The signal degradation that you see with other phones is *not* the same issue that the iPhone has (although it also has that issue). What we're seeing is entirely new and unique to the iPhone 4. Watch this video for a clear demonstration that it is a completely different issue: http://vimeo.com/12864890
If you look more carefully, I did in fact mention how outrageous it sounded. I also mentioned a possible scenario where it would be possible. But you're right about me misunderstanding *something*, I didn't initially see that this was just a test flight.
Ok, nevermind me... this was a test/preparation flight before the actual around the world flight, which would certainly take much longer than 24 hours.
"they hope by flying all day they'll be able to fully charge the batteries, then use the stored energy to power the plane all night."
I must be misunderstanding something... it says it's an around-the-world flight that would last 24 hours... if that's the case, why couldn't they follow the daylight? (of course I highly doubt this plane actually goes fast enough to do what I'm understanding from the article, but they do in fact say it... are they flying around the world closer to one of the poles?)
People with little or no formal education in programming can very well be capable of programming whatever tools you need, but they are much less likely to be able to do it well. Before I took any classes in programming, all I knew how to do was make things work for myself. That didn't mean they were secure, and that didn't mean they were optimal or user-friendly. They just accomplished a single task, and it took me much longer to create those tools than it would take me now.
This is only kind of related, but at my current job my boss insists on hiring a lot of low-paid programmers for the dozens of projects that we have on the horizon. There are normally 5 of us programmers, but I am the only one who ever accomplishes anything. The others have never been able to finish a single project that they've been given. One good software engineer is better than 4 lowly "code monkeys." Hiring qualified programmers is a must.
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.
ETFs are in place because you got a device cheaper than it actually costs (or sometimes even free). You agreed to pay for the device by being a customer of another service for a certain amount of time. Smart phones cost a lot of money to make. She got one for a reduced price (possibly even free) by essentially agreeing to pay it off month by month for a year or two. This is very similar to a loan or car payment. Why should Verizon take the hit?
That being said, they could certainly afford to take the hit in situations like this, but I don't blame them for not doing so.
It has been demonstrated that iPhone 4 drops calls because of a finger in the wrong place. It's now up to you to provide evidence of it happening on another phone. It's impossible to provide evidence for the opposite.
Sorry for the double post. This is not the same issue as what happens with other phones. It is certainly a disaster, and piss poor design and testing. As the comment above this shows, this can be done with a single finger. Calls can be dropped because you have a single finger in the wrong spot. Please tell me of one other phone that will drop a call if I place a finger in a very common and natural position on the phone itself.
Please, tell me of a good coating that wouldn't cost thousands of dollars and that would last for years of normal wear and tear, while still showing off that sexy metal antenna that Apple insists that we must be able to see.
This issue presents itself with the touch of a finger. It isn't the same issue as what happens with pretty much all phones when your hand covers the antenna. It's a much more serious issue that happens because you can actually make contact with the antennas, effectively changing their sizes by bridging the gap with your (conductive) skin.
There is plenty to see here, and Apple will need to create a redesign *within* the current iteration in order to save face, but I have a feeling that the most they'll do is lower the price of their rubber bands, or maybe give them away for free.
In a sane world there's no way that my theory can be right, but here it is:
The lab tests were done at Apple HQ, where AT&T has a tower in order to keep Steve Jobs happy -- plenty of signal even with the defect. The field tests were done with the rubber disguises on, so it didn't affect them.
More Apple praising, and yet still not a single Slashdot story about the iPhone's absolutely disastrous antenna design. I thought there were at least a couple of/. editors who weren't Apple fanboys.
Do those actually exist? Why? How exactly is fusion bad for the environment? I can understand fission, but fusion? come on, people... I know there are issues with tritium and the structure becoming slightly radioactive, but consider the alternatives.
The Motorola Droid came out last year, and has a pixel density of 265 ppi. It isn't as dense as iPhone 4, but iPhone's increase is NOT revolutionary. Revolutionary was what happened last year when standard densities nearly doubled.
