more than $199. I'd guess around $400-$450.

      Buying the phone separately often works out cheaper in the UK, plus your phone is unlocked and you don't have a long-term contract.

    10. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by chrysrobyn · · Score: 1

      You do know that costs are different from prices, right? And that iSuppli has been doing this for years?

      They're careful to state that they're not including distribution, packaging, R&D, or anything like that. They're just counting the raw materials.

    11. Re:Prices aren't close to right. by Mazin07 · · Score: 1

      I was referring to the ibtimes.com article linked in the summary, where a good portion of the article talks about how Apple's margins are "low" compared to the $199 retail price. For a comparison, look at Canada's Apple Store website: http://store.apple.com/ca/

  12. It's simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The update activates the nanite-producing capabilities of the iPhone. The nanites then patch up the phone and install a neural transceiver into the owner. After that, he will never again complain about any Apple product.

  13. No 2-for-1 iPhone offers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only Android phones are cheap enough to be provided in 2-for-1 offers.

    Android needs a task manager but doesn't come with one. 3rd party task managers are available that can corrupt apps. The most popular Android task manager doesn't show which apps are consuming the battery most.

    The EVO 4G judders.

    1. Re:No 2-for-1 iPhone offers by Mr2001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Android needs a task manager but doesn't come with one.

      False. Android doesn't need a task manager: the OS suspends tasks when they become unused (leaving them in memory but not using any CPU), and kills them when it needs to reclaim their memory. Task managers are for people with OCD and people who are confused about how Android's multitasking works.

      The most popular Android task manager doesn't show which apps are consuming the battery most.

      Android 2.x has that built in: Settings | About phone | Battery use

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    2. Re:No 2-for-1 iPhone offers by RajivSLK · · Score: 1

      How does an app maintain a network connection? or listen of incoming messages? Or is this not possible?

    3. Re:No 2-for-1 iPhone offers by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      How does an app maintain a network connection? or listen of incoming messages? Or is this not possible?

      It is possible. The trick is that "unused" has a more complicated meaning than "not in the foreground".

      Android divides all apps into a few different kinds of chunks, the most important of which are "activities" and "services". Activities are the visible pages that you can interact with; tapping an icon in the launcher starts an activity, and pressing the back button returns to the activity you were using before. Services are the parts that can keep running in the background.

      An app that needs to keep doing something in the background must separate that part into a service. For example, the music player starts a service when you hit play, and that service keeps running even when you switch to another activity (even though the activity is suspended). When you pause or when the playlist ends, the service stops. Keeping a network connection open works similarly. The OS tries not to kill processes that are hosting a running service, but it will kill them anyway if it gets desperate enough.

      Well-written apps usually put an icon in the notification bar when they have a background service running. You can also go to Settings|Applications|Running services to see which services are running or to kill them manually -- but if you ever need to do that, it probably means you installed a buggy app that you should replace with something better.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    4. Re:No 2-for-1 iPhone offers by mjwx · · Score: 1

      How does an app maintain a network connection? or listen of incoming messages? Or is this not possible?

      Difference between an application and a service.

      Much like the Iphone, when an application is removed from the foreground it is suspended (effectively terminated and removed from memory). If an application wants to do anything in the background the application needs to start a service, the service can run in the background and can maintain a network connection, process data or perform a variety of other tasks. Third party services cannot be started on the Iphone, even version 4.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    5. Re:No 2-for-1 iPhone offers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nexus One has a task manager built in. It also has a battery usage monitor built in.

      The misinformation spread among Apple fanboi's is pretty amusing.

    6. Re:No 2-for-1 iPhone offers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Via a service

  14. BT, DT, fool me once... by blair1q · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is the same thing they said about the EDGE/3G wobble in the Nexus One.

    The "update" didn't change a fucking thing.

    1. Re:BT, DT, fool me once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again

  15. iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by neoform · · Score: 1

    Yeah, how about they fix whatever they broke in iOS 4 for us 3G users. My phone has decresed in speed by at least half since I installed iOS 4...

    --
    MABASPLOOM!
    1. Re:iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by codepunk · · Score: 1

      Same here the performance of my phone sucks since I upgraded. I have a sneaking suspicion it is the new multitasking changes they did which I was perfectly happy to live without.

      --


      Got Code?
    2. Re:iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by Americano · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I wish Microsoft would do the same thing and let me run Windows XP at modern speeds on a system that originally shipped with Windows 98 or 2000!

      It's not "broken" in iOS 4, it's the fact that it's a significant update with a lot of new features, running on an older piece of hardware... what exactly did you expect?

    3. Re:iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by neoform · · Score: 1

      I'm using the 3G which does not have multi-tasking.

      The new features I got were "unified mailbox", folders and slightly nicer looking icons. The only explanation I can figure for this speed decrease (we're talking a 50% reduction in speed) is because of the increase in resolution of UI elements due to the iPhone 4's higher rez.

      In any case, I want to downgrade, because iOS 4 is basically unusable on my phone.

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    4. Re:iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by Americano · · Score: 1

      And you got all of the updated system applications, frameworks, and other code which powers all of the iOS 4 stuff, even if your hardware doesn't take advantage of all of them.

      It's a performance hit, and downgrading would certainly help, but consider that the targeted hardware is ~2.5x faster than your underclocked iPhone 3G which runs at 412Mhz, vs. the iPhone 4's 1Ghz.

      Like I said, what you're complaining about is like saying that you're outraged that Windows XP doesn't run as fast on hardware that originally shipped with Win98 as it does on "the latest" stuff. The iOS 4 release changes a lot of system code, and is targeted for a much faster hardware platform.

    5. Re:iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by neoform · · Score: 1

      Dude, the iPhone 3G is 2 years old and it runs at an unreasonably slow speed. My complaint is completely legitimate and nothing like a complain that my 10 year old computer cannot run a modern OS.

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    6. Re:iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by Americano · · Score: 1

      Okay, compare the performance of Windows 7 on a brand new laptop, versus its performance on a 2-year -old laptop.

      iOS 4 didn't "break" anything on your iPhone 3G. Your 2 year old, underclocked, limited-RAM iPhone 3G simply doesn't have the power to provide you with the responsiveness you desire when running the brand-new iOS 4. Welcome to the inexorable march of progress.

    7. Re:iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by neoform · · Score: 1

      Uhh, a 2 year old laptop will run windows 7 just fine.

      An iPhone 3G running iOS 4 does not run properly, my ipod skips and lags whenever *anything* happens on it.

      Anyway, I'm done, you're just repeating yourself.

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    8. Re:iOS 4 + 3G = Massive Speed Decrease by Americano · · Score: 1

      You're the one who claimed that the iOS 4 update "broke" something because it was running slow.

      I'm simply pointing out that it's not broken, the hardware simply can't keep up with the computing requirements of the new version of the OS.

      And no, Windows 7 will not run the same on a 2-year old laptop as it would on a brand new laptop. You'll see that the older laptop has much more trouble keeping up than the new one does, and that's the point.

      Wouldn't need to repeat myself if you weren't so insistent on being wrong.

  16. Now bring me the red Swingline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We've fixed the glitch", replied Jobs.

    "Wait, but the antenna still doesn't work any better. All you did was make the OS display 4 bars instead of 2."

    "We've fixed the glitch."

  17. How? by eison · · Score: 0, Redundant

    How could a software update fix a hardware problem with the antenna? Isn't basic physics involved?

    I would genuinely like to know. Plenty of people here (who aren't me unfortunately) know how antennas work, anything that could be done without changing the hardware involved?

    --
    is competition good, or is duplication of effort bad?
    1. Re:How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How could a software update fix a hardware problem with the antenna?

      This is not a hardware issue. I just tested with my old 3G phone updated to iOS 4. It behaves exactly as the iPhone 4 when I cover the lower part of the phone with my hand.

