[PCWorld]

Post your comments for A Liquidmetal iPhone 5: What's in it for You here

[userbgff]

i was hoping to read that "this is the technology that THE MOVIE terminator II used"... that is real liquid metal.

[snort]

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

[snort]

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

[crosswordbob]

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

[Visen]

dasd

[Visen]

In other news, HTC just announced their new Android clones will be made from recycled ashtrays - a clear step up from the current design and materials.

[QUADICON]

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

To be totally honest, you should speak of YOUR own experience, and not try to speak for us who do live in the REAL WORLD.
Facts show here in thr USA, the biggest issues with the antenna were found with the AT&T version of the iPhone. Just like you claim there isnt really an issue with the new iPad?

Well looking at the forum, it shows the biggest majority of the problematic iPad's were made in the Foxconn plant in ShenZhen, which si exactly where my first iPhone from AT&T and Verizon both came from and I had problems with the AT&T model only.

The forum commenst point to the fact, the latest iPad they have exchanged their pre-ordered one, all came from a diffeent Fdoxconn factor. The cit names starts with a C. I beliebe it was speleed Chengz or similar.

My first iPad (32GB) that I purchase last Friday, came from the Foxconn factory in Shenzhen and it did get quite warm even with the brightness at 50%. It also had some WiFi issues even when sitting within 12inches of my Wireless Router. Sometimes the bars would fall all the way down and I kept getting popups saying I needed to connect to WiFi. Turning off an fthen back on the WiFi was a temp fix. I didn't try a restore because it was no big deal since I knew I was goign to exchange it for a (64GB) once they came in. I exchanged it on Wednesday after selling my iPhone 4S and using the cash to buy the 65GB model. It has been great so far. Even with the brightness past 75% which is really bright.

Of course I don't play graphic intensive games to push it any harder. I am actually happy I sold my phone to get it. It was worse selling my phone for.And I have my DAGi stylus which is perfect.

In the real world, we expect any electronic device can have problems. if the iPhone 4 didn't have problems, Apple wouldn't have already have made a bumper that only covered the sides. No matter what you think, or what you say or what you claim, it wasn't blind coincedence. Theer si no such thing as coincedence. All things happen for a reason.

if the iPhone 4 didn't have a problem, then they wouldn't have changed the design of it in the latest models. A teardown shows that the latest iPhone 4S uses the new antenna design as was done in the original CDMA iPhone 4 for Verizon. if it was broke Bob, why did they fix it? If it wasn't broke Bob, then why did they pay for all those bumpers out their pocket so they coudl give them away free? if theer was no problem Bob, why was their a class action lawsuit? The so-called no problem Bob has cost Apple well over $100M in costs.That's offly expensive for something that wasn't a problems. It was a problem Bob...maybe not for you.

Go to Apple's forum and you will see the many comments of posters who have return the new ipad because of overheating and have an exchange that based on the number, show it came from a whole different factory and adjustments ave been made to correct whatever problem it had. It doesn;t matter if the media blows the story up or not. Apple quietly fixed or worked to fix the issue. Which is fine. I have no problem with that.

But what many have stated; after spending nearly $700 which in my case I spent $699+tax, we all know Apple can make very high quality products. After spending $700+ I expect to get what I paid for an nothing less. That goes for all brands, all products and that is why we have consumer protection.

[QUADICON]

Visen, on 20 April 2012 - 10:36 AM, said:

In other news, HTC just announced their new Android clones will be made from recycled ashtrays - a clear step up from the current design and materials.

LOL..thats funny. Did you know HTC was the first phone maker to make a phone using a single uni-body construction as Apple does with the Mac?
Did you know Motorola was the first to make a flip phone that was made of metal and glass? Did you know Motorola set the Guiness Book fo World records by selling over 50M of them in a single year?

Did you know that many company's can make products equal to or better than those branded by Apple? if you had criticized Samsung, I would have been 100% in your corner. For the fact Sammie makes their own devices, and they make the quality components that go ito Apple products, it makes you wonder why they don't do the same for teir own branded stuff?

The HTC One family has been getting raved reviews on quality, design and specs, even above iPhone in some respects.
Every phone maker has at least 1 very good phone. Apple just happens to make one really good phone.

