Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

TUAW posts antenna video with ACTUAL numbers

I know people may be getting tired of antenna threads, but this video is more conclusive than most. No comments?
 
bluenoise said:
I haven't seen the video, yet, but do they show it running on older iPhones, too?
Click to expand...

No because the problem is not inherent in the 3Gs (or older) phones because apple changed the antenna location.

irregardless of apple saying its just a software issue with what's being reported. It is a design flaw with the antenna being in contact with the skin which then interferes with the reception.

I've seen some stuff with the speedtest.net which also confirms its a hardware issue not a software bug.
 
Vertigo50 said:
Erica Sadun of TUAW created an iPhone app that displays the actual signal strength, then covered the strip to show the actual numbers drop.

Oops. Now we know for sure why Apple removed the mode where you can see the signal strength.

http://www.tuaw.com/2010/07/06/video-evidence-of-the-iphone-4-death-grip-this-time-with-real/
Click to expand...

It's a good video but it still uses an iPhone program to display the data. What I'd like to see is someone insert a power/SWR meter between the transmitter final and antenna and see what the SWR looks like as you bridge that non-conductive gap. That someone will need more money and expertise than I, however, so I wait. That would be 100% conclusive proof that it's a hardware problem instead of the current 97%.

I'm also getting kind of tired of this "death grip of doom" bulls**t. You don't need to "death grip" the phone, you don't need to "grip" it, you don't even need to touch it. Simply hold a wire and cross the non-conductive gap and poof, all your signals are belong to us.
 
maflynn said:
No because the problem is not inherent in the 3Gs (or older) phones because apple changed the antenna location.

irregardless of apple saying its just a software issue with what's being reported. It is a design flaw with the antenna being in contact with the skin which then interferes with the reception.

I've seen some stuff with the speedtest.net which also confirms its a hardware issue not a software bug.
Click to expand...

1. That is begging the question, ie assuming what you are trying to prove. We need to see the same test run on the 3G/3GS to work out how much of the problem is to do with the design, we can't just say "We don't need tests because the problem is to do with the design".

2. Irregardless isn't a word.

3. Speedtest.net tests don't prove one way or another whether it's a hardware or a software issue. All they prove is that it's not simply a problem with the number of bars being displayed, but nobody is saying that it is.

Edit: Good on Erica for writing the application, though, and it's good to see these results confirming what Anandtech found, though it's actually less of a drop than they discovered: -95 to -113 is only -18 dB, and goes to show that -95 isn't a particularly awesome signal and shouldn't be getting 5 bars in the first place.
 
This was already posted. I'm not trying to be an ass but if you check the date on a story, and it was yesterday, wouldn't you think that it would already be posted at this of all sites?
 
peterjcat said:
1. That is begging the question, ie assuming what you are trying to prove. We need to see the same test run on the 3G/3GS to work out how much of the problem is to do with the design, we can't just say "We don't need tests because the problem is to do with the design".

2. Irregardless isn't a word.

3. Speedtest.net tests don't prove one way or another whether it's a hardware or a software issue. All they prove is that it's not simply a problem with the number of bars being displayed, but nobody is saying that it is.
Click to expand...

+1
 
mgamber said:
It's a good video but it still uses an iPhone program to display the data. What I'd like to see is someone insert a power/SWR meter between the transmitter final and antenna and see what the SWR looks like as you bridge that non-conductive gap. That someone will need more money and expertise than I, however, so I wait. That would be 100% conclusive proof that it's a hardware problem instead of the current 97%.
Click to expand...

That would be interesting, but not sure it would really matter. I doubt the phone is lying to itself. It's just lying to the users.
 
Why was another topic created on the same old tired subject. Nobody cares anymore. Yawn.
 
peterjcat said:
1. That is begging the question, ie assuming what you are trying to prove. We need to see the same test run on the 3G/3GS to work out how much of the problem is to do with the design, we can't just say "We don't need tests because the problem is to do with the design".

2. Irregardless isn't a word.

3. Speedtest.net tests don't prove one way or another whether it's a hardware or a software issue. All they prove is that it's not simply a problem with the number of bars being displayed, but nobody is saying that it is.

Edit: Good on Erica for writing the application, though, and it's good to see these results confirming what Anandtech found, though it's actually less of a drop than they discovered: -95 to -113 is only -18 dB, and goes to show that -95 isn't a particularly awesome signal and shouldn't be getting 5 bars in the first place.
Click to expand...

All good points, but regardless of what the 3GS would show, the iPhone 4's crappy reception is still crappy reception.
 
peterjcat said:
2. Irregardless isn't a word.
Click to expand...
Oh really that's why webster has an entry for it. :rolleyes:

Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: \ˌir-i-ˈgärd-ləs\
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
Click to expand...

3. Speedtest.net tests don't prove one way or another whether it's a hardware or a software issue. All they prove is that it's not simply a problem with the number of bars being displayed, but nobody is saying that it is.
Click to expand...

Sure it does, bandwidth is being affected. Apple's response has been that the logic used to visually represent signal strength is incorrect and a fix will be sent to adjust the logic. The speedtest.net shows its just not display issue but a signal strength issue, i.e., hardware.
 
dagomike said:
That would be interesting, but not sure it would really matter. I doubt the phone is lying to itself. It's just lying to the users.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree, and I did say it does go 97% of the way to prove it's hardware, but at what point does it stop lying? Who knows. External hardware attached to show the SWR go nuts as you bridge the gap would be 100% proof that you could take to Cupertino and make Jobs eat. Or, more importantly, that you could give to a lawyer who could take it to court and force Apple to fix the bazillion they're so proud of having sold.

FYI: SWR is a ratio of power sent to and reflected back from the antenna. 1:1 is perfect, no standing waves, all power sent down the line is radiated out from the antenna. When an antenna isn't exactly resonant or doesn't match the power source resistance or feed (or both), the SWR goes back which means some of the power being sent out is reflected back to the transmitter and lost as heat. If it's bad enough and the power is high enough, it will fry the final stage of the transmitter.

dagomike said:
All good points, but regardless of what the 3GS would show, the iPhone 4's crappy reception is still crappy reception.
Click to expand...

The iPhone 4 actually has BETTER reception with the exception of this one problem. Put it in a case and it works better than any iPhone to date. Personally, mine hasn't dropped a call yet in the same places where I was never, in two years, able to hold a call longer than 5 minutes. Not even once.

Edit: The external portion of the antenna is why it has better reception than any iPhone before it. All Apple needs to do it replace the metal band, the entire metal band, with the exact same thing coated in a non-conductive material that won't easily chip or flake. Even better would be to take the band out of the equation entirely and, instead, put a groove on the inside of the band (assuming it's not already hollow), run a wire up that groove and use that for the antenna. All Apple is accomplishing with their "software fix" is lowering expectations that the phone will work at all in any given location. And you can be sure AT&T won't give a damn. They go by their reception map when you try to cancel a contract without an ETF, not the math formula du jour as dictated by Apple.
 
mgamber said:
Yeah, I agree, and I did say it does go 97% of the way to prove it's hardware, but at what point does it stop lying? Who knows. External hardware attached to show the SWR go nuts as you bridge the gap would be 100% proof that you could take to Cupertino and make Jobs eat. Or, more importantly, that you could give to a lawyer who could take it to court and force Apple to fix the bazillion they're so proud of having sold.
Click to expand...

I think I'm just saying the results from these decibel tests are pretty intuitive to what we would expect from real-world experiences. It doesn't prove anything, but I'd say actually measuring the antenna would be more of an exercise of curiosity than something needed to make the app credible.

The iPhone 4 actually has BETTER reception with the exception of this one problem. Put it in a case and it works better than any iPhone to date. Personally, mine hasn't dropped a call yet in the same places where I was never, in two years, able to hold a call longer than 5 minutes. Not even once.
Click to expand...
I haven't noticed better signal. I suppose I should test this more in very low signal coverage, but generally the bars have read lower than the 3GS when just sitting on a table in my home.

