iPhone 4 may be dropping as many as 100% more calls than iPhone 3GS

[solarein]

Here's a slide from AT&T showing the percentage of dropped calls on their 3G network:

You can find this slide on page 11 of this document:
http://www.att.com/Investor/Financial/Earning_Info/docs/4Q_09_slide_c.pdf

And here's a slide from Jobs' iPhone 4 presentation:

From the AT&T slide we can surmise that the average percentage of dropped calls on AT&T's 3G network is around 1%. Let us first assume that the percentage of dropped calls for the iPhone 3GS is about the same as the average of all phones on AT&T's network. That means the 3GS drops 1 call per 100. Now, the Apple slide says the iPhone 4 drops <1 more call per 100 than the 3GS. Let's first use the maximum, 1 more per 100. That would mean the iPhone 4 drops approximately 2 calls per 100. That's an 100% increase in dropped calls over the 3GS.

Of course, it may be argued that the above made assumptions are faulty. Let's relax them some. What is <1? I think it could be as small as 0.5. Any less than that, it would be silly for Apple to round up and make themselves look bad. And what about the 3GS' drop rate? Maybe 3GS has worse reception than the average phone on AT&T's network? Could the 3GS have 10 times worse reception than the average phone on AT&T's network? That's pretty harsh, but let's go with that. That means the 3GS drops 10 calls per 100, while the iPhone 4 drops 10.5 calls per 100. That's still a 5% increase in dropped calls, even when we are being so harsh on the 3GS, still a pretty significant number. If we are less ridiculous about the 3GS' performance, and say it performs 2x worse than the average AT&T phone, Then it's 2 dropped call for the 3GS versus 2.5 dropped call for the iPhone 4, a 25% increase, which is still huge.

 

[Surrix]

This is a great post. Percent more calls dropped or multiplier of calls dropped is a much more tangible number than the "additional calls dropped per hundred" that Steve gave. This suggests Steve was deliberately twisting all of that "hard data" to present the statistic in a way that doesn't sound so awful.

 

[scaredpoet]

This is a great post. Percent more calls dropped or multiplier of calls dropped is a much more tangible number than the "additional calls dropped per hundred" that Steve gave. This suggests Steve was deliberately twisting all of that "hard data" to present the statistic in a way that doesn't sound so awful.

Actually, it suggests the opposite: the OP is twisting the data compared to real world impact. to try and make it sound more awful than it really is.

1. We don't know what that less than 1 percent means. It could be 0.1%. It could be 0.9%. Without that data, you're basically making up a figure, assuming the worst, and then trying to spread FUD with that made-up figure. And frankly, fabricating data is even worse than twisting statistics around.

2. Even disregarding point 1, a 100% increase of 1% is 2%. 2 dropped calls out of 100. Will a user notice the increase? I'm betting not.

I made this comparison earlier: if I have 1 penny in the bank, or 1 percent of one dollar, and then I add another penny to my savings, or TWO percent of one dollar, then I've increased my life savings by 100 percent. That sounds pretty significant, right?

But guess what: I'm still broke. The actual, real-world number of how much money is actually in the bank is too small to make a difference, and my overall net worth would still be miniscule.

The same is true with the dropped calls situation. If we're measuring dropped calls, and the phone drops one call out of 100, then the ONLY possible increase is at least 100 percent. You can't drop half a call, or one quarter of a call, one percent of a call.


This is a nice try at spreading FUD, though.

 

[fireshot91]

I got it was less than 1% more additional dropped calls than the 3GS.

He said it was "less than one more PER HUNDRED" The one per hundred= 1%, and less than 1% more than the 3GS.

Regardless of what it means, that was a complicated ass way to word it, and he did it on purpose.

 

[gloss]

I got it was less than 1% more additional dropped calls than the 3GS.

He said it was "less than one more PER HUNDRED" The one per hundred= 1%, and less than 1% more than the 3GS.

Regardless of what it means, that was a complicated ass way to word it, and he did it on purpose.

No.

If the 3GS dropped 1.1 per 100 calls and the iPhone 4 dropped 2.0 per 100 calls (a difference of less than 1 call per 100), that's an 80% increase in dropped calls.