[crosswordbob]

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

To be totally honest, you should speak of YOUR own experience, and not try to speak for us who do live in the REAL WORLD.
Facts show here in thr USA, the biggest issues with the antenna were found with the AT&T version of the iPhone.

No, the biggest problem was shown by all AT&T phones—the iPhone 4 performs as well as its competitors on all networks. That's been shown, so your silly non-arguments that have been disproved more times than I can remember are of no substance (incidentally, why do you keep asking questions I've already answered?). Now, since you proved elsewhere that you don't know the first thing about electronic engineering (not even knowing how power, current and potential are related), I don't see any point going over it again. Let me just point out one thing, though:

QUADICON said:

A teardown shows that the latest iPhone 4S uses the new antenna design as was done in the original CDMA iPhone 4 for Verizon.

That is a lie. The 4S antenna design was very different from the CDMA 4 antenna design. There's more evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.

This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 20 April 2012 - 11:33 AM

[nonseq]

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

To be totally honest, you should speak of YOUR own experience, and not try to speak for us who do live in the REAL WORLD.
Facts show here in thr USA, the biggest issues with the antenna were found with the AT&T version of the iPhone. Just like you claim there isnt really an issue with the new iPad?

Well looking at the forum, it shows the biggest majority of the problematic iPad's were made in the Foxconn plant in ShenZhen, which si exactly where my first iPhone from AT&T and Verizon both came from and I had problems with the AT&T model only.

The forum commenst point to the fact, the latest iPad they have exchanged their pre-ordered one, all came from a diffeent Fdoxconn factor. The cit names starts with a C. I beliebe it was speleed Chengz or similar.

My first iPad (32GB) that I purchase last Friday, came from the Foxconn factory in Shenzhen and it did get quite warm even with the brightness at 50%. It also had some WiFi issues even when sitting within 12inches of my Wireless Router. Sometimes the bars would fall all the way down and I kept getting popups saying I needed to connect to WiFi. Turning off an fthen back on the WiFi was a temp fix. I didn't try a restore because it was no big deal since I knew I was goign to exchange it for a (64GB) once they came in. I exchanged it on Wednesday after selling my iPhone 4S and using the cash to buy the 65GB model. It has been great so far. Even with the brightness past 75% which is really bright.

Of course I don't play graphic intensive games to push it any harder. I am actually happy I sold my phone to get it. It was worse selling my phone for.And I have my DAGi stylus which is perfect.

In the real world, we expect any electronic device can have problems. if the iPhone 4 didn't have problems, Apple wouldn't have already have made a bumper that only covered the sides. No matter what you think, or what you say or what you claim, it wasn't blind coincedence. Theer si no such thing as coincedence. All things happen for a reason.

if the iPhone 4 didn't have a problem, then they wouldn't have changed the design of it in the latest models. A teardown shows that the latest iPhone 4S uses the new antenna design as was done in the original CDMA iPhone 4 for Verizon. if it was broke Bob, why did they fix it? If it wasn't broke Bob, then why did they pay for all those bumpers out their pocket so they coudl give them away free? if theer was no problem Bob, why was their a class action lawsuit? The so-called no problem Bob has cost Apple well over $100M in costs.That's offly expensive for something that wasn't a problems. It was a problem Bob...maybe not for you.

Go to Apple's forum and you will see the many comments of posters who have return the new ipad because of overheating and have an exchange that based on the number, show it came from a whole different factory and adjustments ave been made to correct whatever problem it had. It doesn;t matter if the media blows the story up or not. Apple quietly fixed or worked to fix the issue. Which is fine. I have no problem with that.

But what many have stated; after spending nearly $700 which in my case I spent $699+tax, we all know Apple can make very high quality products. After spending $700+ I expect to get what I paid for an nothing less. That goes for all brands, all products and that is why we have consumer protection.

QUAD you haven't changed or proved your take on the antenna problem in months and your understanding of the thermal problem is sophmoric. It would be nice if you could support your arguments with real data instead of what you consider to be common sense and personal expertise. If you did so, you might have more credibility. Your analysis of the antenna problem and constant repetition of unsupported guesses and suppositions repeated ad nauseum doesn't make them true or you any more credible.

