The most recent Consumer Reports review of the iPhone 4 antenna issue has fueled the war of words in many online sites, with one camp calling Apple to recall the iPhone 4 and another camp saying the iPhone 4 has better reception than the previous iPhones and there is no antenna problems. Based on what reports have shown, I believe there is a design issue with the iPhone 4 antenna system. However, I do not think this justifies a recall because there is no health or safety concerns associated with the issue. Also, fixing the problem with hardware changes is not as simple as what some online experts think. Any change in the antenna design requires the iPhone 4 to go through new FCC regulatory approval on top of the logistics and costs associated with retrofitting the iPhone. Apple has offered iPhone 4 owners to return the iPhone for full refund - the only correct thing Apple had done in this saga.
Apple has handled this issue very badly by deflecting the issue by first claiming there is no issue and then said it is a software problem where the signal strength is displayed incorrectly. If Apple had offered a free bumper with the iPhone 4 (Yes, it is a band-aid type solution but it shows goodwill from Apple), the problem may not turn out to be such a PR nightmare. I think we can expect the next generation iPhone will have a new antenna design.
What will Steve do to diffuse this issue?
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Friday, July 2, 2010
Apple iPhone software fixes hardware or network problem?
Today Apple issued a letter on their web site explaining the iPhone 4 reception issue. I am afraid Apple's explanation is not convincing at all. Apple said "Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong." I am a wireless engineer by training. That explanation from Apple is just bizzare. Not to bore everyone with the technical details I will explain in a note at the end of this blog for those who are interested.
Apple said "To fix this, we are adopting AT&T’s recently recommended formula for calculating how many bars to display for a given signal strength. The real signal strength remains the same, but the iPhone’s bars will report it far more accurately, providing users a much better indication of the reception they will get in a given area." Translation - Now we 'fix' the software to 'accurately' show you how bad the signal really is. It means the phone will show fewer bars with the new software. So, we now blame the AT&T network coverage instead of the iPhone 4 reception or antenna problem?
Now it begs the question whether Apple's iPhone design team knew this antenna problem all along. Apple had never sold any decorative accessories for the iPhone. It leaves the accessories to after-market vendors. Why is Apple selling a plastic bumper for the iPhone 4 and it costs $30! Turning a crisis into an opportunity?
Note:
The phone software can fudge the number of bars displayed to anything. Let's consider a hypothetical example. Let's assume in Phone#1 a signal level of -100dBm shows 1 bar and every 2dBm shows another bar. The signal indicator on Phone#1 will show the following, -100dBm = 1 bar, -98dBm = 2 bars, -96dBm = 3 bars, -94dBm = 4 bars and anything higher than -92dBm = 5 bars. Now, let's change two variables so that on Phone#2 the bar starts showing at -95dBm and every 5dBm shows another bar. The signal indicator on Phone#2 will show -95dBm = 1 bar, -90dBm = 2 bars, -85dBm = 3 bars, -80dBm = 4 bars and anything higher than -75dBm = 5 bars. Now a user starts at a location receiving -90dBm and move to a area where the signal drops to -100dBm. Phone#1 shows 5 bars at the first location and then drops to 1 bar at the second location. Phone#2 displays 2 bars and then drops to no bars. Same phone, same signal, different software show different number of bars. That doesn't solve any coverage or reception problem but just faking the number of signal bars. The real proof is to look at the RxLev in absolute numeric value in dBm in a field test mode, not some artifically fudged signal bars displayed on the phone.
Apple said "To fix this, we are adopting AT&T’s recently recommended formula for calculating how many bars to display for a given signal strength. The real signal strength remains the same, but the iPhone’s bars will report it far more accurately, providing users a much better indication of the reception they will get in a given area." Translation - Now we 'fix' the software to 'accurately' show you how bad the signal really is. It means the phone will show fewer bars with the new software. So, we now blame the AT&T network coverage instead of the iPhone 4 reception or antenna problem?
Now it begs the question whether Apple's iPhone design team knew this antenna problem all along. Apple had never sold any decorative accessories for the iPhone. It leaves the accessories to after-market vendors. Why is Apple selling a plastic bumper for the iPhone 4 and it costs $30! Turning a crisis into an opportunity?
Note:
The phone software can fudge the number of bars displayed to anything. Let's consider a hypothetical example. Let's assume in Phone#1 a signal level of -100dBm shows 1 bar and every 2dBm shows another bar. The signal indicator on Phone#1 will show the following, -100dBm = 1 bar, -98dBm = 2 bars, -96dBm = 3 bars, -94dBm = 4 bars and anything higher than -92dBm = 5 bars. Now, let's change two variables so that on Phone#2 the bar starts showing at -95dBm and every 5dBm shows another bar. The signal indicator on Phone#2 will show -95dBm = 1 bar, -90dBm = 2 bars, -85dBm = 3 bars, -80dBm = 4 bars and anything higher than -75dBm = 5 bars. Now a user starts at a location receiving -90dBm and move to a area where the signal drops to -100dBm. Phone#1 shows 5 bars at the first location and then drops to 1 bar at the second location. Phone#2 displays 2 bars and then drops to no bars. Same phone, same signal, different software show different number of bars. That doesn't solve any coverage or reception problem but just faking the number of signal bars. The real proof is to look at the RxLev in absolute numeric value in dBm in a field test mode, not some artifically fudged signal bars displayed on the phone.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Microsoft Discontinued Kin - That's Quick!
I just saw the news that Microsoft has halted selling Kin. The Kin has got to be one of the shortest life product in Microsoft's company history and it reminds of of the Microsoft Bob. I thought only bad television shows have such short life.
I have not paid much attention to the Kin because they look like toys, especially the square shape Kin 1. It looks like something you would give to a 5-year old. Microsoft wanted to market the Kin as a social networking device to 15 to 30 years olds. Kin is the wrong product for that market segment. The 15 to 30 years olds are the 'multi-tasking generation'. Yes, they want to connect to friends via facebook, tweet to tell the world what they are doing, surf the web, listen to music, have 10 instant messenger windows going, texting, talking on the phone, checking emails and chew gums, all at the same time if they can. They don't want a 'dump-down' device specialized in social networking though.
Well, Microsoft has the courage to stop the Kin rather than to pour more R&D and marketing money into a dead-end product. Let's see if the Microsoft Windows Phone 7 can put up a good fight against the iPhone, Android phone and Blackberry in the smartphone market.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)