    2. Re:How? by dnahelicase · · Score: 1

      How could a software update fix a hardware problem with the antenna? Isn't basic physics involved?

      >

      Yes, but the new software update will allow you to turn it up all the way to 11.

    3. Re:How? by SirMasterboy · · Score: 1

      I can also vouch for this on my 3Gs after updating to iOS4.

      Problem wen't away when I downgraded to 3.1.3.

      Also, if you take a trip to the Apple store and try to perform this on the new iPhone 4 you will find that the signal doesn't go down no matter how you try to bridge that antenna gap.

      My guess is that they are using an ATT microcell in the store to provide the cell signal for demo purposes. Since the bars stay at full it backs up the claim that its related to how the software decides which signal to use and not that the users hand is shorting out the signal.

    4. Re:How? by Wovel · · Score: 1

      A lot of ways. Signal processing, power levels,etc. We don't actually know what is causing the problems, so everything anyone says is pure speculation.

    5. Re:How? by Americano · · Score: 1

      I see the same behavior on my 3G, recently upgraded to iOS 4.

      Left hand, signal plummets.
      Right hand, signal drops a hair slower.
      Before iOS 4, I'd see some attenuation in areas with limited reception, but not to this extent.

      Number of dropped calls I've had over ~2 years of using the 3G? 10-20. Inconvenient, but I really don't think it's that different than my experience with other carriers (Sprint) previous to my swap to AT&T. Maybe I'm just lucky to live and work near strong signals.

  18. How many here have an iPhone 4? by sjonke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you do, do you experience the antenna shorting signal drop to zero issue? I'm curious, because 99% of the messages I see about this issue, on all forums, are from people talking about the problem, but who do not make any mention of actually have an iPhone 4 nor even of knowing anyone who has the problem. Now, maybe in fact everyone who has an iPhone 4 has this issue, but I am having a hell of a time trying to figure that out. And I'm trying to figure that out because I've got an iPhone 4 on order and I'd like to know if I should keep it. Android fans declaring, definitively, perhaps spurred on by the speculation of a specialist who doesn't have an iPhone 4 either, that the iPhone 4 has a fatal flaw does not tell me one way or the other. iPhone 3GS, 3G and iPhone owners saying that the iPhone 4 has a fatal flaw tells me nothing. The only people I want to hear from are genuine iPhone 4 users. So... do you have the issue?

    --
    --- What?
    1. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by Wovel · · Score: 1

      I know 8 or 9 people with an iPhone 4 and only one of them says they can make it happen. I have seen two other people try without success. Even wetting their hands did nothing.

    2. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by BitHive · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have one. I can indeed shave a bar off the signal strength meter by nestling the lower-left corner into my palm. Practically speaking, I haven't had any dropped calls or any problems at all. In fact, I see a larger fluctuation in signal strength just walking around my house. For me, this is such a non-issue that it's kind of mind-boggling to see so many discussions about this. I guess I don't care about my iPhone 4 as much as most people seem to.

    3. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by turb · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have one and thus far comparing it to my 3Gs, reception seems to be markedly better. I'm in a fairly rural area on the edge of AT&T service. I just don't see what the fuss is about.

    4. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by silicone_chemist · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have an iPhone 4 and do NOT experience any signal drop when holding it. I've held it in my hand covering every single joint between the three antennas and no change. I am unable to duplicate the issue.

    5. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by alodien · · Score: 2, Informative

      I do, and I have the issue. When I am out in good signal areas, I have no issues at all. But it is now horrible when I hold at at my home where my average signal was good, but not great with my iPhone 3G.

      I now talk with it on speakerphone or have to hold it very carefully on the top of the phone or else I will drop the call (at home). I can reproduce this every time I use the phone. If I am just browsing on wifi holding the phone in the palm of my hand with the "death grip", then about 50% of the time I show no bars, and the other half it says "No Service". My wife, using my old iPhone 3G right next to me will show to change at all (holding steady between 2-3 bars).