 

[AlsoKnownAs]

My iPhone 3GS dropped 2-3 calls since I bought it at launch so even of its a 100% increase I wouldnt worry about it.

 

[Jordan921]

OMG it drops 1 more call per 100 it's the end of the fuccing world!!

 

[Surrix]

Actually, it suggests the opposite: the OP is twisting the data compared to real world impact. to try and make it sound more awful than it really is.

1. His math is wrong. If the iPhone 3GS drops an average of 1% of all calls, and the iPhone 4 drops less than 1% more calls than iPhone 3Gs, then that is not a 100% increase.

2. Even disregarding point 1, a 100% increase of 1% is 2%. 2 dropped calls out of 100. Will a user notice the increase? I'm betting not.

I made this comparison earlier: if I have 1 penny in the bank, or 1 percent of one dollar, and then I add another penny to my saving, or TWO percent of one dollar, then I've increased my life savings by 100 percent. That sounds pretty significant, right? But guess what: I'm still broke.

This is a nice try at spreading FUD, though.

Because he said only "<1" and not something more specific, that suggests that it was pretty close to 1. If it was more like .75 or lower, it would've made more sense to be more specific.

Expressing it the way he did obfuscates the statistic compared to a much more easy way to express it: the iPhone 4 drops 2x as many calls as the iPhone 3GS, or the iPhone 4 drops 75% more calls than the iPhone 3GS, or whatever the actual number is.

No.

If the 3GS dropped 1.1 per 100 calls and the iPhone 4 dropped 2.0 per 100 calls (a difference of less than 1 call per 100), that's an 80% increase in dropped calls.

80% is a huge increase.

On another note, I virtually never drop calls on my 3GS. Ever. A <1 per hundred increase for me would likely be several hundred percent, should such an increase actually manifest in my location.

 

[fishmoose]

OMG it drops 1 more call per 100 it's the end of the fuccing world!!

I bet that's the one time the president is going to call

 

[solarein]

Actually, it suggests the opposite: the OP is twisting the data compared to real world impact. to try and make it sound more awful than it really is.

1. His math is wrong. If the iPhone 3GS drops an average of 1% of all calls, and the iPhone 4 drops less than 1% more calls than iPhone 3Gs, then that is not a 100% increase.

2. We don't know what that less than 1 percent means. It could be 0.1%. It could be 0.9%. Without that data, you're basically making up a figure, assuming the worst, and then trying to spread FUD with that made-up figure. And frankly, fabricating data is even worse than twisting statistics around.

3. Even disregarding point 1 and point 2, a 100% increase of 1% is 2%. 2 dropped calls out of 100. Will a user notice the increase? I'm betting not.

I made this comparison earlier: if I have 1 penny in the bank, or 1 percent of one dollar, and then I add another penny to my saving, or TWO percent of one dollar, then I've increased my life savings by 100 percent. That sounds pretty significant, right? But guess what: I'm still broke.

This is a nice try at spreading FUD, though.

If your new phone is dropping two times as many calls as your old one, you wouldn't notice? I think going up from 1% to 2% is a pretty big jump.

As to points 1 and 2, my post addresses those directly. If you have a problem with my logic, then point them out, rather than pretending that I did not address them at all.

 

[RC83]

Stop trying to be smarter than Steve Jobs.. you heard what he said.. He pretty much punked all of us and said the phone is fine and to stop whining.. So **** up

 

[fireshot91]

No.

If the 3GS dropped 1.1 per 100 calls and the iPhone 4 dropped 2.0 per 100 calls (a difference of less than 1 call per 100), that's an 80% increase in dropped calls.

I think Steve was referring to the percents in comparison with the percents of each other.


Like...okay Say the 3GS dropped 30% of the calls made on it. (Yes I get it, it's a big number..). Then, in the wording I understood it to mean, the iPhone 4 would only drop less than 1% more of that. He's not saying 1% more based on that 30%...he's saying it as in then the iPhone 4 would drop 31% of the calls made on itself. Like...1% more..as in literally 1% more. Not 1% of the 30%. Cuz that would be like... 0.3?. Then the iPhone 4 could at most only drop 30.3% of it's calls.

