iPhone Firmware Update 2.02 released

Nigel wrote:

> Well it appears to me that many of the issues are US-based. Now that could
> be because AT&T have a crap 3G network (likely),

Very true.

---

› See More: iPhone Firmware Update 2.02 released

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

> Nigel wrote:
>
> > Well it appears to me that many of the issues are US-based. Now that could
> > be because AT&T have a crap 3G network (likely),
>
> Very true.

some more theories -

About 200-300kbit/s seems to be a typical connection speed in the US,
with some people reporting much worse performance (on the fringes of
coverage). However, according to Wired's 3G iPhone performance map, many
users in Europe are getting 1-2Mbit/s quite easily.

Various fingers of blame are being pointed - is it the AT&T (T) network
in the US? Is it the Infineon (IFX) chipset?

Or is this just another manifestation of my favorite bugbear - the
disconnect between mobile network designers and device developers (and
thus by extension the 'real' user experience)? Is it simply the case
that the original usage cases envisaged for HSDPA didn't include the
type of rich, demanding applications (and implied traffic patterns) that
iPhones generate?

Some thoughts:

- First, this could well be a manifestation of the HSDPA "idle mode"
latency I discussed a few weeks ago. For iPhone users used to always-on,
instant-connect WiFi, or even a nailed-up EDGE connection on a matured &
optimized network - the initial "time to connect" could well be notably
worse.
- Second, in many countries, 3G is deployed in a higher frequency band
than 2G (1900MHz vs. 850MHz for AT&T, or 2100MHz vs 900/1800MHz in
Europe). This means it will have shorter range, lesser coverage, and
crucially worse indoor penetration.
- The audience of 3G iPhone users is fairly self-selecting: almost all
actually use the data capabilities. While some of that is attributable
to the phone's usability, it's also the case that it has attracted
existing data-oriented users. It also tends to come bundled with data
plans. This contrasts with most other popular 3G phones, for which only
a small minority regularly use data (or even have a data plan). I'll bet
the average Nokia (NOK) N95 or SonyEricsson K-series user wouldn't
notice a lousy 3G signal, because they only fire up the browser once a
month.
- Various blogs have commented on the new 2.0.2 firmware release,
wondering whether it contains changes to the radio stack. Some have
claimed that they're seeing more bars of signal strength subsequently -
although the cynic in me suspects it's easier to change the
signal-strength indicator software, than the underlying radio.
- AT&T has not previously had the consumer 3G dongle phenomenon take off
the same way it has in many other countries (reflecting different
pricing strategies). So its network engineers may be a little behind the
curve on dealing with massive, sudden ramp-ups of data traffic growth,
often in new and unexpected geographic locations. They're probably faced
with a whole range of optimisation headaches, and may even be needing to
split cells & find new locations.
- Expectations of WiFi-like performance by end users reading about
HSDPA's "headline" speeds may have been unrealistic. Normally, WiFi AP's
only have 1-3 users attached simultaneously, whereas a 3G base station
might have hundreds with the available capacity in a sector shared
amongst them all. Then there's another set of questions about the
backhaul capacity from the cell site, in comparison with WiFi which
usually has a home/office broadband connection to exploit.
- Somewhere there must be some side-by-side comparisons of an iPhone
running next to another 3G handset (Nokia, Moto (MOT), whatever)
connected to the same operator's network. If there was a big performance
delta, that would point the finger of blame clearly at the phone/chipset
rather than the network.
- It could be that the radio chip or antenna has worse performance on
AT&T's 1900MHz band than on most European operators' 2100MHz for some
reason.
- I'd imagine that the density of iPhone users in the US is higher than
in most other countries, and thus more likely to put a strain on AT&T's
network in dense urban areas.

Based on what I've been reading, I'm more inclined to point the finger
at AT&T than at Infineon. Its 3G network has (to date) been geared more
towards corporate PC + datacard users - and I suspect it's realizing
that mass-market consumer usage patterns are very different indeed.

At 20 Aug 2008 08:19:52 -0600 David Moyer wrote:

> > Like making iPod Touch users pay to have product defects fixed? Is that
> > your definition of "the right thing?
>
> Apple has no choice, "It's the LAW".
>
> The logic is something like "If it enhances the product, it has to carry
> a price". Otherwise, if you accounted for the sale of your product on
> your balance sheet and later enhance the functionality, it means that
> your balance sheet was not correct because the product was not finished,
> and therefore you accounted too little. so now, all US companies must
> legally charge for upgrades. you can thank Enron for the mess.
>
> read all about it here.
>
> http://snipurl.com/3i1ru
>
> or
>
> http://michaelmistretta.com/2008/why...ipod-touch-upg
> rade/
>
> "It's the law. Unfortunately, there is a horrible little law called
> Sarbanes-Oxley, that legally doesn't allow you to add features to
> products that you have already been paid for. Apple couldn't add
> features for free. They had to charge something for them. Apple has
> gotten around this for the iPhone and AppleTV, by accounting for their
> payments over the course of 24 months. This means that they can keep
> adding new features to your iPhone or AppleTV for free for up to two
> years. They didn't use this accounting method for the iPod Touch
> however. This means that legally, they can't just add apps to the iPod
> Touch for free."


Because a teenager's tech blog is a definitive guide to accounting law?

Even if that story made sense, Apple could've released the apps as
"optional" freeware. They could've sold them for $1 instead of $20.

It was a money grab (but a fair one, IMO- it was a significant upgrade.)

The Feds haven't sued any PDA manufacturers for adding extra WM6
functionality to some of their WM5 PDAs. My wife's car nav unit received
two major free upgrades, (including traffic display- a new function) since I
bought it, and apparently hasn't been dragged to court. Why would Apple be
different?

David Moyer <[email protected]> wrote in news:48ac2808$0$48217$815e3792
@news.qwest.net:

> DevilsPGD <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >apple always does the right thing, so no need to complain until
apple
>> >fixes the issue. it seems to be a very limited set of people having
>> >issues, 50,000 or less which while not great, still means 3,950,000
3G
>> >owners are quite happy with the device.
>>
>> Always does the right thing?
>>
>> Like making iPod Touch users pay to have product defects fixed? Is
that
>> your definition of "the right thing?
>
> Apple has no choice, "It's the LAW".
>
> The logic is something like "If it enhances the product, it has to
carry
> a price". Otherwise, if you accounted for the sale of your product on
> your balance sheet and later enhance the functionality, it means that
> your balance sheet was not correct because the product was not
finished,
> and therefore you accounted too little. so now, all US companies must
> legally charge for upgrades. you can thank Enron for the mess.
>
> read all about it here.
>
> http://snipurl.com/3i1ru
>
> or
>
> http://michaelmistretta.com/2008/why...he-ipod-touch-
upg
> rade/
>
> "It's the law. Unfortunately, there is a horrible little law called
> Sarbanes-Oxley, that legally doesn't allow you to add features to
> products that you have already been paid for. Apple couldn't add
> features for free. They had to charge something for them. Apple has
> gotten around this for the iPhone and AppleTV, by accounting for their
> payments over the course of 24 months. This means that they can keep
> adding new features to your iPhone or AppleTV for free for up to two
> years. They didn't use this accounting method for the iPod Touch
> however. This means that legally, they can't just add apps to the iPod
> Touch for free."
>

There's another Federal law that covers many of these issues I'm sure
Apple would rather you not know about. It's called the Magnusson-Moss
Warranty Protection Act (15USC50 section 2304):
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht..._15_10_50.html
It's in plain English, for those few Americans who can still read this
language.

Here's the FTC manual:
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/.../warranty.shtm

Of PARTICULAR interest is section 2304 (a)(4) which says quite plainly:

"(4) if the product (or a component part thereof) contains a defect or
malfunction after a reasonable number of attempts by the warrantor to
remedy defects or malfunctions in such product, such warrantor must
permit the consumer to elect either a refund for, or replacement without
charge of, such product or part (as the case may be). The Commission may
by rule specify for purposes of this paragraph, what constitutes a
reasonable number of attempts to remedy particular kinds of defects or
malfunctions under different circumstances. If the warrantor replaces a
component part of a consumer product, such replacement shall include
installing the part in the product without charge."

Kindly take note at the end of line 3 where it says, quite plainly,
"such warrantor must permit the consumer to elect either a refund for,
or replacement without charge of, such product or part (as the case may
be)." The Warrantor, Apple, Inc., must permit the CONSUMER....NOT
APPLE....NOT AT&T WIRELESS....THE CONSUMER to elect whether to get ALL,
not part, not a coupon, not some upgrade bull****, HIS MONEY
BACK....or....a REPLACEMENT unit, not a free carrying case, not a coupon
for a discount on a fixed one....A REPLACEMENT....WITHOUT COSTING HIM A
DIME....not a boostup tradein, not another Apple profit center.

Hundreds, if not thousands, of court cases have determined the warrantor
has THREE attempts and/or THIRTY days, which ever comes FIRST, to make
it right TO THE CONSUMER, not to the guy at the ATT Store, not to the
manager of the Apple Store, not even to Steve Jobs, hissef! They must
make the CONSUMER happy with its performance.

