LG VX6100 switches to "Manner Mode" in my pocket(!!)

Mij Adyaw coughed up:
> Interesting. I have been posting on usenet since 1990 and did not
> know about the top posting.


1. how on earth is that possible?

2. does this current top post mean that you don't care to follow my request?




> The RF attenuation is primarily caused by
> the water in the body.
> Regards,
>
> -mij
>
> "Thomas G. Marshall"
> <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:y4Dbe.6794$WX.1601@trndny01...
>> Mij Adyaw coughed up:
>>> Physical proximity of the phone antenna to your body causes the
>>> phone to loose signal. The body is a very good attenuator of RF
>>> signals. If you do not believe this, in a low signal area, note the
>>> reading on the phone's signal meter and then hold your hand against
>>> the antenna. You will notice that the signal meter will drop a bar
>>> or two. When the phone is on your belt it is not in direct contact
>>> with your body, the signal is not attenuated as much a if the phone
>>> is in your pants pocket.
>>
>> Please STOP top posting after others have bottom posted!!! It makes
>> a mess of the messages and is VERY RUDE!!!
>>
>> Regarding your reply: Is the attenuation directly related to the
>> water in the body? Curious.
>>
>> In any case, I've not missed calls before with [moto] cell phones in
>> my pocket---at least no one, particularly my wife, have complained
>> about not getting to me. But with this LG, I *do* miss the call
>> when it's vibrating. Perhaps the ring volume is alterable as well by
>> the side buttons with the clamshell closed, which could definitely
>> cause missed calls, but I'll have to experiment with that.
>>
>> And the point is moot: I think a cell phone stuck on the belt looks
>> silly---I /want/ the thing in my pocket.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Not Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>> "Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:zGxbe.90334$A31.75383@fed1read03...
>>>>> Don't put the phone in your pants pocket!!! The phones were not
>>>>> designed to be carried in your pants pocket. It reduces the RF
>>>>> signal and you will miss incoming calls. Buy a holster for the
>>>>> phone and carry it on your belt. Problem solved very easily.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just how great is the RF attenuation from resting in my pocket vs.
>>>> that on the side of the belt? Same applies to the phone in my
>>>> wife's purse or in my
>>>> brief case covered by car keys and whatever other 'stuff' might be
>>>> in there
>>>> as well?
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Well, ain't this place a geographical oddity!
>> Two weeks from everywhere!"



--
"So I just, uh... I just cut them up like regular chickens?"
"Sure, just cut them up like regular chickens."

---

› See More: LG VX6100 switches to "Manner Mode" in my pocket(!!)

Dave M. coughed up:
> "Thomas G. Marshall" spewed
>>
>> Please don't top post after others have bottom posted. You're
>> making a HUGE mess!
>>
>> The trial period is of no use---this is something I discovered after
>> the fact.
>>
>> Oh well. At least I know a couple of things.
>>
>> 1. I am only trusting Motorola from now on. They have issues too,
>> but I've never had one like this.
>>
>> 2. I know now to test the side buttons on flip phones to see if what
>> it is they do when the clamshell is closed. I never in a million
>> years would have guessed that such sensitive buttons on the side of
>> a phone would be allowed to switch the phone to manner mode /with
>> the clamshell closed/. It's just common sense to not do this---sense
>> LG clearly didn't have. So it never occurred to me to check
>> something like this.
>
> If in 15 days of use you never experienced this "big problem" even
> once, I guess it kind of shows who were dealing with. Either it
> doesn't happen that often, or you're lacking common sense.

I guess we know who we're dealing with. You're lacking the common sense.

The first 15 days is hardly a great sampling of the usage of a phone. Many
things change that are hard to calculate. There are times where weeks will
go by without me noticing this. And then there will be weeks where it
happens twice a day.

This did not happen during the trial period. It happens all the time now.


> I'm sure
> the buttons do indeed get pressed often when the phone is in your
> pocket, so your problem is obvious... you're lacking common sense. Just
> my opinion...

Unprovoked ad-hominem attacks?

You're clearly an asshole. Just my opinion....

<PLONK>


> Btw, let me give you another clue which most observant users would
> have surely found out by now; if you lock your keys

You /should not have to lock a flip phone/ !!!!!!! My other flip phones
/never/ did this. This is a bad design, period. And I'm far from the only
one complaining about this.


....[rip]...


--
"So I just, uh... I just cut them up like regular chickens?"
"Sure, just cut them up like regular chickens."

