Consumer Reports: iPhone 4 - Not recommended

[email protected] (David Kaye) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I was going to do the same with Citadel Broadcasting, the former ABC
> Radio, because it had sunk to 1 cent a share when it was de-listed. I
> knew that the assets of the company were easily worth about $10 a
> share, even with the heavy debt load. And those who bought at 1 cent
> saw their fortunes grow at least 5,000% in a few weeks' time. I
> didn't buy it because I knew they would eventually reorganize and kill
> the stock, which they did. So, lots of poor suckers were left holding
> worthless Citadel stock. The problem was in knowing exactly when
> Citadel was going to bite it. The bankruptcy court wasn't clear on it
> or I would have joined in and bought some cheap stock.
>

Citadel Broadcasting own WTMA-AM 1250 Khz, a 5KW day, 1KW night
conservative gripe radio station in Charleston, SC. I know some of the
people who work for them and have, for many months now, told them not to
wait a day to cash their paychecks.

It's a queer company that can show a horrible loss while raking in millions
in ad revenues anyone can tell are rolling in because when their local
talking heads are on the air, there's very little actual programming at all
in the constant drone of a wide variety of continuous spam that would make
the old engineers at the FCC who forced them all to provide programming
many years ago, to turn over in their graves if they could hear what's on
AM radio in America today.

I don't know how they can hide the profits, but someone is cookin' the
books at an amazing rate to make Citadel look broke.

--
iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

Larry

---

› See More: Consumer Reports: iPhone 4 - Not recommended

[email protected] (David Kaye) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I never regret selling at a profit, even if the profit is slim. As
> long as I make more than the cost of the trade in and trade out then I
> feel that I've accomplished something. Greed is what kills most stock
> speculators. Also, the idea that something is a once in a lifetime
> deal. There are once in a lifetime deals every day. If I miss one
> there'll be another along in a few days or a few week. I can wait.
>

I'm usually putting, for me, substantial capital at risk on companies with
less-than-stellar results like you trade. Daytrading is much more fun, now
that we have computers without the little bastards sucking away our profits
with bogus "broker fees" noone can explain like the fees and taxes on a
cellular phone bill.

If I'm risking the big bucks, I don't sleep until the sales are closed.
Some times I hold over a weekend, but end up a nervous wreck by the opening
bell on Monday morning.....(c;]



--
iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

Larry

[email protected] (David Kaye) wrote in news:i1h332$smt$3
@news.eternal-september.org:

> Only thing is, it's not designed for ducts and the adhesive dries out
> in a matter of weeks and comes loose.
>

I know. Try using clear mailing tape! It will stick to a cold duct for
years....and is really cheap.

Try to peel the clear mailing tape off a cardboard shipping box that's been
sitting in your hot/cold storage since the kids were born. It's still
stuck to that paper box like it was made of superglue!



--
iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

Larry

Ted Nelson <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > They have 85 year old engineers still designing phones? No wonder
>> > the Droid X has been reviewed so poorly.
>> >
>>
>> Holding your iPhone 4 in your left hand you know exactly what I'm
>> talking about......
>
> mine works fine no matter how I hold it, so it seems to be upset
> android users that are having the problem
>

Do the xenon strobe lights from the ATTWS tower interrupt your sleep, Ted?

--
iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

Larry

On 7/13/2010 12:32 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 08:41:11 -0700, John Slade<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>> however, everyone is suddenly an rf engineer and thinks they have all
>>> the answers, even when apple themselves haven't completely figured it
>>> out.
>>
>> There is nothing to figure out. The antenna is in a bad
>> place.
>
> Ummm... I are an RF Engineer (and I'm enjoying all the speculation). I
> also design and model antennas in my spare time:
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/antennas/>
>
> It's not the location of the antenna. The same antenna design located
> anywhere on the phone will cause the same problem. I don't think
> anyone has tried it but I suspect that the BlueGoof and Wi-Fi
> performance might also suffer when the other antenna is touched.
>
> I posted my guesses previously (high impedance antenna with
> excessively high Q) and am waiting for a chance to rip into the guts
> of an iPhone 4 to see how the antenna is really designed. The inside
> photos that I've seen don't show enough.
>
> Drivel: I wonder if the black silicon rubber prophylactic that Apple
> wraps around the phone is doped with carbon black for static
> reduction. That should make a nice RF attenuator and/or slightly
> conductive "short".
>
> 10 Things Apple Can Do to Fix iPhone 4 Antenna Woes
> <http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/10-Things-Apples-Can-Do-to-Fix-iPhone-4-Antenna-Woes-492275/>
>

Well the hardest part is over because they finally
admitted the problem.