The FTC manual is a real education of your rights under this law. I
successfully returned, to Yamaha Motors' dismay, a 1997 Yamaha
Waverunner GP1200, the most powerful jetski Yam built over its many
defects and poor engineering that were cracking hulls, causing Yamaha to
do a complete replacement of the engine and gas tank mounts at Serial
Number 5000, engine troubles that never got fixed right, parts falling
off. I decided, AS THE CONSUMER in the above Federal Law, to return it
to my ****ty dealer for a FULL REFUND after they dicked around all
summer from February to September. They tried to refuse, but I was
holding all the cards....no down payment, no payment until
September....THEY had possession of it under my valid, but bogus, 4-year
Y.E.S. Yamaha extended warranty I paid big money for.

You can't use it on sellular SERVICE, but you certainly CAN use it on
DEFECTIVE HARDWARE like iPhones.....(c; If they refuse, and you used a
credit card, put it in "dispute" and ask your credit card company for a
"chargeback", which isn't rocket science but requires you to jump
through many hoops to accomplish. Those are different laws:
Go here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/index.html
enter:
credit card
into the search box for a list of the laws scattered across the books...

"We can't", isn't an option, "We won't", is against the law. We can and
We must is what it says, to their dismay.

David Moyer <[email protected]> wrote in news:48ac2f7f$0$48228$815e3792
@news.qwest.net:

> type of rich, demanding applications (and implied traffic patterns) that
> iPhones generate?
>

List some of them for us....

NO file sharing....
NO online gaming....
NO user streaming because the codecs aren't supported....Realmedia, DivX,
Windows media, etc.
NO servers, except to sell you something from ATT or Apple....
NO massive downloading because there's no media to store it on.....

Which "demanding applications" are you talking about, flashlights?? I-Am-
Rich??

At 20 Aug 2008 08:51:43 -0600 David Moyer wrote:

> some more theories -
>
> About 200-300kbit/s seems to be a typical connection speed in the US,
> with some people reporting much worse performance (on the fringes of
> coverage). However, according to Wired's 3G iPhone performance map, many
> users in Europe are getting 1-2Mbit/s quite easily.


It's not as roy in Europe as you claim. Speeds are higher perhaps, but
speed isn't the complaint- it's dropped connections and lousy 3G reception
causing the phone to fallback to 2G.

> Various fingers of blame are being pointed - is it the AT&T (T) network
> in the US? Is it the Infineon (IFX) chipset?

T-Mobile Netherlands places the blame squarely on the phone:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10015661-37.html


> Or is this just another manifestation of my favorite bugbear - the
> disconnect between mobile network designers and device developers (and
> thus by extension the 'real' user experience)? Is it simply the case
> that the original usage cases envisaged for HSDPA didn't include the
> type of rich, demanding applications (and implied traffic patterns) that
> iPhones generate?


Bullplop- 3G (pre-iPhone), at least here in the states was primarily used
by data cards in laptops. Are you suggesting the iPhone runs "richer, more
demanding applications" or more traffic than COMPUTERS do?


> - The audience of 3G iPhone users is fairly self-selecting: almost all
> actually use the data capabilities.

As are data card users, who are a self-selected group that 100% of use data
since the cards don't do voice1

>While some of that is attributable
> to the phone's usability, it's also the case that it has attracted
> existing data-oriented users. It also tends to come bundled with data
> plans. This contrasts with most other popular 3G phones, for which only
> a small minority regularly use data (or even have a data plan). I'll bet
> the average Nokia (NOK) N95 or SonyEricsson K-series user wouldn't
> notice a lousy 3G signal, because they only fire up the browser once a
> month.


Oh please, again- data cad users use a lot of data. And no one carries a
data plan on the phone to fire up a browsr once a month.

Cut the nonsense- this is very simple: the networks adhere to a standard
that connected equipment has to comply with, just like a home phone works
in any residential jack you plug it into. Some iPhone users across the
globe are having connectivity issues on various networks where other device
and data card users aren't, period. This is 100% on Apple. Period. Now
is it a big deal? IMO, no- Apple will fix it one way or another and make
it right, fairly quickly by whatever means necessary- to much is at stake
this early in their mobile business to leave a defect, even one only
affecting a few % of users, hanging.


> - AT&T has not previously had the consumer 3G dongle phenomenon take off
> the same way it has in many other countries (reflecting different
> pricing strategies). So its network engineers may be a little behind the
> curve on dealing with massive, sudden ramp-ups of data traffic growth,
> often in new and unexpected geographic locations. They're probably faced
> with a whole range of optimisation headaches, and may even be needing to
> split cells & find new locations.

Again, connectivity issues have been reported in Europe as well- this isn't
AT&T's fault, (except for the slow speeds!)

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

> List some of them for us....
>
> NO file sharing....

you can share any file via email

> NO online gaming....

yes, there are online games

> NO user streaming because the codecs aren't supported....Realmedia, DivX,
> Windows media, etc.

it streams radio, video just fine.

> NO servers, except to sell you something from ATT or Apple....

???

> NO massive downloading because there's no media to store it on.....

what? the iphone has massive amounts of storage, collectively the most
of any cell model.

> Which "demanding applications" are you talking about, flashlights?? I-Am-
> Rich??

again, collectively, the iphone is far and away the most data demanding
device on cell networks today, it's crushing the feeble cell data
network that's all.

In article <[email protected]>,
Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:

> Because a teenager's tech blog is a definitive guide to accounting law?

that's just one of many articles on the subject, google around.

> Even if that story made sense, Apple could've released the apps as
> "optional" freeware. They could've sold them for $1 instead of $20.

i'm sure the law has something to do with that. the new apps were worth
$20 so apple had to charge that amount.

> It was a money grab (but a fair one, IMO- it was a significant upgrade.)

no, it was in order to not break the law.

> The Feds haven't sued any PDA manufacturers for adding extra WM6
> functionality to some of their WM5 PDAs. My wife's car nav unit received
> two major free upgrades, (including traffic display- a new function) since I
> bought it, and apparently hasn't been dragged to court. Why would Apple be
> different?

apple is different since they follow the rules, they've always been anal
about that kind of thing. fear of lawsuits help

David Moyer <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> List some of them for us....
>>
>> NO file sharing....
>
> you can share any file via email
>
>> NO online gaming....
>
> yes, there are online games
>
>> NO user streaming because the codecs aren't supported....Realmedia,
>> DivX, Windows media, etc.
>
> it streams radio, video just fine.
>
>> NO servers, except to sell you something from ATT or Apple....
>
> ???
>
>> NO massive downloading because there's no media to store it on.....
>
> what? the iphone has massive amounts of storage, collectively the most
> of any cell model.
>
>> Which "demanding applications" are you talking about, flashlights??
>> I-Am- Rich??
>
> again, collectively, the iphone is far and away the most data
> demanding device on cell networks today, it's crushing the feeble cell
> data network that's all.
>

Come on, David. You're not that naive. File Sharing is not emailing me
a photo. File sharing is Gigabytes of movies/music/stuff and YOU KNOW
IT.

Online games are eating cable internet systems. Iphone's little toy
games are NOT online gaming...and YOU KNOW IT.

How does it stream radio and video it doesn't support over a system that
typically provides 200-300Kbps?? Oh, you're NOT gonna tell me about
iTunes, are you?

I noticed you conveniently forgot to LIST THE DEMANDING APPLICATIONS and
went into a company sales promotion. It is NOT the most data demanding
device, and you are VERY aware of its lack of anything that uses
BANDWIDTH, as it was designed to do. The most bandwidth it uses is to
load the spam GIFs off a webpage.

Did you type in that list of apps, yet?

At 20 Aug 2008 12:09:58 -0600 David Moyer wrote:

> > Again, connectivity issues have been reported in Europe as well- this
> > isn't AT&T's fault, (except for the slow speeds!)
>
> go complain here -------
>
> http://seekingalpha.com/article/9179...3g-s-performan
> ce-in-the-iphone


Why is it you never post the source of your "info" until someone shoots
holes through it?

In message <[email protected]> David Moyer
<[email protected]> wrote:

>DevilsPGD <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >apple always does the right thing, so no need to complain until apple
>> >fixes the issue. it seems to be a very limited set of people having
>> >issues, 50,000 or less which while not great, still means 3,950,000 3G
>> >owners are quite happy with the device.
>>
>> Always does the right thing?
>>
>> Like making iPod Touch users pay to have product defects fixed? Is that
>> your definition of "the right thing?
>
>Apple has no choice, "It's the LAW".

Not at all.

They have released several security fixes in the past, but now that a
paid upgrade is available, the free defect fixes have dried up.

