The 4 Major Issues Plaguing the iPhone 4 Today

[Pei-chen]

10 percent of PC user are anti-Apple fanboys. 10 percent of Apple user are anti-PC fanboys. The problem is, there are 10 times the PC user so I have to run across PC idiots 10 times as often.

 

[house70]

[citation][nom]Smochina[/nom]So you're saying you are holding your phone with your palm touching the backside and all fingers reaching onto the touch screen? I find it pretty tiring and I can't get it close to my ear like that. Are you afraid of someone stealing it from your hand?I only hold it with the tips of my fingers, three of them on the far side, the thumb on the other side and the pinky below.[/citation]
he, he, I guess Jobs will be buried at the root of a "smochin" (fig tree)....all the "smochine" (figs) appear to be big fans.

 

[Guest]

I have my iOS 4 unicorn tears... I see no reason to upgrade from my 3G. OK, well the iphone 4 is sexy, but that's not enough reason in itself for me.

 

[guzz46]

4 years ago backlit sensor didn't exist.

Xenon flash did though, my nokia n82 is 3 years old and it still has a better camera than the iphone4

 

[c210pilot]

anyone else had problems with the 3G after updating the OS to 4? native apps now load very slow, specifically Msgs, approx. 6 secs to load/run.

 

[watcha]

@beayn

'I just had a very long discussion with someone who claims otherwise. I'm sure he'll post here soon to dispute what you are saying.'

Troll much? LOL.

I said all along that there MAY be a hardware issue as well. I still stand by my assessment that we wont know for sure until the software is fixed, since that's how we measure the signal. And even if it turns out there is a hardware issue as well, that doesn't mean that it wasn't possible that it was just a software issue, as I said all along ;-)

 

[eddieroolz]

Issue #1: it's made by Apple.
Issue #2: it's made by Apple.
Issue #3....

You know where this is going.

 

[beayn]

[citation][nom]watcha[/nom]'Troll much? LOL. I said all along blah blah blah[/citation]

The author of this article basically said the EXACT same thing I have been saying all along and you have disputed it tooth and nail while claiming I don't know anything. You can argue with the author, Marcus Yam about it now.

 

[Tamz_msc]

The pictures have progressively gotten more colored with each generation.

 

[Tamz_msc]

[citation][nom]Pei-chen[/nom]I usually let the camera choose white balance preset but it usually came up bad. If you want good indoor white, use custom white balance.BTW, the images are shot "in warm, indoor lighting without the flash" so it looks like 3GS and 4 got the closest color. Without looking at the scene in person, there is no way to tell which is correct but the 5D looks too cold.[/citation]
Comparing the 5D with iPhone, and saying that the 5D takes 'cold' pictures means that someone out here needs to go to the ophthalmologist.

 

[watcha]

'The author of this article basically said the EXACT same thing I have been saying all along and you have disputed it tooth and nail while claiming I don't know anything. You can argue with the author, Marcus Yam about it now.'

And just like when you said it, it doesn't disprove my point. It's what us intelligent people call 'irrelevant'

Even if this issue does turn out to be hardware in addition to the software problem, (as I've said all along it could do), it doesn't make me wrong - I have always left open the possibility that this is also a hardware error.

I have made 2 points:

1 - That this is definitely AT LEAST a software issue.
2 - That this problem COULD be caused just by software (if the software was responding badly to a 'short' caused by the phone being touched and misrepresenting the signal).

So you see, your and the authors posts are irrelevant to those 2 facts. ;-)

 

[beayn]

@watcha Haha, you were actually saying I was WRONG for saying exactly what Marcus said here. You refused to admit it could even remotely be a hardware problem for like half a dozen posts or something. You can keep changing your stance all you like but the discussion is still over.

 

[Pei-chen]

[citation][nom]Tamz_msc[/nom]Comparing the 5D with iPhone, and saying that the 5D takes 'cold' pictures means that someone out here needs to go to the ophthalmologist.[/citation]
Here, I post the link for you
http://www.dpreview.com/
You should spend the next 3 months reading that site before commenting on anything related to digital photography. You are embarrassing yourself without knowing it.

 

[watcha]

@beayn, please carefully read over all of my posts. I said you were WRONG to think that it COULDN'T be a software issue. No more, no less.

And you still are - EVEN IF it turns out to be a hardware problem AS WELL AS a software problem.

The fact that you don't seem to get why you're being irrelevant is again one of the many sources for my comments on your level of intelligence.

It is a common misconception amongst non-tech-aware people that it MUST BE a hardware issue just because it is triggered by doing something with the hardware. It remains the case that that is a false assumption - even if the false assumption turns out in this case to be right (which we still don't know, by the way).

 

[watcha]

'You refused to admit it could even remotely be a hardware problem for like half a dozen posts or something'

I never said anything which even remotely meant that. You are either deliberately claiming I said things I didn't, because you know I'm right, or because you are just genuinely not that bright, and didn't understand what I was saying.

All along, I was saying that it COULD be a hardware issue, but it COULD ALSO be a software issue, since every time any website (eg Anandtech) has tried to read the signal strength - they have used the SOFTWARE reading to tell them the strength. I could write some software which told you the phone had -2000db, would you still maintain that it CANT be software?

And that's the difference, by the way. I am claiming it isn't NECESSARILY hardware, and you're claiming it CAN'T be software. You're making a much bigger and untrue claim, wheras my claim is very modest and OBVIOUSLY true. Maybe you genuinely don't get it though, and I'm banging my head against a brick wall.. lol

 

[beayn]

@watcha Still babbling? Wow man. You just keep arguing something you don't understand while claiming I don't understand it. Touching the antenna reduces signal strength and you can not bypass the effects with a software patch. That's all there is to it. That's what the disagreement was about from the beginning. You said it COULD be bypassed, that's how you came up with "unique interference caused by your hand that could be detected by the software".

Toss around insults, pretend you know everything and pretend you have superior intellect all you want. My simple point stands true.

 

[watcha]

'Touching the antenna reduces signal strength and you can not bypass the effects with a software patch'

All you know by the fact that the software is reporting a low signal is that the software is reporting a low signal. Whether that's due to faulty software or faulty hardware - it can be caused by either.

' "unique interference caused by your hand that could be detected by the software"'

Again, a complete misquote. I said (specifically) a SHORT which DID NOT CAUSE ANY LOSS IN SIGNAL is POSSIBLE, and IF THAT WAS THE CASE it would be solvable by software. I did not, and I repeat (because you appear to be too dumb to read) I did NOT say that it was NOT a hardware issue - I said that it isn't NECESSARILY a hardware issue, and that we would only know when the software was fixed to report the correct values.

I said that it is POSSIBLE that touching an antenna, on any phone, could cause a short and MISLEAD some software to believe the signal was lost when it actually wasn't, and IF THAT WAS THE CASE it would be solvable by software.

Like I said before, you're either deliberately misquoting because you're dumb, or because you know you're wrong. Either way it's a fail.

 

[beayn]

@watcha

Not misquoting, it's what you said, you just keep changing your stance to justify yourself. The fact still remains, you can't fix signal loss from touching the antenna with a software patch. It's a simple concept, there are no other theories involved, no other hypothetical situations, that was the simple fact. Your hardware and software can both be absolutely perfect and it will still happen.

You kept making up silly non-technical unsubstantiated theories about what MIGHT be happening and what you MEANT to say while totally disputing my simple point. It wasn't until the last couple of posts that you decided you were saying all along that it was "possibly not fixable with software". I suppose that is some progress.

 

[watcha]

@beayn

You claim you are 'not misquoting' me.

Here is a quote from my first comment (ever) on the subject

'That proves that just because a problem is caused by interacting with the hardware in some way - doesn't mean that the problem is with the hardware. The software might be responding in the wrong way.'

Note the key words 'DOESN'T MEAN' and 'MIGHT'. Note also that this is exactly what you just claimed I 'changed'.

My second comment (ever) on this issue:

'Do you not understand that software could be displaying fewer or greater number of bars when responding to the aerial being touched?'

Note the key word 'COULD'.

My second post continued:

'You miss the whole point of my post anyway. My point was that JUST BECAUSE something is TRIGGERED by hardware DOESN'T NECESSARILY make it a hardware fault. '

Note the key words 'NECESSARILY' and 'JUST BECAUSE'

My third post ever, on the subject:

'We wont know until the software fix from Apple whether it was in fact JUST a software issue, or a Hardware AND a software issue.'

Note the key words 'We wont know' and 'Hardware AND a software issue'.

My fourth post on this subject (ever):

'If you prevent the software responding improperly to that change in signal, you prevent the problem (assuming that the problem is JUST software related). The problem, may of course, be Hardware related too.'

Note the key words 'assuming that the problem is JUST software related' and 'the problem, may of course, be hardware related too'

My fifth post on the issue (ever):

'Whether we are then left with an ADDITIONAL problem that the signal is still destroyed (which WOULD be hardware), we'll only know after Apple builds the fix.

To be clear - I think a software problem is pretty much as bad as a hardware problem. I'm not trying to justify it - just trying to make it clear that it COULD be just a software issue, even though that software problem is triggered by touching the antenna.'

Note the key words 'WOULD be hardware' , 'COULD be just a software issue' and 'ADDITIONAL problem'.

My sixth post on the issue:

'To add to this one - you're missing the entire point. It might be the case that this is NOT A CASE of physical signal degradation - but just a software error which makes the phone BELIEVE THAT IT IS. And as I said, we will only know if it a hardware problem AS WELL AS A SOFTWARE PROBLEM after they fix the software (which answers various further paragraphs in your essay, lol)'

Note the key words 'might be the case' and 'we will only know if it's a hardware problem AS WELL AS A SOFTWARE PROBLEM after'.

Later on in same comment:

' Whether we are then left with an ADDITIONAL problem that the signal is still destroyed (which WOULD be hardware), we'll only know after Apple builds the fix.''

Note the key words 'ADDITIONAL', 'WOULD be hardware'.

My next comment on this (ever):

'As I already said, it may be the case that once we've fixed the software problem, there MAY BE an actual hardware problem which causes signal loss'

Are you seeing a pattern here?

Do you now realise how you've failed to grasp my WHOLE POINT since the very start? I COULDN'T have been more consistent, and your idiotic claim that I said anything meaning anything else is not only disproved by this post, the fact that you deny I said what I said proves that you know what I said was right. It also shows you're trying to argue against someone without having a clue what you're arguing about.

Totally destroyed.

 

[beayn]

@watcha

I'm glad you took so much time to go through and quote yourself. You simply proved my own point. You never once said that you can't fix signal loss by touching the antenna with a software patch. In fact, you claim everything else "could" be happening and even say "just trying to make it clear that it COULD be just a software issue".

BUT touching the antenna is NOT a software issue. Touching the antenna can NOT simply cause the BARS to go down and not actually cause signal loss like you suggest. Even if software is giving wrong signal values, or the BARs go down more than they should (as is proven and being fixed with their patch), there is still signal loss, period. Every phone has this problem. People interfere with radio signals.

You are the one who has failed to grasp this concept from the start. You keep suggesting everything else could be happening while failing to understand that people simply interfere with radio signals. Every time you respond without admitting this, you're just arguing for the sake of it because you can't let it go.

Keep pretending you "totally destroyed" me. It's great entertainment for me and the wife. She understands the concept too, simply from the fact when we walk past our little radio in the kitchen, it causes a hum. If you touch the antenna, it buzzes out, completely losing the signal.