Results tagged “Apple” from Bill's Words

Let’s translate the PR, shall we?

Apple® will broadcast its September 1 event online using Apple’s industry-leading HTTP Live Streaming, which is based on open standards.

!)#%&# you, Flash.

Viewing requires either a Mac® running Safari® on Mac OS® X version 10.6 Snow Leopard®, an iPhone® or iPod touch® running iOS 3.0 or higher, or an iPad™.

Screw you, too, Windows.

The live broadcast will begin at 10:00 a.m. PDT on September 1, 2010 at www.apple.com.

Rats, I’m busy at that time.

But there’s more to it than that.

Yes, it’s a decidedly-anti-Flash “telecast,” and I chose that word intentionally. What if a bunch of network execs were watching this “telecast” somewhere offsite, waiting to see how well it works, on an AppleTV? What if they were watching on Macs? What if they were watching it side-by-side with Windows boxes of various flavors?

I think there are three purposes to showing this “telecast.” They will demonstrate to network execs that:

1 - Flash isn’t necessary for streaming video.

2 - If we own the platform, it provides a much better viewing experience than anything else out there, especially if it’s a Windows Media PC or Windows box of some sort.

3 - We have the capacity to stream live TV to a zillion viewers.

Care to sign up?

(via Daring Fireball

This picture, from iFixit, shows the copyright date of the Magic Trackpad as being 2009.

It’s also on the box, for that matter. This thing’s been waiting in the wings for quite a while. Anybody else wonder why? Anybody got any theories?

See the rest of the pictures at iFixIt. Man, I love their work…

Article here in which Steve John Gruber says the following (quoting another of his readers):

“We know from the Gizmodo stolen iPhone that the prototypes were disguised in cases when outside Apple’s campus. Maybe that’s why Apple missed this flaw in the antenna: they never noticed it on campus because they have a strong AT&T signal, and never noticed it off campus because the iPhones were always inside cases, and cases mitigate the skin-touching-the-spot problem.”

That’s just not possible.

He then explains why it’s supposedly not possible; I summarize his reasoning as “When the iPhone 4 was used inside the anechoic chambers where the signal could be weak or strong, and inside the special iPhone testing vans, the phone would have not been in a case. There was one helluva’ lot of testing.”

While his reasoning may be true, the blanket statement “That’s just not possible” isn’t proven by it.

Because it is possible. It’s just one of the possibilities, and to discount this possibility based on Steve Jobs’s statements and the antenna lab tours is not terribly good reasoning.

Remembering that the iPhone 4 differs from every other phone, smart or not, in that its antenna structures are touchable, here are some more possibilities:

• Testing occurred in the labs with weak signals, granted. But the antenna labs are climate controlled and it’s possible that the humans who came into contact with the phone never had very much moisture on their fingers because they just weren’t sweaty enough to cause total signal loss. Was skin conductivity even measured?

Not that that is what happened, but it’s possible.

• The people in the tests never held it in the short-the-antenna-structure-out fashion. Unless they documented the way the phones were held and used with every test, they missed an important piece of data.

Not that that is what happened, but it’s possible.

• The phones used out in the open (not at Apple or in the vans under well-controlled conditions) were used with cases, mitigating the problem.

Not that that is what happened, but it’s possible.

I would bet a beer that nobody ever thought to model and/or evaluate skin conductivity between the two antenna structures. I am, however, certain that the conductivity and “meat” involved where the hands touch a single antenna were at least modeled, if not tested. I guarantee that, in fact—and am willing to bet a beer on that, too. (Offer valid only for Gruber or Jobs or his designee. Sorry, everybody else.)

Furthermore, Steve didn’t say, “When the iPhone 4 is held with the two antenna structures shorted out, we knew it would lose a few bars.” No, he says, “We knew that if you gripped it in a certain way, the bars are going to go down a little bit, just like every smartphone. We didn’t think it’d be a big problem, because every smartphone has this issue.”

First, he never says what “the certain way” is, but implies that it’s the same “certain way” that any other smartphone might exhibit a problem with. And second, yes, they very well may have “this issue,” but the issue they don’t have is that of shorting out one or more antenna structures. And that is the crux of the issue, the proverbial point which is being missed here, over and over again.