Drumstick coughed up:
> In article <vXtbe.3302$u56.1608@trndny09>,
> [email protected] says...
>> Roger Binns coughed up:
>>> "Thomas G. Marshall"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote in
>>> message news:HJ7be.1675$oD6.97@trndny07...
>>>> Is there any software update available at all that will give me an
>>>> option to fully disable the side buttons when the clamshell is
>>>> closed??????
>>>
>>> Nope. This "feature" has been present in LG phones since at least
>>> the VX4400. I always tell people to call up LG and ask for a fix.
>>> You won't get
>>> one, but at least they will have people, time and money taken up
>>> with the issue and may actually get a clue one day.
>>>
>>> That said, I have only had it happen to me once (I always keep my
>>> phone in my pocket). Other people with LG phones seem to have it
>>> *A LOT*.
>>>
>>> Roger
>>
>> I've already emailed both LG and Verizon.
>>
>> LG responded quickly with "there is no way we can provide a software
>> fix for this, since it is up to verizon to do so."
>>
>> Verizon responded with useless bull**** about how to press the keys
>> to
>
> I've had the VX6000 for about a year and a half. I always carry it in
> my pocket. But, I have the leather case. I started carrying it on the
> belt but I like the pocket better because the belt clip would not hold
> the phone securely and so it was coming open and looked stupid! Also,
> I can better feel the vibrate in my pocket.
>
> Short answer, the leather case protects the phone...mine looks almost
> like new...and keeps the dumb button presses from happening. Works
> fine.
>
> BTW, I'm in a rural area away from towers and still get great signal
> inside and outside. And this under my metal shingled roof (house built
> 1920). Pager (Motorola) doesn't work in the house but the cell does.
>
> I don't see a button problem here if using the leather case.
>
> I hope that helps.


I hate the thickness of the phone with the case on it, but yes, thank you,
your information is helpful.


--
"So I just, uh... I just cut them up like regular chickens?"
"Sure, just cut them up like regular chickens."

The Ghost of General Lee coughed up:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 04:30:32 GMT, SL <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Not only are the side buttons a stupid and redundant feature for the
>> switching of modes function, since you can do it with the star key
>> inside, but whats even worse is you can't answer the phone while it
>> is closed. You either have to flip it open or push a key inside. Not
>> great when your driving or have the phone in a holster with ear
>> buds.( I know, you can set it to auto answer.) The phone is not for
>> serious users who just need a good phone. I switched back to my
>> kyocera 2325. No frills but a workhorse. Good software interface for
>> backing up numbers and speed dials too.
>
> I'm very familiar with the 2325. My mother has one, and I have a
> 3035. Same basic feature set. I'd have to argue the "no frills"
> comment. It has some frills, just *useful* ones. The scheduler is
> great. I just bought a new battery for my 3035, as I intend to use it
> until there's absolutely no life left in it. Even then, I have
> extended warranty coverage, so I may be with a 3035 for a few more
> years. After finally getting all the bugs worked out (well, most of
> them), it has been a wonderful phone. I will give up cell service
> completely before I use one of those damned flip phones.

I would have preferred to have kept my beat up solid as a rock StarTac. It
wasn't tri-mode tho.

The guys at verizon said that they are always getting requests for the
tri-mode startacs. Funny.


--
"So I just, uh... I just cut them up like regular chickens?"
"Sure, just cut them up like regular chickens."

Slope coughed up:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 22:19:15 GMT, "Thomas G. Marshall"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Mij Adyaw coughed up:
>>> It is not just the antenna poking you problem. The antenna is so
>>> close to your body that it significantly attenuates the RF
>>> performance of the phone. Cell phone signals are also vertically
>>> polarized and therefore the phone should be kept upright for optimal
>>> performance. This is a very well known fact in RF engineering. Why
>>> don't you just get a leather case or pouch and carry the phone on
>>> your belt?
>>
>>
>> 1. I read a complaint that even having that phone on a clip will
>> cause the same behavior, since it is easy to move in such a way that
>> the button is pressed.
>>
>> 2. I do not /want/ a phone anywhere but in my pocket. It's a
>> matter of what you're used to, and what you like. If I cannot put a
>> phone in my pocket, then I don't want it. Period, end of chapter,
>> end of story.
>>
>> After my eons of having a wired-into-the-car phones (all Motorola), I
>> switched to the StarTac. Awesome phone. In the pocket. No issues,
>> except that the antenna tip was allowed to bend. $10 fix every year
>> or so. Eventually I switched to a moto T720i. Perfect in the
>> pocket. Now this phone. Except for the stupid buttons, it'd be
>> fine in the pocket.
>>
>> To me, phones, loose change, keys, are all pocket items. There's
>> nothing wrong with that.
>
> Quit crying. You have to hold the button for several seconds for the
> feature to activate.

So what? It activates in my pocket---bottom line.


> If it does, manner mode means it will vibrate,
> something you can feel if you have it in your pocket! The fact is
> that they are decent phones,

Not with side buttons that activate with the clamshell closed and which
cannot be disabled.


>if you don't happen to like it (for
> whatever reason) don't buy it.

Too late. There is no way for me to discover this in the trial period with
verizon. So I'm left with paying out of pocket for another phone (at full
price).


....[rip]...

--
"So I just, uh... I just cut them up like regular chickens?"
"Sure, just cut them up like regular chickens."

Hypocritical morons like you are fun to laugh at. You print your titles
of your posts in CAPS, a well know faux pax, but oh yes, it's our little
Tommy Marshall. And you change the reply of everyone you want to reply to
with "coughed-up"; oh yes, another nice little polite mannerism. And
yet you're complaining that Mij Adyaw is "top posting". hahaha, what a
little punk..

And now you don't like your phone, after Verizon gave you 15 days to try it
out, so you want to pout like a little baby. hahahaha I guess when you buy
a car that has a problem, you cuss out the world; hit a bad golf shot,
throw your clubs... yeah, we've seen your type. Simply stated, your
pathetic.... Get a life!


"Thomas G. Marshall" <[email protected]>
wrote in message news:FoWbe.3042$Xl.1519@trndny03...
> Mij Adyaw coughed up:
>> Interesting. I have been posting on usenet since 1990 and did not
>> know about the top posting.
>
> Thomas Marshall Spewed:
> 1. how on earth is that possible?
>
> 2. does this current top post mean that you don't care to follow my
> request?
>
>
>
>
>> The RF attenuation is primarily caused by
>> the water in the body.
>> Regards,
>>
>> -mij
>>
>> "Thomas G. Marshall"
>> <[email protected]> wrote in
>> message news:y4Dbe.6794$WX.1601@trndny01...
>>> Mij Adyaw coughed up:
>>>> Physical proximity of the phone antenna to your body causes the
>>>> phone to loose signal. The body is a very good attenuator of RF
>>>> signals. If you do not believe this, in a low signal area, note the
>>>> reading on the phone's signal meter and then hold your hand against
>>>> the antenna. You will notice that the signal meter will drop a bar
>>>> or two. When the phone is on your belt it is not in direct contact
>>>> with your body, the signal is not attenuated as much a if the phone
>>>> is in your pants pocket.
>>>
>>> Please STOP top posting after others have bottom posted!!! It makes
>>> a mess of the messages and is VERY RUDE!!!
>>>
>>> Regarding your reply: Is the attenuation directly related to the
>>> water in the body? Curious.
>>>
>>> In any case, I've not missed calls before with [moto] cell phones in
>>> my pocket---at least no one, particularly my wife, have complained
>>> about not getting to me. But with this LG, I *do* miss the call
>>> when it's vibrating. Perhaps the ring volume is alterable as well by
>>> the side buttons with the clamshell closed, which could definitely
>>> cause missed calls, but I'll have to experiment with that.
>>>
>>> And the point is moot: I think a cell phone stuck on the belt looks
>>> silly---I /want/ the thing in my pocket.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Not Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:zGxbe.90334$A31.75383@fed1read03...
>>>>>> Don't put the phone in your pants pocket!!! The phones were not
>>>>>> designed to be carried in your pants pocket. It reduces the RF
>>>>>> signal and you will miss incoming calls. Buy a holster for the
>>>>>> phone and carry it on your belt. Problem solved very easily.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just how great is the RF attenuation from resting in my pocket vs.
>>>>> that on the side of the belt? Same applies to the phone in my
>>>>> wife's purse or in my
>>>>> brief case covered by car keys and whatever other 'stuff' might be
>>>>> in there
>>>>> as well?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> "Well, ain't this place a geographical oddity!
>>> Two weeks from everywhere!"
>
>
>
> --
> "So I just, uh... I just cut them up like regular chickens?"
> "Sure, just cut them up like regular chickens."
>
>

"Not Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> LG tells folk that the 'feature' is a VZN requirement and to call VZN.
>
> VZN's responce is it's a 'feature'

Make sure to call them up again in a weeks time to see if they have changed
their mind. If enough people call, maybe someone in a position to do something
about this actually will do so.

