I wasn’t present at Friday’s special iPhone 4 Press Conference held by Apple at their Cupertino Campus, but I followed the excellent live coverage from Jason Snell at Macworld. Ignoring the specifics of the announcements (spoiler: there is no fucking recall you fucktards), one thing jumped out at me: Steve Jobs was palpably angry with the media.
In the process of providing actual hard data regarding the impact of the antenna issues (hint, not fucking much) Steve called out no less than three separate organizations for their shoddy coverage. First, of course, was the douche collective over at Jizzmodo. The less said about those felonious fuckwits the better, so I’ll leave it at that. In addition, during the Q&A portion of the event, Steve Jobs and Scott Forstall denied anonymously sourced reports by BusinessWeek and the New York Times regarding the issue calling them “bullshit” and patently false” respectively.
In addition to those specific examples Steve had some choice comments about the press in general. Here’s Jason Snell’s report of what Steve Said:
In search of eyeballs for websites, people don’t care what they leave in their wake. So I look at this whole thing and say, wow. Apple’s been around for 34 years. Haven’t we earned the credibility and trust from some of the press to give us a little bit of the benefit of the doubt, of our motivations, the fact that we’re confident and will solve these problems. I think we have that trust from our users, but I didn’t see that in the press. This thing was blown so far out of proportion. But I’m not going to say we’re not at fault. We didn’t educate enough.
Now to be clear here, unlike some others in the Twitterverse I don’t think that Steve is asking for a free pass from the press here. I think that he’s expressing his dismay over how the press, in the complete absence of any actual hard evidence, blew this issue completely out of proportion to the point where a camera-hog Senator felt compelled to get in on the action.
And let’s be clear here. This story was blown out of proportion. Does the iPhone 4 have a spot that, when blocked, causes signal attenuation? Yes, as do all modern smartphones. Is this situation acerbated by the fact that the iPhone 4′s antenna is placed outside of the casing? Yes, but that decision demonstrably improves reception in the vast majority of situations. The bottom line is, this was a “debacle” almost entirely created by the press.
As I was driving to get lunch after the press conference it came to me why I so identify with Steve Jobs’ reaction: I’ve been in the same position.
More than once in my career I’ve been in a situation where something has gone wrong, sometimes catastrophically wrong. During situations like that, when every available hand is on deck trying to fix the problem, the most enraging thing in the world is a chorus of people who have no data, no real understanding of the issue, or even an understanding of the principles involved with the issue demanding answers NOW!
That’s the role that the press has taken during this debacle. Unquestioningly repeating the claims of anyone who was willing to make a comment, speculating about technical issues that they were patently unqualified to comment on, and demanding that Apple act NOW NOW NOW to resolve the issue. And speaking of just horrible reporting; the less said of Consumer Reports embarrassing flip-flopping the better.
In a situation like this there comes a time when someone has to stand up and say “enough.” Again, I’ve been there. I’ve had to stand in the middle of an engineering bullpen and tell the CEO of my company that every minute I spend answering panicked emails and attending blamestorming conference calls was a minute that I wasn’t spending fixing the fucking problem.
That’s basically what Steve Jobs did on Friday. He got up on stage, explained that this issue wasn’t as bad as it was being made out to be, told the people that mattered how it would be resolved, and told the harpies to shut the fuck up. I’m glad he finally got pissed off enough to do it.
LOL fanboy much? My phone is a “modern smartphone” and it doesn't have that magic spot you're claiming.
Bottom line is, they knew it was a problem, could have given free cases from day one(and this would have been a dead issue), and they get all the media praise, so when things go wrong, Jobsie can't claim it's unfair.
So, should motorola give out free covers too?
You just haven't found the spot yet. They are there for all phones, because of the way antennas work. (hint, there is a dead spot where the connector is.)
I'd like to know what phone that is.
I've got your fucking fanboy right here. The bottom line is it's a fucking multibillion dollar company with a hierarchy, deadlines, and a fuckton (metric) of people working for them.
22 days is fucking EPIC speed for a corporation of this size to respond to the issue. And all the while the douche republic led by Jesus Diaz was whipping this into a page view fuck fest. The bottom line, like the real fucking line where reality starts and bullshit ends is the actual users were not lining up returning the phone, the actual users if you knew any, were so busy enjoying the phone that it's a non issue, Just like the data suggests.. Those that weren't were most likely group thinkers that spend 10 hours a day covering the thing intentionally on youtube and saying SEE! SEE WHAT I MEAN.