Consumer Reports gets it. I get it. Those inside the RDF, on the other hand, just don’t seem to be able to get it.

The Computer Museum has published the entirety of the source code for Bill Atkinson’s genius magnum opuses… opi? opum? MacPaint and QuickDraw. You, too, also unwashed and unworthy, can gaze upon these magnificent files by clicking here.

Yes, I’m just that geeky. I get all tingly as I look on the code and marvel at how readable and meaningful each line is. And then I reflect on its absolute Earth-shattering impact, at how instrumental these lines of code were in reshaping the whole computer industry.

It’s just that cool.

And, if you don’t think it is just that cool, that’s OK, too.

Well, Apple’s not quite done the right thing, and it is disappointing to me.

Instead of admitting that there is a well-documented and clearly-understood problem with the iPhone, Apple’s saying that all smartphones have a problem and their phone isn’t alone.

Unfortunately, this is mixing Apples (ahem) and oranges because, while there are certain positions you can hold any phone in that will attenuate the signal by sticking your meaty hands in the way, the iPhone 4 is the only phone whose antenna you touch directly.

One more time: the iPhone 4 is the only phone whose antenna you touch directly.

It’s not the fact that you stick your hand in the way like other phones. It’s that you are a conductor between two portions of the antenna system. It is rocket science. But it’s simple rocket science.

If Apple put a clear, non-conductive coating on the antenna structure, my guess is that there would still be some capacitive coupling between the two antennas when you grip the thing “the wrong way.” But it wouldn’t be nearly as substantial as directly shorting out the two antenna parts.

Sigh…

I’m going to give mine a shot of Krylon. I’ll let you know how it goes.

It’s not magic. It’s simple physics, and there’s no “consensus” to be reached. Of course, implementing the simple physics into a consumer product is akin to magic. But let’s go over a very simplified version of the physics bit now, shall we? Then we can see why there’s no consensus to be reached.

A while back, something on the order of twenty years ago, I took some classes in which we studied radio waves. Jack Derry taught me, and taught me well, he did. Though I don’t remember the details, here’s the gist of what is happening in the iPhone 4.

First, let’s remember that antennas are mechanically designed to best suit the electrical characteristics of the radio waves they are transmitting and receiving. Generally, their lengths are multiples (or halves or quarters, usually) of the wavelengths they are carrying. They are usually precisely tuned in this way because when the wavelength matches up nicely to the length of the antenna, the signal goes out and comes in relatively unimpeded.

Second, let’s remember that there’s a receiver in the iPhone 4 (and all other cellphones) which has what’s known as a sensitivity. For simplicity’s sake, we’ll just say that if the signal reaching the receiver is bigger than this sensitivity, the signal gets received. If not, then no bars.

Third, let’s also remember that cell sites are spread out and that the closer to one you are, the stronger the signal into your phone. The farther away, the weaker the signal. You know this already because you drive out of the city and your radio station fades into nothing as you get farther from it. Drive back into the city, and your morning DJ comes in loud and clear. Sometimes, too clear.

Finally, let’s look at the antenna structures of the iPhone themselves. These structures are on the outside of the phone. No, it’s not the first time cell phone antennas have been where you can see them. Remember all of those brick phones with rubber ducky antennas on them? How about the smaller Motorola StarTACs with the retractable thin antennas? Remember those? But what’s different here is that this is the first time (that I know of) where the antenna system has been exposed as part of the phone that you touch, intentionally and deliberately.

Now let’s put all of this stuff together.

What is happening to everybody—whether you notice the problem or not—who holds the phone using the Sweaty Palm Grip is that you are becoming a not-so-great part of the antenna. On top of that, you’re shorting across that plastic divider between two of the phone’s antenna elements. I will ignore the question of what bands or signals these elements carry—it’s irrelevant because at least one is related to the cell signal, and that’s all that matters. The net result of your putting your Sweaty Palm onto the antenna elements is that the iPhone antennas don’t work as well as they did without you since you’re not a finely tuned piece of antenna structure. No, you’re a blobby, resistive, funky-lookin’ piece of meat, and meat doesn’t work well as an antenna.

No, instead when you touch those antenna bits with the Sweaty Palm Grip or its equivalent, the Slimy Pinky Touch of Death, you screw up all of Apple’s antenna engineers’ obsessive and loving work. Your hand wasn’t part of their plan, or at least, not as you grip the phone. If you grip the phone the way these guys planned that you would, it wouldn’t be a problem. Or so says Apple, anyway.

The problem with your Funky Grip is that the signal that should be nicely entering the antenna doesn’t go in so nicely anymore. And if it doesn’t go in the antenna, it can’t be picked up by the receiver. And if it can’t be picked up by the receiver, no bars.

So why do some people notice it and others don’t? The guys at Wired Gadget Lab couldn’t reproduce the problem at all. Well, it all has to do with your distance from the cell phone site. The closer you are, remember, the stronger the signal. The farther away, the weaker the signal. When you are close, your Funky Grip does keep some signal from getting in (“attenuates,” to use the right terminology), but enough gets through that the receiver can pick it up anyway.

When you are far away from the cell site, however, your Funky Grip keeps the same amount of the signal from getting into the antenna system. The problem is that farther away from the cell site (or with more buildings in the way or whatever), there’s not as much signal to start with, and the net result of the Funky Grip is that there’s not enough left for the receiver to work with. No bars.

I can demonstrate this effect at my home in the boonies (far from a cell site) and at my desk in the city (right across the street from a cell site). At home, Funky Grip yields no bars. At work, the bars don’t budge.

It really is that simple. Q.E.D.

Now, there are, as I’ve said before, some other losses associated with having your meaty hands in the path of the signal, but all phones have that problem, not just the iPhone 4. What the iPhone 4 has that is unique, as I said above, is antennas (antennae are for bugs) which are exposed to electrical contact with your hands.

Other sites have done the electrical tape experiment I proposed in an earlier entry and have been successful in demonstrating that the problem goes away. I’d rather not screw up the appearance of my phone with electrical tape, however, so I’m still looking for a solution.

And I’m guessing Apple’s looking too, but maybe not as hard as we’d like, as their letter seems to indicate.

First, Apple has to back off its “You’re holding it wrong” stance. And it is also going to have to back off the “We’ll change the bars calculation” approach, too. It doesn’t matter how many bars there are. If the phone has service and works, then great. But if gripping it in a manner comfortable to me keeps it from working, the number of bars is irrelevant. And the fact that it has better reception than an iPhone 3G or 3GS is irrelevant, too, because that’s not what iPhone 4 users are holding in a manner comfortable to them.

Second, it’s going to have to issue a fix, and it won’t be cheap. It’ll either be $29 for a bumper (though I doubt that costs Apple anywhere near $29 per bumper) per phone, or it will be a clear, non-conductive coating applied to the phone itself. Maybe there are ways for them to do that in the stores, maybe via replacement via mail… I dunno’. Apple can afford a fix. They can’t afford the bad PR. It just doesn’t look good, feel good or work well. And those are Apple’s core values, according to me, and this problem and their current response tarnish those values.

In any case, Apple’s stance is simply wrong. Yes, they may be surprised in some ways, but, quite frankly, I have to side with the lawsuits on this one, and I’m torteophobic.

(Note to attorneys: Don’t come looking to me for expert testimony. You can’t afford me, though I dare you to try.)

There’s a problem with the iPhone 4 antennas which limits their effectiveness. Many people point to this article by Spencer Webb who seems to be (and I know nothing different) to be an antenna expert to explain why there’s a problem, but he’s a bit off base.

The problem with the antennas, as he points out pretty clearly in his article, is that two of the iPhone 4’s metal frame pieces are pretty-well shorted out when you smoosh your palm over the slot between them. To quote:

If you short these slots, or cover them with your hand, the antenna performance will suffer…

I think, judging by the remainder of his discussion, that he somehow thinks the slot is responsible for the miraculous improvement in antenna performance vs. the 3G or 3GS. Either that, or he is just drawing the wrong conclusion from the videos and his own experiments, because he spends the rest of the article discussing the antenna location, the FCC, radiation into the body, attenuation by body parts, and other good (and true) stuff. But he seems to forget the whole “antenna is shorted out” problem.