    6. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW, I have an iPhone 4 and have yet to see the mysterious antenna issue. All of my calls have gone through just fine, and I have yet to experience a dropped call. Maybe I'm just holding the phone right or maybe my hands aren't sweaty enough, I don't know, but the antenna issue has not been a problem for me.

    7. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by blurryrunner · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are 4 iPhone 4s in our office. We all experience the issue. 3 came at the same time and was ordered through AT&T and the other came straight from apple.

      I did see a theory about it being related to what is running the tower. This seems to fit for me since at work none of us have the problem, but at our homes we have the issue. It could also be that we have a tower 100 yards away in plain view...

      br/

    8. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by Manfesto · · Score: 2, Informative

      a) Yes, I have an iPhone 4.
      b) Yes, I can recreate the signal drop issue (although I can't get it to drop to zero).
      c) No, I don't consider it to be a fatal flaw.

      To expand:
      a) I bought one on launch day after reserving it back on June 15th. Not much else to say there.

      b) By palming the phone in my left hand, I can get the signal bars to drop from five bars to three bars. I've also performed speed tests to compare 3G speeds when held differently. Here are those results (using the Speedtest.net app):

      Held in Right Hand: 4.14Mbps down, 1.38Mbps up, 396ms ping
      Held in Left Hand: 3.16Mbps down, 0.49Mbps up, 1208ms ping

      So yes, palming the phone in the left hand has a measurable impact on signal quality.

      c) I didn't bother doing this test until I'd actually heard this was an issue, because I simply didn't notice it. The first thing I did with my iPhone when I had it out of the box and was still in the Apple Store was put it in a bumper case.

      When I'd heard there was an issue, I asked my girlfriend if she'd had any issues, but she also didn't notice it. Her phone isn't in a case, but she holds her phone in her right hand.

      /*It must also vary from person to person, as she can only get my phone to drop down to four bars instead of three. I think it's because my palms tend to sweat.*/

      Once it was isolated to the bottom left corner on the MacRumors forum, I took my phone out of the case, palmed it, thought "huh, interesting", ran speed tests, then put my case back on and went on about my business.

      So yeah, the issue is a non-issue if you are right handed, or if you are going to put your iPhone 4 in a case.

      Now, I realize that that isn't going to be good enough for most people here on slashdot. Apple is putting form over function, it's unreasonable to expect people to hold their phone differently, etc, etc, etc. Fair points all around.

      But I honestly am not bothered by it. I was planning on buying a case anyway, and even if I weren't, the vast majority of calls I make or take are done with the included headset (meaning I'm not touching the phone at all). Plus, the phone is still a noticeable step up in speed, battery life, screen quality, and reception (even despite the "fatally flawed" antenna) over the iPhone 3G it replaced.

      YMMV and all, but I think this issue is being blown out of proportion. It's a flaw, but it's not a dealbreaker. It's at worst a minor annoyance on what is, to me, still the best smartphone on the market for what I want/need in a phone (sorry Android, you've come a long way since the G1, and I dig the Evo's giant screen, but iOS4 is still better polished and the App Store still has more quality apps). All of that last paragraph is IMHO, of course, and is worth only the requisite $0.02. Not a cent more or less.

    9. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by jtosburn · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can make my iphone4 do this at will. It's especially annoying since my primary use is for web and email use, and being right-handed, I hold it with my left in just the fashion that causes this problem.

      I haven't been able to test the other iphone4's in the office yet, so I can't definitively state that it effects them all, or if it's only mine. But my phone absolutely does this.

    10. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      I still have an iPhone 3gs, but this had me trying to remember when was the last time I saw somebody other than me using an iPhone without a case. I don't use a case myself, but one of the reasons I'm interested in the iPhone 4 (once AT&T lets me upgrade without paying a penalty) is that I like the "bumper case" design.

    11. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have the iPhone 4, and have used it extensively since the 24th. I have tried my hardest to force the signal drop on my phone, and have been unable to do so. I even moistened my finger and held it across the gap. No dice.

