NEWS: Apple sued over hot iPad shutdowns
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: Todd Allcock on 5 Aug 2010 00:32 At 04 Aug 2010 19:56:40 -0700 John Navas wrote: > On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:03:35 -0700, in > <alangbaker-9DD5D2.18033504082010(a)news.shawcable.com>, Alan Baker > <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > > >In article <90o6o.49749$xZ2.44301(a)newsfe07.iad>, > > John Slade <hhitman86(a)pacbell.net> wrote: > > >> To me this is yet another clear cut case where a device has > >> been produced without allowing technology to catch up. There > >> should be no compromises for using an iPad or any tablet/netbook > >> in sunlight. They should have tested it in the sunlight. They > >> could have made it thicker with better cooling. But no, they > >> wanted thin and cute rather than a little thicker and practical. > > > >How would making it thicker have given it better cooling? > > Less thermal energy per unit of volume. Physical shrink of a device > with the same components tends to exacerbate thermal problems. Then the iPad should be fine. It's an iPod Touch with 800% of the volume! ;)
From: Char Jackson on 5 Aug 2010 00:54 On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 22:31:27 -0600, Todd Allcock <elecconnec(a)AnoOspamL.com> wrote: >Assuming there's a heat shutdown issue on the iPad (and other than in >this thread I've never heard of it,) I expect Jobs to do another >presentation showing various mobile devices shutting down in hot cars, >desserts, and convection ovens, and tell us all it's not just the iPad >that shuts down when overheated. I know you meant deserts, but that made me laugh. Thanks. :-)
From: Jeff Liebermann on 5 Aug 2010 01:02 On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:38:10 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >In article <uaak5653diku4j78lid5bn9voug1ruffuc(a)4ax.com>, Jeff >Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:29:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> >> wrote: >> >You do realize that the whole antenna issue is looking more and more >> >like the non-issue that some of us said it was... >> >> See: >> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/cellular/cell-test.htm> >> >> >...right? >> >> Nope. The iPhone 4 is at least between 6 and 18 times more affected >> by touching the antenna than the worst conventional cell phone I >> tested. Double that again for the typical cell phone. It's not a >> problem in strong signal areas, but might drop the call in a weak >> signal area. > >now try real world tests. Is there a problem with my testing methods or results? If so, how is it not a "real world" test? Have you tried your phone? >changewave found that the iphone 4 is dropping *fewer* calls than the >3gs, and roughly 80% of iphone 4 users don't find the antenna issue to >be much of a problem, but they do think at&t sucks, the #1 complaint. Did you actually read the original article on which that's based? It's a customer satisfaction survey, not a field test: <http://www.changewaveresearch.com/articles/2010/08/new_iphone4_owners_20100804.html> In a surprising finding, iPhone 4 owners reported a better dropped call rating (5.2%) than their 3GS counterparts (6.3%). In other words, despite the hoopla surrounding the antenna issue, in actuality iPhone 4 owners report experiencing slightly fewer dropped calls on the average than do iPhone 3GS owners. That's a fabulous 213 iPhone 4 owners surveyed. That's out of 3 million sold in the first 3 weeks. Funny, but I don't see anything about 80% of the users not having a problem with the antenna. However, in the 3rd graph, you'll see that it's the #3 complaint, where 24% of the 213 users didn't like the antenna problems. Extrapolate that to 3 million owners, and there should be 720,000 irate users rioting at Apple's doorstep. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl(a)cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
From: ZnU on 5 Aug 2010 01:02 In article <s0ak5698todbea96dqr2gg53hk5vv4o8ht(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:03:35 -0700, in > <alangbaker-9DD5D2.18033504082010(a)news.shawcable.com>, Alan Baker > <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > > >In article <90o6o.49749$xZ2.44301(a)newsfe07.iad>, > > John Slade <hhitman86(a)pacbell.net> wrote: > > >> To me this is yet another clear cut case where a device has > >> been produced without allowing technology to catch up. There > >> should be no compromises for using an iPad or any tablet/netbook > >> in sunlight. They should have tested it in the sunlight. They > >> could have made it thicker with better cooling. But no, they > >> wanted thin and cute rather than a little thicker and practical. > > > >How would making it thicker have given it better cooling? > > Less thermal energy per unit of volume. Physical shrink of a device > with the same components tends to exacerbate thermal problems. In the case of an iPad in direct sunlight, the thermal energy is primarily coming from an external source. Unless you think they should have pun a fan in the thing (which is ludicrous, IMO), it's really unclear exactly what they could have possibly done about this. I mean, other than making the device highly reflective. Which it is. In any event, there is no systematic testing showing an actual problem here in the first place. -- "The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes
From: ZnU on 5 Aug 2010 01:09
In article <nkgk565d1p8mk0g2bdsajtg4gpb3ke4umn(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: [snip] > That's a fabulous 213 iPhone 4 owners surveyed. That's out of 3 > million sold in the first 3 weeks. Funny, but I don't see anything > about 80% of the users not having a problem with the antenna. However, > in the 3rd graph, you'll see that it's the #3 complaint, where 24% of > the 213 users didn't like the antenna problems. Extrapolate that to 3 > million owners, and there should be 720,000 irate users rioting at > Apple's doorstep. Yet there don't seem to be. You frankly can't trust people reporting that they're bothered by a problem the media has told them they're supposed to be bothered by. -- "The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes |