Slashdot Mirror


iOS 11 Will Prevent Your iPhone From Automatically Connecting To Unreliable Wi-Fi Networks (trustedreviews.com)

A new feature spotted in iOS 11 beta 2 intelligently manages wireless networks based on their reliability, learning to ignore those that are too far away to provide a consistent experience. TrustedReviews reports: It follows the company's Wi-Fi Assist feature which meant handsets would switch to a data connection when Wi-Fi networks became too slow. Naturally, users weren't thrilled with the resulting data usage issues, and it seems Apple is looking to do better this time around. This new feature will disable "Auto join" for any network which suffers from low speed issues or is deemed to be generally unreliable. Users will, of course, still be able to join these networks manually, but the change should prevent the frustration that comes from iPhones automatically joining networks users know to be inadequate. At this point, there's no way to know how well the feature will work, and there will undoubtedly be issues when it eventually arrives in iOS 11.

88 comments

  1. Of course, of course... by ls671 · · Score: 0

    Of course, it is a well known fact, corporations always know better than the customer, especially with regards to their needs.

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    1. Re: Of course, of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so it won't work with most hotel wifi?

    2. Re:Of course, of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm more surprised anyone would auto-join open wireless networks at all. Why would you want it to, without asking?

      But then I vaguely remembered disabling some auto-join feature when I got my newest iPhone.

    3. Re:Of course, of course... by dbialac · · Score: 0

      And if you want to be constantly spied on by Google, you go for Android. At this point, there is no good platform. You can either choose Google Spyware or an OS celebrating its 10th anniversary of not having a significant UI update other than being beaten over the head by Jony Ive's ugly stick.

    4. Re:Of course, of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Handful of platforms... Window phone? :D

    5. Re:Of course, of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eh? This isn't about you losing any control - you retain the choice to join any WiFi network you like.

      It's about the OS not choosing to auto-join ones that don't work.

    6. Re:Of course, of course... by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 2

      I'm more surprised anyone would auto-join open wireless networks at all. Why would you want it to, without asking?

      It doesn't. It joins known networks to which you've previously connected. You can also tell it to forget a network.

    7. Re: Of course, of course... by joetomato · · Score: 2

      10 years without a UI update is EXACTLY what I would want in an OS. The whole point of an OS is to allow me to run software and stay the hell out of my way. Changing a usable UI just for the sake of changing it is just a learning curve nobody needs.

    8. Re:Of course, of course... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      If you wanted control, you would never go for apple. Apple is for sheep. :)

      Listen, FUCKTARD:

      1. You can disable Auto-Join.

      2. You can tell it to "Forget" a Network.

      3. It NEVER Joins a "NEW" (never previously connected) Network without ASKING first.

      So, take your HATER BULLSHIT and SHOVE IT UP YOUR ANONYMOUS, COWARDLY ASS!!!

      Got it?

    9. Re: Of course, of course... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      10 years without a UI update is EXACTLY what I would want in an OS. The whole point of an OS is to allow me to run software and stay the hell out of my way. Changing a usable UI just for the sake of changing it is just a learning curve nobody needs.

      EXACTLY.

      The opposite of that is what you got with the Windows 7 to 8 transition.

    10. Re:Of course, of course... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Orphaned again...

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    11. Re:Of course, of course... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      No, don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.

      (um, it's just a phone...)

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    12. Re:Of course, of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and in addition you can set preferred order joining networks. I don't know about Androids, but Windows have been always an still is quite miserable with this matter.

      BTW, same method works with laptops (macOS, OS X) too, where you have more and different type interfaces and this in addition to having connection profiles which actually have worked very well over 10 years already. PC Windows network joining still seems to be mostly hit and miss. Not that I have to use much much Windows these days (I still need occationally Visio), but it still occationally bites after running updates in VM (VmWare, Qemu-KVM) that network profile fcked :/

    13. Re:Of course, of course... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      No, don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.

      (um, it's just a phone...)

      Tell that to the Haters.

    14. Re:Of course, of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm more surprised anyone would auto-join open wireless networks at all. Why would you want it to, without asking?