      IMHO this issue could be a combination hardware and software issue.

    12. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have an iPhone 4. Before I bought a cheap protective case (I want to prevent getting scratches on the finish, etc.) I did the test of putting my thumb over the left side. I am left handed and I hold the phone as typically pictured. I live in The Bronx, (NYC), and in my apartment, I get terrible reception in my bedroom. However, sometimes I get 5 bars in my room. I tested the phone when I had 5 bars, and put my thumb over the left side before I got the case, and after a few seconds it dropped one bar.
      Then I went to my kitchen to test, where I get a solid 5 bars 99% of the time. I get the one bar drop by covering the antenna with my thumb.
      Buying the case fixed the problem, but I still get terrible reception in my bedroom, which is a problem with AT&T.
      The other day I was calling a friend of mine and the phone call dropped 4 times, so AT&T is still somewhat shitty at the moment.
      However, NYC residents take note, I read on Engadget that AT&T just upgraded their network to improve voice quality (doesn't say if they improved reception...)...

    13. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've been using my iphone 4 since it showed up on the 23rd. Everything about it kicks ass except for making calls.*

      I haven't been able to reproduce the issues with reception dropping to zero. I tried it with my hands, with wire, by holding all the metal surfaces at the same time, but nothing happened.

      What HAS been an issue is the proximity sensor. Long story short, the phone does a poor job of knowing when it's pressed to your ear, the screen turns on, and you end up either dialing numbers or hanging up. I had an iphone 3g and this was never an issue. For a sense of how bad the problem is: out of the 2-2.5 hours I've talked on the phone, it has hung up over 10 times. These aren't dropped calls, they are actually my phone hanging up.

      Very frustrating, but I imagine it's something that can be solved in software.

      -b

      *which, fortunately, I hardly ever need to do.

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    14. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is not with the phone, its with your ear. No worries though, an IOS4 update will fix that as it can fix anything.

      - apple fanboi

    15. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by sjonke · · Score: 1

      I just want to say that I really appreciate all the responses to this. It looks like people's experiences vary, though at the very least the problem is clearly there for some. Unfortunately It's not entirely clear if those who haven't had the problem simply haven't been in the right situation for it to occur. Maybe only in areas with a weak signal to start with as one person posted? Then again, the demo on YouTube showed it dropping from 5 bars to 0 bars, and back, so that wasn't a poor signal area at all, and then you wonder why everyone doesn't experience the problem everywhere. It's confusing. Hopefully it's a manufacturing defect with some iPhone 4's, but not all, and could be fixed by an exchange (presuming the manufacturing flaw is fixed), but I don't know. I'm not sure what to do about my order. :(

      --
      --- What?
    16. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by bennettp · · Score: 1

      What HAS been an issue is the proximity sensor. Long story short, the phone does a poor job of knowing when it's pressed to your ear, the screen turns on, and you end up either dialing numbers or hanging up. I had an iphone 3g and this was never an issue.

      I have this problem with my iPhone 3G. Never had dropped calls, but I always get muted. (Maybe my phone is telling me something!) You can fix it by pressing the sleep button after the call has started. That will lock the touchscreen, preventing any unwanted actions.

    17. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by epo001 · · Score: 1

      I have one (in the UK) and can see this signal strength display issue though I personally have not had a dropped call.

      My concern is the handset is about to be replaced and I will be stuck with an old lemon with poor resale value. Mainly for that reason I am inclined to return mine for a refund and wait for iPhone 4.1

    18. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by Stenchwarrior · · Score: 1

      I can hold my iPhone 4 on the sides and watch it go from 5 bars to 1 (or less) in about 10 seconds. I also experience dropped calls even when I'm not holding the phone in my hands.

      --
      Loading...
    19. Re:How many here have an iPhone 4? by gpalyu · · Score: 1

      I got mine today, and this was one of the first things I tried. My bars do not move at all, no matter how I hold the phone. In the line at the AT&T store they were explaining the issue, and where to not hold it to avoid the problem. But on my unit I have no bar loss.