BTW coming here and calling him a fanboy after reading his article, shows that you have a tenuous grasp on the english language.
Other than that lack of data this whole fucking frenzy was all for page views as steve said. I dare say Engadget was the most professional of the blogs about it. They didnt post 55 differently worded articles a day.
Also has anyone else Noticed that Fandroids are now probably the single most obnoxious thing on the internet? Like worse than MacMacs.
Nope no dead spots. Maybe I “just haven't found it yet”, but after having a phone for 3 months, and not finding it, nor having any reports of it happening with my phone anywhere, I'm sticking with my original analysis that it doesn't have the magic iPhone4 spot.
That doesn't mean that the iPhone4 is crap or that Apple sucks. I'm not anti-Apple, just anti-fanboy and a little bit anti-Jobs.
Actually, people that type in all caps and lose their tempers over online discussions of phones are the most obnoxious.
As far as “actual users” I know three personally. One hasn't enough of an issue to complain about, one lives in the sticks and has complained since day one(but to be fair, he has never had good coverage), and the third had his company 'recall' his iPhone4 due to some Exchange issues.
My main reason for initially replying was directly related to the blog post regarding Jobs anger at the media. He had no problem when every media outlet worshiped at his feet, but now when they are reporting negatively he gets his panties in a wad. The guy at cult of mac.com had the same opinion.
http://www.cultofmac.com/steve-jobs-hates-his-b...
to Weapon II–It's an HTC Touch Pro2
Are you implying that I TYPED IN ALL CAPS? BeCAUSE i'M NOT seEING iT.
Steve didn't complain that they were getting negative press from the media. He complained that they were making shit up and criticising Apple for a problem that most smart phones have.
I can't find a dead spot on my iPhone 4 either – whoop de do. In the UK we have the iPhone on 5 networks. I have managed to replicate the signal drop on one iPhone on one network. I live in Central London which has good coverage. There clearly is an issue for some people, but a very small minority, and always in marginal signal areas. Just so you know – I know the deathgrip, but my signal is good enough that it doesn't make any difference. I suspect yours is too,hence you can't 'find it yet'.
He didn't mind when they were praising the iPhone for having capabilities and features that most smartphones had…
Quite possible.
So the fuck what?
The fact that the tech media is consistently incompetent doesn't give them some sort of pass. You have a problem with overly glowing praise of Apple products, get your own fucking blog and whine about it there.
It's mainly an artifact of the current moment in history. The MacMacs were the same level of obnoxiousness a few years back when Apple began their upswing. Now the majority of them have either grown up or moved on when Apple “sold out.”
And if you have a problem with differing opinions, turn off the comments. Just a thought.
So because the press have given Apple praise in the past means they can never again complain about criticism?
I have no problem with differing opinions. I do have a problem with sloppy arguments. Arguing that Apple can't be pissed at shoddy negative journalism because they choose not to be pissed at shoddy positive journalism is an example of the later.
Point taken, however, that wasn't my argument. Instead of recreating an entire article, I point you towards the link provided above which somewhat sums up my thoughts. Somewhat.
Sigh…can you make the call? yes? Then the number of bars is kind of immaterial. Can you make the call? No? Then the number of bars doesn't matter.
If you can get work done, bars are, MAYBE a POSSIBLE indication of connection quality, but not as often as you think. If you can't, then getting 1, 3, 5, or eleventy bars doesn't much fuckin' matter does it?
Thanks for (finally) admitting your biases. Discussions are best served when either we know of the biases or , better yet, there aren't any. And don't spew out the “everybody has a bias” argument – if a bias interferes with with a discussion it ruins the natural progression of discourse. It's like pissing in the soup.
You'll take my bars from my cold, dead DeathGrip®
Seriously, why didn't Apple just add more bars? If it went to seven or nine, they would have FIXED this whole problem by now!!
Just watched the press conference video http://bit.ly/b3Z8es (h/t @ihnatko). The adjective “seething” immediately sprang to mind.
The press should be thankful that Jobs only castrated them figuratively. I'm surprised that blood wasn't spilled.
Just for our sake, go look at the popular tech blogs stories over the last 2 weeks. They have taken 2 data points. Sj email to a customer, and an anandtech article and turned it into over 300 articles with almost 500k words. And that is with no real data.
This is purely unnacceptable. If you can't understand that the 22 days since the iPhone has launched and Apple responding is fucking fast. And this isnt even an oil spill. This is a fucking cell phone that for all intents and purposes works just great.