Get it? I mean, I get what you're saying too. I'm saying it could honestly go either way how he worded it. My understanding was ^^.

 

[fishmoose]

If your new phone is dropping two times as many calls as your old one, you wouldn't notice? I think going up from 1% to 2% is a pretty big jump.

As to points 1 and 2, my post addresses those directly. If you have a problem with my logic, then point them out, rather than pretending that I did not address them at all.

I've dropped 3 calls on my iPhone 3G during two years this means I'm likely to drop 5-6 calls on my iPhone 4 (during two years). Let me tell that's a non-issue to me.

 

[solarein]

Another interesting point is that Steve Jobs gave an excuse for why he couldn't just tell us how many calls the iPhone 4 drops. He said he could only give us the difference between the 2 phones, and not the absolute numbers, because AT&T doesn't allow them to disclose statistics on dropped calls.

Well, that turns out to be a blatant lie, as you can see, AT&T freely discloses the amount of dropped calls on their network in their financial statements.

 

[Surrix]

I think Steve was referring to the percents in comparison with the percents of each other.


Like...okay Say the 3GS dropped 30% of the calls made on it. (Yes I get it, it's a big number..). Then, in the wording I understood it to mean, the iPhone 4 would only drop less than 1% more of that. He's not saying 1% more based on that 30%...he's saying it as in then the iPhone 4 would drop 31% of the calls made on itself. Like...1% more..as in literally 1% more. Not 1% of the 30%. Cuz that would be like... 0.3?. Then the iPhone 4 could at most only drop 30.3% of it's calls.

Get it? I mean, I get what you're saying too. I'm saying it could honestly go either way how he worded it. My understanding was ^^.

Your way is right: it is 1% more. If it were 30% for the 3GS, it would be 31% for the iP4. However, the data suggest that the actual 3GS percent is more like 1%, and therefore the iP4 would be about 2%, hence a ~2x increase.

 

[freejack]

I posted this in another thread and thought it should be considered here as well...


Let's cut through the crap and examine the facts. Jobs admitted that the i4 drops more calls than the 3gs. At&t has come a long way in upgrading their network since the 3gs launched. I'm sure when they were comparing, they were using the aggregate number of dropped calls since the 3gs launch which had been much worse than it is now. The i4 has the luxury on launching on a more robust network yet it is STILL dropping more calls.

Given that knowledge, I can safely say that there is a considerably higher percentage of dropped calls on the i4 than Jobs is admitting to.

 

[scaredpoet]

If your new phone is dropping two times as many calls as your old one, you wouldn't notice?

Less than 2 calls out of 100 calls? No.

I think going up from 1% to 2% is a pretty big jump.

It is only when your agenda demands that you find every possible way to discredit what you disagree with. You are just as guilty of distorting the facts as you accuse Apple and Steve Jobs of being. And you STILL don't know what "<1%" means, and so have assumed (read: fabricated) a figure to suit your purpose. And for convenience - in other words, to better suit the way you're spinning things - you've rounded that faked figure to 1%.

 

[solarein]

I think Steve was referring to the percents in comparison with the percents of each other.


Like...okay Say the 3GS dropped 30% of the calls made on it. (Yes I get it, it's a big number..). Then, in the wording I understood it to mean, the iPhone 4 would only drop less than 1% more of that. He's not saying 1% more based on that 30%...he's saying it as in then the iPhone 4 would drop 31% of the calls made on itself. Like...1% more..as in literally 1% more. Not 1% of the 30%. Cuz that would be like... 0.3?. Then the iPhone 4 could at most only drop 30.3% of it's calls.

Get it? I mean, I get what you're saying too. I'm saying it could honestly go either way how he worded it. My understanding was ^^.

No, for what you are saying, he would have to say "the iPhone 4 has 1 more dropped call per 100 dropped calls on the iPhone 3GS." That's a 1% increase in dropped calls. What he actually said was, the iPhone 4 has 1 more dropped call per 100 calls made. This is where the deliberate deception is, it's very clever really. The way he worded it sounds like he's saying the former, which does not sound like a big problem. But the reality is the latter, which is a big problem.