Referring to the false-advertising... are you sure you're thinking of the same clip as me? It starts with a 4x density grid, then zooms out to show 2 very different versions of the letter a. It was absolutely implied that it was based on the original 4x density grid where it was zoomed out from. As it zoomed out, the grid disappeared, as did the "pixels" (before becoming "infinitely" small). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJxezPZNckA Watch the pixels on the right "a" magically disappear.
I heard the other day that the jumbotron at the new cowboy stadium is a retina display.... from a distance of 27 miles.
This seems to be an arbitrary way of claiming that your screen is better than everyone else's.
It's nice, but it isn't revolutionary outside of the iWorld. It's only a little bit denser than other phone displays that have been around for months. Did anyone notice the demonstration of the difference between the two versions of the letter a? In the video, did everyone notice how the pixels on the "better" a just kind of disappeared? Will someone please tell me how that isn't false advertising? He was comparing a pixel density that was probably 50x greater than in the other "a."
Tell me... What's so low quality about Microsoft's products these days? I'd love to hear it. This anti-MS fap fest is one of the worst I've seen in quite some time, and that's saying a lot for slashdot.
Have you ever used a mac? or pretty much any Linux distro? OS X updates occur much more often than windows updates, and linux updates occur daily. And don't say "but that's not linux itself; it's the packages on linux!" -- the same applies to windows.
This entire thread is ridiculous. Microsoft makes quality products, whether or not you choose to believe so. And if you insist on bringing up past versions of windows, why not compare those to other products available at the time?
Slashdot Mirror
The signal degradation that you see with other phones is *not* the same issue that the iPhone has (although it also has that issue). What we're seeing is entirely new and unique to the iPhone 4. Watch this video for a clear demonstration that it is a completely different issue: http://vimeo.com/12864890
If you look more carefully, I did in fact mention how outrageous it sounded. I also mentioned a possible scenario where it would be possible. But you're right about me misunderstanding *something*, I didn't initially see that this was just a test flight.
Ok, nevermind me... this was a test/preparation flight before the actual around the world flight, which would certainly take much longer than 24 hours.
"they hope by flying all day they'll be able to fully charge the batteries, then use the stored energy to power the plane all night."
I must be misunderstanding something... it says it's an around-the-world flight that would last 24 hours... if that's the case, why couldn't they follow the daylight? (of course I highly doubt this plane actually goes fast enough to do what I'm understanding from the article, but they do in fact say it... are they flying around the world closer to one of the poles?)
People with little or no formal education in programming can very well be capable of programming whatever tools you need, but they are much less likely to be able to do it well. Before I took any classes in programming, all I knew how to do was make things work for myself. That didn't mean they were secure, and that didn't mean they were optimal or user-friendly. They just accomplished a single task, and it took me much longer to create those tools than it would take me now.
This is only kind of related, but at my current job my boss insists on hiring a lot of low-paid programmers for the dozens of projects that we have on the horizon. There are normally 5 of us programmers, but I am the only one who ever accomplishes anything. The others have never been able to finish a single project that they've been given. One good software engineer is better than 4 lowly "code monkeys." Hiring qualified programmers is a must.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gb3aQ5XoQw
Single finger.
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.
ETFs are in place because you got a device cheaper than it actually costs (or sometimes even free). You agreed to pay for the device by being a customer of another service for a certain amount of time. Smart phones cost a lot of money to make. She got one for a reduced price (possibly even free) by essentially agreeing to pay it off month by month for a year or two. This is very similar to a loan or car payment. Why should Verizon take the hit?
That being said, they could certainly afford to take the hit in situations like this, but I don't blame them for not doing so.
Please tell me where I can touch my Nexus One (with a single finger, mind you) that will cause it to drop a call. Calling this a nonissue is moronic.
It has been demonstrated that iPhone 4 drops calls because of a finger in the wrong place. It's now up to you to provide evidence of it happening on another phone. It's impossible to provide evidence for the opposite.
