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.
Technical explanation on iPhone 4 Antenna issue
- Thread starter EEiPhoneFail
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not precise at all the way you were doing it. So no, i'm not wrong lol. And what samcraig stated is exactly true especially in dense metro areas. Hell in my house alone, I can use at least 3 different physical cell sites. But I can hit about 8-10 different sectors, 4-5 on one channel, 4-5 on another channel.
Even still, you are still ignoring physics and that is what's most entertaining about your posts.
YA JUST CAN'T LOSE CAN YA? It's ok, just relax.
Sorry Andy but you're wrong and exaggerate to play the victim. For example - if I was really stalking you (and not just in your mind) I would have posted
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1036967/
and here
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1032555/
and here
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1033474/
and here
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1040572/
and here
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1031483/
But I haven't. I have, however posted in threads that you have also posted in when it's about the antenna issue. The connection isn't YOU Andy. The connection is the subject.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1036967/
and here
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1032555/
and here
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1033474/
and here
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1040572/
and here
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1031483/
But I haven't. I have, however posted in threads that you have also posted in when it's about the antenna issue. The connection isn't YOU Andy. The connection is the subject.
how is not doing the exact same thing not precise? your logic is baffling. i'm quite out in the countryside, there's not that many towers around, so chances of us being on seperate towers when on the same mobile network (or carrier for the US peeps) is quite slim.
but if you wanna choose to ignore all my facts so you can feel smart and right, go ahead..... samcraig is known by a few people to not admit when he's wrong, there's a few people who have actively blocked him as he just never gives up. as for me, i've stated my facts and i'm walking away from this convo with you.
lol so going through my posts? epitomy of stalking. thanks. anyway like the others, i'm blocking you now.
I'm glad. Clearly when confronted with the truth (I searched the threads you recently posted in just to discredit you and your accusation. That's not stalking LOL. But since you're blocking me at least now you won't make wild accusations just because you can't admit that you're wrong. I freely admit I AM stubborn. But I can also admit when and where I'm wrong OR if I've not considered an alternative explanation. That's where we differ. Thanks for the block!
Precise would be recording the test on video, using Signal app on both phones (side by side) and displaying current connect cell information (db, channel, PSC all on one page), making sure no data transmission is happening, making sure you are on the same channel, connected to the same cell and sector by verifying the PSC on each device, then bridging the gap with your thumb for 60 seconds.
So no, your test was not precise not only that, I guarantee the db readout in signal would show attenuation lol as if you don't think it will, then lol.
EDIT: Another example of "precise"
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...gn-defect-confirmed/16935237001/111613310001/
And they fixed the "design flaw" (as stated by consumer reports) with free bumpers for everyone!!! YAY!!!
And you can take the fact that Apple had some big press event, and gave out bumpers for free as an acknowledgment that yes, this new antenna does have some design issues, so here, these free bumpers will make things better.
Did you solder on a 50 ohm coax to it, calibrate a network analyzer hook it up to it and look at the return loss (s11 or s22) across frequency with and without your hand on it.
The antenna issue is not propagation change. Skin is conductive. When you touch both antennas at the same time you're JUMPING the antennas.
I don't think anyone at Apple realizes this, if they did, they would just apply a non-conductive clear coat on the band. Bam, problem solved.
I'm an amateur radio operator, and to get said license i had to study how RF works. I also had to learn how antenna systems work, as well as the theory behind radio signal propagation and other factors that go into making radio systems work.
What you say here is entirely untrue from the standpoint of how you claim holding a phone keeps the antenna from vibrating. I couldn't have thought up a more idiotic explanation myself. Touching one section of the band isn't going to change it's propagation, but touching both bands at the same time will jump the two antennas. Why would jumping the antennas be a bad thing? Because one antenna is getting signals it shouldnt be and vice versa.
No. Radio waves can travel through a clear coat. Acrylic clear coat is non-conductive but at that thickness it would be invisible to radio waves.
Clear coat is basically clear paint, except plasticized so its way more durable.
Ok, let's clarify something for those who have no idea how things like this work.
Non-conductive coatings are like the rubber housings that encase "rubber duck" antennas. The rubber coating is non conductive, but the waves travel right through. Get it now?
Non-conductive coatings are like the rubber housings that encase "rubber duck" antennas. The rubber coating is non conductive, but the waves travel right through. Get it now?
You weren't joking! Oh well, you managed to make me laugh anyway.
You really think that you know more than all the PhDs in RF engineering that work at Apple because you've heard of resistance and maybe you can even apply Ohm's law? Well I've got another few words for you. Some of them are a bit long so don't get too scared. How about "capacitance"? Here's another one: "dielectric constant". Care to tell us what the DC is likely to be for this coating that is so obviously the "problem solved" fix and would you care to compare and contrast it with the DC for the rubber surrounding a rubber duck antenna? No, I thought not.
- Julian
What is wrong with you? Do you have any idea of what you're saying? Putting a coating won't affect the antenna, it will just insulate the surface from conductive materials like sweaty human skin. It's like insulation on an electric wire. I am sorry that your feeble brain cannot handle such high tech concepts like electrical insulation.
Can you imagine the iphone 4 with such an insulation?!!! The endurance of the device would be equal to zero, needless to say, the design would be creepy.
Really, it's funny how some people think they're smarter than others
))
Last edited:
Can you magine the iphone 4 with such an insulation?!!! The endurance of the device would be equal to zero, needless to say, the design would be creepy.
Really, it's funny how some people think they're smarter than others
I don't know what's up Julian's goat either.
Apple's antenna design is awesome, they just need to put a clear coat (which won't alter the looks at all) on the band so that people with sweaty palms (like me) wont bridge the 2 antenna together when holding it.
Err, because direct contact isn't necessary to bridge the two antennas. Bringing the finger close, even with a resistive coating, is still likely to cause capacitive coupling. An antenna has a resonant frequency so if it's detuned badly enough then its ability is compromised. I don't pretend to be an RF engineer but I did do a lot of waveguide and transmission line theory as part of my computer engineering course. I am also in the final year of a physics degree (studied in my spare time at my own expense) so I'm familiar with the basics of electromagnetism (and quantum mechanics, conductors, insulators, semiconductors, superconductors, etc). I can't be sure but, judging by the simplistic nature of your responses, I suspect that even I, who knows very little about RF engineering, know one heck of a lot more than you.
I really did think you were joking at first and were making a very dry comment about some people here who think that, with maybe a bit of high school science, they know more about RF engineering and the "obvious" and "simple" fixes that somehow the Apple experts know nothing about. Now sadly I find that you actually are one of those people.
Frankly I've spent enough time on this now and I don't particularly want to get deeper into increasingly I'll-tempered exchanges so I'm out of here. I actually really hope that you're right and the fix is as simple as you believe but I personally doubt it.
- Julian