  19. Steve Jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I guess Steve Jobs' response to the concerned buyer should have been "Just don't hold it like that......and download the Apple patch."

    For a smart guy, he's a fucking moron.

  20. Please stop with the apple stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm starting to feel like slashdot has turn to some sort of engadget degenerate ... also the only IOS that matters to nerds is the one by Cisco, so this is quite misleading

  21. Obligatory Hitler Reacts by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

    "I'm sure Steve Jobs will fix this immediately."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h3Ogt2L44Q


    .

  22. An interesting bit from the TOS by shoehornjob · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In other Apple news, Germany has demanded that the company "immediately make clear" what data it collects from customers, and what use it makes of that data (perhaps spurred by Google's Wi-Fi sniffing debacle).

    While updating my Ipod touch (3gs) last night I noticed in the tos that you can control which apps have access to the service. I think this is a cool idea but I didn't see anything in the new os that allows me that access. It doesn't really matter that much for me as I usually turn location services off till needed but what is Apple pulling here? I'd be very disappointed if that only works with an iphone.

    --
    "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
    1. Re:An interesting bit from the TOS by Slime-dogg · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a prompt that you get when first starting the application itself. As it tries to access the service, it asks. Some apps already did so, but others did not. Now, they all ask, and you can selectively allow them access to location services.

      --
      You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
  23. There is no iPod Touch 4 by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

    it's only 2k if you count the basic phone plan, but by this point pretty much any consumer buying an iphone is either switching from some other form of cell phone or would probably at least get a basic cell phone if they didn't end up with a smart phone of some kind.

    Pretend I want to develop an app that runs on an iPhone 4. Until there's an iPod Touch 4, I have to buy an iPhone 4 to test on an iPhone 4. I am satisfied with my current phone plan at $7 per month from Virgin Mobile USA. So yes, it would cost me over a thousand dollars to switch to an iPhone.

    1. Re:There is no iPod Touch 4 by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Informative

      You could just use the simulator, if you didn't want to shell out for an actual iPhone 4.

      If you're not wealthy enough as an app developer to sink enough money into the hardware you are releasing on (and I'm sure there are a few who aren't, and it's not necessarily a bad thing) there are ways to test the app using a phone simulator. It's obviously not ideal, but if you are looking to make a living from your apps, then a $1000 business expense if your apps really take off is not all that huge. It's not pocket change, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

  24. Re: Start of message in subject line by Tetsujin · · Score: 0, Troll

    Interested to know how a software update will fix an human-caused short circuit.

    It's not a short circuit, it's just the fact that the user's hand is physically covering the antenna, and thus interfering with it...

    I believe their plan was to send intense pulses down the antenna periodically, felt by the user as a small electric shock, so they won't hold the phone that way any more.

    --
    Bow-ties are cool.
  25. An apple a day by sneilan · · Score: 0, Funny

    keeps the paycheck away.

    --
    "I like it when the red water comes out.."
  26. Sounds fishy. by Posting=!Working · · Score: 1

    The upcoming OS update might fix it. But if the update is no help, Apple would probably still say it'll be fixed soon, so keep buying them. If the update doesn't fix the issue, this will allow them to sell as many as they can before the update is released and sales drop like a left handed call.

     

    --
    This sentence no verb.
  27. Seems like a batch issue by bdrewery · · Score: 0

    I went down to my local apple store and tested out 9 iPhone 4s. Of those 9, 4 showed the problem, while 5 were perfectly fine. The test was to place my thumb on the lower left spot, thus "shorting" the two antennas. I repeated my test on each one multiple times and it was consistent. This leads me to believe it's a production batch issue and not any of the other theories being floated around.
    Any software fix will only be covering up the problem.
    Of course, who doesn't use a case though?

  28. Not quite by wfolta · · Score: 2, Informative

    The apps ask you when they first want access to Location, which is not really new.