So here’s what I think, and why. Let’s start with what we know:

• At least the bottom metal component (the shortest piece of the frame) is an antenna.
• Based on a picture at iFixit, the left metal component appears to be very much part of the ground of the iPhone, and hence becomes part of the ground plane for that antenna, given that it is screwed into other metal, shield-like structures in the phone. It’s possible that it’s insulated, but the iPhone 4 behaves as if it isn’t. (Maybe it should be insulated—is this the insulation that Apple might have missed on some phones?)

It is my contention that the degradation of antenna performance is simply the direct result of shorting the antenna to its reference ground plane.

The problem here is that both Spencer and everybody else on the web seem to be blaming the fact that sticking your hand in the way of the antenna is somehow responsible for the performance degradation. Though there certainly may be something to that assertion, it is most likely a minor cause of performance degradation.

Here’s what I did to confirm my conclusion. Holding the phone using the prescribed iPhone 4 Vulcan Grip, I noted that I had three bars in the basement of my house. When I licked my pinky and moved it upward to cover the slot so it was touching both metal frame components on the left of the phone, the bars went away, slowly, but surely. I didn’t introduce any large portion of my body (yeah, I’m 6’6” tall and have big hands, but not that big!) into the radiation pattern of the phone, and yet the signal all but went away.

So I’ll make you a bet (nothing’s riding on the bet, sorry): if you cover the left portion of the metal frame or the bottom portion of the metal frame with electrical tape, the problem will go entirely away. I’m not totally sure about the involvement of the right portion of the metal frame, because I don’t know if it’s electrically isolated from ground or if it’s another band’s antenna. Maybe you’ll have to cover that one, too.

In any case, I simply can’t believe all of the hype and misinformation here. There is a problem, that’s certain. Using a Bluetooth headset and keeping your phone in your pocket will help it, but for the wrong reasons. Becoming a “righty” might help it just as much. Anyway, at some point in the future, I’ll call Apple and complain a bit about the phone’s reception and see if I can get mine replaced with one that may have some protective coating applied wherever it should have been. But in the meantime, I’ll just use the iPhone 4 Vulcan Grip and will still be just as pleased with the amazing piece of technology resting between my fingers.

I’m an electrical engineer by trade, but not an antenna expert. The knowledge I’m relying on here, though, is sophomore physics class-type stuff, and is not rocket science.

Article about how iPads are selling faster than Macs can be found here.

Also outselling Macs:

• iPods.
• iPhones.
• Floppy disks (3.5”)⁺
• Light bulbs.
• Oil-absorbant towels.
• Kleenex.

…and lots of other things which aren’t in the same product category as Macs.

(via DaringFireball.net)

⁺ No, really. Floppy disks! The Mac is doomed!

In record time: eight days. Article here.

I predict Apple will do one of two things: two WWDC’s per year, one for Mac OS and one for iPhone OS, or (more likely), one WWDC per year with alternating Mac OS and iPhone OS content. There will be some items in each for both platforms, but really, Apple has set itself up nicely for a major delivery per platform every two years.

Until Apple jumps into another market, or until there’s a major shift in the content/capabilities of either OS, I don’t think we’ll see the rapid pace of development that requires annual developer conferences as we have in the past.

This is exactly the kind of double standard that our country seems to thrive on. On one of the MSM’s hands, it’s OK for Adobe to whine to the feds about Adobe’s perception of Apple’s practices. But on the other one of the MSM’s hands, it’s not OK for Apple to tell the DA and police that they’re going to press charges in a clear-cut case of stolen property.

Of course, everybody is entitled to his own opinions, and that’s mine.

Some choice quotes from the MacNews summary of the MarketWatch piece:

“There is no way that this is not negative in some way for the company,” [Roger] Kay told MarketWatch. “The question here is what is Apple hoping to get?”