> AppleCare: The iPhone 4 Update Won't Solve the Antenna Problem
> <http://gizmodo.com/5580587/applecare-the-iphone-4-update-wont-solve-the-antenna-problem>
>
>

It seems you know more about antennas than me and Apple
combined. Maybe you should apply for one of those antenna
engineering jobs Apple has open now.

John

On 7/13/2010 12:32 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 08:41:11 -0700, John Slade<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>> however, everyone is suddenly an rf engineer and thinks they have all
>>> the answers, even when apple themselves haven't completely figured it
>>> out.
>>
>> There is nothing to figure out. The antenna is in a bad
>> place.
>
> Ummm... I are an RF Engineer (and I'm enjoying all the speculation). I
> also design and model antennas in my spare time:
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/antennas/>
>
> It's not the location of the antenna. The same antenna design located
> anywhere on the phone will cause the same problem. I don't think
> anyone has tried it but I suspect that the BlueGoof and Wi-Fi
> performance might also suffer when the other antenna is touched.
>
> I posted my guesses previously (high impedance antenna with
> excessively high Q) and am waiting for a chance to rip into the guts
> of an iPhone 4 to see how the antenna is really designed. The inside
> photos that I've seen don't show enough.
>
> Drivel: I wonder if the black silicon rubber prophylactic that Apple
> wraps around the phone is doped with carbon black for static
> reduction. That should make a nice RF attenuator and/or slightly
> conductive "short".
>
> 10 Things Apple Can Do to Fix iPhone 4 Antenna Woes
> <http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/10-Things-Apples-Can-Do-to-Fix-iPhone-4-Antenna-Woes-492275/>
>

Well the hardest part is over because they finally
admitted the problem.

> AppleCare: The iPhone 4 Update Won't Solve the Antenna Problem
> <http://gizmodo.com/5580587/applecare-the-iphone-4-update-wont-solve-the-antenna-problem>
>
>

It seems you know more about antennas than me and Apple
combined. Maybe you should apply for one of those antenna
engineering jobs Apple has open now.

John

In article <[email protected]>, Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Only thing is, it's not designed for ducts and the adhesive dries out
>> in a matter of weeks and comes loose.
>>
>
>I know. Try using clear mailing tape! It will stick to a cold duct for
>years....and is really cheap.

Cold duct? Probably. Duct work used for heating and cooling? Nope!

And it won't pass muster with a code inspector either. It's
flammable.

Seriously, use suitably rated metalic tape for sealing ducts
and do the job properly.

--
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". |
| [email protected] Gary Player. |
| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote:

> > you can fix most any hardware problem through software don't forget.
>
> Not so. The laws of physics (including antenna efficiency) can't be
> circumvented with software.

yes, but you can direct more power to the appropriate antenna if an
incorrect touch is detected, you can delay signal attenuation, you can
patch software on the towers, and about 100 other methods. software can
fix most hardware issues is what i'm saying.

On 7/13/2010 9:46 PM, Ted Nelson wrote:
> "John Richards"<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> you can fix most any hardware problem through software don't forget.
>>
>> Not so. The laws of physics (including antenna efficiency) can't be
>> circumvented with software.
>
> yes, but you can direct more power to the appropriate antenna if an
> incorrect touch is detected, you can delay signal attenuation, you can
> patch software on the towers, and about 100 other methods. software can
> fix most hardware issues is what i'm saying.


Software can patch or workaround, not fix poor design.

AES <[email protected]> wrote:

> > you can fix most any hardware problem through software don't forget.
>
> Not if it requires violating the laws of physics!

but nobody is suggesting breaking any laws, it's just solving the
problem in the best way possible.

