Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

iOS Update May Tackle iPhone 4's Antenna Problems

Posted by Soulskill on from the this-is-your-apple-a-day dept.

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).

34 of 282 comments (clear)

  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

      Frequency calibration apparently http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/06/25/death_grip_hysteria_may_end_monday_with_ios_4_01.html

    5. 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.
    6. 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.

    7. 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.

    8. 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.

    9. 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).

    10. 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 :)

    11. 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.
    12. 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.

    13. 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.

    14. 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...

    15. Re:Interested to know... by Pieroxy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Standards aren't Variables don't.

      Are you high?

      --
      Write boring code, not shiny code!
    16. 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.
  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 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
    3. 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.

      --
      Comment of the year
  3. 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.
  4. Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    AppleInsider article by Daniel Eran Dilger.

    Oh dear.

  5. 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 :-(

  6. 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 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. Re:IOS == Cisco Internetworking Operating System by Dracker · · Score: 3, Informative

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

  10. 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 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.

    2. 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.
  11. 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)

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

    I officially nominate you for comment of the story.