Roger

"John Henderson"

| > Again not a calibrated indication.
|
| Do elaborate.

The design/manufacturing limits (as in $$) do not allow the use of
sufficiently tight tolerances that RSSI would be anything except a very
rough indication. Added to that are the variations in the manufacturing
process such as which plant produced the various handsets. This is from
direct observation of the manufacturing process.

| > 10 dBm drop 'relative to what' and how measured?
|
| In this example, the signal strength's 10 dBm weaker when the
| phone's in the leather (and metal) case sitting on a desk - not
| being worn. Two brands of leather case were tried, with
| virtually identical results. Readings were of the phone's own
| RSSI measurement via a serial cable, giving +- 2 dBm accuracy.

Again what's the standard? Is it calibrated? If so how and against what?
Having over seen a standards lab I have very serious questions about claims
based on handset RSSI especially when they are reported as absolutes.

| > FWIW a drop of that magnitude is the result of other factors
| > and *not* due to bio-metrics.
|
| What caused the 12 - 16 dBm attenuation with the phone held to
| the ear then? All my amalgam tooth fillings?

| Because it's an internal-antenna phone, my hand was also
| covering the antenna. But that's how people use them. I can
| repeat these results ad nauseam.

Assigned channel, dynamic power adjustments, multi-path, variations in the
link budget for the various transmitters used including something a simple
as a hand off to another tower. FWIW the real world cell site conditioning
process allows great variation in performance even for transmitters sharing
an antenna. This variance is increased when the use of multiple antennas
are factored into the equation. As to the effects of the hand: while there
is some direct attenuation my experience is that the changes in the Q of the
antenna and detuning of the matching elements have a greater effect on the
signal.

Again the simple orientation of the handset in relation to the cell site has
a more demonstrable effect. Check the actual radiation pattern of a
handset. The patters from two units pulled in sequence (S/N are one number
apart) from the production line have great variations. By whatever standard
of measurement they are clearly, not single-point spherical radiators and
since the orientation is not controlled these will have a much greater
impact on received signal than bio-attenuation.

You might find it interesting to know that the effects of the body on
emissions is much greater on the handset to cell site link than the reverse.
This has been explained as near field effects. As near field attenuation is
based on the proximity of the body to the transmitting antenna it clearly
has little effect on the RSSI There are numerous studies, many by the DOD
which while no longer classified are not widely published. The key studies
that come to mind that may be more readly accessed are those done by
Motorola's Balzano as they are now part of records of the various FDA
hearings.

BTW his studies were preformed initially with cadaver heads and later with
analog equivalents. The demonstrations I observed were performed with the
analog heads and while there were some discernable attention they were
nowhere near 12-16 db for either transmit or received signal levels. As I
said before handset transmitted signal level comparison were more profoundly
effected (still low regardless) but again in the near field. ( a few
centimeters @ 800 MHz) Attenuation beyond that was negligible.

(OT -- he tells a great story about a security guard at his lab who was told
emphatically not to open a specific shipment. Being curious and having the
right to open all boxes she opened the box regardless ... with the result
that she now opens *no* boxes for inspection)

| > I direct you to work done by Dr. Queue Balzano (spl?) of
| > Motorola on the SAR for the CTIA studies of the bio-hazard of
| > RF energy for more specifics on these parameters. (hint it's
| > not light reading)
| >
| > BTW at 800 mHz passing behind a grove of trees will give you a
| > 20 db (+/-) path loss. This is commonly factored into the
| > link budget of all RF communications systems.
|
| And this is variable with the variation due to different
| moisture content of the leaves according to research done by
| Australia's peak government scientific body - the CSIRO. You
| and I contain moisture, just like leaves do.

It's a lot more complicated that simple fact of the moisture content. As
example (an over simplification) the losses due to long needle pine trees
are greater than the losses do to sort needle pine. Oak trees likewise vary
as a function of the species i.e, live oak have a greater effect than pin
oak for a give size of tree even though the physical size of the leaves are
similar. This from direct observation (proof of performance certification)
of live systems.

