First Official iPhone 4 Teardown

The first official teardown... and some other great links...

http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone-4-Teardown/3130/1

Top notch Buyers Guide... It has all the tricks and details...

http://guides.macrumors.com/iPhone_Upgrade_Guide

All the features...

http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/

Everyone that bought an iPhone 3GS early, will be eligible for the
iPhone 4, for $18 + $199 - you can see for sure by calling *639#

It's going to be a great day tomorrow for all advanced phone users!

Enjoy!

---

› See More: First Official iPhone 4 Teardown

On 6/23/10 2:35 PM, Oxford wrote:
> The first official teardown... and some other great links...
>
> http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone-4-Teardown/3130/1
>
> Top notch Buyers Guide... It has all the tricks and details...
>
> http://guides.macrumors.com/iPhone_Upgrade_Guide
>
> All the features...
>
> http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/
>
> Everyone that bought an iPhone 3GS early, will be eligible for the
> iPhone 4, for $18 + $199 - you can see for sure by calling *639#
>
> It's going to be a great day tomorrow for all advanced phone users!
>
> Enjoy!


Golly gee, quick--- sign up for an iPhone with a two year commitment
that will average over $100 a month with any kind of serious use.

Do the math! At least $2400 to "be cool" and have a bunch of silly-ass
apps that you'll pay even more for on a phone you'll not be able to make
or receive calls numerous times a week. It's a cell PHONE people-- a
tool from God to make and receive calls...

In message <[email protected]> Shaun <[email protected]> was
claimed to have wrote:

>Do the math! At least $2400 to "be cool" and have a bunch of silly-ass
>apps that you'll pay even more for on a phone you'll not be able to make
>or receive calls numerous times a week. It's a cell PHONE people-- a
>tool from God to make and receive calls...

That might be how you use yours, but it's not the case for many of us.

We're using under 500 minutes a month across 5 phones. Currently we're
at two iPhones, two BlackBerry smartphones, and one "feature" (dumb"
phone), despite all being relatively heavy users of our devices.

I'm not sure that I've even put a single voice minute on my Blackberry
this month so far, despite the fact that I probably use it a dozen times
daily.

DevilsPGD wrote:
> In message <[email protected]> Shaun <[email protected]> was
> claimed to have wrote:
>
>> Do the math! At least $2400 to "be cool" and have a bunch of silly-ass
>> apps that you'll pay even more for on a phone you'll not be able to make
>> or receive calls numerous times a week. It's a cell PHONE people-- a
>> tool from God to make and receive calls...
>
> That might be how you use yours, but it's not the case for many of us.
>
> We're using under 500 minutes a month across 5 phones. Currently we're
> at two iPhones, two BlackBerry smartphones, and one "feature" (dumb"
> phone), despite all being relatively heavy users of our devices.
>
> I'm not sure that I've even put a single voice minute on my Blackberry
> this month so far, despite the fact that I probably use it a dozen times
> daily.

Do you use it for web surfing, e-mail, texting, PDA Functions, or all four?

In message <[email protected]> "Richard B.
Gilbert" <[email protected]> was claimed to have wrote:

>DevilsPGD wrote:
>> In message <[email protected]> Shaun <[email protected]> was
>> claimed to have wrote:
>>
>>> Do the math! At least $2400 to "be cool" and have a bunch of silly-ass
>>> apps that you'll pay even more for on a phone you'll not be able to make
>>> or receive calls numerous times a week. It's a cell PHONE people-- a
>>> tool from God to make and receive calls...
>>
>> That might be how you use yours, but it's not the case for many of us.
>>
>> We're using under 500 minutes a month across 5 phones. Currently we're
>> at two iPhones, two BlackBerry smartphones, and one "feature" (dumb"
>> phone), despite all being relatively heavy users of our devices.
>>
>> I'm not sure that I've even put a single voice minute on my Blackberry
>> this month so far, despite the fact that I probably use it a dozen times
>> daily.
>
>Do you use it for web surfing, e-mail, texting, PDA Functions, or all four?

That, and more.

On 6/24/10 12:03 AM, DevilsPGD wrote:
> In message<[email protected]> "Richard B.
> Gilbert"<[email protected]> was claimed to have wrote:
>
>> DevilsPGD wrote:
>>> In message<[email protected]> Shaun<[email protected]> was
>>> claimed to have wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do the math! At least $2400 to "be cool" and have a bunch of silly-ass
>>>> apps that you'll pay even more for on a phone you'll not be able to make
>>>> or receive calls numerous times a week. It's a cell PHONE people-- a
>>>> tool from God to make and receive calls...
>>>
>>> That might be how you use yours, but it's not the case for many of us.
>>>
>>> We're using under 500 minutes a month across 5 phones. Currently we're
>>> at two iPhones, two BlackBerry smartphones, and one "feature" (dumb"
>>> phone), despite all being relatively heavy users of our devices.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure that I've even put a single voice minute on my Blackberry
>>> this month so far, despite the fact that I probably use it a dozen times
>>> daily.
>>
>> Do you use it for web surfing, e-mail, texting, PDA Functions, or all four?
>
> That, and more.