      It doesn't. It joins known networks to which you've previously connected. You can also tell it to forget a network.

      I kind of wish they'd include an Auto-forget feature that only uses the connection for the session, next connect requires user action.

    15. Re:Of course, of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So finally it behaves, and is disabled, the exact same way it's benn done in Android since 2012? Once again - Apple copies from Android and completely screws the pooch on the implementation...

    16. Re:Of course, of course... by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      No, they're just putting a bit of common sense into which connection they'll use. As opposed to Android, which will strain for minutes at a time to connect to some dodgy WiFi signal with the throughput of a 2400bps modem rather than using the high-speed 4G cellular that's all around it. Or connect to the 1-bar WiFi with almost no connectivity when there's a five-bar signal present alongside it. Or several other equally dumb options.

    17. Re: Of course, of course... by dbialac · · Score: 1

      Updating iOS wouldn't be "changing just for the sake of changing." iOS fails its users (and developers) because it can't take advantage of they types of things that more modern OS's (Android and Windows Phone) can. In a nutshell, the home screen is static, forcing you to bury yourself into various different applications in order to find information. People using either of these platforms have already put their phones away in the time it takes for a user of iOS to open up the app they need to get at the information they're looking for.

    18. Re: Of course, of course... by joetomato · · Score: 1
      I'll give you that, the iOS home screen is my worst pet peeve. I ended up putting my dozen or so apps into folders by subject so I can find stuff pretty much instantly but nobody else using my phone would stand a chance.

      but I'll still take it over the android way, my inlaws get a new Samsung note every other year and every time it's a totally new learning curve trying to find where all the settings got moved to this time.

      I know you can install your own launcher on android and get mostly the same experience, (used to use Nova Launcher and highly reckoned it) but like I said all the settings pages, where the buttons are and what they do etc, there's no good reason to mess with that and yet everyone but ios always seems to. (Even Mac OS is guilty of it so I'm not totally defending apple either)

  2. Recent XKCD post by cerberusss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's actually a very recent XKCD post about reliability of WiFi versus cellular: https://xkcd.com/1865/

    --
    8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    1. Re:Recent XKCD post by ls671 · · Score: 0

      hmmm... chipset conspiracy and collusion? Cellular brings in more money for the providers...

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    2. Re:Recent XKCD post by peragrin · · Score: 1

      90% of wifi nodes are the isps modem that they rent you. Placed in a convient spot for cable tv but not broadcasting wireless. I have always had my own routers and ap's and as such speeds are decent and coverage is great. My current house if setup the traditional way would have coverage for the main house barely. My setup with an outside ap and ceiling mounting ap covers the house, the garage the driveway and half the back yard in usable signal.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    3. Re:Recent XKCD post by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

      You mean $50k radios, with access to highly regulated frequencies, in bands that are far better suited for long-range communication provide a better connection than the cheap pieces of shit most people put in their homes, usually in awful locations, on an unregulated and congested frequency band? Man, I'm shocked.

    4. Re:Recent XKCD post by skids · · Score: 1

      It's not like, with apple devices, using an uncongested 5GHz band will help, unless you know enough to tune down your 2.4G radios so the 5GHz signal is always at least 3dB stronger, and play with the beacon interval to make 5GHz statistically more likely to be seen. And, make sure you aren't still joined to the AP by the door you came in from, because Apple wifi drivers won't let go of it despite being right next to another AP.

      I can't wait to see what new hell iOS11 brings to our enterprise setup.

    5. Re:Recent XKCD post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tru dat. I had to install an ap in my room for decent speed. It's like ISPs deliberately install shitty routers...

    6. Re:Recent XKCD post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This premise is wrong, and considering it is the linchpin of all your arguments, there's no use listening to you.

    7. Re:Recent XKCD post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got rid of my TWC/Spectrum UBEE modem/wifi router and replaced it with a Netgear modem and Netgear Orbi router system. Not only do I have coverage over my entire property (2500 square foot home, 2 stories, and a 5000 square foot lot), my ping times were cut by a factor of 4, and my download/upload speeds each tripled. And I can connect all 35 IP devices without DHCP collisions and failures (seems the UBEE box can't really handle more than 20-25 IPs at a time).