>The logic is something like "If it enhances the product, it has to carry
>a price". Otherwise, if you accounted for the sale of your product on
>your balance sheet and later enhance the functionality, it means that
>your balance sheet was not correct because the product was not finished,
>and therefore you accounted too little. so now, all US companies must
>legally charge for upgrades. you can thank Enron for the mess.
>
>read all about it here.
>
>http://snipurl.com/3i1ru
>
>or
>
>http://michaelmistretta.com/2008/why...ipod-touch-upg
>rade/
>
>"It's the law. Unfortunately, there is a horrible little law called
>Sarbanes-Oxley, that legally doesn't allow you to add features to
>products that you have already been paid for. Apple couldn't add
>features for free. They had to charge something for them. Apple has
>gotten around this for the iPhone and AppleTV, by accounting for their
>payments over the course of 24 months. This means that they can keep
>adding new features to your iPhone or AppleTV for free for up to two
>years. They didn't use this accounting method for the iPod Touch
>however. This means that legally, they can't just add apps to the iPod
>Touch for free."

What they could do is to charge $1.99 for the upgrade. Another option
would be $20, with a $20 iTunes credit or $20 AppStore-only credit.

In message <200820081015340982%[email protected]> nospam
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, DevilsPGD
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Like making iPod Touch users pay to have product defects fixed? Is that
>> your definition of "the right thing?
>
>what defect was that?

Each of the security fixes in 2.0.0 is unavailable to 1.x.x users
without paying for an upgrade.

Yeah,
good question. What exactly is the error rate? Never mind, I wouldnt know
what the answer means anyway.

So, should I keep my 1st Generation iPhone?


"nospam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:200820081015320865%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Larry
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> NightStalker <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> > My recommendation - wait for the next update and skip 2.0.2
>> >
>>
>> One more time....SOFTWARE is NOT going to fix defective HARDWARE, not
>> now,
>> not ever....
>
> and you know this how? did you take apart one and determine the cause
> and a fix? didn't think so.
>
> there is nothing conclusive that says whether it's hardware, software
> or a combination thereof. a financial analyst claimed it's hardware,
> but this same guy claimed last year's iphone had a defective screen,
> something which turned out to be false. not a whole lot of credibility
> there.
>
>> The radio problem in iPhone is an ANALOG problem....****ty antennas
>> feeding
>> multipath to poorly designed and implemented receivers.....and, of
>> course,
>> PROPAGATION PHYSICS eating high speed data with timing errors, every
>> time.
>
> exactly what is the error rate? did you buy one and put it on a test
> bench? let's see some numbers. oh wait, you don't have any.

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

DevilsPGD <[email protected]> wrote:

> >> Like making iPod Touch users pay to have product defects fixed? Is that
> >> your definition of "the right thing?
> >
> >Apple has no choice, "It's the LAW".
>
> Not at all.
>
> They have released several security fixes in the past, but now that a
> paid upgrade is available, the free defect fixes have dried up.

it only applies to additional features, or "value" compared to the
original shipped item, not bug fixes or maintenance releases.

> >The logic is something like "If it enhances the product, it has to carry
> >a price". Otherwise, if you accounted for the sale of your product on
> >your balance sheet and later enhance the functionality, it means that
> >your balance sheet was not correct because the product was not finished,
> >and therefore you accounted too little. so now, all US companies must
> >legally charge for upgrades. you can thank Enron for the mess.
> >
> >read all about it here.
> >
> >http://snipurl.com/3i1ru
> >
> >or
> >
> >http://michaelmistretta.com/2008/why...ipod-touch-upg
> >rade/
> >
> >"It's the law. Unfortunately, there is a horrible little law called
> >Sarbanes-Oxley, that legally doesn't allow you to add features to
> >products that you have already been paid for. Apple couldn't add
> >features for free. They had to charge something for them. Apple has
> >gotten around this for the iPhone and AppleTV, by accounting for their
> >payments over the course of 24 months. This means that they can keep
> >adding new features to your iPhone or AppleTV for free for up to two
> >years. They didn't use this accounting method for the iPod Touch
> >however. This means that legally, they can't just add apps to the iPod
> >Touch for free."
>
> What they could do is to charge $1.99 for the upgrade. Another option
> would be $20, with a $20 iTunes credit or $20 AppStore-only credit.

no, they would run afoul of the law by not charging an appropriate
amount. and giving a "kickback" would be seen as cooking the books so
that's no good either.

the law obviously needs to be changed, hopefully soon so consumers
aren't confused.

In article <[email protected]>,
Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:

> > go complain here -------
> >
> > http://seekingalpha.com/article/9179...3g-s-performan
> > ce-in-the-iphone
>
>
> Why is it you never post the source of your "info" until someone shoots
> holes through it?

nobody has shot holes through it, thought you could figure it on your
own.