The iPhone 4 Redux: Analyzing Apple's iOS 4.0.1 Signal Fix & Antenna Issue
by Brian Klug & Anand Lal Shimpi on July 15, 2010 12:28 PM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Apple
- iOS 4
- iPhone 4
- Mobile
Final Words
The new signal strength visualization in iOS 4.0.1 is simply going to be more honest with iPhone users. Whether that's going to result in customers confused about why their phone performs "worse" after the update or simply get really mad at AT&T remains to be seen. In the area of Raleigh, NC that I live in, it's tough to get better than -90 dBm on AT&T without driving a few miles away. Even then you're only at -80 dBm at best. I literally have to drive for about 10 minutes to see a fifth bar on the iPhone 4 now in my area.
Not everyone will like the new bars but you can't fault Apple for being more honest with its users. We'd still prefer if Apple allowed all users to see a numeric readout of their signal strength if they desired, but this is a step in the right direction for transparency at least. Unfortunately, that's only part of the problem.
Yesterday Microsoft’s COO referred to the iPhone 4 as Apple’s Vista. I’d actually take that one step further and call this whole situation Apple’s first Microsoft moment. And I don’t mean that in a bad way towards Microsoft, but rather that as a result of Apple’s own great success, it is now susceptible to the sort of fire that Microsoft has been for years.
When Apple had issues with battery life in Snow Leopard, CPU utilization while playing MP3s in Mac Pros, or even SSDs in 2nd gen unibody MacBook Pros the backlash just wasn’t there. While Mac users care about having problem-free hardware, there simply aren’t enough users to really create the angry mob that has happened in iOS land. Well there are a ton of iPhone users out there. This isn’t going to be the last time that Apple feels the heat.
A large part of it is Apple’s fault. At any company that regularly introduces new products there’s this concept of regression testing. It’s particularly prevalent in technology companies that have to deal with things like driver updates. The idea behind regression testing is to make sure that anything new you introduce doesn’t break anything that previously worked fine. While the iPhone 4’s antenna tradeoff is largely acceptable if you live in an area with good reception, if you don’t then it quickly becomes a problem. This combined with some of the other Apple follies I mentioned above leads me to believe that Apple simply needs to test more. This is something I’ve asked for in previous Mac articles.
And Apple honestly should have been more willing to discuss the issue publicly than it has been. There's no reason Apple couldn't have come public with its own testing showing the same results we showed in our iPhone 4 review.
The phone itself delivers better battery life than anything else in its class, has good performance and a wonderful screen. Whether or not the antenna design manifests itself as an issue really depends on AT&T’s coverage where you’re using the phone. As a result, AT&T can also share in the blame here. As I mentioned in our EVO 4G review, Sprint and Verizon appear to have slower data rates but more consistent coverage wherever I use them. In comparison, AT&T generally offers higher peak transfer rates but reception that varies more wildly.
Criticism that isn't constructive is rarely useful, and as we’ve just shown there are things that Apple can do to address the issue today. Using a bumper the iPhone 4 behaves no differently than the 3GS. Hold the phone as tightly as you want with a bumper and it’ll lose as much signal as a 3GS or Nexus One. Put some sort of insulating coating on the stainless steel band and you’ll significantly reduce, but not eliminate the issue.
Apple iPhone 4 with Bumper Case. Image Courtesy of Sarah Trainor.
The third option would be a redesign of the phone’s internals, potentially even taking a step back to something more reminiscent of the 3GS’ antenna design. I’m not sure this is necessary because of the options on the table today.
Our original assessment still stands: Apple should provide free bumpers to iPhone 4 customers. Nickel and diming is never the way to maintain a loyal customer base. Introducing a non-conductive antenna band and replacing existing phones in the market also makes a lot of sense, assuming Apple has found a way to do that. Apple planned a press conference for tomorrow to talk about the iPhone 4 and presumably these issues. In a little over 24 hours we'll find out how Apple views the situation and what it plans to do about it.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
146 Comments
View All Comments
screensurfer - Saturday, July 17, 2010 - link
No. Care to explain? It's not my words, it's his (something like this): "we haven't found a solution to defy the laws of physics. YET!", i.e., after September 30th we'll have a different antenna system that doesn't drop calls so easilybarelyinaudible - Saturday, July 17, 2010 - link
I keep seeing this article quoted as "proof" to apple's signal problem. However, I am finding that you are leaving out one rather important piece of information -- Your reference.Are you measuring in dBc, dBJ, dBm, dBi, dBd, dBq? There are literally hundreds of different reference points to choose from?
Also, dB is a logarithmic function - What is starting point for the attenuation? 100 dB? 30 dB?
Going from 120 - 100 dB is a MUCH MUCH bigger drop than from 30 - 10 dB -- since dB increases exponentially.
