Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
not worried. Not that they are the same, i don't know very much about antennas... but i know when i used to touch my old bunny ear tv antenna the signal actually improved, same thing for my fm radio antenna. And as for jumping the signals between the 2, i don't think it's anything to worry about.
 
And you know it picks up a better signal how??

I'm a bit worried that holding the antenna will harm reception. We'll see.

You hold your iphone now dont you? The RF is propagating through less layers now, since its on the external part of the phone.
 
Why does it sound dumb you ask?

Yes, it is because it was like ten years ago that cell phones had external antennas. I wonder why?

Why? Because internal antennas are more aesthetically pleasing. Internal antennas were actually a very big technical challenge for the cell-phone industry.

Antennas work better exposed. It's really basic science.

Apple wouldn't release it if it wasn't better.

Yeah, becuase Apple NEVER makes a mistake. :rolleyes:
 
um. thats not what i was saying. i was saying apple has new and improved antennas. this proves it perfectly fine

No, you used the iPad reception to prove the 4G antenna would work fine. They don't use the same antenna setup.
 
They will be fine due to the "seams" :p

They must have tested it thoroughly.
The guy who lost the prototype whaz checking how a beer jump could impact the performance, also how good the signals was.

And why do you think the front facing camera is there?
It is to shoot picts of the faces we will have when we receive our :apple: magical electrical shocks while using our iPhone 4.
It also detects if the user is talking or writing in MR about seams -> magical shock -> instant pict -> Cloud -> iAd video
 
I wish Apple would put out a statement in layman’s terms for the benefits of this design so people wouldn't be so worked up.

I'm an RF engineer with an EE degree and 10 years of experience. By touching the antenna your body becomes part of the circuit, essentially making one large antenna. This improves reception considerably. Remeber old rabbit ears on your tv? You use to move them with your hands, when you touched them the picture was clear, as soon as you let go it got worse? It made it hard to tune them in. Same thing applies here. The bars decreasing when touched is a software glitch because the impedance has changed on the circuit, the software is simply calibrated to not being held.

As far as shorting it out, some simple isolation barriers take care of that, so no worries.
 
I wish Apple would put out a statement in layman’s terms for the benefits of this design so people wouldn't be so worked up.

I'm an RF engineer with an EE degree and 10 years of experience. By touching the antenna your body becomes part of the circuit, essentially making one large antenna. This improves reception considerably. Remeber old rabbit ears on your tv? You use to move them with your hands, when you touched them the picture was clear, as soon as you let go it got worse? It made it hard to tune them in. Same thing applies here. The bars decreasing when touched is a software glitch because the impedance has changed on the circuit, the software is simply calibrated to not being held.

As far as shorting it out, some simple isolation barriers take care of that, so no worries.

Makes sense, but how do you explain the actual dropped calls? Also, aren't antenna lengths optimized to receive specific wavelengths? Wouldn't changing the antenna length potentially harm the reception?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.