EDIT: actually it seems you think it's the latter too, and I agree with you.

 

[solarein]

Out of 100 calls? No.




It is only when your agenda demands that you find every possible way to discredit what you disagree with. You are just as guilty of distorting the facts as you accuse Apple and Steve Jobs of being. And you STILL don't know what "<1%" means, and so have assumed (read: fabricated) a figure to suit your purpose.

Please read my post again, I state very clearly how I interpreted the <1, and even offer up an alternative interpretation and different numbers based on that.

As to whether a 100% increase on 1% is a big deal or not, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm not distorting any facts here, it is my opinion that 100% increase on 1% is a big deal, just like it is your opinion that it is not.

 

[scaredpoet]

Please read my post again, I state very clearly how I interpreted the <1,

And I'm stating that your "interpretation" has no basis in fact. You assumed the worst possible figure and rounded up. On other words: you fabricated it. Which is the worst possible way to distort facts.

 

[harcosparky]

This is a great post. Percent more calls dropped or multiplier of calls dropped is a much more tangible number than the "additional calls dropped per hundred" that Steve gave. This suggests Steve was deliberately twisting all of that "hard data" to present the statistic in a way that doesn't sound so awful.

Everybody twists the data to put their spin on it - look at the title of this thread.

iPhone 4 May Be Dropping As Many As 100% more calls than the iPhone 3Gs

The above sounds much more nastier then the below, yet they both say the say thing ......

iPhone 4 May Be Dropping 2X more calls than the iPhone 3Gs

It's that " 2X " vs " 100% ", 100% in this context of the thread title sounds more negative.

Even my title has some negative spin to it ..... " May Be Dropping " could also be " May NOT Be Dropping ".

Everybody has their own spin on the matter, and here is mine .....

I personally can attest to the FACT ( in my case ) that my iPhone 3Gs dropped more calls then my iPhone 4 so far. There is a very good reason for this, when I first got my iPhone 3Gs I spent a lot of time in areas with spotting coverage.

My iPhone 4 has not dropped one call.....so far.

 

[fireshot91]

Okay, say the 3GS has 0.5% dropped calls rate.


If the iPhone 4 has 1.5% (A 1% increase), then that's like...200%. But...it's still not a big enough number to notice. That's like going from 1 dropped call to 3 dropped calls.

 

[solarein]

And I'm stating that your "interpretation" has no basis in fact. You assumed the worst possible figure and rounded up. On other words: you fabricated it. Which is the worst possible way to distort facts.

God damn, can you really not read? Read the freaking second paragraph.

 

[TMar]

Actually, it suggests the opposite: the OP is twisting the data compared to real world impact. to try and make it sound more awful than it really is.

This is a nice try at spreading FUD, though.

And they try to make it sound less awful then it is. If you drop 1 call per day on a 3gs in your area then with the i4 you should expect to see up to 2. Doesn't sound bad at all. But what if person X doesn't live in such a good service area? If this person use to see 5 dropped calls a day he should expect to see up to 10. Person y lives in a even crappier service area. He use to see 10 drop calls a day. He can now expect to see up to 20 with the i4.

I can keep going but I'm sure you can see how much larger the dispersion gets. People who suffer from dropped calls will notice the difference.

 

[solarein]

Everybody twists the data to put their spin on it - look at the title of this thread.

iPhone 4 May Be Dropping As Many As 100% more calls than the iPhone 3Gs

The above sounds much more nastier then the below, yet they both say the say thing ......

iPhone 4 May Be Dropping 2X more calls than the iPhone 3Gs

It's that " 2X " vs " 100% ", 100% in this context of the thread title sounds more negative.

Even my title has some negative spin to it ..... " May Be Dropping " could also be " May NOT Be Dropping ".

Everybody has their own spin on the matter, and here is mine .....

I personally can attest to the FACT ( in my case ) that my iPhone 3Gs dropped more calls then my iPhone 4 so far. There is a very good reason for this, when I first got my iPhone 3Gs I spent a lot of time in areas with spotting coverage.

My iPhone 4 has not dropped one call.....so far.

Are you serious? 2X is far worse than 100%. 2X is 200%!