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

[.Andy]

Way to respond to one part of my entire post. Talk about misleading.. Please respond to everything else I stated if you want to contribute.

There's nothing to be gained conversing with people that dismiss others with a different point of view as "idiots". Especially over a subjective issue. If that's the level you're racing to you can do it on your own. If you want to discuss something perhaps restate it without being antagonistic.

 

[dvrk547]

Cube's discussion about limits is about calculus.

The definition of a derivative is
f'(x) = lim h->0 (f(x+h) - f(x)) / h

So you learn about limits as the first topic (at least that's the first thing I learned when I took the course)

Yeah, I know that. I'm just wondering what limit has anything to do here. (Let alone derivative.) x is just a number of dropped calls. It doesn't decrease or increase in a phone. How can it approach something?

If something is undefined, it's just undefined. It doesn't mean that you can use limit and suddenly it will have some value or it will be infinity+. It's still undefined. You should look at the definition of limit.

 

[brayhite]

There's nothing to be gained conversing with people that dismiss others with a different point of view as "idiots". Especially over a subjective issue. If that's the level you're racing to you can do it on your own. If you want to discuss something perhaps restate it without being antagonistic.

Oh, sorry. Replace idiots with illogical. Now respond please.

 

[cube]

Yeah, I know that. I'm just wondering what limit has anything to do here. (Let alone derivative.) x is just a number of dropped calls. It doesn't decrease or increase in a phone. How can it approach something?

If something is undefined, it's just undefined. It doesn't mean that you can use limit and suddenly it will have some value or it will be infinity+. It's still undefined. You should look at the definition of limit.

It's because you would take a series of better and better phones and the others would be worse and worse, so that when one approaches to be perfect, the others would tend to be infinitely worse.

 

[dvrk547]

You can't compute 1/0. So you take the limit of 1/x when x approaches 0.

Yeah, the limit of 1/x as x->0+ is infinity+. But that still doesn't make 1/x defined when x is 0. Limit is limit. Value at that point is value at that point. Two different things.

That's what computers mean when you do 1/0 and they return +Inf.

My program just crashes

 

[cleric]

Still a lot less than my ATT tower drops

 

[harcosparky]

Wow ... this web of deception (thread) is still spinning!

 

[dvrk547]

It's because you would take a series of better and better phones and the others would be worse and worse, so that when one approaches to be perfect, the others would tend to be infinitely worse.

I'm talking about x and x is the number of dropped calls from one phone.

 

[cube]

I'm talking about x and x is the number of dropped calls from one phone.

A real number x is the limit of a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers. You are already using limits.

 

[solarein]

Trying to turn this into a percentage as opposed to how many calls per 100 is a waste of time. If the 3GS dropped 1% of calls and the 4 2% of calls (this is all made up since we don't know the numbers) then we could say OMG the 4 drops 100% more calls, thats twice as many! The reality is: it's 2 calls out of 100, a complete non issue. It's like a stock that went from .01 to .02 a share. Wow, a 100% increase! Well, whoopdedoo, it's still a worthless stock.



Imagine that? Steve tried to put things in a way that would put his product in the best possible light. Shocking!

That's a horrible analogy to use for the point you are trying to make. A stock gaining 100% value is a stock gaining 100% value, no matter how worthless it is. If I had invested $1000 in that stock, I would have $2000 now.

 

[1BadManVan]

That's a horrible analogy to use for the point you are trying to make. A stock gaining 100% value is a stock gaining 100% value, no matter how worthless it is. If I had invested $1000 in that stock, I would have $2000 now.

and if you invested $1 you would have ****ing $2!!! Which is much more in line with the call drop figure being talked about now! Jeezus..

 

[TonyC28]

OP, good work...this thread is en fuego.

To all of you who say that Steve was being misleading or trying to confuse people with numbers: He didn't do himself any favors by admitting that the 4 drops more calls than the 3GS. Really, he could have skipped over this info. And all of you who think percentages are the only real way to present numbers, what if he had said "The iPhone 4 drops 2% fewer calls than the 3GS"? You would all be freaking out wanting to know what the original number was and accusing him of being misleading by not telling us that.
I really think you guys are looking for an issue that isn't there. Steve explained it pretty well in a way that anyone can understand. He admitted that the 4 drops more calls than the 3GS, but only one more per 100. WTF is so hard to understand about that?
Maybe next time he will say that the iPhone 4 drops twice as many calls as the 3GS, but it only went from 1 to 2 per 100. Would that satisfy everyone?

 

[TonyC28]

That's a horrible analogy to use for the point you are trying to make. A stock gaining 100% value is a stock gaining 100% value, no matter how worthless it is. If I had invested $1000 in that stock, I would have $2000 now.

So if you had a single share worth $1 that doubled to $2, would you be jumping for joy? Actually after reading some of your stuff I think you would because you think thats a "significant increase"...but really, stop thinking about this stuff like its a math problem. We are talking less than one extra dropped call per 100...who cares?!?!?!?!?!

 

[solarein]

So if you had a single share worth $1 that doubled to $2, would you be jumping for joy? Actually after reading some of your stuff I think you would because you think thats a "significant increase"...but really, stop thinking about this stuff like its a math problem. We are talking less than one extra dropped call per 100...who cares?!?!?!?!?!

Of course it's a significant increase. If I only have a single share worth $1, that means $1 is a decently big value for me. Therefore, if I gained another $1, I'd be pretty happy.

That's how ratios work. They are not absolute numbers, they scale with a base.

 

[brayhite]

Of course it's a significant increase. If I only have a single share worth $1, that means $1 is a decently big value for me. Therefore, if I gained another $1, I'd be pretty happy.

That's how ratios work. They are not absolute numbers, they scale with a base.

So I guess you skipped over my response to you?

 

[TonyC28]

Of course it's a significant increase. If I only have a single share worth $1, that means $1 is a decently big value for me. Therefore, if I gained another $1, I'd be pretty happy.

That's how ratios work. They are not absolute numbers, they scale with a base.

Statistically speaking, yes I suppose that would be a significant increase. But in the real world, thats the place where I use my phone the most, an increase of 1 more out of 100 is not a big deal. In fact, I'd say it's pretty insignificant. However, like I said earlier, after the way they talked about the new antenna there should have been no increase at all

 

[solarein]

So I guess you skipped over my response to you?

I already addressed your points in other posts. I don't think such a significant increase can be attributed to case use, but I concede that's just my interpretation based on no evidence.

 

[cube]

This is exactly how hi-fi works. An amplifier with 0.01 THD is 10 times worse than another with 0.001 THD by this measure.

 

[brayhite]

I already addressed your points in other posts. I don't think such a significant increase can be attributed to case use, but I concede that's just my interpretation based on no evidence.

Do you disagree with my point that a 100% increase in cell phone drop rate, regardless of concrete number of increases, may be important to the engineer, but to the consumer whom Jobs was essentially addressing, he presented the information in the most effective way to avoid unnecessary negativity regarding the drop call rates?

 

[dvrk547]

A real number x is the limit of a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers. You are already using limits.

Yeah... and? That doesn't anwser my question. Even if x is the limit of some sequence, how does it increase or decrease? I mean, how does the limit of some sequence increase or decrease? Let alone how it automatically approaches zero.

 

[cube]

Yeah... and? That doesn't anwser my question. Even if x is the limit of some sequence, how does it increase or decrease? I mean, how does the limit of some sequence increase or decrease? Let alone how it automatically approaches zero.

You don't need any measurements approaching zero. You just compute by approaching zero instead of using zero.

 

[dvrk547]

Study mathematics some more and maybe you'll understand.

There are infinitely many different sizes of infinity, for one.

lol, didn't see this comment.

So is the iPhone 4 "infinitely worse" than the 3GS, but it's still better than a phone that doesn't make a call at all, right?

If so, can you tell me why is it better? And how much is it better? Is the phone that doesn't make a call at all "infinitely+1.037491 worse" or what?

And I'm wondering something. If I can make 999,999,999 calls out of 1,000,000,000 calls, people here would still say the iPhone 4 is infinitely worse than the 3GS, right? I think I should return it now, lol.

 

[dvrk547]

You don't need any measurements approaching zero. You just compute by approaching zero instead of using zero.

But.... it's zero. It's not a number that is a little bit more than zero. It's zero. How come the limit of some sequence suddenly changes value???

 

[solarein]

Do you disagree with my point that a 100% increase in cell phone drop rate, regardless of concrete number of increases, may be important to the engineer, but to the consumer whom Jobs was essentially addressing, he presented the information in the most effective way to avoid unnecessary negativity regarding the drop call rates?

No, I think he did not present the facts in a neutral way, but rather in a way that's most favorable to his company. As to whether "100%" or "1 more in 100" is more meaningful to the consumer, I don't think we can make such sweeping generalizations, each consumer will prefer one over another due to individual preferences and circumstances.

 

[cube]

Nobody is saying that it is actually infinitely worse, only that the presentation has the leeway for it.