If you look at the comments on those tech blogs, you will also see a amount of fud spreaders saying shit like “too bad it doesnt work like a phone” which is bullshit hyperbole. It works better than the 3gs as a phone, it just has a soft spot, like a little baby. Can you not manage to take care of a baby without putting your thumb in it's head? ? /jk
PS: No all caps, except that PS, fuck and that one.
I dont know how many fucking times I have to tell you this John. Apple only owns like 30 million bars. There is only so fucking many bars to go around, fortunately as you said bars mean jack fuck and they are taller now, so there is that.
So play nice and share motherfuckers.
ELEVENTY BARZZZZZ
It would almost be worth jailbreaking an iPhone to make it have 11 bars.
“I’m glad he finally got pissed off enough to do it.”
I'm just sad it were basically respectable news outlets that drove him to be this angry and disappointed.
You can see Steve didn't particularly care about tech blogs and the random NMD; he was angry that journalistic institutions gave into the temptation of producing badly researched, exaggerated and unverified link bait.
Than you're a lucky man, because by habit you hold your phone in a way that doesn't hamper reception.
Just to give you an example of the dead spot issue:
I've used the Sony Ericsson W550i (http://www.livingroom.org.au/cameraphone/sony-e...) for quite a while. I bought it because it was attested the best reception of all (!) cell phones in the market back then.
The reason for this? All of its antennae sit inside the arch at the top of the phone.
I was able to place and hold onto calls in the relatively weak E-band network (E-Plus in Germany, 1850MHz) where nobody else could.
Now comes the big BUT: Sony Ericsson explicitly wrote in the manual not to touch the arch, because it would hamper signal quality and it did. Put a finger on the antenna and it would loose the signal quicker than any other phone I had before.
I'd just wish people would read the AnandTech articles about this issue and the reality of how well bars reflect the ability to send and receive data.
Then again, most people don't have the comprehensive skills to understand them.
You're perfectly right and it goes even further than this:
Most publications, actual press and blaghers seem to have abandoned the use of phrases like “from what I have heard”, “this isn't scientifically proven data”, “these comments come from a layman”, “the source of this information is”, or a plain and simple “in my (humble) opinion”.
Lately, humility, professionalism and logic seem to have taken an extended leave from the tech press/blogosphere when it comes to matters Apple.
I'm blogging for fun and hope that the fact that I have no stake in this hole business will keep me grounded.
The iphone 4 has a spot that when TOUCHED, not “blocked”, causes signal interference. There is a big difference. Putting tape over the spot causes the problem to go away, even if you “block” the spot. This is nothing like the issue with other phones. It's a design defect, pure and simple. The external antenna was a bad idea. If it was a car, it would be called a lemon.
Blocking or touching… it's attenuation in both cases.
The error in your logic is, that the observed issue has no stronger effect on signal quality than 'blocking' on other phones, which was shown by Apple yesterday. Yes, the design has this particular drawback, but in most other cases it delivers better reception.
“no stronger” .. You don't have enough data to make such a comparison. Apple's presentation is not a reliable scientific study. Their comparison with other phones has confused you. In one case you have a conductive object (a fingertip) making direct contact with an antenna. On the other hand you have phones that are properly designed with antennas encased in a non-conductive material. Apple had to cover those phones with an entire hand to see a change in signal strength. Who knows what other tricks they used in testing. (Apple's never been too rigorous about their benchmarks either).
to quote a comment from another thread: “Anyone that knows anything about antennas and rf, knows that if you touch a antenna with a conductive object (your hand) it de-tunes the antenna, killing the efficiency and absorbs the energy like a rf load.”
So, your statement “in most other cases it delivers better reception” is incorrect. The initial iPhone4 antenna design is an inferior solution in ALL cases because the antenna is exposed. This is why they rushed out a fix. Unlike the initial iPhone4, the currently shipping iPhone4 antennas are covered with a non-conductive coating – a temporary improvement until the iPhone 5. When that coating chips or rubs off the users will have the signal problems again. The external antenna is a stupid, broken, failed design – a lemon.
It would've been nice of you to reply to my post, but alas…
Let's begin:
“On the other hand you have phones that are properly designed with antennas encased in a non-conductive material.”
— What makes you think this is the only proper way to design antennae? Just because it is done like this most of the time, doesn't mean it is THE proper way. You're biased.
“Apple had to cover those phones with an entire hand to see a change in signal strength.”
— Yes, they did, but Jobs also said, that with the iPhone 4 you don't need an entire hand, just this little spot.
You're biased and you didn't listen to the press conference carefully.
