Zellio2010
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2009
- Messages
- 460
It could be possible his mind is being remotely controlled from Apple HQ.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It could be possible his mind is being remotely controlled from Apple HQ.
I hate to keep going back and forth like this, because it feels like I'm harping on you, and that's not my intention.
But really? Steve Jobs = Apple
They are one and the same.
BTW, are you an Apple employee? You said "Steve Jobs make us easy to hate."
Which is exactly why we see (and I can complain about) the issues the "average populace" doesn't know or care about.I just don't like some of the narrow thinking some people seem to be having here. It annoys me, considering the entire purpose of this forum and web site is for technicians and enthusiasts who knows better than the average populace.
Who do you think oversees and is RESPONSIBLE FOR those employees?I know Steve Job has a lot to say about how Apple operates, but nobody's perfect. I just don't see one man being the company. It's the engineers and employees that make a company. But that's just me and how I think.
I'm sure they had more than one of these engineers testing it.
Uh, yeah, sorry guys. Remember that "maximum signal" you thought you had? Uh, in reality it was just "maximum crappy signal AT&T was giving you". We're going to fix it so that our phone now shows how crappy a signal you actually are getting.
That would actually be a really good test. Detuning has to be happening at least on the voice/data side -- considering that Wi-Fi is benefiting from the larger antenna. I'm also curious what frequencies AT&T is using in various areas for their voice/data. In theory the antenna behavior can be different when in an 850Mhz coverage zone compared to 1900Mhz, but the antennas are usually okay, since all you're doing is doubling the frequency. Likewise, has anyone tested these on the Euro frequencies (900, 1800)? I'm curious how dialed-in their design happens to be. Antenna design gets especially odd when you include T-Mobile's AWS frequencies since you're at 1700 and 2100. Legitimate world-phones need to be able to tune a ridiculous number of frequencies these days.I really wish I could get my hands on the antennas from the iPhone 4. I have access to a Network Analyzer that would tell me if the resonant frequency for the antennas gets changed with and without a finger bridging the two.
So, we choose from incompetence or malice.
Agreed. I don't understand why this wasn't a viable solution. If Apple's sensible, they're already working to implement some sort of coating process in the manufacturing process. ~24 dBm of attenuation is not acceptable, even if it's somewhat avoidable for some users.The reality of the issue is that Apple could have spent a *fraction of a penny* on each iPhone and sprayed a liquid sealant over the exposed antennas. The diamond coating would have been slightly more (not much), but they required a minimum layer of insulation.
Antenna design gets especially odd when you include T-Mobile's AWS frequencies since you're at 1700 and 2100. Legitimate world-phones need to be able to tune a ridiculous number of frequencies these days.
Very good point.Uh, you guys are forgetting something significant. The unit found in the bar was contained in a "fake" iPhone 3GS wrap-around, so that people wouldn't be suspicious a prototype was in use.
If all their field-units received a similar treatment, their engineers could have never contacted the antenna, thus triggered the problem.
No, they didn't just now "find" it... Consumers just now "realized it". Apple freaking put that issue in there back during a 3G update when they originally faked the signal bars, and it's stuck with the OS ever since.The company said it will fix the formula to one recommended by AT&T Inc. through a free software update within a few weeks for the most recent iPhone models, 3G, 3GS and 4. However, the "wrong" formula goes back as far as the original iPhone, launched in 2007."
2007? This has been an issue since the first iPhone and they're just now finding it?
Except that's not what they're doing. They choice to lie about the issue, cover it up, and continue to sell units they know are defective. IE, fraud.They made a mistake, back to the drawing board.
Except that's not what they're doing. They choice to lie about the issue, cover it up, and continue to sell units they know are defective. IE, fraud.
So don't buy it, lol.
It needs to go further than that, Apple needs to be in court.
Now the problem has "surfaced" Iphone 4 users are carrying on and baying for apple's blood and of course the next step is lets sue them for millions of dollars.
Class action isn't enough.Isn't someone suing them already for some iPhone 4 flaw? A class-action suit?
Except they'd lose billions in company value (stock holders). It still makes more financial sense for them to lie about it. But if criminal charges ever end up being brought against them, that'd be even more devastating than the recall.The longer this mistake takes to be fixed, the more money Apple will need to retain to help early buyers. Worst case, they start spraying an insulated coating on the side, recall all the initial units. Replace them, then refurb the initial units with the coating, and sell those again for a discount. The economic loss in this situation would be fairly "small potatoes."
Class action isn't enough.
They need criminal charges brought against them, as the class action isn't going to do a darn thing to help consumers.
Selling a product you know is flawed and doesn't work as intended... Is fraud. Fraud is crime.Class action suit is worthless in this case...but selling a shitty product isn't a criminal offense.
Selling a product you know is flawed and doesn't work as intended... Is fraud. Fraud is crime.
Selling a product you know is flawed and doesn't work as intended... Is fraud. Fraud is crime.
Well, not sure I agree with that. Intel rebounded fine after their problems, which arguably was worse since it could lead to all sorts of floating point issues (in the grand scheme of things a "dropped call" is annoying but not critical). In general, I think consumers tend to respect firms that admit mistakes, and if anything gain more brand-loyalty over time due to a correction. I kind of figure Toyota will be the same way -- give it a year or two and everyone will suddenly respect them for being willing to admit problems and make-good.Except they'd lose billions in company value (stock holders). It still makes more financial sense for them to lie about it. But if criminal charges ever end up being brought against them, that'd be even more devastating than the recall.
Which is exactly why mandating a way we hold our phones to be asinine.It works if you don't hold it a certain way. Last time I checked there was no internationally mandated wait to hold a cell phone.
Which is exactly why mandating a way we hold our phones to be asinine.
Apple advertises people holding it exactly like that. Here's a screencap from one of their ads, though many abound:And thinking someone should go to jail for fraud because you can't hold your phone the way you to want isn't asinine?