    The new thing is when you go to Settings -> General -> Location Services (which might fool you into thinking it only sets Yes/No), where you'll see all apps that use Location Services and you can turn them off and on by hand. A little arrow head next to the app indicates it's used your Location in the last 24 hours. An app won't be in this section without having asked to use Location Services first, but it's really nice to be able to track and revoke Location permissions after the initial ask.

  29. Can't be an issue - where's the downfall video? by phonewebcam · · Score: 1

    Oops, might have just started something there...

  30. Re: Start of message in subject line by Firehed · · Score: 1

    No, it IS a short circuit*. If you bridge the two pieces of metal on either side of the band width a small metal object (a key, paper clip, etc) you get the same effect without blocking most of the antenna.

    Of course, my testing is only a single data point, but I've asked other people to do the same and they've seen similar results.

    * Ok, I don't think it's really a short. But by bridging an antenna with another piece of metal, you're altering it's length and as a result the frequencies that it will pick up.

    --
    How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
  31. Rotate the antenna by carpevita · · Score: 1

    so the gap is on the top of the phone?

  32. Time to foil unlockers? by GraZZ · · Score: 1

    I submit the following conspiracy theory to explain the antenna situation:

    Apple, in its efforts to thwart unlockers, knowingly ships a defective baseband firmware in iOS4, fully expecting it to be unlocked quickly. Apple then releases iOS4.01 with a new firmware, fixing the horrible issue, as well as the unlocking vector.

    Sound possible?

    1. Re:Time to foil unlockers? by lwsimon · · Score: 1

      What do they do about the unlocking vector we use to unlock 4.0.1?

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
    2. Re:Time to foil unlockers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have access to a disassembler as anyone else. I'm almost certain that 4.0.1 is going to squash the current jailbreaking method or methods. If not, I'll seriously consider eating my phone.

    3. Re:Time to foil unlockers? by lwsimon · · Score: 1

      If that is the case, why have they not done it before?

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
  33. How do I raised startup capital? by tepples · · Score: 1

    there are ways to test the app using a phone simulator.

    Is the iPhone 4 simulator accurate enough to the point where one can test an app exclusively on the simulator and be reasonably certain that it will work on the device? Or is it like Nesticle, the obsolete emulator whose inaccuracies the NES homebrew scene loves to hate?

    if you are looking to make a living from your apps, then a $1000 business expense if your apps really take off is not all that huge.

    What's the easiest way for someone with a thin credit file to come up with over $2,000 of startup capital to buy what is needed to start a business (Mac, iPhone, iPhone developer certificate, and 24 months of an extra phone line)?

    1. Re:How do I raised startup capital? by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The simulator is part of the Xcode suite, and is provided by Apple - I assume that they ensure it is as close to an actual iPhone/Touch etc as possible.

      I'm not saying it's easy or cheap, if you want all the hardware - ideally as a developer you'd have an iPhone 3G, a 3GS and an iPhone 4, and the three different generations of the iPod Touch, which is going to set you back a lot if you want to hardware test on all potential platforms for your apps.

      In the grand scheme of things, the startup capital for the Mac, the phone and a developer contract is only part of it - rent, power, food etc are all going to add to it, unless it's not your primary income source. In which case, you will have to justify whether the expense of an actual phone for hardware testing is worth it.

  34. What about the real problem - folders? by MikeFM · · Score: 1

    What about fixing folders to be something that is actually usable. Talk about a kludge. It looks like the kind of crap you'd find on Android. You have to click to enter/exit a folder, each can hold only 12 apps, and they are crap ugly. I knew folders was a bad design idea when I heard about it but after seeing it I know it is way worse than I imagined. Why not allow home screens to be grouped by topic and scroll up/down between them similar to the existing left/right scrolling? Why not make them smart so apps can be in more than one and defined either manually or by user-created rules? Doh. Screw iPhone users. I paid $900 for an iPad with 64GB of storage and I can only have eleven pages of apps and folder feature, coming someday to iPad, is horrible.

