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: Jeff Liebermann on 5 Aug 2010 21:07 On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 17:21:10 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >In article <hlkm56pra2bet8aj0u9gu0tohl98n0ppui(a)4ax.com>, Jeff >Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > >> >I think a persistent setting is changed in the phone when activated. >> >> Yep. The flag to allow operation might also be on the SIM card. >> Difficult to tell yet. > >it's not on the sim. Ok, thanks. This is fairly new to me and I'm learning a few things the hard way. >> Agreed. I shouldn't have upgraded to 4.0 and 4.0.1. I would go back >> to 3.1.3 via the DFU mode, but every time I try it on 2 different >> phones, it hangs and dies about 3/4th of the way into the firmware >> upload. I know it can be done because there are examples all over the >> web, but I seem to be having problems. I'm trying to avoid turning >> jailbreaking into a major project, but it seems that there's no >> alternative. > >a 3g can go back, a 3gs cannot unless you took measures prior to >upgrading. Yep. Fortunately, I don't have an 3GS iPhone. However, I goofed. Apparently, the error message is normal. See: <http://lifehacker.com/5572003/how-to-downgrade-your-iphone-3g%5Bs%5D-from-ios-4-to-ios-313> I also didn't know about RecBoot. >there are also some things you can do to improve the performance of a >3g on ios4, and apple is looking into it. <http://thenextweb.com/apple/2010/07/27/does-ios4-1-fix-slow-iphone3g-units-yes/> I haven't tried iOS 4.1 beta yet. 4.1 beta 3 just came out, but I have to wait for the jailbreak to try it. Some users claim 4.1 fixes the slowness, others say otherwise. -- 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 21:12 In article <82nm56tmuv8f4rn75mfd72p6i1hh79smb5(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > I haven't tried iOS 4.1 beta yet. 4.1 beta 3 just came out, but I > have to wait for the jailbreak to try it. Some users claim 4.1 fixes > the slowness, others say otherwise. unless you're a developer you won't get far with beta versions, since they can only be activated by developers.
From: Jeff Liebermann on 5 Aug 2010 21:23 On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 17:59:41 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: >Dude: here's what the person (Lloyd, not John) said in the post to which >you just replied: > >"In numbers in use? I don't think so. Can you provide a link showing >that please?" > >And you provided market share figures instead. Let's play sematics. Why would Lloyd ask John to provide numbers for something that he didn't claim (i.e. overall ownership)? John said: On the contrary -- Android has now moved past iPhone into 2nd place behind RIM in smartphones. which means current sales, not overall user count. John's statement is correct for both the current quarter and 6 month sales. Also, see link and quoted numbers below. The first column is "overall US ownership" which is the number of users in the US by phone operating system. The numbers were extracted from the 2nd and 3rd graphs from the URL below. My notation as it being the 2nd quarter, 2010 is to indicate the ending date. That should be the same as "in numbers in use". >> For overall user figures (2nd quarter, 2010), see: >> <http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/android-soars-but-iphone-still-most-desired-as-smartphones-grab-25-of-u-s-mobile-market/> >> >> Overall US 6 months >> ownership sales >> Rim 35% 33% >> iPhone 28% 23% >> Windoze Mobile 15% 11% >> Android 13% 27% >> Palm 3% 1% >> Linux 3% 3% >> Symbian 2% 2% -- 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: Lloyd Parsons on 5 Aug 2010 21:36 In article <jcom56hvfoojlfl72uj3qnvdb0jom75rau(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: > On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 17:59:41 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> > wrote: > > >Dude: here's what the person (Lloyd, not John) said in the post to which > >you just replied: > > > >"In numbers in use? I don't think so. Can you provide a link showing > >that please?" > > > >And you provided market share figures instead. > > Let's play sematics. Why would Lloyd ask John to provide numbers for > something that he didn't claim (i.e. overall ownership)? John said: > On the contrary -- Android has now moved past iPhone > into 2nd place behind RIM in smartphones. > which means current sales, not overall user count. John's statement > is correct for both the current quarter and 6 month sales. > > Also, see link and quoted numbers below. The first column is "overall > US ownership" which is the number of users in the US by phone > operating system. The numbers were extracted from the 2nd and 3rd > graphs from the URL below. My notation as it being the 2nd quarter, > 2010 is to indicate the ending date. That should be the same as "in > numbers in use". > > >> For overall user figures (2nd quarter, 2010), see: > >> <http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/android-soars-but-iphone > >> -still-most-desired-as-smartphones-grab-25-of-u-s-mobile-market/> > >> > >> Overall US 6 months > >> ownership sales > >> Rim 35% 33% > >> iPhone 28% 23% > >> Windoze Mobile 15% 11% > >> Android 13% 27% > >> Palm 3% 1% > >> Linux 3% 3% > >> Symbian 2% 2% Jeff, you misread John. His implication was that Android is bigger in use than iPhone. But it is easy to misread what John means or implies as he has no grasp on business concepts at all. Go back a read a few of his posts concerning market share, revenue vs profit and others for examples of his lack of basic business concepts. -- Lloyd
From: -hh on 5 Aug 2010 22:04
John Navas <spamfilt...(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > > The apparent problem here is nanny design by Apple... Yet another "but I'm not being judgmental" judgmental statement from Navas :-) > ... which shuts the > machine down at a conservative temperature, which can be quite annoying, > and quite possibly unnecessary. YMMV on if a 'forced' shutdown is more inconvenient than allowing a chunk of your money go poof because the machine was dumb and thus allowed itself to be fried. Classically, while chips do permit themselves to run at higher operating temperatures, the TANSTAAFL consequence is a shorter lifespan. > My ThinkPad, by comparison, will only > resort to that when the processor actually approaches an unsafe > temperature, continuing to operate normally even with a quite hot > chassis. But then it has active cooling. ;) Golly, that's odd: both of my ThinkPads have had the same exact 95F rating as the iPad uses. And when they get hot, the fan screams and battery life gets sucked away ... all while the machine bogs to hell as it cycles back the CPU to become useless. Golly gee...that's (cough) "Better" alright! -hh |