I had and have phones were you only need one finger to provoke a similar effect: Treo 650, Sony Ericsson W550i, Ericsson T39m, Siemens SL45.
“(Apple's never been too rigorous about their benchmarks either)”
— Yes they are, take their battery benchmarks and their graphics benchmarks and check for yourself. You're biased and you didn't provide proof for your statement.
“to quote a comment from another thread”
— Where is that quote from? Who made it?
“So, your statement “in most other cases it delivers better reception” is incorrect.”
— No, it's not, I took it from the AnandTech review of the device, which I didn't link to in my response to you, my bad. Check the link at the bottom and read the review. But go ahead, disprove me.
“The initial iPhone4 antenna design is an inferior solution in ALL cases because the antenna is exposed.”
— No, it's not. I don't know squat about RF tech, but this I know. It has disadvantages, but it is not inferior per se. You're biased.
“This is why they rushed out a fix”
— They didn't. They fixed the euphemistic display algorithm for the bars and an Exchange bug.
“Unlike the initial iPhone4, the currently shipping iPhone4 antennas are covered with a non-conductive coating – a temporary improvement until the iPhone 5.”
— Source? So far I've heard nothing of that sorts, again, check the AnandTech review, this time the second link.
So far all you did was make biased, unproven allegations, didn't deliver sources for your information and criticise the device.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3794/the-iphone-4...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3821/iphone-4-red...
You are correct, in that there is /some/ attenuation if you touch the sweet spot, or simply block it. You will also get some measure of attenuation if you 'block' the antenna on any other phone. This is a matter of physics. However, you will ALWAYS get more attenuation if you touch the antenna. This is also a matter of physics, because as your hand touches the antenna, you will essentially become part of the antenna. Antennas are finely tuned to certain frequency bands by the length of wire and the resistance that is added to them. By bringing yourself in as an antenna element (or even worse, making yourself a bridge between two antenna elements which seems to be causing the worst issues), you change the properties of the antenna, and it will no longer be tuned for the frequency band that you are trying to get.
To think of it another way — lets say you are having a conversation with somebody. 'Blocking' is similar to the person you are talking to putting their hand in front of their mouth — the same signal still comes through but it is quieter. When you change the properties of the antenna it is similar to talking with your mouth completely full of food — the words will get garbled and most likely not understandable to others.
I was lucky enough to run some tests in my lab to see what the difference was. While all phones drop some signal when you hold them, (most average about 5 – 10dBm), the iPhone 4 lost nearly 20 dBm worth of signal when you touch it's sweet spot. The most I was able to get the iPhone 3 to drop by touch alone was only 4 dBm. “Death Grips” (which are impractical to study, because they are not natural usage of the phones) caused significant signal loss in all phones tested — however the iPhone lost nearly 27 dBm in our tests, while our average smartphone (in our case the BlackBerry 8900g) lost only 21 dBm. My test results mirrored those of Anandtech's available here : http://www.anandtech.com/show/3794/the-iphone-4...
Before you ask, my background is that of an RF Engineer, and I am a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Michigan. Our lab uses its own BDA in an RF neutral environment for testing.
Thanks for the great explanation.
I'm aware of that problem, I used to build/drive RC cars back when I was younger.
The effects of a touched antenna were quite funny sometimes.
To be honest, I had a thought similar to the people at AnandTech when I saw the finished product: Is there some kind of coating on the antennae?
But since you have made some tests, maybe you can answer this: How big is the loss in signal quality, when you hold the phone without (!) bridging the gap between the GSM/3G antenna and the WiFi/GPS/Bluetooth antenna?
I don't have an iPhone 4 of my own so far, but I've tried a friend's iPhone 4 and couldn't replicate this problem, as long as I didn't touch the sweet spot. I know of one situation where I'd bridge the gap unintentionally (when holding the phone with my left hand during a call), but even then I wasn't able to drop a call
(we do have good reception, though).
It's really hard to actually hold the iPhone 4 without bridging the two antennas (part of the design flaw). The GSM/3G antenna runs along the right side and bottom, where the other antenna runs along the top and left. If you are careful and only hold it along the bottom, you can do it.
By holding only the GSM antenna element, the drop is about 8- 11 dBm, which is about an 5% drop of the normal scale.
Interesting. So when you don't touch the sweet spot, the attenuation effect isn't much greater than with other phones. Please correct me, if I read this wrong.
