BF2S Forums iPhone 4 & iOS 4

Ilocano wrote:

At least for most of the US, the iPhone isn't the issue, it's the AT&T 3G network.  It majorly sucks.

Spring EVO 4G:

http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/11550 … _EVO4G.JPG

sweet

Poseidon wrote:

Just got shipped.

PUMPED.

My mate got his yesterday!

CapnNismo wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

At least for most of the US, the iPhone isn't the issue, it's the AT&T 3G network.  It majorly sucks.

Spring EVO 4G:

http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/11550 … _EVO4G.JPG

sweet

they didn't say users are "holding it wrong" - they said that there is a fault and advised on ways to hold it to avoid the fault. very different stance and attitude - and a very shitty purposeful bit of misconstruing the facts there on your behalf. the iphone 4 smashed from a 1-foot drop, by the way? haven't heard about that... my iphone 3gs has been dropped so many times and is still intact and working, with hardly any cosmetic damage. i would have thought that the metal chassis for the iphone 4 would make it even stronger, if anything. could be wrong though - but again, don't base your entire judgement on the phone's structural strength on a few anecdotes. anecdotal evidence a rule doth not make.

Zimmer wrote:

I can't believe people actually buy this POS. Antenna problems, smashes after 1ft drops... why the fuck would you touch a thing like this?

Especially when the company that has made this product comes out with comments like "You're holding it wrong". Absolute fail. I wanted to smack the little girl that had the iPhone 4 in a restaurant a week back. Sheep will always be sheep I guess.

They don't smash easily.

Way tougher than the old ones.

Uzique wrote:

i thought that would be the case... and my iphone 3gs is one indestructible little piece of technology

Pretty much every phone I've had has survived 5-6' drops and nothing happened to them. My current blackberry has been dropped a few times and is fine.

Worst injury to a phone of mine was when me and a friend were struggling as I was trying to draw on his face with a marker pen, and one of landed on my phone and cracked the screen. Nokia N95 btw, £70 for a new screen

Those Steve Jobs e-mails can't be real?

Jenspm wrote:

Those Steve Jobs e-mails can't be real?

They're real. The email headers were verified by an ex-Apple employee. They're posted on BGR, pretty much the most trusted source on tech leaks on the internet.

Bertster7 wrote:

No it wasn't. I've seen all the public corporate statements about the phone. A dismissive one line email from a guy who seems to be relentlessly hassled by customers, as far as I can make out from your links, is not the same as what the corporate stance on an issue is.

The corporate stance was "You're in an area of bad reception" until very recently. Lying to customers is not a smart move.

Holding it that way doesn't matter much. You take a reception hit, but it's not as massive as is made out.

I'd like to believe you, but stuff like this:
http://fscked.co.uk/post/751030001/more … gnal-issue

Says otherwise. It's a massive design fault, and something which should not have passed through to the end product.

Which fault? The fault which means it loses marginally more reception than a 3GS when held tightly, but typically gets better signal overall due to improved SNR?

Marginally? Dropping to 1 and 2 bars in a strong signal area is not marginal, nor is it acceptable.

The fault where in drop tests it typically comes out better than the 3GS?

Really? Where? Please point.

How is this covered under competition law? There is no such thing as antitrust law in Europe.

What? Seriously? Ever heard of the Intel Antitrust case?
http://roybatty.newsvine.com/_news/2010 … rust-rules

Oh, and the Intel case:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/busin … r=2&hp

Zimmer wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

No it wasn't. I've seen all the public corporate statements about the phone. A dismissive one line email from a guy who seems to be relentlessly hassled by customers, as far as I can make out from your links, is not the same as what the corporate stance on an issue is.

The corporate stance was "You're in an area of bad reception" until very recently. Lying to customers is not a smart move.

Actually, that's a pretty accurate response.

Nor does that change the fact that was not Apple's stance on the issue. I am CC'd on all Apple press releases and suchlike. I've been making sure to read the ones about the iPhone 4.

Zimmer wrote:

Holding it that way doesn't matter much. You take a reception hit, but it's not as massive as is made out.

I'd like to believe you, but stuff like this:
http://fscked.co.uk/post/751030001/more … gnal-issue

Says otherwise. It's a massive design fault, and something which should not have passed through to the end product.

I notice the article you have linked to points out in the update section at the top the Anandtech have done a much more accurate and in depth investigation into this. An investigation which I have read fully and which supports everything I have said. I suggest you read that.

Yes there is a problem - but it's been massively overblown. I suspect future releases will have some sort of insulative coating around the antenna.

Zimmer wrote:

Which fault? The fault which means it loses marginally more reception than a 3GS when held tightly, but typically gets better signal overall due to improved SNR?

Marginally? Dropping to 1 and 2 bars in a strong signal area is not marginal, nor is it acceptable.

Using reception bars as any sort of technical indicator is foolhardy. Worst case scenario it loses about 24dB, whereas the 3GS loses about 14dB and the Nexus One loses about 17dB.

Yet overall the reviewers in the know, like the ones at Anandtech that your article mentions, say the phone has improved reception over the 3GS.

Also, from your link:

Making the bars more closely represent reality is a step forward, and I believe the perception of the size of the problem has certainly been exaggerated by the miscalibration - with the attendant hysteria from some of the press.

Zimmer wrote:

The fault where in drop tests it typically comes out better than the 3GS?

Really? Where? Please point.

I haven't got the relevant links here. They're on my work machines. Googling won't give you an accurate picture as it's all been sensationalised around it shattering (much like the hysteria about the reception).

The tests I've seen suggest that in identical drop tests conducted on a 3GS and an iPhone 4 the iPhone 4 kept working for longer than the 3GS.

Zimmer wrote:

How is this covered under competition law? There is no such thing as antitrust law in Europe.

What? Seriously? Ever heard of the Intel Antitrust case?
http://roybatty.newsvine.com/_news/2010 … rust-rules

Oh, and the Intel case:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/busin … r=2&hp

That's because you're using American sources. In America antitrust is what they call competition law. What is anti-competetive about this phone? There is a massive choice of phones available on the market for consumers. How is there a case? With Intel it is very different.

You could make a case against the App store. But I doubt they will. Anyway, that has nothing to do with the new phone and would apply to all existing iPhones.

specialistx2324 wrote:

iphone 4 no doubt is an awesome phone, but its being pinholed in its capabilities due to their substandard wireless carrier, gay t&T.

Only in the US. They're sold unlocked everywhere else.

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/electr … k-gsm.html