    8. Re:Recent XKCD post by skids · · Score: 1

      Heheh. I know who YOU are. Congratulations on stalking me into a completely apolitical thread.

    9. Re:Recent XKCD post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. Why would I use a slow, unreliable wifi network that happens to be available right here, but will fade out 100 ft from here, when I have unlimited data at a decent bandwidth via cellular data?

      Stop relying on random wifi access points and get a decent data plan.

  3. So... not actually addressing the issue by mrbester · · Score: 2

    Nothing there suggests that users still won't get bumped to a cellular network should the wireless one be deemed to be slow / unreliable (what is "slow"? Is that configurable?) just that you have to force the connection as it has been flagged. Will the forced connection remain even if it is "unreliable"?

    How about just a notification on the icon (like a ! ) to easily let the user know the connection isn't up to snuff for whatever reason? Then the _user_ can decide if they want to go on a (potentially metered) cellular network. This can have an configuration option (default off) that automatically does this should the user be on an unmetered plan.

    Given the options of "pay and get the content (probably an add) quicker" or "I can wait a few more seconds for free" even iPhone users would probably choose the latter.

    --
    "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    1. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by mrbester · · Score: 1

      Yeah I know: "add". I even corrected the auto-correct, but it auto-corrected itself...

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    2. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > but it auto-corrected itself...

      This is eerily self-referencial. There's another post up there about "corporations knowing better than end users", and I was about to answer that what infuriates me is "software know better than end users", which to me is designer meta-arrogance. Utterly insulting.

      Sadly, you even meet this pattern in free software!

      Then, there you have it: your autocorrect knows better than you.

    3. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by necro81 · · Score: 1

      Nothing there suggests that users still won't get bumped to a cellular network should the wireless one be deemed to be slow / unreliable

      That is a feature (or is it a bug?) that is easily disabled. One could argue that it ought to be turned off by default, rather than turned on. I've had it off for years. Considering that turning WiFi on an off is one swipe and tap away in most circumstances, it is trivial for me (or anyone else) to fall back on cellular data when the WiFi is crappy.

      I'll ask the audience: is there anyone who feels that WiFi Assist is a useful feature?

    4. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by MikeMo · · Score: 1

      You already have this. It's obvious when the connection isn't working well. With your suggestion, things would remain as they are: you notice internet sucks, you go turn off wifi.

      I have this happen to me all the time. I happen to have an Xfinity cable, and my phone automatically connects to any Xfinity hotspots when I'm outside the home. They usually suck, and I have to go to settings and turn wifi off. I hate having to do that, because I usually forget to turn it back on!

      I'm looking forward to this feature.

    5. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by swb · · Score: 1

      I think it's useful to the extent that the WiFi "signal strength" meter is 3 bars of meaningless information, and I'm often in a location where I get "1 bar" WiFi. I *could* let the app time out, swipe around to turn off WiFi (and forget to turn it back on) and then just use cellular, but it seems to me that assist prevents most data timeouts and gets me the useful information I'm looking for without a bunch of manual intervention.

      Of course, it's mostly when I'm doing something that requires a small amount of data so the "extra" cellular data is really insignificant. And in fact, the extra cellular data used by WiFi assist is probably less than the extra cellular data consumed by forgetting WiFi is off and being in an area of good coverage (like at home) and then consuming a bunch of data without realizing you're slurping cellular.

      Of course, I'm not a huge consumer of video on the phone with primary access to WiFi on always-marginal networks. I could see where those people get burned, but for ordinary app-type data access, I think assist is a smart feature.

      My wife is a great example -- she was majorly spiking data usage, and I figured out she had "auto join" enabled and was just smart enough to turn off WiFi to get data service, and never turned it back on. I disabled auto-join for her and her data usage actually went down as she stopped connecting to shitty hotspots and stopped turning WiFi off as often.

