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 8 Aug 2010 14:05
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 10:47:38 -0700, in
<ggpt5656lb85lv1ou8bo383m1oq130f25u(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote:

>What bugs me is where is JD Powers and Associates, which traditionally
>had done the bulk of the wireless customer satisfaction surveys?
><http://www.jdpower.com/telecom/articles/2010-Wireless-Call-Quality-Performance-Study-Volume-1>
><http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2010039>
>Dropped calls is just one factor mixed in with the customer
>satisfaction ratings.
><http://www.jdpower.com/Electronics/ratings/wireless-smartphone-ratings-%28volume-1%29>
>Not very useful without the full report.

My guess(tm) is that JD Powers didn't find such data reliable enough to
report on it, leaving it only with vague "satisfaction".

--
John

"Assumption is the mother of all screw ups."
[Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: SMS on 8 Aug 2010 14:13
On 08/08/10 10:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> No kidding. I've seen duplicated surveys, where the same users can't
> even supply the same responses a week later. Garbage in, statistics
> out. Still, it's the best we have to work with.

What's important are the relative numbers. An AT&T subscriber is no more
or less likely to report accurately (either intentionally or
unintentionally) than a Verizon, T-Mobile, or Sprint subscriber. A large
sample size is vital, and the survey needs to be conducted by an
impartial organization. A survey bought and paid for by a carrier is
worthless, as the "fewest dropped calls" survey used by Cingular in its
ads a few years ago shows (even the organization that conducted the
survey disputed Cingular's conclusions that they used in their ads).
From: nospam on 8 Aug 2010 14:15
In article <dort569htld5nn7m8j8juqilmv2sq71a75(a)4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:

> Really? Which ones (specific models that have significant market share)
> aren't in the same class as the iPhone (all models) in your opinion?

other than the likes of the droid x and htc evo, most of them. having a
screen that can't be seen in ordinary daylight is a huge, huge
drawback.

> Vague statements, like much of what ZnU wrote (e.g., "accelerometers
> that don't really work"), aren't terribly persuasive,

why not? if the accelerometer doesn't work, that's a flaw. you don't
get to dismiss it because you don't consider it a big deal.

> not to mention
> pegging the irony meter with "unremovable apps bundled" ;)

what's ironic about that? iphones ship with some software, most of it
useful, but they don't ship with crappy demoware, such as a nascar app.

> -- and "old
> versions of the operating system" would seem to define many earlier
> iPhones out of the class as well.

nope. *all* iphones other than the original, which is 3 years old and
about 5% of total install base, can run the latest firmware. there are
some issues with the iphone 3g and ios 4 and apple is looking into it.

that's very different than phones bought eight months ago that will
never get froyo, and even the t-mobile g1 is *still* listed on their
web site, a nearly two year old phone that is even more hobbled. most
android users are still waiting for the 2.2 update.

> You seem to be defining the class as
> iPhone 4 and any other phones that exactly match it, of which there
> aren't any! ;)

so which other phones have a high resolution display, gyroscope, a
wealth of excellent third party apps, easy to use high quality video
chat that doesn't require third party software (qik and fring suck in
comparison), excellent battery life, to name just a few?
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 14:27
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:13:10 -0700, in
<4c5ef398$0$22112$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote:

>On 08/08/10 10:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> No kidding. I've seen duplicated surveys, where the same users can't
>> even supply the same responses a week later. Garbage in, statistics
>> out. Still, it's the best we have to work with.
>
>What's important are the relative numbers. An AT&T subscriber is no more
>or less likely to report accurately (either intentionally or
>unintentionally) than a Verizon, T-Mobile, or Sprint subscriber.

Sorry, but that's not how statistics work. Relative rankings are only
meaningful if the differences significantly exceed the error of
estimate. Otherwise they are meaningless (noise).

>A large
>sample size is vital,

Sorry, but that's not how statistics work. What matters is random
selection and the uniformity of the population. That's part of why
self-selected populations must be taken with a grain of salt.

>and the survey needs to be conducted by an
>impartial organization.

Not necessarily -- good results can be produced by organizations with an
agenda, and bad results can be produced by organizations with no agenda.
What matters is the methodology, not the organization.

>A survey bought and paid for by a carrier is
>worthless,

Not necessarily -- it just should be subjected to scrutiny.

>as the "fewest dropped calls" survey used by Cingular in its
>ads a few years ago shows (even the organization that conducted the
>survey disputed Cingular's conclusions that they used in their ads).

That's a considerable misstatement.

--
John

"It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant,
than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." -Mark Twain
"A little learning is a dangerous thing." -Alexander Pope
"Being ignorant is not so much a shame,
as being unwilling to learn." -Benjamin Franklin
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 14:28
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:27:17 -0700, in
<1ett56ldsq17ctotsjd8mticd1ulnkbet4(a)4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:13:10 -0700, in
><4c5ef398$0$22112$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS
><scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote:

>>A large
>>sample size is vital,
>
>Sorry, but that's not how statistics work. What matters is random
>selection and the uniformity of the population. That's part of why
>self-selected populations must be taken with a grain of salt.

Correction: That's part of why self-selected _samples_ must be taken
with a grain of salt.

--
John

"We have met the enemy and he is us" -Pogo
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks