Slashdot Mirror
Consumer Reports Can't Recommend iPhone 4
jbezorg was one among many readers to send word that Consumer Reports has concluded that they cannot recommend the iPhone 4. (They still enthusiastically recommend the 3G S.) "It's official. Consumer Reports' engineers have just completed testing the iPhone 4, and have confirmed that there is a problem with its reception. When your finger or hand touches a spot on the phone's lower left side — an easy thing, especially for lefties — the signal can significantly degrade enough to cause you to lose your connection altogether if you're in an area with a weak signal. Due to this problem, we can't recommend the iPhone 4. ... Our findings call into question the recent claim by Apple that the iPhone 4's signal-strength issues were largely an optical illusion caused by faulty software that 'mistakenly displays 2 more bars than it should for a given signal strength.'" The comments on the article don't display any of the vitriol the Apple faithful have been known to unleash upon anyone daring to question the Cupertino way. Perhaps they are moderated.
Apple really dropped the ball this time. All they had to do was say 'oops, our bad, we messed up but here is a free case' and the problem would have been effectively solved, and they would have saved face.
Such a cheap solution to a potential marketing disaster.. I just don't understand it. ( and ill be keeping my 3Gs and not upgrading, but that is beacuse i don't like cases... Perhaps the model 4Gs.. )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Cars are probably their primary claim to fame, but appliances and consumer electronics would likely be #2 and #3. The most newsworthy part of this is that an independent source that is beyond reproach (to the extent that such a thing is possible) has confirmed that this is a legitimate problem that shows up in normal use.
They do testing on pretty much everything. They are non-profit, and have a reputation for accurate reporting. They were the ones who made the world realize that air ionizers are essentially useless (like Ionic Breeze from sharper image).
Generally they break stuff into categories, and the 'recommend' 'do not recommend' is not particularly useful, since it might still be good in the categories you care about. But one thing you can be sure about, if they say a product is not good in a certain category, they have the research to back it up (and from time to time have defended the evidence in court).
Qxe4
And here we go with the Apple fanbois. Come on, pal. Everyone knows the iPhone 4 has a huge goddamned problem. Blaming the messengers is ludicrous. Apple screwed the pooch big time, and it's going to cost them money and reputation to fix it, so rather than dicking around bitching at consumer magazines and critics, Steve Jobs should be ordering the company to begin immediate recalls...
Unless of course, they don't have an easy fix. In which case Apple has a really big problem on their hands.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Sometimes they don't know what they're talking about, though.
I know digital photography pretty well, and a lot of the stuff they say in their digital camera reviews is just plain wrong.
If you want to argue that Consumer Reports is engaging in sensationalism, then make that point. But to imply that a magazine in inherently "impartial" (did you mean sensational?) is stupid.
Consumer Reports depends on subscribers who would pick up on any whiff of sensationalism and flood the editors' desks with complaints. They're about as impartial and fair as they get.
Oh, please, it's a painful fact that Apple has legions of... fanboys that defend anything Apple does. Apple has some nice (overpriced, but nice) products but some hipsters treat them like a technological godsend, especially (in my experience) the less technically inept people I know that are into gadgets. Apple fans are bought on marketing and come to identify with apple products the same way some people love Nike shoes (and yes, they exist too).
It helps when people set the tone correctly. By attacking people in the summary like this article and a lot of others do you're signaling to both sides this discussion isn't going to be civil. What would would happen if you posted a random Linux article and ended it with "... but as we all know Linux users are a bunch of basement dwelling nerds" you think ? Ridiculously skewed moderation (most often anti-Apple) in Apple threads doesn't help either.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
I've been using cell phones heavily since the bricks of the early 90's. We used to have exposed antennas. Then retracted antennas that we could extend. Then the manufacturers decided phones would look cooler (and in some cases be cheaper) if the antennas were internal. I definitely noticed a decrease in signal quality when this move happened. As a heavy cell phone user, I also have always noticed that phones with internal antennas can have big changes in reception performance based on how you hold the phone. I've been re-learning the "optimal holding position" for every Nokia, Motorolla, and Samsung I've owned. It's just basic RF. Move your hands around your HDTV antenna and see how reception changes.
Apple did something really innovative by using a structural component of the case as an antenna. They went a step further by using that component for multiple antennas to allow for better reception and transmission of Wifi and GPS. So finally we have external antennas again, and ones that are much larger than other phone's internal antennas. The reception improvement in my experience is significant. I can walk around on a long call in areas where I would regularly get dropped calls due to AT&T's poor coverage; and not drop. Yes, I hold my iPhone 4 differently than my previous phone; but this is nothing new. When I talk to my friends and co-workers who also have an iPhone 4, they report the same. Every review I've seen has said the iPhone 4 has better reception than any iPhone before. My guess is that it has better reception than most other AT&T phones.
It's fun to have controversy to talk about, and I guess that's why everyone is spamming the internet with this issue. I'm certain the article on Consumers Reports is getting a lot of hits, and they are probably getting new subscribers. But why is this a huge deal? The whole thing just makes no sense to me. I think it's illogical to not buy a phone that takes such leaps forward in so many ways because of an issue that is a fact of life for every RF device ever made. The fact that so many of my fellow geeks are getting so revved up about this makes me wonder what they are thinking.