This post has been edited by nonseq: 20 April 2012 - 11:41 AM

[snort]

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

Not to stir the pot, but I have both a degree in electronics engineering and an iPhone 4 that very obviously suffers from the problem. Maybe some aren't qualified to comment, but I happen to know what I'm talking about. I'm not sure what real-world evidence you're referring to that contradicts. Apple formally acknowledge the problem exists.

[nonseq]

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

Not to stir the pot, but I have both a degree in electronics engineering and an iPhone 4 that very obviously suffers from the problem. Maybe some aren't qualified to comment, but I happen to know what I'm talking about. I'm not sure what real-world evidence you're referring to that contradicts. Apple formally acknowledge the problem exists.

If you have a citation of Apple acknowledging that the problems exists I would love to see it. Also, are you an RF engineer? Do you have experience in transmitter/receiver/antenna design or is your understanding derived from classwork? Thanks.

[QUADICON]

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 11:29 AM, said:

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

To be totally honest, you should speak of YOUR own experience, and not try to speak for us who do live in the REAL WORLD.
Facts show here in thr USA, the biggest issues with the antenna were found with the AT&T version of the iPhone.

No, the biggest problem was shown by all AT&T phones—the iPhone 4 performs as well as its competitors on all networks. That's been shown, so your silly non-arguments that have been disproved more times than I can remember are of no substance (incidentally, why do you keep asking questions I've already answered?). Now, since you proved elsewhere that you don't know the first thing about electronic engineering (not even knowing how power, current and potential are related), I don't see any point going over it again. Let me just point out one thing, though:

QUADICON said:

A teardown shows that the latest iPhone 4S uses the new antenna design as was done in the original CDMA iPhone 4 for Verizon.

That is a lie. The 4S antenna design was very different from the CDMA 4 antenna design. There's more evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.

Before you call someone a lie you need to read...

Step 14

We find the same 960 x 640 pixel Retina display that debuted in the iPhone 4 last year.

The hardware might not be new, but the iPhone's display is still impressive. Graphics performance is also likely to be improved with the A5 powering it.

We noted that the Verizon and AT&T iPhone 4's display assemblies had different mounting tab locations. While most of the 4S has resembled the CDMA iPhone 4, the display assembly appears to be very similar the one found in the GSM version at first glance. Unfortunately, it's not the same.

What appears to be the ambient light sensor and infra-red LED for the proximity sensor comes off the display assembly.

BOB the meta band that goes around the iPhone 4S, is nealt identical to the one used in the CDMA iPhone 4. The guys states above, most of what they saw in the iPhone 4 is, was more like the iPhone 4 CDMA model made for Verizon, while the most significant change was how the digitizer mounts to the rest of the device. It was the only thing that was different.

Here - go and look at the teardown Bob - http://www.ifixit.co...Teardown/6610/2
The guy states Bob...Most of the work they see in the iPhone 4S looks much like the exact same parts in the CDMA iPhone 4 except foe the mounts on the digitizer. Hmmm! I don't think I misread anything Bob

[crosswordbob]

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

Not to stir the pot, but I have both a degree in electronics engineering and an iPhone 4 that very obviously suffers from the problem. Maybe some aren't qualified to comment, but I happen to know what I'm talking about. I'm not sure what real-world evidence you're referring to that contradicts. Apple formally acknowledge the problem exists.

Surveys (e.g. Changewave) that show the iPhone 4 drops no more calls than average across all smartphones on each US carrier. Of course, it depends what you mean by "problem". The phone is known to suffer greater degrees of attenuation than other phones, but since it also copes better with lower signal strengths, overall it seems to perform as well as its competitors. Hence not really a problem. Apple formally acknowledge that all phones suffer degraded performance when handled - to the best of my knowledge they have always maintained that the iPhone 4 was engineered such that the actual impact of this was no worse than normal.

Unless, of course, you can find any actual usage statistics that demonstrate any detectible trend towards the iPhone 4 underperforming against its competitors - I'll happily change my opinion if you can, but until now, nobody's managed to come up with any, while I have the Changewave stats that say otherwise. Which would seem odd, given that the phone's been heavily used for nearly two years, and the whole "Antennagate" thing was such big news - I'd have thought it would have been easy to show iPhone users dropping more calls than others if there was actually anything in it.