Easy answer: They’re trying to make sure that this doesn’t happen again. It’d be a significant disincentive for future iThingy prototype thieves if this one went to jail.

And this one:

“Apple has been drifting into looking like the wrong side of their famous Big Brother ad for some time,” added Rob Enderle, a longtime Silicon Valley technology analyst. “This could easily turn out to be one of the biggest mistakes the firm has ever made because the investigation … could showcase other Apple problems as this story snowballs.”

Um, yeah. Rob Enderle is one helluva’ analyst. I’m sure he’s right about this one, too.

As explained by Engadget, this technote is a bone lobbed gently towards the slobbering beast that Adobe has become in recent months. The technote says that it Apple is giving programmers (including Adobe’s Flash plugin developers) access to hardware acceleration for H.264. And that’s all fine and good, because the net result will be lower power consumption when using Flash to deliver video encoded with H.264.

Less power? As in “longer battery life?”

Yeah, as in “longer battery life for those Macintosh laptops that are selling like hotcakes.” According to Apple’s numbers, the average selling price of Macs is down, implying the lower-end models (laptops, anyone?) are selling better than the more expensive ones (desktops, anyone?).

Would longer battery life yield a better user experience? You betcha’. And that’s just what Steve Jobs wants.

But it was almost a given seeing as how Steve himself said it was coming.

These guys have a bunch of items that I don’t see happening. I would bet a nickel, however, on a unified inbox for the Mail app. That’s it. The rest? Dunno’.

This is funny stuff.

(via DaringFireball.net)

This chart is rather interesting. It compares the various markets of two juggernauts in the world of electronics and web presence, Google and Apple, and… Yahoo… which is pretty much a has-been.

While interesting, I think that’s not a really great comparison. While Google may want to be everything Apple is (and seems to be headed that way), Apple doesn’t want to be everything Google is. Furthermore, Steve Jobs doesn’t want to be Eric Schmidt/Sergey Brin/Larry Page/whoever. They might want to be him, but not the other way around.

So, if I had to pick someone that Steve Jobs might aspire to achieve parity with (if he doesn’t already think of himself as being at the top of the heap), it would be Sir Richard Branson.

Interestingly, Virgin is a $9.6 billion company, and Apple is a $50+ billion company.

I’m not exactly sure why I think this. Perhaps it’s because much of what Virgin does, Apple does: entertainment and mobile services. Maybe it’s because Steve is rich enough to begin investing in other enterprises that are closely tied to his interests. Goodness knows, an Apple airline would be an interesting item. Of course, he would never do that because he couldn’t control the whole widget, which includes TSA, in order to make the entire flight experience a Jobsian one.

Anyway. Just thinkin’ out loud.

Not necessarily Earth-shattering, but with the ecosystem that Apple has in iTunes and the iPhone already, sure to be a success.

It all came to me last night in a dream about the product announcement. Let me describe the new and innovative interface that Steve himself showed me:

At the top of the screen will be a menu bar. I remember “File” being on there. To use the “File” menu, you simply touch it and drag down. As you do, a 26-letter menu appears, much like a vertical keyboard. This allows you to drag each letter of the command.

To open a file, you would merely drag your finger around from the “O” to the “P” to the “E” to the “N” tiles. That’s it! So simple that anybody who can remember what is supposed to be under the “File” menu can use it!

Of course, the fact that Steve was dressed as a nerd and the whole announcement took place in the bleachers of a school gym make me a little suspicious of the quality of the revelation.

Um, yeah. Because Apple always does what marketing studies say do.

Some questions spring to mind.

Why does Apple need to do anything? What war is going on that Apple needs to win? Isn’t 14% of a bajillion dollar market enough?

Does Apple really want netbook customers, the kind of customer that appreciates cheap crap that doesn’t do any job particularly well? Probably not. Apple’s not in the business of selling Smarts or Chevys. They’re in the business of selling Mercedes or BMWs to people who appreciate those brands for what they are, and are willing to pay for it.

This kind of marketing research that gives direction to Apple is all about pageviews, I’m convinced.