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> While there are some hardware problems that can be worked-around or at
> least alleviated in software, there are also some that cannot, and this
> looks to me to be more likely in the latter category, with only fig leaf
> fixes (e.g., no signal strength meter) possible.

software will fix a good 70% of the problem, but yes, the rest might
need a case to fully solve it.

> I think the interesting question is whether or not Apple will try to
> slipstream a change to the iPhone 4 hardware, or tough out this design
> for a year until iPhone 5.
>
> The problem of toughing it out is that the problem will continue to grow
> should it ultimately lose in court or in the court of public opinion.

considering the problem affects very few people. (around 1,400 users)
it's best that apple fixes it through software, then give a $50 credit
to all iPhone 4 users to any Apple Store, (or Online) to end the
remaining complaints.

> The problem with a slipstream change is that it would throw fuel on the
> fire of the criticism and lawsuits unless Apple is prepared to offer
> free hardware swaps, which would be a huge hit to the bottom line.

there wouldn't be a need to give out new hardware, the problem isn't
that widespread.

> I personally think Apple will probably continue to stonewall and push
> fig leaf "solutions", risking its brand, because that's the Steve Jobs
> Way. How successful that will be only time will tell.

well, we need to keep in mind the problem isn't that serious. anyone
with a case won't have that problem. people that live in strong at&t
coverage areas won't have a problem... software will fix much of it, so
we are talking about 1-2% of iPhone 4 users.

the 3G had much more serious antenna problems after release, but people
have forgotten that since Apple fixed the problem in less than 6 weeks,
so this is no different.

John Slade <[email protected]> wrote:

> Some people are already talking "recall" but Apple will
> probably never do this given their fear of losing face even when
> they're wrong.

why would there need to be a recall? there is no safety issue, it still
has the best reception of any smartphone, so it's primarily a software
glitch.

think, slade, think!

On 13/07/10 7:44 PM, Todd Allcock wrote:
> "Ted Nelson"<[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "John Richards"<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> you can fix most any hardware problem through software don't forget.
>>>
>>> Not so. The laws of physics (including antenna efficiency) can't be
>>> circumvented with software.
>>
>> yes, but you can direct more power to the appropriate antenna if an
>> incorrect touch is detected...
>
> Leave it to Oxford, just like Apple, to blame the user. "Incorrect
> touch..."
>
> Priceless!

You mean there are sensors in the antenna that will detect when they are
being incorrectly touched.

On 2010-07-13, Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:54:04 -0700, nospam <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>, John Slade
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Yea it's clear from Youtube videos and tests like the one
>>> from CR that the iPhone 4 has a hardware problem when it comes
>>> to the antenna.
>>
>>touch any phone's antenna, watch what happens.
>
> Did you actually try it? I did with several phones that have
> projecting antennas. LG VX8000, VX8100, and VX8300 on Verizon
> (900MHz). Also, Motorola RAZR V3m. I can wrap my hand around the
> antenna and get maybe a -4dB drop (about 1 bar). A 1900Mhz PCS phone
> will probably have a larger drop.
>
> Might as well try it right now.... Going into field test mode, and
> making a call. Rx power = -75dBm. Wrap my hand around the antenna,
> and it drops to -78dBm (average). Not much but enough to drop a call
> if I'm in a marginal area. Now, compare that to the iPhone 4 drop of
> about 30dB.

I have an old, cheap LG VX3400 on Verizon. In my living room
cupping the antenna sticking out the top drops it from -94 dBm
to -110 dBm, though the call still stays connected and is still
decent quality.

I wish I knew how to get that display with my GSM/UMTS Nokia 6700.
I can get that one to drop an AT&T GSM call in my living room if
I put my hand around the top third of the (candybar) phone.

Dennis Ferguson

Ted Nelson <[email protected]> wrote in news:4c3d110e$0$1325$815e3792
@news.qwest.net:

> considering the problem affects very few people. (around 1,400 users)
>

Denial is a terribly ugly thing to watch, isn't it?

--
iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

Larry