Just to be sure, the technology required to track fingers is much different than the one required to track a stylus, in power, complexity and components. For one thing, the stylus requires pressure or conductive contact, while the finger requires capacitive contact.
Think about this, if it is all the same, how come phones are now including touch-screens instead of the old, tried-and-true stylus like the PDAs of yore? Perhaps it's because the technology has improved enough, and its cost lowered enough as to be practical.
To say that a finger-trackpack would not be good for editing images just because older tools did not do it, is as short-sighted as saying touch-sensitive screens on phones are useless because they didn't used occur in smartphones before.
It may guarantee a drop in signal strength, but not a dropped call. A dropped call will occur as a result of this issue when the signal is weak to begin with. However, since the iPhone has higher sensitivity than other phones at lower signal strengths, this issue is still mitigated.
Although you may be right, this is only a problem if the calls get dropped. And it is not so certain that they will as a result of the new antenna design, except in areas where the signal is weak to begin with.
This is Jobs' point, not necessarily conflating two separate issues. In essence, he is saying "something causes our phones to attenuate signal, but something causes all phones to attenuate signal." The fact that these two somethings are different is not really relevant.
What's relevant is the degree to which it affects call performance. So far, Apple's assertion is that the iPhone 4 seems have generally better call quality than the previous version--because and not in spite of its antenna design.
The point is that the same "BSD-Based" OS is in those devices as in the current Mac computers, so its lineage has little to do with how the hardware is adapted to support a version of the OS where ads are forced.
>> If you use Apple's number, 0.55% out of 1.7 million means 9350 calls have been placed by their customers to complain about this. That means, up to 10,000 customer are annoyed enough with the problem to call. I don;t think any business can ignore the opinion of 9350 customer. Or do you think 9350 is a small number?
I do not think it is a small number, nor do I think Apple is ignoring those customers. They did have a press event about it today. However, you need to put that number into perspective: the problem is affecting a very small percentage of customers, and not to the majority as implied by much of the articles on the subject.
It is a problem, and even Steve Jobs expressly said this, but one that is affecting a relatively small number of users, compared to the vast majority of those to whom it is not.
"So what if only 0.55% of people called AppleCare about this issue? If that is 80% of their call volume, then it is a real problem affecting users. "
How do you reconcile that?
If less than 1% of the customers who purchase an iPhone 4 are calling to complain about a specific problem, how does the total call volume change its significance? Unless you are implying that it is a significant problem for Apple, since their overall call volume increased.
Yes, it is a real problem affecting 0.55% of users. Steve Jobs admitted this much, and said he apologizes to those users, and offered them a free bumper case.
"From what I read, they didn't admit they had an issue. The tried to prove there isn't an Apple specific issue, and gave inconclusive numbers to try to bull**** their way through. "
We must not have read the same transcripts. Steve Jobs, as quoted by various "live-blogs", said: "Now when we look at this data, it's hard to escape the conclusion that there is a problem, but that problem is affecting a very small number of users."
I keep seeing this quoted around like gospel. As far as I know, Jobs' e-mail response to a specific complaint about the so-called "death grip" was "don't hold it that way", which is different in tone and meaning.
I don't deny that you are having problems, I've seen comments similar to yours in Apple's Support Forum, of people with iPhone 3G with performance issues after the iOS 4 upgrade.
The two common solutions that seem to work for the majority of cases is to reboot the device or to reset it and restore from back-up.
I have no idea why this would work, but those who complained about performance claim it does.
I (and my wife), on the other hand, have not experienced any such problem with our iPhone 3G after updating. Then again, we had it JailBroken, had some trouble specifically with iBooks, and un-JailBroke it back. Perhaps this qualified as a "reset". Our iPhone 3G is now running iOS 4 without JailBreakiness, and working fine.
Do you have a 3G or a 3GS? The 3G does not support multi-tasking, so that cannot be the issue.
Also, this is just anecdotal, though no more than your comment, but my wife's 3G iPhone performs just as well as it did, after the iOS 4. I didn't notice any difference.
Is your iPhone JailBroken? I ask because there have been some issues with some JailBroking packages for iOS 4 (redsn0w, I'm looking at you!).
OK, Mr. Expert, you also missed one more detail: as far as all the empirical tests, anecdotes, and random blogger videos (including those from Consumer Reports and AnandTech), the attenuation issue seems to occur when the device is touched in a specific way, presumably bridging the gap between two different antennae, causing it to detune.
This seems to suggest that, had it been only a single antenna encompassing the device, there would have been no issue. And this is on top of the improved reception inherent in this design that has been documented, when not engaged in the "death grip."
So, tell me again, why is it that "only an ignorant fool would put an external, metal antenna on a phone" when that specific design clearly improved the sensitivity of the antenna and thus, the reception of the phone? The fact that "nobody do[es] this," and "nobody has ever done this in the history of mobile phones" means nothing. Technological advancement typically--nay, intrinsically--comes from doing things nobody has done before.