I think this article is being intellectually dishonest by not providing proper information to your readers (read: 85% of statistics are made up on the spot.)
ameridian - Saturday, July 17, 2010 - link
There are 22 occurrences in this article referrings to dBm's as the unit of measure. I'd advise reading the article before posting comments.leeseng - Saturday, July 17, 2010 - link
Hi anand,Full tight grip is about tight grip with another palm cover up the phone as well. That's very similar to how a tight-grip-fellow talking over the phone call.
I just did a test. Full-tight-grip cost -24dBm in my htc desire. Where as tight grip cost -12dBm. What about iPhone4?
rushbc - Saturday, July 17, 2010 - link
my favorite quote from the article is this one:"Ultimately this is why I consider Apple’s design here to be unnecessarily risky. Introducing a change with stylistic and technical benefits where the downside is limited but potentially very noticeable is just ballsy."
i agree and would like to add the following:
so is creating and mass-producing a $700 smartphone out of glass!!
that is pure Steve Jobs "balls to the wall, damn the torpedos, full speed ahead, F 'em if they don't like it" ballsy. love ya, Steve (and J.Ive), but you guys may be a little too aggressive sometimes in your design decisions.
i love my iphone 4, it's great, it's fast, it's beautiful, it works super for ALL of my needs--yes even phone calling/signal strength is great--but i am in constant fear of dropping it. dropping a $700 piece of glass would suck, because, guess what? glass breaks when you drop it!
...but try not dropping something that you carry around with you every single day, wherever you go, and are constantly using it throughout each day, picking it up, putting it down, taking it out of pocket, putting it back in pocket, etc. not an easy task....it requires constant care and vigilance to not drop the darn thing. and yes, glass can be slippery, so theres that, too.
love the phone, hate the stress!
Griswold - Saturday, July 17, 2010 - link
Get one of the free bumpers. It would be the first I'd do with a glass sandwich like that.ajb - Saturday, July 17, 2010 - link
I notice that in the photos of the iPhone 4 compared to the 3GS you were holding the iPhone 4 in your left hand (presumably having much more contact with the sensitive area of the antenna aray) while the photo of the 3GS depicts you holding the phone in your right hand. Could this have resulted in whole or in part for the larger drop of signal strength with the iPhone 4? Trust me, I'm not trying to defend the iPhone 4 - I've had enough problems of my own with maintaining a signal. I only ask to make sure that the numbers quoted are accurate.Also, I have noticed a very discernable difference in wi-fi performance at the weak end of the wi-fi bar scale (2 out of 3 wi-fi bars). My 3GS did much better in performance than does my 4. I sometimes get the impression that the phone's alogorithm at that wif-fi signal strength can't make up its mind whether it wants to be on 3G or wi-fi, which even with 2 bars should be and with the 3GS always was much faster than 3G. I do believe I read somewhere that there might be a problem with not releasing expired IP addresses, but I don't think that accounts for all of the problems I have been having because even after turning off wi-fi, moving closer to my wireless router, turning wi-fi back and, and walking back to where I originally was, I continue to experience the problem. Have you done any wi-fi testing? Do you have any insights into this problem? Any idea if this is a wide-spread problem?
codeachrome - Saturday, July 17, 2010 - link
Try KaptonTape.comanandreader - Sunday, July 18, 2010 - link
Brian-Could you clarify what you did there?
I'd like to enable dBm instead of bars on my iPhone.
Thanks!
Fri13 - Sunday, July 18, 2010 - link
"While the software update obviously does not and cannot address the design of the antenna itself - or make the drop from holding the phone any less - it does change the way the issue is perceived among users. "Actually the algorithm should effect the reception. The firmware (where the algorithm is placed) is responsible to use more or less power (W) to boost the signal what phone antenna is receiving. I have heard that max output is 2W. With 1W boost you gain -30dB.
While the bars tells the signal strength from cellphone to tover, the algorithm needs to compensate the drop/rise of the signal strength so it would not drop off. So if the max drop of is -24dB and before the iOS 4.0.1 the 1-4 bars were merely calculating -22dB range before drop out, the boost was never enough to keep the cellphone in the network (like you had -22dB signal, you touched and you got -24dB drop and algorithm boosted only -15dB, you were -7dB over the needed signal strength).
As anandtech has noted, software can not affect the hardware itself. The software can not eliminate the -24dB drop what is coming from hand (and touch). But the software can make the drop smaller by boosting the signal to needed level.
What is the needed level? Stronger signal = bigger power consuming -> less talk time / stand-by time. Needed level is simply that what gives good enough voice quality and keeps data transfer at maximum. It is not wise to overrun the power use so the battery is empty more faster.
And do people remember when Apple did improve the battery life in the 3Gs time with software patch? That would be very easy to do just by making the signal boost algorithm such that it does not use so much power = weaker boosting.