Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: John Navas on 5 Aug 2010 02:27 On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:13:52 -0700, in <injk56ta7jp0g7spc59do5ikl0ie3cbc13(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >213 first adopters were >surveyed approximately 3 weeks after initial introduction. What did >you expect? Of course everyone will be satisified. I was rather >surprised at how many were not. 213 buyers could easily have come >from one store and is a VERY small sample. With 3 million buyers, I >would want to see a survey of a minimum of about 0.1% of the user >base, or 3,000 users. What's more important than sample size is random selection. 213 chosen randomly is a respectable sample even of 3 million. 3000 not chosen randomly is not. I'm guessing the standard error of estimate might surprise you. >Also, customer satisfaction surveys tend to >guide the people to the desired response. I would want to see what >questions were asked and under what circumstances before declaring >this survey to be indicative of the general population. That's rarely a problem these days in my experience. >>also note that at&t's call drop rate is on an upward trend and just >>about *triple* that of verizon. at&t really does suck. > >I'm on Verizon and get very few dropped calls. I would say they all >suck, but AT&T seems to suck the worst. Unfortunately, that's the kind of anecdotal assessment you complain about, and it simply doesn't make sense. Because of dedicated channels, GSM will rarely drop calls except in mobile handoffs when the new tower is full, whereas CDMA2000 drops static calls due to cell breathing, so something else is at work, like differences in handsets, customer expectations, misreporting of call problems, etc. And even then, differences between carriers are relatively small, the same order of magnitude as the sampling error. Much ado about (little or) nothing. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: Jeff Liebermann on 5 Aug 2010 02:30 On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 22:48:49 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >In article <dnik56t7klh1o7eotlf4a51aqrambn6s5u(a)4ax.com>, Jeff >Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > >> Fast forward about 15 years to the iPhone 4. If customers had not >> heard about the antenna problems in the press, they would probably >> blame the dropped calls on the much maligned AT&T wireless network. > >yep, and a good part of it is at&t. people on other carriers aren't >reporting as many problems. norway said it's entirely at&t. Complaint rate is very inelastic. A small change in service or conditions will cause a massively disproportionate change in complaint rate. Just below the threshold, where complaints go exponential is where most vendors try to position their services. I also have a guess(tm) that some vendors are dropping long length calls when the system gets busy in order to improve availability. The problem is that I can't prove that it's intentional, and not the result of something like CDMA cell breathing or interference. >> I'm sure every iPhone 4 owner has tried the death grip test. If they >> were in a strong signal area, it wasn't a problem. If in a weak >> signal area, they suddenly have a problem. Since Apple or AT&T saw >> fit to remove the field test mode application in the iPhone 4, it's >> not possible for users to supply real numbers, resulting in some >> really subjective guesswork. > >there's a very slick replacement called signal that plots the towers on >a map. jailbreak only. Nifty: <http://thegadgets.net/technology-news/planetbeings-signal-app-lets-you-see-real-signal-strength-on-your-iphone-4-3g-and-3gs/> Thanks, but I use my 3G as a PDA without cell service. -- 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: nospam on 5 Aug 2010 02:36 In article <uqlk56hiot9ita8tki7uf9ia0bv94crlvf(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >I'm on Verizon and get very few dropped calls. I would say they all > >suck, but AT&T seems to suck the worst. > > Unfortunately, that's the kind of anecdotal assessment you complain > about, and it simply doesn't make sense. Because of dedicated channels, > GSM will rarely drop calls except in mobile handoffs when the new tower > is full, whereas CDMA2000 drops static calls due to cell breathing, so > something else is at work, like differences in handsets, customer > expectations, misreporting of call problems, etc. And even then, > differences between carriers are relatively small, the same order of > magnitude as the sampling error. Much ado about (little or) nothing. that sounds good on paper but at&t is consistently rated the worst in multiple surveys, including the one you say is a respectable sample size, where the call drop rate was nearly triple that of verizon. that's quite a bit more than 'relatively small.'
From: John Navas on 5 Aug 2010 03:14 On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:30:49 -0700, in <crlk56lctpm4elgpjp70jj0nj3n3e6vgnp(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 22:48:49 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> >wrote: >>yep, and a good part of it is at&t. people on other carriers aren't >>reporting as many problems. norway said it's entirely at&t. > >Complaint rate is very inelastic. A small change in service or >conditions will cause a massively disproportionate change in complaint >rate. Just below the threshold, where complaints go exponential is >where most vendors try to position their services. I also have a >guess(tm) that some vendors are dropping long length calls when the >system gets busy in order to improve availability. The problem is >that I can't prove that it's intentional, and not the result of >something like CDMA cell breathing or interference. With all due respect, that sounds like assumptions to me. ;) My own experience is quite different: Complaints are greatly affected by perception (like blaming AT&T for iPhone issues), level of frustration (like how annoying the issue is), how well the issue is understood (like what actually caused the problem), and offsetting factors (like how cool the device is in other ways). I can't count the number of times I've heard people say something like, "My computer crashed, I must have done something wrong." Level of service in most if not all companies I've worked with is actually a sophisticated profitability assessment, balancing the cost of lost business against the cost of retaining business, as well as the value of reputation, a big issue at most consumer companies. They tend to find that happy customers are much more profitable than customers who are just tolerating their product or service. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: Todd Allcock on 5 Aug 2010 04:06
At 04 Aug 2010 20:36:03 -0700 nospam wrote: > John Navas wrote: > > > Alan Baker 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... > > > > > >...right? > > > > On the contrary -- see data from Jeff and the citation I posted. > > his data is not real world, much like your claim about specs of > temperature extremes not being all that relevant. > > changewave just did a survey of people who actually own the iphone 4 > (real world data, oh no) Well, yes and no. A survey is data based on people's recollections. It's as "real" as their memories are accurate (more below-) > and found that overall, the iphone 4 is > outperforming just about all other smartphones (their words), although > it's a little less than the 3gs. "Their words"- minus a few. Outperforming "in terms of overall customer satisfaction and meeting owners' expectations..." was the rest of the quote. It's disingenuous of you to imply the "outperforming" has anything to do with antenna or reception performance. > nearly 2/3rds of the respondents do *not* find the antenna to be a > problem and an additional 14% think it's a minor issue. for the math > impaired that's about 80% who think it's not a big deal. > > of the remaining users, 14% think the antenna issue is somewhat of a > problem and only 7% think it's a serious problem. > > that's pretty good for a phone that the media would like you to believe > is fatally flawed. Or a testament to just how good cellular service is in most areas. Even so, that's 1-in-5 believing it's a problem. > the survey also notes that the #1 complaint is about at&t (not the > antenna) Also disingenuous: The number one complaint (27%) isn't actually AT&T service, but the _requirement_ to use AT&T. That could just as easily be an indictment of the iPhone's exclusivity with any one carrie ras it is of AT&T itself. The second place complant was a tie between AT&T service issues, and ANTENNA ISSUES! Followed closely (23%) by dropped calls! Is it not possible that some of the dissatisfaction of AT&T by iPhone owners is from antenna/dropped calls problems of the phone being blamed on the operator? > and also that the iphone 4 is dropping *fewer* calls than the > previous 3gs, even though at&t's overall call drop rate has gone *up*. Again, Changewave uses surveys, based on customer recollections, to determine dropped call rates. The fact that AT&T (according to Steve's Antennagate presentation) told us that based on their _actual_ data the 4 drops more calls than the 3GS, tells us Changewave's data accuracy (meaning the fuzzy memories of their respondents) is likely suspect. > also, norway tested the iphone 4 and found that it's not a problem > there and is blaming everything on at&t. IIRC, O2 in the UK took the opposite stance. (Blaming the phone, I mean, not blaming Norway!) > i know someone who uses an > unlocked iphone 4 on t-mobile usa and has no issues at all. > > so no, it really isn't a big deal, according to actual users. 4 out of 5 if you believe Changewave. 20% having issues is a pretty significant number! |