That Apple letter in full...
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Dummy mail accounts.
Next: iPhone spellchecker
From: Jochem Huhmann on 7 Jul 2010 18:43 Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> writes: > Idle thought, but I wonder how much of this signal snafu is due to Apple > field testing units my putting them in fake 3GS cases, and thereby > (unknowingly) avoiding the problem? Come on, you don't design a phone with an external antenna without looking at the signal while holding it. There's no real field testing needed for that, configure it to display dBm instead of bars (or use the field test app that was still included with the first iOS 4.0 betas) and you'll clearly see the signal drop. You do not need to wait for dropped calls or take it out into a bar. The most basic usage and testing in the lab would be enough. No, I think Apple knew this perfectly well. They just thought (and probably still think, and maybe they're even right) that getting a very compact iPhone with much room for a large battery inside by using a steel band for the outer case, the main structural spine and the antenna was worth this signal attenuation. I would agree with them this is a rather clever design. If you look at the dissection photos this thing has extremely few parts, it's bascically just the antenna frame, a narrow board with the chips on it, a large battery and the display slapped onto the front and a cover on the back. Minimal, highly integrated and compact. But to make people accept that design you need to be upfront about it, explain both the advantages and the disadvantages and readily offer the customers a way to avoid the problem by including a bumper in the box. Maybe even demo and deliver it with a bumper installed and treat the bumper as a changable part of the case you can even optionally leave off (if you accept some limitations in holding the thing when you have a weak signal). It may sound absurd, but all the confusion is mostly a marketing problem. And this from Apple! Or they really didn't catch that. In this case they're bloody amateurs and really shouldn't design smartphones anymore. Jochem -- "A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
From: Jochem Huhmann on 7 Jul 2010 18:58 Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> writes: > On 2010-07-07, Ben Shimmin <bas(a)llamaselector.com> wrote: >>> >>> Idle thought, but I wonder how much of this signal snafu is due to Apple >>> field testing units my putting them in fake 3GS cases, and thereby >>> (unknowingly) avoiding the problem? >>> >>> Seems very unlikely but stranger things have happened. >> >> It's a possible explanation, but don't you think it's a ridiculous one? > > Oh, absolutely. It's just that I wouldn't be surprised to find that > that's at least _some_ of the cause. From what I hear, AT&T's signal is > very strong around Apple's locations, so inhouse caseless units may not > have exhibitted the symptoms. Mind you, you'd have hoped they were > looking at raw numbers, not signal bars, and therefore would have seen > the numbers drop. There's no way someone designs a phone and tests it by looking at bars only, external antenna or not. Expecially since the first beta versions of iOS 4.0 still contained the field test app which displays dBm values and more. I could rather believe that the iPhone was actually meant to be delivered with a bumper and Jobs hated them enough to show off the naked iPhone and sell the bumpers separately. This thing is so obviously *not* meant to be used naked that it hurts. It's not only the naked antenna, it's also the fully exposed glass edges on both sides. There's a good reason that all previous iPhones and iPod touch had a flush frame around these edges, they are rather fragile after all. Tough glass can take quite a hit flat on the face but the edges not so. Jochem -- "A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
From: zoara on 8 Jul 2010 06:28 Jochem Huhmann <joh(a)gmx.net> wrote: > It's not only the naked antenna, > it's also the fully exposed glass edges on both sides. There's a good > reason that all previous iPhones and iPod touch had a flush frame > around > these edges, they are rather fragile after all. Tough glass can take > quite a hit flat on the face but the edges not so. The glass edges are *not* fully exposed. Take a very close look - there's a thin plastic strip around the edge; black on the black one and (presumably) white on the white one. Probably won't show up in any photos, you might have to see it in person. I assume this is for shock protection. -z- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: Jochem Huhmann on 8 Jul 2010 07:17 zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> writes: > The glass edges are *not* fully exposed. Take a very close look - > there's a thin plastic strip around the edge; black on the black one and > (presumably) white on the white one. Probably won't show up in any > photos, you might have to see it in person. No, I've seen them on photos, too. It's not much protection though. In the now almost three years I've been using my iPod touch I have had more than one blood-freezing moment when the thing clattered down to the floor. It has at least three deep dents in the metal around the glass exactly in the place where these thin plastic strips are on the iPhone 4. > I assume this is for shock protection. Hmm, you're totally right insofar that they wouldn't have bothered with these if the iPhone wasn't meant to be sold naked. Jochem -- "A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
From: zoara on 11 Jul 2010 06:21
Jochem Huhmann <joh(a)gmx.net> wrote: > zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> writes: > >> The glass edges are *not* fully exposed. Take a very close look - >> there's a thin plastic strip around the edge; black on the black one > > and >> (presumably) white on the white one. Probably won't show up in any >> photos, you might have to see it in person. > > No, I've seen them on photos, too. It's not much protection though. It certainly doesn't look much, but I'm assuming Apple have done drop tests. > In the now almost three years I've been using my iPod touch I have had > more than one blood-freezing moment when the thing clattered down to > the > floor. It has at least three deep dents in the metal around the glass > exactly in the place where these thin plastic strips are on the iPhone > 4. Though of course metal and plastic respond differently to shock. >> I assume this is for shock protection. > > Hmm, you're totally right insofar that they wouldn't have bothered > with > these if the iPhone wasn't meant to be sold naked. > That's actually a point I hadn't thought of. -z- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm |