Being the voice of reason, how does one use their phone twice a month without a phone? 2 ≠ 0
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Radiation levels for IP6 off the charts
- Thread starter mackinmike
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Being the voice of reason, how does one use their phone twice a month without a phone? 2 ≠ 0
What you said isn't really accurate. If RF radiation has no impact on cancer rates and merely increases body temperature by a negligible amount, then in this case less RF would not be any better than more of it.
And that's beside the point because it's impossible to design a cellular device that doesn't emit RF, so even if it were true that it were harmful, it really adds nothing to the discussion to merely say "less is better."
I don't recall saying I don't use my phone. But you seem to think if it's not something you're using constantly you're a fool to be paying for it. I don't think that's the voice of "reason", it just seems to be bait which I guess I took. So, that's on me.
I'll sign off now to get in my car that I pay for on a monthly basis but only use maybe an hour or two a day. I then need to make my semi-annual insurance payment for something I never use.
Well, technically, you could use any VOIP app with a bluetooth headset on a networked computer or cellular connected laptop/tablet to "talk" and dispense with the phone if her needs were really that minimal.
Still, people should carry around something that can make an emergency call.
Read my my friend..
If you using phone 2 x a month...buy a cheap dumb phone or get one for free with upgrade instead of paying $800+ on a phone you don't use.
...the voice of reason
----------
Ahh..another voice of reason. I agree you should have something for emergencies..dumb phones are free with upgrade. Andrew Luck still uses an old flip phone..he's not trying to prove anything to anyone
Again, you're assuming the "Phone" is just that. The $800 computer in my pocket gets used constantly. Mostly for data but I make an occasional phone call. I would much rather carry one device that does all. People have different needs. It is more feasible for me to have a cell phone plan that has data included than to carry both an iPad and a dumb phone.
You were not the target of my initial post. My post was referring to the people that used their phones less than 5 x a month...
I'm sure if you make or receive an occasional call (5 x a day? 10?), you want to do more than talk and text, you need a smartphone.
If you're getting 2 calls a month like the person that I initially was posting to, the voice of reason believes he/she is spending way to much on a device they don't need.
..the voice of reason
Coincidentally this is what happens when you're exposed to too much radiation: You become way too interested in whether or not other people need iPhones.
Totally seamless segue back onto the topic, you're all welcome. HOLY CRAP WATCH OUT FOR THOSE GAMMA RAYS!
Totally seamless segue back onto the topic, you're all welcome. HOLY CRAP WATCH OUT FOR THOSE GAMMA RAYS!
Emitters yes, but not necessarily transmitters. Wifi can be on, but its not transmitting full power like when you download stuff. It's just on. Big difference.
The voice of reason has steered this off topic and for that I apologize..you won't hear from me again in this thread unless I want to discuss radiation.
...the voice of reason
Stupid comparison. Different radiation. Also, this story involves Edison, which was the biggest jerk on the planet and , really, wasn't even a real scientist in the first place. So there... Disney used to give uranium to his friends and colleagues and belived it could produce rejuvenating effects etc. see where I'm heading?
I feel that I fit into that category. I would say I make about 3-5 calls a month. Now, that's not much more than two. Point being, just because one doesn't make voice calls often, it's not illogical to have a cell phone plan. I'm not here to argue the validity of owning a smartphone, I think we all get it. I was simply stating that needing a phone two times a month, while not much, still requires a phone. For people that do not want to carry more than one device, the smartphone is the solution.
-enters thread because the title seems interesting-
-last two pages are an argument completely unrelated to the topic-
It's the radiation man
I think it'd need to be an even more elaborate situation than that... You'd have to be actively uploading on multiple radios (when downloading you're just sending back packets saying, "ok, I got those packets") and you'd probably have to be in a low signal area as well since the radios don't use full power unless they have to.
If people want to go nuts about RF EMR they should check out the giant towers everywhere that are blasting anyone in line of sight with Netflix streams.
When Apple comes out with a cellular iPod touch, let me know. Until then I will stick with my iP6+.
I am going to sue apple if I can't have anymore kids
Maybe you shouldn't let your penis make phone calls?
Transmitters are by definition emitters.
WiFi will transmit the entire time it's enabled. It doesn't vary much while data is being sent. You can use something like the app iNet to see signal the router is receiving from a particular device. I usually see something like -48dBm from my iPad Air, <10' from the AEBS. That means it's reporting receiving ~10nw. The iPhone is transmitting at around -12dBm, or ~60µw, which is very little power (I couldn't find whether that's antenna input or radiated, but even with some gain, it's still a small level). You can search around for comparisons. The "dBm" page at Wikipedia shows what many devices' transmit and receive power typically is, but nano- and micro-watts are pretty low energy levels
And to reiterate what others have said regarding radiation: Please keep non-ionizing and ionizing radiation separate. Radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic (EM) radiation is non-ionizing, and can only affect tissue through negligible heating effects. (In the case of the power levels used in mobile devices. RF at high enough (talking 10's to 1000's of watts, depending on antenna and distance from it) power levels can heat enough to cause burns.)
Edit: Just a thought as to why the iPhone 6 SAR might be higher than the 5 is its different physical antennas arrangement and use of MIMO for 802.11ac/n. SAR can be affected by many factors, including antennas design and placement (what the radiation pattern(s) are and any resulting signal gain), how the device is typically held, distance from each antenna to the body, and others I can't think of off the top of my head.
I haven't looked it up yet, but I suspect an iPad Air has a higher SAR than the previous model because it has redesigned antennas and supports MIMO. And, come to think of it, a current iPad Mini might be higher yet (you can get more of the mini against you than the air...but that's just a SWAG I could most definitely be wrong
). I'll try and post a note here if I get around to it.
Last edited:
We are in an iPhone forum.
Besides, you are unlikely to find any place on earth with zero radiation.
That's true. Even in the universe you're unlikely to find such a place. But that's a strawman argument anyway. In most cases the transmitter will not be directly against your head or body. As I'm sure you're aware, the power density of radio waves decrease proportionally with the square of the distance from the emitter.