Sorry for the double post. This is not the same issue as what happens with other phones. It is certainly a disaster, and piss poor design and testing. As the comment above this shows, this can be done with a single finger. Calls can be dropped because you have a single finger in the wrong spot. Please tell me of one other phone that will drop a call if I place a finger in a very common and natural position on the phone itself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gb3aQ5XoQw
Please tell me where I put my finger on my Nexus One to cause it to lose 4 bars.
Please, tell me of a good coating that wouldn't cost thousands of dollars and that would last for years of normal wear and tear, while still showing off that sexy metal antenna that Apple insists that we must be able to see.
Something that affects 50% of customers is a non-issue? Despite your claim, you are, in fact, a "fanboi."
This issue presents itself with the touch of a finger. It isn't the same issue as what happens with pretty much all phones when your hand covers the antenna. It's a much more serious issue that happens because you can actually make contact with the antennas, effectively changing their sizes by bridging the gap with your (conductive) skin.
There is plenty to see here, and Apple will need to create a redesign *within* the current iteration in order to save face, but I have a feeling that the most they'll do is lower the price of their rubber bands, or maybe give them away for free.
Until it gets scratched
In a sane world there's no way that my theory can be right, but here it is:
The lab tests were done at Apple HQ, where AT&T has a tower in order to keep Steve Jobs happy -- plenty of signal even with the defect. The field tests were done with the rubber disguises on, so it didn't affect them.
More Apple praising, and yet still not a single Slashdot story about the iPhone's absolutely disastrous antenna design. I thought there were at least a couple of /. editors who weren't Apple fanboys.
Anti-nuclear environmentalist organizations . . .
Do those actually exist? Why? How exactly is fusion bad for the environment? I can understand fission, but fusion? come on, people... I know there are issues with tritium and the structure becoming slightly radioactive, but consider the alternatives.
When I said "densities nearly doubled" I meant PPI nearly doubled (which means much much better improvement in density occurred last year).
Also, here's a webpage explaining what I'm talking about with the false advertising: http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/06/apple-using-fake-489-to-815-ppi-on-iphone-4-ads/
The Motorola Droid came out last year, and has a pixel density of 265 ppi. It isn't as dense as iPhone 4, but iPhone's increase is NOT revolutionary. Revolutionary was what happened last year when standard densities nearly doubled.
Referring to the false-advertising... are you sure you're thinking of the same clip as me? It starts with a 4x density grid, then zooms out to show 2 very different versions of the letter a. It was absolutely implied that it was based on the original 4x density grid where it was zoomed out from. As it zoomed out, the grid disappeared, as did the "pixels" (before becoming "infinitely" small). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJxezPZNckA Watch the pixels on the right "a" magically disappear.
I heard the other day that the jumbotron at the new cowboy stadium is a retina display.... from a distance of 27 miles.
This seems to be an arbitrary way of claiming that your screen is better than everyone else's.
It's nice, but it isn't revolutionary outside of the iWorld. It's only a little bit denser than other phone displays that have been around for months. Did anyone notice the demonstration of the difference between the two versions of the letter a? In the video, did everyone notice how the pixels on the "better" a just kind of disappeared? Will someone please tell me how that isn't false advertising? He was comparing a pixel density that was probably 50x greater than in the other "a."
In reality Windows security is a joke.
How so? Please give me an example of how security on Microsoft's current OS (Windows 7) is a joke.
Tell me... What's so low quality about Microsoft's products these days? I'd love to hear it. This anti-MS fap fest is one of the worst I've seen in quite some time, and that's saying a lot for slashdot.
Have you ever used a mac? or pretty much any Linux distro? OS X updates occur much more often than windows updates, and linux updates occur daily. And don't say "but that's not linux itself; it's the packages on linux!" -- the same applies to windows.
This entire thread is ridiculous. Microsoft makes quality products, whether or not you choose to believe so. And if you insist on bringing up past versions of windows, why not compare those to other products available at the time?