    6. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      again, the consumer is kept dumb.
      the intelligent thing to do, would be to INFORM the user that wifi is crappy and SHOW him/her
      a nice graph (of detected APs and their used channels) that explains WHY the wifi is crappy.

      but nooooo, the consumer is just a big baby that needs to have decisions made for them.

      i am sure all apple wifi products are thus superior and will get a higher threshold of "crappyness" before the
      apple lus3r is disconnected from them ...

      note: there are many free wifi "spectrum scanners" out there. the people that making these are very nice.
      i am sorry if my suggestion might remove some revenue stream, but it is for the grater good of mankind : P

    7. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Nothing there suggests that users still won't get bumped to a cellular network should the wireless one be deemed to be slow / unreliable (what is "slow"? Is that configurable?) just that you have to force the connection as it has been flagged. Will the forced connection remain even if it is "unreliable"?

      How about just a notification on the icon (like a ! ) to easily let the user know the connection isn't up to snuff for whatever reason? Then the _user_ can decide if they want to go on a (potentially metered) cellular network. This can have an configuration option (default off) that automatically does this should the user be on an unmetered plan.

      Given the options of "pay and get the content (probably an add) quicker" or "I can wait a few more seconds for free" even iPhone users would probably choose the latter.

      Yeah, Apple is evil, and wants you to spend money ON A CELL NETWORK THEY DON'T OWN.

      Riiiight.

      Fucking Haters.

    8. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 0

      again, the consumer is kept dumb.
      the intelligent thing to do, would be to INFORM the user that wifi is crappy and SHOW him/her
      a nice graph (of detected APs and their used channels) that explains WHY the wifi is crappy.

      but nooooo, the consumer is just a big baby that needs to have decisions made for them.

      i am sure all apple wifi products are thus superior and will get a higher threshold of "crappyness" before the
      apple lus3r is disconnected from them ...

      note: there are many free wifi "spectrum scanners" out there. the people that making these are very nice.
      i am sorry if my suggestion might remove some revenue stream, but it is for the grater good of mankind : P

      You have so little understanding of human nature, it is actually frightening.

      Go back to your Mom's basement. That's where you belong.

    9. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      What? Your home wifi doesn't have a unique SSID?

      It occurred to me long ago that a great attack vector would be to have an open network with a common default SSID. Especially for people who's gadgets autoconnect to whatever their default wireless name is at home.

      I don't connect to any open wireless network named after an ISP or a router manufacturer, and all the wifi systems I've set up have unique, meaningful names. (And they're not open, but that's another discussion.)

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    10. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple: we don't design to uplift people, we design to keep them down at the lowest common denominator.

    11. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by mrbester · · Score: 1

      No, my point was that to give the user the fastest response the phone switches networks for them. The priority is on the speed of transfer (which is fair enough, users want content NOW),, not any associated cost that might arise from it.

      Maybe Apple think that if you can afford their stuff you're most likely on an unmetered plan or don't mind a few dollars extra on your bill at the end of the month. Or maybe they didn't even consider the unintended circumstance because it didn't affect any of those who thought it was a good idea. I'd go with the latter because of the complaints mentioned in TFS.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    12. Re:So... not actually addressing the issue by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      No, my point was that to give the user the fastest response the phone switches networks for them. The priority is on the speed of transfer (which is fair enough, users want content NOW),, not any associated cost that might arise from it.

      Maybe Apple think that if you can afford their stuff you're most likely on an unmetered plan or don't mind a few dollars extra on your bill at the end of the month. Or maybe they didn't even consider the unintended circumstance because it didn't affect any of those who thought it was a good idea. I'd go with the latter because of the complaints mentioned in TFS.

      I think that any algorithm may have corner-cases and weighting-issues; and I also think that Apple will need some real-world data to tune said algorithm.

      IOW, it's too soon to tell.

  4. You're not allowed to do that, nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop it. Not allowed. We're stopping you. We think that's a bad thing and you're a bad person for doing it. Stop it.

  5. Network Neutrality by johnsie · · Score: 0, Troll

    Soon you will need to have iRouters and iAcceePoints if you want to use apple devices.