Yeah-- but you'll still have to cough up $2400 to find yourself with a
paperweight in your pocket too many times a week...

Shaun wrote:
> On 6/24/10 12:03 AM, DevilsPGD wrote:
>> In message<[email protected]> "Richard B.
>> Gilbert"<[email protected]> was claimed to have wrote:
>>
>>> DevilsPGD wrote:
>>>> In message<[email protected]> Shaun<[email protected]>
>>>> was
>>>> claimed to have wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do the math! At least $2400 to "be cool" and have a bunch of silly-ass
>>>>> apps that you'll pay even more for on a phone you'll not be able to
>>>>> make
>>>>> or receive calls numerous times a week. It's a cell PHONE people-- a
>>>>> tool from God to make and receive calls...
>>>>
>>>> That might be how you use yours, but it's not the case for many of us.
>>>>
>>>> We're using under 500 minutes a month across 5 phones. Currently we're
>>>> at two iPhones, two BlackBerry smartphones, and one "feature" (dumb"
>>>> phone), despite all being relatively heavy users of our devices.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure that I've even put a single voice minute on my Blackberry
>>>> this month so far, despite the fact that I probably use it a dozen
>>>> times
>>>> daily.
>>>
>>> Do you use it for web surfing, e-mail, texting, PDA Functions, or all
>>> four?
>>
>> That, and more.
>
> Yeah-- but you'll still have to cough up $2400 to find yourself with a
> paperweight in your pocket too many times a week...

I don't see where you get that idea!

I have never been unable to make a call in the twelve or so years that I
have been using cell phones! Of course I live, work, shop, etc. in the
Philadelphia (PA) area; it's densely populated and very well covered by
VZW. YMMV!

On 6/24/10 9:14 AM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Shaun wrote:
>> On 6/24/10 12:03 AM, DevilsPGD wrote:
>>> In message<[email protected]> "Richard B.
>>> Gilbert"<[email protected]> was claimed to have wrote:
>>>
>>>> DevilsPGD wrote:
>>>>> In message<[email protected]> Shaun<[email protected]> was
>>>>> claimed to have wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do the math! At least $2400 to "be cool" and have a bunch of
>>>>>> silly-ass
>>>>>> apps that you'll pay even more for on a phone you'll not be able
>>>>>> to make
>>>>>> or receive calls numerous times a week. It's a cell PHONE people-- a
>>>>>> tool from God to make and receive calls...
>>>>>
>>>>> That might be how you use yours, but it's not the case for many of us.
>>>>>
>>>>> We're using under 500 minutes a month across 5 phones. Currently we're
>>>>> at two iPhones, two BlackBerry smartphones, and one "feature" (dumb"
>>>>> phone), despite all being relatively heavy users of our devices.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure that I've even put a single voice minute on my Blackberry
>>>>> this month so far, despite the fact that I probably use it a dozen
>>>>> times
>>>>> daily.
>>>>
>>>> Do you use it for web surfing, e-mail, texting, PDA Functions, or
>>>> all four?
>>>
>>> That, and more.
>>
>> Yeah-- but you'll still have to cough up $2400 to find yourself with a
>> paperweight in your pocket too many times a week...
>
> I don't see where you get that idea!
>
> I have never been unable to make a call in the twelve or so years that I
> have been using cell phones! Of course I live, work, shop, etc. in the
> Philadelphia (PA) area; it's densely populated and very well covered by
> VZW. YMMV!

In case you missed it, the iPhone is only available on ATT Wireless--
consistently rated on the bottom among the major carriers due to network
overload-caused poor performance.

I'm a Verizon man myself (though through Straight Talk and PagePlus for
the last six months or so) and have never had a drop in the same 12
years of being a customer.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:42:50 -0400, in <[email protected]>,
Shaun <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 6/24/10 9:14 AM, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:

>> I have never been unable to make a call in the twelve or so years that I
>> have been using cell phones! Of course I live, work, shop, etc. in the
>> Philadelphia (PA) area; it's densely populated and very well covered by
>> VZW. YMMV!
>
>In case you missed it, the iPhone is only available on ATT Wireless--
>consistently rated on the bottom among the major carriers due to network
>overload-caused poor performance.

The iPhone is available on other carriers outside the USA, and can be
used on T-Mobile (EDGE) in the USA if unlocked from AT&T.

--
Best regards,
John

If the iPhone and iPad are really so impressive,
then why do iFans keep making excuses for them?

