'I'm glad you took so much time to go through and quote yourself. You simply proved my own point.'
No, I proved MY point, by DISPROVING your idiotic claim that I'd said it was categorically a software problem.
'You never once said that you can't fix signal loss by touching the antenna with a software patch'
Yet again, you miss the point entirely. Whether there IS 'Signal loss' or not is NOT A MATTER OF FACT, because all the readings taken use the SOFTWARE which apple admits is incorrect. So, IF the issue is purely with software, fixing the software WOULD CORRECT THE 'APPARENT' hardware issues. That is the key element that you don't get.
'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".'
Precisely - it COULD. Any problem which is only visible within the software (such as is the case here - ie the signal meter goes down) CAN be caused by the software. Like I already told you, I could write software which showed a signal of -2000db. Would that mean it was a hardware issue? Of course not, because it's the SOFTWARE which you are reading.
'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. '
Absolutely incorrect. It is ABSOLUTELY possible (like I've said before) that touching the signal COULD cause NO SIGNAL LOSS but still AFFECT THE WAY IN WHICH THE SOFTWARE INTERPRETS THE SIGNAL STRENGTH. In THAT CASE, it would be a software issue, not a hardware issue. And as you should have realised by now, my whole point is that it is POSSIBLE to be caused just by software, without making any claims to know the exact cause in this case.
'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. '
Er.. how do you know? LOL. You just considered the case (finally) that the software was showing an incorrect signal, so how do you KNOW that there is signal loss? THE ONLY WAY OF MEASURING SIGNAL IS VIA THE SOFTWARE. That was your dumbest statement yet.. lol.
'Every phone has this problem. People interfere with radio signals.'
First of all, if you're trying to suggest that every phone is the same, then any issue with the IPhone must apply to EVERY OTHER PHONE.
Secondly, if you're trying to argue that this issue is not DISTINGUISHABLE from the problem in other phones due to the fact that the problem appears to be more severe, then you've already failed.
Thirdly, given we've just established that SOME signal loss APPEARS to be normal in SIMILAR PHONES (not really proving anything), it is STILL ABSOLUTELY POSSIBLE THAT the SOFTWARE could be misrepresenting the LEVEL OF THIS SIGNAL DEGRADATION (assuming there is ANY).
Fourthly - given the UNIQUE design of this aerial it does NOT NECESSARILY behave the same way as other antennas.
'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'
Yet again, totally hypocritical. I've never said that people touching phones can't affect the signal. If we simply apply that test, then EVERY PHONE has a 'fatal flaw' and should be recalled. Oh no, WAIT, the WHOLE POINT IN THIS CASE IS THAT THE SOFTWARE SEEMS TO SUGGEST A GREATER LOSS IN SIGNAL THAN WOULD ORDINARILY BE EXPECTED. This can be caused by one, or BOTH, of the following:
1 - Software reporting the signal incorrectly.
2 - Hardware actually losing more signal than other phones.
It's beyond belief that you don't recognise that a problem which is only manifested in software COULD be just a software problem. It's also beyond belief that you think that an antenna for a radio is in ANY WAY COMPARABLE. It's like saying, my car broke down because the engine overheated - therefore any LORRY which breaks down must have a faulty engine, and it can't be caused by anything else.
To be completely honest with you, I genuinely think you don't really know what I've been saying all along, you lack the coherence to actually read something properly and understand the real implications.
It's exactly like the cost example, where you thought that proving that $200 goes to apple DOES NOT prove that all of the $2500 doesn't. It's like you're arguing for the sake of it without realising what you're arguing against, or that none of your comments are relevant.
Epic fail tbh.
No, I proved MY point, by DISPROVING your idiotic claim that I'd said it was categorically a software problem.
'You never once said that you can't fix signal loss by touching the antenna with a software patch'
Yet again, you miss the point entirely. Whether there IS 'Signal loss' or not is NOT A MATTER OF FACT, because all the readings taken use the SOFTWARE which apple admits is incorrect. So, IF the issue is purely with software, fixing the software WOULD CORRECT THE 'APPARENT' hardware issues. That is the key element that you don't get.
'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".'
Precisely - it COULD. Any problem which is only visible within the software (such as is the case here - ie the signal meter goes down) CAN be caused by the software. Like I already told you, I could write software which showed a signal of -2000db. Would that mean it was a hardware issue? Of course not, because it's the SOFTWARE which you are reading.
'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. '
Absolutely incorrect. It is ABSOLUTELY possible (like I've said before) that touching the signal COULD cause NO SIGNAL LOSS but still AFFECT THE WAY IN WHICH THE SOFTWARE INTERPRETS THE SIGNAL STRENGTH. In THAT CASE, it would be a software issue, not a hardware issue. And as you should have realised by now, my whole point is that it is POSSIBLE to be caused just by software, without making any claims to know the exact cause in this case.
'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. '
Er.. how do you know? LOL. You just considered the case (finally) that the software was showing an incorrect signal, so how do you KNOW that there is signal loss? THE ONLY WAY OF MEASURING SIGNAL IS VIA THE SOFTWARE. That was your dumbest statement yet.. lol.
'Every phone has this problem. People interfere with radio signals.'
First of all, if you're trying to suggest that every phone is the same, then any issue with the IPhone must apply to EVERY OTHER PHONE.
Secondly, if you're trying to argue that this issue is not DISTINGUISHABLE from the problem in other phones due to the fact that the problem appears to be more severe, then you've already failed.
Thirdly, given we've just established that SOME signal loss APPEARS to be normal in SIMILAR PHONES (not really proving anything), it is STILL ABSOLUTELY POSSIBLE THAT the SOFTWARE could be misrepresenting the LEVEL OF THIS SIGNAL DEGRADATION (assuming there is ANY).
Fourthly - given the UNIQUE design of this aerial it does NOT NECESSARILY behave the same way as other antennas.
'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'
Yet again, totally hypocritical. I've never said that people touching phones can't affect the signal. If we simply apply that test, then EVERY PHONE has a 'fatal flaw' and should be recalled. Oh no, WAIT, the WHOLE POINT IN THIS CASE IS THAT THE SOFTWARE SEEMS TO SUGGEST A GREATER LOSS IN SIGNAL THAN WOULD ORDINARILY BE EXPECTED. This can be caused by one, or BOTH, of the following:
1 - Software reporting the signal incorrectly.
2 - Hardware actually losing more signal than other phones.
It's beyond belief that you don't recognise that a problem which is only manifested in software COULD be just a software problem. It's also beyond belief that you think that an antenna for a radio is in ANY WAY COMPARABLE. It's like saying, my car broke down because the engine overheated - therefore any LORRY which breaks down must have a faulty engine, and it can't be caused by anything else.
To be completely honest with you, I genuinely think you don't really know what I've been saying all along, you lack the coherence to actually read something properly and understand the real implications.
It's exactly like the cost example, where you thought that proving that $200 goes to apple DOES NOT prove that all of the $2500 doesn't. It's like you're arguing for the sake of it without realising what you're arguing against, or that none of your comments are relevant.
Epic fail tbh.