Did you by any chance measure what happens when your right pinky touches the GSM antenna on the lower left side, the phone resting in the palm of your right hand and the ring and middle finger touching the WiFi antenna? That is incidentally the way I would hold the iPhone 4 (always held the 3GS in the same manner).
I can accept that Apple was too optimistic when placing the antennae around the device, but a 'defective by design' verdict I cannot.
I guess there's going to be a big market for 2cm long stickers to put over the gap on the iPhone 4
can you release all the data on your phone testing, including raw measurements?
actually, it doesn't always “de-tune” the antenna. To be blunt, it doesn't “de-tune”, it “re-tunes” or alters the antenna reception characteristics. in the case of the iPhone, because of the wavelengths and frequencies involved, this reduces sensitivity. At other wavelengths, such as VHF TV ranges, grabbing the antenna with your hand can increase the sensitivity. Same thing with car radios, at least older models. Put your hand over the radio, or reach out and grab the antenna, sometimes, you lost signal, sometimes, it came in more clearly.
so there, now we're all on the same page.
Also, external antennas on cell phones? not new. Not even slightly. In fact, they used to be the norm, until the obsession with small phones forced all the antennas internal. That was never an engineering requirement, it was a fashion statement. The last phone I had with an external antenna, the Kyocera 6035, got calls in places your 'superior phone with an internal antenna' would think was an anechoic chamber.
It was also ugly as sin with the antenna extended, but damn, it got calls. While you're bitching about the attenuation from the human hand, keep in mind that the iPhone antenna design is *far* more sensitive than the iPhone 3GS, (by almost 20dbm). Actually, given the measurements i've seen of sensitivity between the iPhone 3GS (-107dbm) and the iPhone 4 (-121dbm), worst case with the attenuation, the iPhone 4 is still in the -100dbm sensitivity range. So, it's not like you've a brick. in fact, true net loss between the 3GS and the 4 is about 6dbm.
If you enclose the antenna, you lose sensitivity, but you mitigate the holding it issue. If you expose the antenna, you gain a lot of sensitivity, (around 14dbm), but you have more issues with skin interference. There's no free ride in engineering. Every design choice has problems. Every one.
I'd love to see them, too. Should've asked earlier. It would be extremely helpful for putting this issue into perspective.
you are a moron sir! thank you, now, may i have another please?
Another question for you:
Did you test in 3G mode, or was 3G deactivated? It's of interest, because everything I've read so far, only mentioned 3G or didn't mention the mode at all.
you are generally misinformed.
http://www.ifixit.com/blog/2010/07/is-apple-sil...
Huzzah, more unverified speculation from blogtards with no particular expertise in the subject at hand.
The old external cell phone antennas were always clad in plastic or some other non conductive material. Not the same thing as an exposed conductive metal antenna. It's a misleading and irrelevant comparison.
You cannot compare TV which is a different spectrum with different characteristics. Cell phones are more sensitive to signal loss than tv or radio. it's ok to lose tv or radio reception for a few seconds. Not ok during a phone call. So again, it's misleading to compare radio and tv. It's a bad idea to expose a cell phone antenna in that manner.
I agree that it may work better in some situations (if you're wearing gloves, for example). On balance it's a bad engineering decision that they probably will not repeat (given that they're already starting to coat the iPhone 4 antennas in some kind f plastic).
It's almost disgusting how Jobs sought to deflect attention by suggesting that other phones suffer from the same design flaw.
In a word: bullshit. It may be hard for you to do so, but the millions of iPhone 4 owners who aren't complaining about this “issue” — you know, the real users not overly self-entitled members of the tech media — indicates that people adapt and move on.
They're looking into the issue, still nothing conclusive. Why am I misinformed again?
You should check your reading comprehension skills.
You rewrite history when you defend Apple's benchmarking. They were notorious for producing misleading benchmarks in their marketing materials. Do you not remember that? How you can defend Apple so blindly is really bizarre. Many reports on the web that current shipping models of the iPhone4 have different plastics and coatings to fix the antenna issue and the proximity sensor issue. Common sense would tell me that they shipped a lemon too early and are trying to defuse the problem with PR and misleading scientific comparisons while they fix the problem. Sorry for not replying to right post. Not familiar with your site. I'll shut up now. Sorry, but this site really seems like an extension of Apple PR. I'm pretty sure I can drink the Angry Drunk under the table any day, unless we're drinking Apple Kool Aid.
[...] complete absence of any actual hard evidence, blew this issue completely out of proportionSource:http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2010/07/16/why-steve-jobs-is-legitimately-pissed-at-the-media/ Jul [...]