71–80 of 145 posts
This makes no sense to me. Maybe I'm ignorant, but it sounds a lot like going to a mechanic because your car keeps turning off and they offer a new paint job to fix the issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does the Droid have an antenna? Edit: I didn't understand your original comment. Rereading it, yeah, that doesn't make much sense. Perhaps the dear leader only cares about the Droid family on Verizon. Well, more likely they just didn't want to acknowledge the existence of Android in a press release where they are delivering a mea culpa.
upvoted you, because I don't know how to downvote...
From paragraph six, "We are also making bars 1, 2 and 3 a bit taller so they will be easier to see." It's a psychological thing. A few extra pixels do indeed give the illusion of better network reception, albeit the actual level doesn't change. Similar to designing progress bars, the actual progress is hidden from the user. Instead, the user is presented with the illusion that the process is progressing faster than i…
good observation. i'm wondering why bars are not equally the same height across. the quantity alone should be enough (1 vs 5) to convey strength. with the height being variable, it seems to make things seem worst in the worst possible way -- 5 will still be 5, but when its a 1, because the height is so much shorter, it seems worst than 1. what is the upside to variable height when you already have variable width in t…
Someone should write an iPhone app...
What a strange coincidence. Just after releasing a phone that uses a metal ring all around the chassis as an antenna (which is something that perplexed every engineer living outside of the reality distortion field as soon as they saw the first pictures of the phone), they discovered that they've always used the wrong algorithm to calculate the signal strength.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
good observation. i'm wondering why bars are not equally the same height across. the quantity alone should be enough (1 vs 5) to convey strength. with the height being variable, it seems to make things seem worst in the worst possible way -- 5 will still be 5, but when its a 1, because the height is so much shorter, it seems worst than 1. what is the upside to variable height when you already have variable width in t…
"Bar rendering" debates and the actual signal (yes, a physical quantity!) that the phone sees from the AT&T network are non-issues with a BlackBerry thanks to its wondrous ability to display RSSI directly: http://www.blackberrycool.com/2009/04/22/converting-signal-s... Someone should write an iPhone app...
http://gizmodo.com/5048905/iphone-21-update-available-now
Especially entertaining is the update note at the bottom:
The "3G signal strength display" fix certainly seems to have done something for my iPhone 3G: it's sitting here in the same place on my desk, and has gone from two bars of 3G signal with the 2.0.2 software to a whopping five bars in version 2.1.
To phrase that another way, it's not that covering the antennae gives you poor reception, it's that you've always had poor reception but didn't realize it. Doesn't seem right to me, as I thought I had hear complaints about calls being dropped upon covering the antenna - not just fewer bars.
Nobody would be that surprised if hugging the antenna causes a call to be dropped when the signal was already marginal, but if you thought that the signal was strong, it would be a big disappointment. The iPhone 4's design, which doesn't make it at all obvious where the antenna is, compounds the gap between what the user thinks is happening and what actually is.
Ironically, I now have a much better idea of the iPhone 4's antenna location than that of any cell phone I've owned since they had protruding antennae.
What a strange coincidence. Just after releasing a phone that uses a metal ring all around the chassis as an antenna (which is something that perplexed every engineer living outside of the reality distortion field as soon as they saw the first pictures of the phone), they discovered that they've always used the wrong algorithm to calculate the signal strength.