    1. Re: Network Neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shut up nerd

    2. Re:Network Neutrality by Dog-Cow · · Score: 0

      Soon, you'll die. But, alas, not soon enough.

    3. Re:Network Neutrality by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Haven't you heard? There's no team working on AirPort products at Apple anymore. That means even Apple users need to buy bug-ridden, backdoor-infested routers from crap companies now.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:Network Neutrality by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 0

      Soon you will need to have iRouters and iAcceePoints if you want to use apple devices.

      Hey dumbass!

      In case you didn't notice before you posted your fucking SCREED, Apple exited the Router/AP business about a year ago.

      Do try to keep up, if you're going to spew HATE.

    5. Re:Network Neutrality by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Haven't you heard? There's no team working on AirPort products at Apple anymore. That means even Apple users need to buy bug-ridden, backdoor-infested routers from crap companies now.

      Which actually concerns me greatly. Since they were never one of the growing number of router and AP brands that had exploits.

      Guess I need to buy one of their AC routers before they're all gone...

  6. Sketchy Wifi maybe more of a concern by rmdingler · · Score: 2

    so it won't work with most hotel wifi?

    "Of course it will very very much.

    Please enjoy here shopping and banking online."

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Sketchy Wifi maybe more of a concern by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Isn't this one of the problems that HTTPs is supposed to fix? The wifi might be bugged, but you can verify you are really talking to the bank and then establish a secure connection over HTTPs and your details are protected.

      If it were any other way you would be pretty much screwed because your packets have to pass through many untrusted servers on their way to the bank.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Sketchy Wifi maybe more of a concern by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Isn't this one of the problems that HTTPs is supposed to fix? The wifi might be bugged, but you can verify you are really talking to the bank and then establish a secure connection over HTTPs and your details are protected.

      If it were any other way you would be pretty much screwed because your packets have to pass through many untrusted servers on their way to the bank.

      Maybe.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

  7. you ./ users... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut up and give us your money.

    - Apple.

    1. Re:you ./ users... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Piss off apple.

      - the majority of the world

  8. No way of knowing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At this point, there's no way to know how well the feature will work

    Well given that there's a public beta and your website is called TrustedReviews, how about you do your job, install the beta, and review how it works? Or are you just going to regurgitate information you found on the web? Because that's not a review I trust.

  9. Silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "At this point, there's no way to know how well the feature will work, and there will undoubtedly be issues when it eventually arrives in iOS 11."

    Will it also be an issue if the feature is not there when iOS launches?
    Will it also be an issue the only people who don't have a more reliable and secure experience are those that want an Apple branded Android device?
    Will it also be an issue if you have to pay for feaures that other platforms give for free after providing absolutely no indication that those features would ever be free on the platform?

    The Apple hate is stupid. It's no secret how they manage their garden.

  10. How about deleting old networks by necro81 · · Score: 1

    When traveling, I often join a local WiFi network for an hour or a day. When I am leaving the area, I don't always remember to go into iOS wifi settings and saying to "forget this network". Once the network is out of range, I don't know of a way to tell iOS to forget about it. I know that this increases my threat envelope somewhat, because iOS will keep looking for that network (or one with the same SSID).

    So: does anyone know of a way to get iOS to list all the WiFi networks it has remembered, so that they can be selectively deleted? does someone produce an app for that? OS X has had this ability since...well...forever. Why doesn't iOS have it?

    1. Re:How about deleting old networks by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

      hummm, well, it's 2017, and has been in every windows distro or android, so this must exist in iOS too

      --
      "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
    2. Re:How about deleting old networks by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      OS X and iOS have been exchanging WiFi connections for ages so I wonder if you delete it from OS X, if that will delete it from iOS as well.
      I can't test is as this feature for some reason does not work with my iCloud account and I can't get it to work.

    3. Re:How about deleting old networks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are using the same iCloud account on the Mac, the networks joined in iOS will show on the Mac as well. Delete them from there and iOS will forget them also.

  11. Simple Implementation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me guess, it would check the MAC Address of the WiFi AP.

    00-1B-63 (hex) Apple Inc.

    if the MAC address doesn't match, the network is "unreliable".

    Or, if some proprietary "apple handshake" fails, the network is unreliable.

    Basically, if it's not apple branded hardware, it's unreliable.

    1. Re:Simple Implementation by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 0

      Let me guess, it would check the MAC Address of the WiFi AP.

      00-1B-63 (hex) Apple Inc.

      if the MAC address doesn't match, the network is "unreliable".

      Or, if some proprietary "apple handshake" fails, the network is unreliable.

      Basically, if it's not apple branded hardware, it's unreliable.

      Hey DUMBASS:

      Apple went OUT of the Router/AP business over a YEAR ago.

      Stupid fucking Hater. DIE MOTHERFUCKER DIE!!!

  12. old beta had this as well by johnjones · · Score: 1

    what really is intriguing is the evaluation of the network bandwidth since apple can not even set the captive portal detection server they run to send HTTP headers correctly to no-cache... I'd like to see their workings and I'm sure the network administrators who control the MDM systems would as well...

    Apple has quite an investment in the enterprise space and a change to networking would be quite a change...

    regards

    John Jones

  13. iOS11's big feature is surely the multi window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Submitter seems to focus on a tiny feature, when the big new iOS11 feature is surely the tablet friendly multi-window. Much much easier to create split screens, the apps history groups screens not apps, and a mass of touch friendly drag drops between apps. You could do it before, but now its a damn site more intuitive.

    Very impressive. I'm stuck with Android since I'm using a lot of Android code, but it's very very impressive. On Android we'll probably get stuck with a piss poor WIMP interface from Chrome.

    You won't find a 12 inch+ Android device with the kind of usability features you see in iOS11.

    It's nice to see Apple finally taking a lead with features, its been playing catch up for quite a while now, and as a result, Google has been rudderless with Android.

  14. android has it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just another feature android has had for ages. shouldnt even be news

  15. Android has had this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Android has had this for years. Hopefully they patented it and can sue Apple over it.

    1. Re:Android has had this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And a delightful fucking feature.

      Our Android phones will drop off WiFi randomly, then we burn up all the wireless data in one night without realizing it.

      The access point is 10 feet away but Android decides it's not a strong enough signal.

  16. But when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But when will the OS be able to bypass a stingray device?

  17. This is dumb. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens when one is in an area where there is no cellular signal, and the only connection available is a slow WiFi connection? I am frequently at the lake on the weekends, and there is no cellular reception on my boat dock. There are plenty of WiFi connections, but the speed is always slow. In this case I would rather connect to a slow WiFi than have no internet at all.

  18. QoS Exploits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, but will iOS 11 still violate 802.11 QoS standards to ensure that iThingys get traffic before any device that adheres to the standards in good faith?

  19. ffs, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Timmy, stop second guessing me. Do what you're told.

  20. Why not just let users set a signal threshhold? by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

    I have this same problem on my Android phone. Both my cellular and my home internet ISPs have hotspots all over the place that I can use for "free" (read included with my plans). They really do have heavy coverage which is handy if you are in a business or public venue or whatever and can connect to their "free" wifi. The problem is, I may walk into a business that is a few doors down from one with a hotspot, and my phone will happily connect to the SSID at -85 dBm. This is not a particularly useable signal, and I end up having to disable wifi so I can have a proper connection on LTE, then remember to enable it again when I leave.

    If I could just have a setting that says "Don't connect to any wifi below (insert signal strength here, I'd probably go with about -60 to -65 dBm)", problem solved. Yes I know SNR matters too, but the above would probably take care of the vast majority of cases that cause me issues.

    1. Re:Why not just let users set a signal threshhold? by hackel · · Score: 1

      Obviously asking users to understand what signal strength in dB means is not an option. They could have a slider or something, though. "poor-low-med-high' etc. In the meantime, you can enable "Aggressive Wi-Fi to Mobile handover" in developer options.

    2. Re:Why not just let users set a signal threshhold? by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      Then I end up on LTE when I am at home sitting next to my access point. I'm not sure how it is trying to measure "bandwidth", but it does not work well.