If there is a design flaw, it does not appear to be in putting "an external, metal antenna on a phone", but on the uninsulated gap between two differing antennae on the same surface which may be easily bridged under some circumstances.
Bad analogy. We can agree that the "engine falling out" of a car is a critical problem. Touching the iPhone 4 antenna in a very specific way so as to cause reception to drop temporarily would be more akin to a "40 grand new car that was supposed to run great" but the engine drops a few thousand RPMs temporarily if you operate the door locks and the powered-windows control simultaneously while cruising.
In that case I would, you know, not do that and enjoy my brand new car.
It's a support forum, not an open come and bitch about our stuff forum. It is intended for users to get support on particular questions.
If you read the (few) complaints regarding deleted posts, you'll notice a pattern: Someone either gratuitously posted a link to the CR report, or someone posted the link as a purported answer to someone's question.
In either case a link to the review is not a constructive response to any legitimate support question, or at least that is how Apple is taking it. This violates the Terms and Conditions of use of the forum according to the moderators.
So, if a developer opts to not use it, what does he use? Are we back to the days of un-balanced paragraph and table cell tags, with each web browser making its own assumptions regarding conflicting layout possibilities?
Actually, when I first read the headline, I interpreted it as meaning that Google is scraping pennies in order to collect enough money to pay the prize. I don't see how "struggles to" can be interpreted in any positive way for Google.
I have a slightly better one. I'll give you more details, but first I'd like you to invest in my new company, Soylent. We're coming out with a brand new product, it's so hip and modern that we're calling it just "Green".
>> It's a damn shame Google hasn't done more to help the world, but to criticize them for only starting? What harm will have Google done by not following through? People gotta remember that most companies don't even care enough to try.
Google is not being criticize for "only starting" to help the world, but for setting this so-called contest for what appears now to be largely a PR stunt, and then brushing it off. In that light, what Google did is perhaps worse than other companies not caring enough.
Slashdot Mirror
Just to be sure, the technology required to track fingers is much different than the one required to track a stylus, in power, complexity and components. For one thing, the stylus requires pressure or conductive contact, while the finger requires capacitive contact.
Think about this, if it is all the same, how come phones are now including touch-screens instead of the old, tried-and-true stylus like the PDAs of yore? Perhaps it's because the technology has improved enough, and its cost lowered enough as to be practical.
To say that a finger-trackpack would not be good for editing images just because older tools did not do it, is as short-sighted as saying touch-sensitive screens on phones are useless because they didn't used occur in smartphones before.
-dZ.
Wow, "troll"? Really? A response that qualifies and adds perspective to a previous post a "troll"?
-dZ.
It may guarantee a drop in signal strength, but not a dropped call. A dropped call will occur as a result of this issue when the signal is weak to begin with. However, since the iPhone has higher sensitivity than other phones at lower signal strengths, this issue is still mitigated.
-dZ.
>> It's a whole wide world out there, with loads of opportunities.
Oh, there's a lot of opportunities if you know when to take them, you know?
if there aren't you can make them--make or break them.
Money.
Although you may be right, this is only a problem if the calls get dropped. And it is not so certain that they will as a result of the new antenna design, except in areas where the signal is weak to begin with.
This is Jobs' point, not necessarily conflating two separate issues. In essence, he is saying "something causes our phones to attenuate signal, but something causes all phones to attenuate signal." The fact that these two somethings are different is not really relevant.
What's relevant is the degree to which it affects call performance. So far, Apple's assertion is that the iPhone 4 seems have generally better call quality than the previous version--because and not in spite of its antenna design.
-dZ.
The point is that the same "BSD-Based" OS is in those devices as in the current Mac computers, so its lineage has little to do with how the hardware is adapted to support a version of the OS where ads are forced.
-dZ.
Yes, and how is that working out for you in your iPhone?
JailBreaking is something different, as it requires basically patching the kernel after a buffer-overrun attack.
-dZ.
>> If you use Apple's number, 0.55% out of 1.7 million means 9350 calls have been placed by their customers to complain about this. That means, up to 10,000 customer are annoyed enough with the problem to call. I don;t think any business can ignore the opinion of 9350 customer. Or do you think 9350 is a small number?
I do not think it is a small number, nor do I think Apple is ignoring those customers. They did have a press event about it today. However, you need to put that number into perspective: the problem is affecting a very small percentage of customers, and not to the majority as implied by much of the articles on the subject.
It is a problem, and even Steve Jobs expressly said this, but one that is affecting a relatively small number of users, compared to the vast majority of those to whom it is not.
-dZ.
How do you reconcile that?
If less than 1% of the customers who purchase an iPhone 4 are calling to complain about a specific problem, how does the total call volume change its significance? Unless you are implying that it is a significant problem for Apple, since their overall call volume increased.
Yes, it is a real problem affecting 0.55% of users. Steve Jobs admitted this much, and said he apologizes to those users, and offered them a free bumper case.