In terms of my comment about legions of unqualified commenters, how many posts did we see that claimed all it would take is a thin insulating coating would have made the problem go away? Such a lot of people thinking they know how to make a phone better than Apple, despite apparently never having heard of a capacitor.

[crosswordbob]

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 11:58 AM, said:

Before you call someone a lie you need to read...

Step 14

We find the same 960 x 640 pixel Retina display that debuted in the iPhone 4 last year.

The hardware might not be new, but the iPhone's display is still impressive. Graphics performance is also likely to be improved with the A5 powering it.

We noted that the Verizon and AT&T iPhone 4's display assemblies had different mounting tab locations. While most of the 4S has resembled the CDMA iPhone 4, the display assembly appears to be very similar the one found in the GSM version at first glance. Unfortunately, it's not the same.

Here - go and look at the teardown Bob - http://www.ifixit.co...Teardown/6610/2
The guy states Bob...Most of the work they see in the iPhone 4S looks much like the exact same parts in the CDMA iPhone 4 except foe the mounts on the digitizer. Hmmm! I don't think I misread anything Bob

There is a massive difference between "resembles", or "looks much like" and being the same. I read just fine - you don't. Remember Consumer Reports? Their silly tests showed the Verizon iPhone 4 behaving just like the AT&T one. But somehow the Verizon one seemed to work much better? Conclusion: CR's flawed tests did not show a problem with either phone; the Verizon iPhone 4 has an antenna much more like the AT&T iPhone 4 than the iPhone 4s; and the whole thing was just down to AT&T having a crappy network, and nothing to do with Apple. Simple logic.

This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 20 April 2012 - 12:12 PM

[QUADICON]

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 11:29 AM, said:

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

To be totally honest, you should speak of YOUR own experience, and not try to speak for us who do live in the REAL WORLD.
Facts show here in thr USA, the biggest issues with the antenna were found with the AT&T version of the iPhone.

No, the biggest problem was shown by all AT&T phones—the iPhone 4 performs as well as its competitors on all networks. That's been shown, so your silly non-arguments that have been disproved more times than I can remember are of no substance (incidentally, why do you keep asking questions I've already answered?). Now, since you proved elsewhere that you don't know the first thing about electronic engineering (not even knowing how power, current and potential are related), I don't see any point going over it again. Let me just point out one thing, though:

QUADICON said:

A teardown shows that the latest iPhone 4S uses the new antenna design as was done in the original CDMA iPhone 4 for Verizon.

That is a lie. The 4S antenna design was very different from the CDMA 4 antenna design. There's more evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.

It doesn't matter what you try or APple try to claim in numbers. All those other phone makers blasted Apple for trying to drag their phone into the mix. The other phone makers had far less returns of phones for anything related to antenna issues.

No matter how you pan it Bob, there is a big different in wrapping your hand completely around a device and covering it vs just taking 2 fingers and covering the gaps. There are countless videos that say YOU ARE WRONG. I don't care what Apple claims.

I do agree with you, all of AT&T phones do have some issues on AT&T network. Which is why i did put some of the blame on them. That doesn't mean that the design of the phone didn't contribute to the issue. Which is what you blindly don't except. None of those other phones require you to buy a case of any kind to prevent you from covering any specific spot that would prefevt you from using your device. That si a fact. You can believe whatever you want. Facts show that even tho the VZW iPhone was made similar in design on the outside. holding the gaps didn't produce the exact same effect. Facts show it has nothing to do with CDMA vs GSM. It all had to s=do with the design of the phone. The design was changed Bob before the iPhone 4 for Verizon was released.

A teardown of the Verizon iPhone 4S and the GSM model show they are nearly 100% identical in design and ow the antenna runs inside. In both cases the design is different from what Apple did with the original A&T model of the device. if it was broke in the first place, they wouldn't have needed to fix it.

Numbers show that other devices including iPhone had poor performance in certain markets. For example, people here in Chicago and in New York speak about how horrible ATT service is overall. But also stated that after getting an iPhone the problem was worsen, while in California they didn't experience the same issues no matter which devices. Which shows the issue is a problem for the network and the device maker.

Why don't you stay in the UK or wherever in Europe where you live, and let us in the US stay on top of what is happening here. Because you only believe what you read from Apple, you have no actual experience whatsoever to speak from since you don't live in the States. Which makes ANY point you make about using communication devices in the States moot. You aren't speaking from any experience. PERIOD.

[crosswordbob]

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Numbers show that other devices including iPhone had poor performance in certain markets. For example, people here in Chicago and in New York speak about how horrible ATT service is overall. But also stated that after getting an iPhone the problem was worsen, while in California they didn't experience the same issues no matter which devices. Which shows the issue is a problem for the network and the device maker.

Show us these mythical numbers. Or is that another lie?

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Why don't you stay in the UK or wherever in Europe where you live, and let us in the US stay on top of what is happening here. Because you only believe what you read from Apple, you have no actual experience whatsoever to speak from since you don't live in the States. Which makes ANY point you make about using communication devices in the States moot. You aren't speaking from any experience. PERIOD.

Who cares if I have experience in the States? You said yourself, my experience is irrelevant. And I've told you time and time again that I have never been talking about my experience, I've been talking about actual usage statistics. You know - the stuff that actually matters.

Try it some day.

This post has been edited by crosswordbob: 20 April 2012 - 12:16 PM

[QUADICON]

nonseq, on 20 April 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

crosswordbob, on 20 April 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

snort, on 20 April 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

It's hard to believe they'd go to a metal back again given how absorptive of radio signals it is, especially after the iPhone 4 antenna debacle. A metal case is a horrible idea for something that transmits and receives radio waves.

It's not that hard to believe. Apple's actual antenna engineers—unlike the legions of unqualified commenters who believed their vague memories of high-school physics were a valid substitute for expertise—were never taken in by the nonsense that was "Antennagate".

Unsurprisingly, real-world evidence has shown that they were right.

To be totally honest, you should speak of YOUR own experience, and not try to speak for us who do live in the REAL WORLD.
Facts show here in thr USA, the biggest issues with the antenna were found with the AT&T version of the iPhone. Just like you claim there isnt really an issue with the new iPad?

Well looking at the forum, it shows the biggest majority of the problematic iPad's were made in the Foxconn plant in ShenZhen, which si exactly where my first iPhone from AT&T and Verizon both came from and I had problems with the AT&T model only.

The forum commenst point to the fact, the latest iPad they have exchanged their pre-ordered one, all came from a diffeent Fdoxconn factor. The cit names starts with a C. I beliebe it was speleed Chengz or similar.

My first iPad (32GB) that I purchase last Friday, came from the Foxconn factory in Shenzhen and it did get quite warm even with the brightness at 50%. It also had some WiFi issues even when sitting within 12inches of my Wireless Router. Sometimes the bars would fall all the way down and I kept getting popups saying I needed to connect to WiFi. Turning off an fthen back on the WiFi was a temp fix. I didn't try a restore because it was no big deal since I knew I was goign to exchange it for a (64GB) once they came in. I exchanged it on Wednesday after selling my iPhone 4S and using the cash to buy the 65GB model. It has been great so far. Even with the brightness past 75% which is really bright.

Of course I don't play graphic intensive games to push it any harder. I am actually happy I sold my phone to get it. It was worse selling my phone for.And I have my DAGi stylus which is perfect.

In the real world, we expect any electronic device can have problems. if the iPhone 4 didn't have problems, Apple wouldn't have already have made a bumper that only covered the sides. No matter what you think, or what you say or what you claim, it wasn't blind coincedence. Theer si no such thing as coincedence. All things happen for a reason.

if the iPhone 4 didn't have a problem, then they wouldn't have changed the design of it in the latest models. A teardown shows that the latest iPhone 4S uses the new antenna design as was done in the original CDMA iPhone 4 for Verizon. if it was broke Bob, why did they fix it? If it wasn't broke Bob, then why did they pay for all those bumpers out their pocket so they coudl give them away free? if theer was no problem Bob, why was their a class action lawsuit? The so-called no problem Bob has cost Apple well over $100M in costs.That's offly expensive for something that wasn't a problems. It was a problem Bob...maybe not for you.

Go to Apple's forum and you will see the many comments of posters who have return the new ipad because of overheating and have an exchange that based on the number, show it came from a whole different factory and adjustments ave been made to correct whatever problem it had. It doesn;t matter if the media blows the story up or not. Apple quietly fixed or worked to fix the issue. Which is fine. I have no problem with that.