Roger Binns coughed up:
> "Not Me" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> LG tells folk that the 'feature' is a VZN requirement and to call
>> VZN. VZN's responce is it's a 'feature'
>
> Make sure to call them up again in a weeks time to see if they have
> changed their mind. If enough people call, maybe someone in a
> position to do something about this actually will do so.
>
> Roger


Hope so.

FWIW, I never let them off the hook. I always press them with words to the
effect of:

How can I get this information up to the
people who make decisions about this?

and

I cannot let this end with you merely saying
that it is something unsupported. It /should/
be supported. Do you have management
in charge of gathering customer complaints
that I could talk to?

etc.


--
Forgetthesong,I'dratherhavethefrontallobotomy...

"Roger Binns"

| > LG tells folk that the 'function' is a VZN requirement and to call VZN.
| >
| > VZN's response is it's a 'feature'
|
| Make sure to call them up again in a weeks time to see if they have
changed
| their mind. If enough people call, maybe someone in a position to do
something
| about this actually will do so.

Based on years of dealing with VZN from the hardware manufacture's side I'm
reminded that VZN's historic response is typically 'micro-give-a-sh|t'.

"paul j." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 15:08:23 GMT, Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
>
>> (I *knew* that switching away from Motorola was a crap-shoot, but the
>> salesman at verizon insisted that he has seen no issues whatsoever with
>> this
>> phone.)
>
> Maybe they don't read newsgroups.

Actually, switching FROM Motorola is probably the best thing he ever did.

He just needs to have some education about what to put in his pocket.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:18:06 -0400, "Not Me" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Roger Binns"
>
>| > Is there any software update available at all that will give me an
>option to fully disable the side buttons when the clamshell is
>| > closed??????
>|
>| Nope. This "feature" has been present in LG phones since at least the
>VX4400.
>| I always tell people to call up LG and ask for a fix. You won't get one,
>| but at least they will have people, time and money taken up with the issue
>| and may actually get a clue one day.
>
>LG tells folk that the 'feature' is a VZN requirement and to call VZN.
>
>VZN's responce is it's a 'feature'

That's curious. VZN offers phones by other manufacturers that do not
possess this "feature". I got fed up with the rogue side buttons on
my VX4400 and got a Samsung A670 instead. When the 670 is closed and
not ringing, the side buttons do nothing at all. When closed and
ringing it will silence the phone (for that call attempt only) but it
will not change the mode to/from ringing/vibration/silence like the
VX4400 does. Sounds like the LG folks were just dodging you.

Klein

Klein coughed up:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:18:06 -0400, "Not Me" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Roger Binns"
>>
>>>> Is there any software update available at all that will give me an
>> option to fully disable the side buttons when the clamshell is
>>>> closed??????
>>>
>>> Nope. This "feature" has been present in LG phones since at least
>>> the VX4400. I always tell people to call up LG and ask for a fix.
>>> You won't get one, but at least they will have people, time and
>>> money taken up with the issue and may actually get a clue one day.
>>
>> LG tells folk that the 'feature' is a VZN requirement and to call
>> VZN.
>>
>> VZN's responce is it's a 'feature'
>
> That's curious. VZN offers phones by other manufacturers that do not
> possess this "feature". I got fed up with the rogue side buttons on
> my VX4400

You mean you weren't smart enough to get fed up with this disfeature
*within* the 15 day waiting period?

The thing that's astounding is that given that there is something pushing
the right buttons, there really is no way at all to keep it from hopping
into Manner Mode. None, save pulling the battery out. "Locking" the phone
does nothing to manner mode. Presumably they want you to be able to hop in
and out of manner mode without the arduous effort of opening the clamshell.



> and got a Samsung A670 instead. When the 670 is closed and
> not ringing, the side buttons do nothing at all.

And *that* is what any sane person would reasonably expect. I think both my
startac and T720i were close to that (I think they alter the ringing volume,
but they require repeated hits).


> When closed and
> ringing it will silence the phone (for that call attempt only) but it
> will not change the mode to/from ringing/vibration/silence like the
> VX4400 does. Sounds like the LG folks were just dodging you.

I'm right now in an email tug of war with me in a rope knot in the center
between these two hairy ogres. I think that part of the problem may come
from a definition of "programming".

Somehow, I think that "programming" now refers to call tower update
information and not the software (javaME or otherwise) that is driving the
thing. I'm currently verifying this with the LG person.