We must not have read the same transcripts. Steve Jobs, as quoted by various "live-blogs", said: "Now when we look at this data, it's hard to escape the conclusion that there is a problem, but that problem is affecting a very small number of users."
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/16/live-from-apples-iphone-4-press-conference/?sort=newest&refresh=60
-dZ.
You win the Internetz today.
-dZ.
Those are some very high pockets.
-dZ.
>> "holding it wrong"
I keep seeing this quoted around like gospel. As far as I know, Jobs' e-mail response to a specific complaint about the so-called "death grip" was "don't hold it that way", which is different in tone and meaning.
-dZ.
Chickens don't roam the earth, silly. They're grown in pens. It's cheaper that way.
-dZ.
To both responders to my comment:
I don't deny that you are having problems, I've seen comments similar to yours in Apple's Support Forum, of people with iPhone 3G with performance issues after the iOS 4 upgrade.
The two common solutions that seem to work for the majority of cases is to reboot the device or to reset it and restore from back-up.
I have no idea why this would work, but those who complained about performance claim it does.
I (and my wife), on the other hand, have not experienced any such problem with our iPhone 3G after updating. Then again, we had it JailBroken, had some trouble specifically with iBooks, and un-JailBroke it back. Perhaps this qualified as a "reset". Our iPhone 3G is now running iOS 4 without JailBreakiness, and working fine.
Of course, your mileage may vary.
-dZ.
Do you have a 3G or a 3GS? The 3G does not support multi-tasking, so that cannot be the issue.
Also, this is just anecdotal, though no more than your comment, but my wife's 3G iPhone performs just as well as it did, after the iOS 4. I didn't notice any difference.
Is your iPhone JailBroken? I ask because there have been some issues with some JailBroking packages for iOS 4 (redsn0w, I'm looking at you!).
-dZ.
OK, Mr. Expert, you also missed one more detail: as far as all the empirical tests, anecdotes, and random blogger videos (including those from Consumer Reports and AnandTech), the attenuation issue seems to occur when the device is touched in a specific way, presumably bridging the gap between two different antennae, causing it to detune.
This seems to suggest that, had it been only a single antenna encompassing the device, there would have been no issue. And this is on top of the improved reception inherent in this design that has been documented, when not engaged in the "death grip."
So, tell me again, why is it that "only an ignorant fool would put an external, metal antenna on a phone" when that specific design clearly improved the sensitivity of the antenna and thus, the reception of the phone? The fact that "nobody do[es] this," and "nobody has ever done this in the history of mobile phones" means nothing. Technological advancement typically--nay, intrinsically--comes from doing things nobody has done before.
If there is a design flaw, it does not appear to be in putting "an external, metal antenna on a phone",
but on the uninsulated gap between two differing antennae on the same surface which may be easily bridged under some circumstances.
-dZ.
Just buy a bumper or return it for a full refund. It's not a big deal.
-Steve
--
Sent from my iPhone
That is why civilian corporations would not use USENET as a vehicle for their support fora. What's your point?
-dZ.
Bad analogy. We can agree that the "engine falling out" of a car is a critical problem. Touching the iPhone 4 antenna in a very specific way so as to cause reception to drop temporarily would be more akin to a "40 grand new car that was supposed to run great" but the engine drops a few thousand RPMs temporarily if you operate the door locks and the powered-windows control simultaneously while cruising.
In that case I would, you know, not do that and enjoy my brand new car.
-dZ.
I don't know about that... people keep on buying the devices. A few of my friends that bought an iPhone 4 are perfectly happy with it.
The (very loud) cries of a few nerds in the Internet may not travel as far as some think.
-dZ.
It's a support forum, not an open come and bitch about our stuff forum. It is intended for users to get support on particular questions.
If you read the (few) complaints regarding deleted posts, you'll notice a pattern: Someone either gratuitously posted a link to the CR report, or someone posted the link as a purported answer to someone's question.
In either case a link to the review is not a constructive response to any legitimate support question, or at least that is how Apple is taking it. This violates the Terms and Conditions of use of the forum according to the moderators.
-dZ.
So, if a developer opts to not use it, what does he use? Are we back to the days of un-balanced paragraph and table cell tags, with each web browser making its own assumptions regarding conflicting layout possibilities?
-dZ.
Actually, when I first read the headline, I interpreted it as meaning that Google is scraping pennies in order to collect enough money to pay the prize. I don't see how "struggles to" can be interpreted in any positive way for Google.
-dZ.
I have a slightly better one. I'll give you more details, but first I'd like you to invest in my new company, Soylent. We're coming out with a brand new product, it's so hip and modern that we're calling it just "Green".
-dZ.
>> It's a damn shame Google hasn't done more to help the world, but to criticize them for only starting? What harm will have Google done by not following through? People gotta remember that most companies don't even care enough to try.
Google is not being criticize for "only starting" to help the world, but for setting this so-called contest for what appears now to be largely a PR stunt, and then brushing it off. In that light, what Google did is perhaps worse than other companies not caring enough.
-dZ.