  21. What constitutes unreliable? by HyperStasis · · Score: 1

    And how long before blocking malware/adware/marketing at the router level considered "unreliable"?

  22. Lagging behind as usual... by hackel · · Score: 1

    I believe Android has had this feature since at least the 4.0 days. It definitely seems like a must. Apple is too focused on shiny toys to attract their baby-like fans instead of actual technical solutions people need. Oh well, glad they've finally gotten it.

  23. It may be deemed unreliable, but.... by aklinux · · Score: 1

    My Android devices have been doing this as well lately, especially my Pixel C, and I get it. The problem is that I realize that the network has some reliability issues when I choose to connect to it but it's what's available without using up my cellular data allowances. All the available WiFi in the area is about the same as far as reliability goes. My choices are to tolerate it, or go to my home or office for a "reliable" connection.

  24. Sounds good to me, if it is what I think it is by blindseer · · Score: 1

    At home when storms roll through my crappy cable internet can die on my but the Wi-Fi signal will still be strong. My iPhone will keep hammering away at the Wi-Fi because it sees a signal but it goes no where. If I disable the Wi-Fi and use the cellular network instead then I can go back to my e-mail, surf the web, or whatever. If the iPhone was smart enough to switch to cellular data when the Wi-Fi internet connection dies on me then that would be convenient. When the Wi-Fi internet comes back, because the cable company finally got their act together, then I'd like the iPhone to switch back automatically without me having to remember to re-enable Wi-Fi.

    I'd want some indication on the screen that a Wi-Fi connection is available but deemed "unworthy" so I can look into why it failed. This is also so I can be aware I'm using my limited cell data instead of an unlimited Wi-Fi. I have certain apps disabled from using cellular data to keep me from going too far on grabbing data but even so I have to watch myself. For instance I had web browsing disabled on the cellular network to keep me from watching YouTube and using up all my data, but then I found that this also kept me from comparing prices online as I shopped. Some finer grained control might be handy here as well.

    I will say that the Wi-Fi calling feature sure it nice. As I sit in my basement office I'll sometimes have a marginal cell signal. With Wi-Fi calling it's not a worry, at least until storms knock out my cable internet again. It was also nice to see that I could still make phone calls even in a basement lecture hall. No cell signal there but the campus Wi-Fi worked.

    It seems this preference for Wi-Fi is now becoming a problem and it's nice to see Apple working on it.

    --
    I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    1. Re:Sounds good to me, if it is what I think it is by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      At home when storms roll through my crappy cable internet can die on my but the Wi-Fi signal will still be strong. My iPhone will keep hammering away at the Wi-Fi because it sees a signal but it goes no where

      Fair enough. A great wifi radio signal with no backhaul would be kind of the opposite of my issue and just as annoying. Hopefully future solutions will consider all the various failure modes.

    2. Re:Sounds good to me, if it is what I think it is by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      You could swap your iPhone with an Android phone and this problem will be fixed.

      Or you could want until the iOS update with this feature and you phone will start ignoring your home WiFi completely, even when there is no storm.

  25. Like Android? by taniwha · · Score: 1

    My Nexus6 wont connect to wifi in China if the phone is connected .... why? because Google considers a network to be seriously broken if you can't access Google's servers .... so Google thinks your expensive roaming connection is the only valid connection you have

    You can get around this by doing the counter intuitive going into flight mode and then tuirning on wifi

    While it's arguable that the connection IS broken it's still useful (wechat works for example) even if you're stuck with bing

    1. Re:Like Android? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      You can turn off mobile data without flight mode. You can still use the cellular connection for calling and text messaging.

  26. I have an idea by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the phone should only automatically connect to networks the user has requested it do so.

    Like on my laptop, there is a "Connect automatically" checkbox.

    1. Re:I have an idea by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      Like on my laptop, there is a "Connect automatically" checkbox.

      Yes. We would like a "Connect automatically if this network is better than the one I'm on" checkbox, with a handful of parameters to define better.