>
> Klein



--
"It's easier to be terrified by an enemy you admire."
-Thufir Hawat, Mentat and Master of Assassins to House Atreides

"Thomas G. Marshall" <[email protected]>
wrote in message news:Frfce.4078$u56.522@trndny09...
> Klein coughed up:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:18:06 -0400, "Not Me" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Roger Binns"
>>>
>>>>> Is there any software update available at all that will give me an
>>> option to fully disable the side buttons when the clamshell is
>>>>> closed??????
>>>>
>>>> Nope. This "feature" has been present in LG phones since at least
>>>> the VX4400. I always tell people to call up LG and ask for a fix.
>>>> You won't get one, but at least they will have people, time and
>>>> money taken up with the issue and may actually get a clue one day.
>>>
>>> LG tells folk that the 'feature' is a VZN requirement and to call
>>> VZN.
>>>
>>> VZN's responce is it's a 'feature'
>>
>> That's curious. VZN offers phones by other manufacturers that do not
>> possess this "feature". I got fed up with the rogue side buttons on
>> my VX4400
>
> You mean you weren't smart enough to get fed up with this disfeature
> *within* the 15 day waiting period?
>
> The thing that's astounding is that given that there is something pushing
> the right buttons, there really is no way at all to keep it from hopping
> into Manner Mode. None, save pulling the battery out. "Locking" the
> phone does nothing to manner mode. Presumably they want you to be able to
> hop in and out of manner mode without the arduous effort of opening the
> clamshell.
>
>
>
What's the big deal if your phone goes into "manner mode". Heck, in your
pocket you just might enjoy it too much.

My phone is probably in manner mode 90% of the time out of respect for the
people around me, but seeing your posts and your childlike postures, I can
see why you don't mind if your phone is ringing away in some store,
business setting, movie theatre or whatever. Come to think of it, your
probably the clown talking on his phone in the movie theatre. After all,
it's your phone and you have rights, right???

Stop crying about your inability to pick the right phone for you and/or
judge it's characteristics like everyone else does within 15 days. Grow up
and move on Tommy.

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:15:57 GMT, "Dave M." <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>
>"Thomas G. Marshall" <[email protected]>
>wrote in message news:Frfce.4078$u56.522@trndny09...
>> Klein coughed up:
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:18:06 -0400, "Not Me" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Roger Binns"
>>>>
>>>>>> Is there any software update available at all that will give me an
>>>> option to fully disable the side buttons when the clamshell is
>>>>>> closed??????
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. This "feature" has been present in LG phones since at least
>>>>> the VX4400. I always tell people to call up LG and ask for a fix.
>>>>> You won't get one, but at least they will have people, time and
>>>>> money taken up with the issue and may actually get a clue one day.
>>>>
>>>> LG tells folk that the 'feature' is a VZN requirement and to call
>>>> VZN.
>>>>
>>>> VZN's responce is it's a 'feature'
>>>
>>> That's curious. VZN offers phones by other manufacturers that do not
>>> possess this "feature". I got fed up with the rogue side buttons on
>>> my VX4400
>>
>> You mean you weren't smart enough to get fed up with this disfeature
>> *within* the 15 day waiting period?
>>
>> The thing that's astounding is that given that there is something pushing
>> the right buttons, there really is no way at all to keep it from hopping
>> into Manner Mode. None, save pulling the battery out. "Locking" the
>> phone does nothing to manner mode. Presumably they want you to be able to
>> hop in and out of manner mode without the arduous effort of opening the
>> clamshell.
>>
>>
>>
>What's the big deal if your phone goes into "manner mode". Heck, in your
>pocket you just might enjoy it too much.
>
>My phone is probably in manner mode 90% of the time out of respect for the
>people around me, but seeing your posts and your childlike postures, I can
>see why you don't mind if your phone is ringing away in some store,
>business setting, movie theatre or whatever. Come to think of it, your
>probably the clown talking on his phone in the movie theatre. After all,
>it's your phone and you have rights, right???
>
>Stop crying about your inability to pick the right phone for you and/or
>judge it's characteristics like everyone else does within 15 days. Grow up
>and move on Tommy.

I guess you haven't understood yet that the side buttons cause the
phone to cycle between three states: ringing/vibration/silence. With
a random number of pushes of the side button the phone could be in any
one of these three states. E.g., you set it to silence before
entering the courtroom (church, theater, whatever) and after a while
you are surprised by a ringing phone - your phone - which you KNOW you
set to silence.

Yup, we were too stupid to figure this out right away. It is
certainly an unexpected behavior and it takes a while to realize that
it's happening.

Good luck to you.

Klein