To me it's also silly to say it's better IF... My 3GS has better reception if I climb up on my roof. But I don't want to do that to make call, just like I don't want to be mindful of what I touch when using a phone.

It does work better with a case, however. I still drop more calls, but the signal bar at least doesn't drop.
 
dagomike said:
I think I'm just saying the results from these decibel tests are pretty intuitive to what we would expect from real-world experiences. It doesn't prove anything, but I'd say actually measuring the antenna would be more of an exercise of curiosity than something needed to make the app credible.

I haven't noticed better signal. I suppose I should test this more in very low signal coverage, but generally the bars have read lower than the 3GS when just sitting on a table in my home.

To me it's also silly to say it's better IF... My 3GS has better reception if I climb up on my roof. But I don't want to do that to make call, just like I don't want to be mindful of what I touch when using a phone.

It does work better with a case, however. I still drop more calls, but the signal bar at least doesn't drop.
Click to expand...

At home I have awful reception but since I have any at all, I can't get out of the contract. I also have two 3G's, a 3GS and two iPhone 4s and, without a doubt, the two iPhone 4s do much better than any of the other iPhones. Data is consistently and measureably faster and calls don't get dropped. What's worse, AT&T rolled out their microcell "nationwide" but it's not available here so I'm thinking of getting a repeater. They're more expensive, a decent one starts around $350, but there's no activation, they don't use your broadband connection, there's no monthly charge....to use your broadband connection...and they work great as long as you have any reception at all. They cover both bands, 3G and voice and you can buy a directional yagi antenna with lots of gain and point it right at a tower if you barely have reception on the best of days.
 
mgamber said:
At home I have awful reception but since I have any at all, I can't get out of the contract. I also have two 3G's, a 3GS and two iPhone 4s and, without a doubt, the two iPhone 4s do much better than any of the other iPhones. Data is consistently and measureably faster and calls don't get dropped. What's worse, AT&T rolled out their microcell "nationwide" but it's not available here so I'm thinking of getting a repeater. They're more expensive, a decent one starts around $350, but there's no activation, they don't use your broadband connection, there's no monthly charge....to use your broadband connection...and they work great as long as you have any reception at all. They cover both bands, 3G and voice and you can buy a directional yagi antenna with lots of gain and point it right at a tower if you barely have reception on the best of days.
Click to expand...

What repeater are you looking at?
 
maflynn said:
No because the problem is not inherent in the 3Gs (or older) phones because apple changed the antenna location.

irregardless of apple saying its just a software issue with what's being reported. It is a design flaw with the antenna being in contact with the skin which then interferes with the reception.

I've seen some stuff with the speedtest.net which also confirms its a hardware issue not a software bug.
Click to expand...

If I hold my old 3G a certain way, the bars drop just like on my iP4.
 
dagomike said:
It's been established that most all phones attenuate when held. The iPhone 4, however is much worse to the point of instant transmission loss. The iPhone 4 drops calls/data where the 3GS doesn't.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt that is happening, but I haven't experienced it, yet. In fact, my iP4 has maintained calls through an area where my 3G often dropped. I don't hold either phone in my hand, though, when driving.
 
dagomike said:
To me it's also silly to say it's better IF... My 3GS has better reception if I climb up on my roof. But I don't want to do that to make call, just like I don't want to be mindful of what I touch when using a phone.
Click to expand...

That's how I feel about the signal loss issue others are discussing. I don't ever bridge the antenna seam or cup the antenna in my palm when I use the phone. I'd have to really go out of my way to try to do it.

In everyday use, my 3GS dropped far more calls than my iPhone 4 does. I use mine everyday and count on it for my business. If it were worse than the 3GS I would have returned it immediately.
 
bluenoise said:
I don't doubt that is happening, but I haven't experienced it, yet. In fact, my iP4 has maintained calls through an area where my 3G often dropped. I don't hold either phone in my hand, though, when driving.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt some people have no problems. It's multivariate, so a single experience doesn't represent the whole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back