    Multitasking is fine. All the whining is that it isn't like a PC. Folders is a bad implementation because it is to much like a PC.

    --
    At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  35. OS 4 fucks up Ipod Touch too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It made my Ipod touch (2nd or 3rd gen, I'm not sure which) become much less responsive, pauses a lot when trying to "do stuff" and iBooks is just horribly unresponsive (6 full seconds just to switch the font style). I'll be reverting back to OS3 as soon as I figure out if it can be done without wiping out all my data.

  36. I beta-tested the fix by microbee · · Score: 1

    It works really great. Basically, during your call if the quality goes any bad or there is a drop, the phone plays the sound of VUZULELA automatically until the signal is picked up again. This way it never really drops the call, at least not obviously.

  37. Re: Start of message in subject line by node+3 · · Score: 2, Funny

    No, it IS a short circuit*.

    ...

    * Ok, I don't think it's really a short.

    Is this one of those riddles where you have to figure out which villager is the one who lies every time and which one always tells the truth?

  38. Re: Start of message in subject line by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    But my reading of the situation was that both bits of metal are antennas, and the phone can use either or both. If they set the phone to use both antennas then a short between them would not be important.

  39. No! ... Something Else Going On. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The antenna problem seems just the start.

    Many, i.e All the new apps are a bust.

    The iOS 4 and iPhome 4 appear a very distant, Gamma, at best, and an experimental model at worst.

    Question: Why did Apple release this?! It is likely to take a year or more to fix the various hardware and software problems.

    Question: Did Apple release the iPhome 4 becaue Jobs will not live to see it as a completed working device? (!)

    A photo of Jobs and the iPone 4 White shows him holding it in his left hand.

    Did the "connection - reception problem" at the WWDC result from "left handedness" or "bandwidth crowding"?

  40. Am I the only iPhone4 user... by Ballade · · Score: 0

    ...who is completely unable to replicate this problem?

    I just really want to be a part of the mob, but no mattery how hard I try I can't seem to hold the damn thing in any way that causes signal loss!
    I've tried in calls and out of calls; the bars don't move, the calls don't drop. Do I have some kind of magical iPhone?

    --
    -kt
    1. Re:Am I the only iPhone4 user... by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Apparently it doesn't affect all of them. If the rumors about incorrectly applied coatings can be believed, then it makes a bit of sense. Those which have sufficient coating thickness (probably a clear coat of sorts) insulate the band from the user's skin (preventing bridging). It's not like we're talking about a 6+-9s manufacturing operation.

      It's not too surprising that there are manufacturing issues - they happen with just about every new device.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  41. What reception problem? by MK_CSGuy · · Score: 1
  42. $30 screen by quadrox · · Score: 1

    Where can you get such a nice screen so cheaply?

    I have been looking for screens of varying size for custom tablet projects, but I find it rather difficult to find a good usable screen.

    Now the IPhone screen is too small for my needs, but I wonder where one would even start looking for something that good and that cheap.

  43. There are plenty of videos showing other phones by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1
    Examples of cellphones other than iPhone 4 affected by holding it:

    HTC Droid Incredible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaDE941PzQ

    Nexus One: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2g5J4qPp54

    Nokia E71: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gi1gHDa7-X0

    Nokia 6230: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_RP7Fn1w8Q

    Nokia 6720: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ7t75Uo6qQ

    You can keep on blaming the phone for carrier network issues in some cities but it does not change facts.

    There are videos of the 3G and 3GS upgraded to iOS 4 exhibiting a similar issue if you hold it a certain way in your left hand but the strength of your local network towers is still a factor as I have only been able to bring my 3GS running iOS4 down by one bar from full service while trying to reproduce the problem because I have strong Fido towers all around me. I don't even hold my iPhone that way most of the time when I'm on a call.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  44. Android leads the way again by intheshelter · · Score: 1

    Once again, Android had this feature long before the iPhone. . .