In message <[email protected]> Shaun <[email protected]> was
claimed to have wrote:

>In case you missed it, the iPhone is only available on ATT Wireless--

Mine isn't on AT&T.

>consistently rated on the bottom among the major carriers due to network
>overload-caused poor performance.

This would seem to depend on where you live. In NYC service is
miserable, but in the suburbs of Phoenix and Dallas (the only places
I've used AT&T) the service works fine.

DevilsPGD <[email protected]> writes:
> In message <[email protected]> Shaun <[email protected]> was
> claimed to have wrote:
>
> >In case you missed it, the iPhone is only available on ATT Wireless--
>
> Mine isn't on AT&T.
>
> >consistently rated on the bottom among the major carriers due to network
> >overload-caused poor performance.
>
> This would seem to depend on where you live. In NYC service is
> miserable, but in the suburbs of Phoenix and Dallas (the only places
> I've used AT&T) the service works fine.

Very location dependent. In my previous home, when I first moved
there I was on Sprint. Phone didn't work. I switched to T-Mobile
because it worked better than any other (including Verizon) at that
time. AT&T was useless there for the longest time and my friends with
iPhones couldn't make or get calls at my house.

AT&T finally got their act together around the time the 3G came out.
And I finally switched to an iPhone a few months later.

Where I live now, all phones seem to work just fine.

The point is that ALL cellular services seem to have holes in their
networks in various places. AT&T may not be quite as close to
seamless as Verizon (which seems clearly to be the most comprehensive)
but their coverage is really quite good.

The other AT&T problem is that in some of the most connected
cities, their data network has apparently been overwhelmed by
too much data traffic, but as far as I know, that problem is
quickly getting better, too. It's never affected me noticeably
either in NYC or San Francisco which are the two places it's
been pointed out the most.





--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.

In article <[email protected]>, Shaun <[email protected]>
wrote:

> In case you missed it, the iPhone is only available on ATT Wireless--
> consistently rated on the bottom among the major carriers due to network
> overload-caused poor performance.

Actual mobile network engineers say that most other networks would have
similar or worse problems if they had the iPhone on their network. AT&T
is actually better prepared to handle the iPhone than other networks.

--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

On 6/24/10 10:57 AM, in article [email protected],
"DevilsPGD" <[email protected]> wrote:

> In message <[email protected]> Shaun <[email protected]> was
> claimed to have wrote:
>
>> In case you missed it, the iPhone is only available on ATT Wireless--
>
> Mine isn't on AT&T.
>
>> consistently rated on the bottom among the major carriers due to network
>> overload-caused poor performance.
>
> This would seem to depend on where you live. In NYC service is
> miserable, but in the suburbs of Phoenix and Dallas (the only places
> I've used AT&T) the service works fine.

Same in Houston and Tulsa. The only *real* problem places are NYC and
NavASS's crib, SF. Most of the rest of the nation is just fine, despite the
hatebois' propaganda.

In article <[email protected]>,
Jolly Roger <[email protected]> wrote:

> Actual mobile network engineers say that most other networks would have
> similar or worse problems if they had the iPhone on their network.

which ones?

> AT&T is actually better prepared to handle the iPhone than other networks.

nonsense. verizon has far better coverage and capacity, and while they
would be hit by the load, it would not have been anywhere near as bad.

at&t is still *adding* 3g capacity, while verizon has had it for years.
sprint is adding 4g and verizon is expected to deploy lte in the fall,
something at&t said they're not in any rush to do.

On 6/24/10 1:15 PM, George Kerby wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/24/10 10:57 AM, in article [email protected],
> "DevilsPGD"<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In message<[email protected]> Shaun<[email protected]> was
>> claimed to have wrote:
>>
>>> In case you missed it, the iPhone is only available on ATT Wireless--
>>
>> Mine isn't on AT&T.
>>
>>> consistently rated on the bottom among the major carriers due to network
>>> overload-caused poor performance.
>>
>> This would seem to depend on where you live. In NYC service is
>> miserable, but in the suburbs of Phoenix and Dallas (the only places
>> I've used AT&T) the service works fine.
>
> Same in Houston and Tulsa. The only *real* problem places are NYC and
> NavASS's crib, SF. Most of the rest of the nation is just fine, despite the
> hatebois' propaganda.
>

Objective surveys like the recent one in Consumer Reports confirm that
ATT is the worst carrier in most metro areas across the US.

How other carriers would do under an iPhone network load is irrelevant.
ATT has iPhone. If that trashes their network to the detriment of other
users, that's on them-- now. It's not some hypothetical/theoretical
issue, especially for the $2400 boys.

As for service being good in PHX and DFW, good for those folks. But for
those of us that travel nationally on a regular basis, we need reliable
cellular service across our travel footprint.....