But what many have stated; after spending nearly $700 which in my case I spent $699+tax, we all know Apple can make very high quality products. After spending $700+ I expect to get what I paid for an nothing less. That goes for all brands, all products and that is why we have consumer protection.

QUAD you haven't changed or proved your take on the antenna problem in months and your understanding of the thermal problem is sophmoric. It would be nice if you could support your arguments with real data instead of what you consider to be common sense and personal expertise. If you did so, you might have more credibility. Your analysis of the antenna problem and constant repetition of unsupported guesses and suppositions repeated ad nauseum doesn't make them true or you any more credible.

First off, as I told Bob numbers don't tell the full story. It doesn't matter even if only less than 1% of the sold device had the issue. I could care less about percentages. What I care about is, when I hold the device in my hands and it doesn't work as I expect it should, then it has a problem. I don't give a crap what Consumer Reports say, I don't care what other uses say whether they have the issue or not. What I care about is how my experience compares to others.

I have been with Verzion since 1996 and I have never experience the type of issues I had when i move to ATT.
When the iPhone 4 came out it was the first phone I ever used with ATT. Before that and before Verizon my cell phone was with GTE in Florida which is now Verizon, but they didn't buy the cell network when they bought GTE. They spun it off to AllTel.

Here in the USA, CDMA has several advantages over GSM. For example, when I was a courier and had to constantly go up in buildings, my VZW and Sprint devices worked in elevators and in tall buildings while I watch ATT devices always search for signals or drop calls. ATT devices also didn't work in the subways here. ATT also is way to pricey with rates. Even when I worked for Ameritiech and they gave away free ATT devices when the company bought us out after we spun from the breakup of ATT, I refused to take one.

For a week a tried to new Windows Phones on ATT before moving my number back to Verzion after getting the ATT iPhone. The HTC Surround and the Samsung Windows Phone both didn't drop one single call in the week I used them. The calls were clear, unlike the static/garble using the iPhone. Even the Verizon iPhone calls were much clearer vs ATT devices.

I spoke many times saying ATT network is horrible...all of us in the USA know this. You guys dont because you dont live here. That doesn't mean a device design can't add to the issue because it did. PERIOD. What data so you want? There are countless videos on youtube that sjows everyone can duplicate the antenna issue without even trying too. That si all the data I need.

We aren't talking how many devices had an issue vs how many were sold. We are talking about people who actually had the problem period. Whether they returned the device or simply got the bumper is not relevant to my argument. There is nothing to argue. If theer was no problem Apple wouldn't have spent $100M in hush money to stop the bad publicity they were getting. It si that simplr. They don't have to admit to any wrong doing. Steve said, they DID notice an issue with the iPhone 4 dring testing, but his words were "it wasn't a big deal". Well if it wasn't then, why did they pay a company to make a bumper that only fit the sides of the device and not make a real case the covered the back and sides like everyone else was making.

You chose not to look ay the facts. Fine...don't. Apple made a fix they tried to sell as a decorative item. Apple has NEVER in all the years they made any computer or mobile device ever made any type of protective covering whatsoever. And all of a sudden with the iPhone 4, they made this rubberband that only fits the sides. That is a fact Nonseg, whether you like it or not. 3 models of iPhone existed before the iPhone 4. How many cases have Apple ever made? NONE. How many cases does Apple makes for their present devices? NONE. They make a cover for the iPad and that is it.

Apple has made 6 generations of mobile devices and only ONE had a case-like cover. Why? Is that blind coincidence or on purpose?

You are just like the non-believers who actually think a 757 can take down 2 110 story buildings, yet make only a 20 foot hold on the side of the Pentagon. Or that a plane can crash in the middle of an open field and leave no seats, no tail, no bodies and no papers or nothing...yeah...you just keep believing what you want.

[crosswordbob]

QUADICON, on 20 April 2012 - 12:29 PM, said:

You are just like the non-believers who actually think a 757 can take down 2 110 story buildings, yet make only a 20 foot hold on the side of the Pentagon. Or that a plane can crash in the middle of an open field and leave no seats, no tail, no bodies and no papers or nothing...yeah...you just keep believing what you want.

There's a word for people who believe these things. "Sane". Probably best you keep your fruit-loop conspiracy theories out of this.