Translation From Apple's PR-Speak to English of the Letter Regarding iPhone 4

http://daringfireball.net/2010/07/translation_iphone_4

by earcar • 16 years ago

247 89 16 years ago

I wish he had commented on the remark that Apple is going to make "bars 1, 2 and 3 a bit taller so they will be easier to see". Right, so they're easier to see. Not intending at all to play any Jedi mind tricks on you.

How stupid is it that Apple is going to increase the height of the first three bars? This sounds like the kind of design by committee that happens elsewhere. Not naming names, because it happens all over the place.

It's as if someone in engineering stood up and said:

"Hey, we knew our 'bar' algorithm was shit when we implemented it, and we in engineering said something about it, but no one listened. So fuck those guys in marketing, we need to implement a realistic algorithm, pronto."

Then the marketing team responds:

"Well, it might be good engineering, but users certainly aren't going to get the warm and fuzzies. Isn't there something else we can do?"

UX reluctantly speaks up:

"Well, we could make bars 1-3 taller, so they appear more like the old 4-5 bars."

Marketing and UX: <HIGH FIVE>

Engineering: <cries in a corner>

ttol10• 16 years ago

I made this comment/question in the other thread about iPhone 4 letter, but I'll paste here:

"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 terms of number of bars? it's not as if there's an algorithm that determines the correct height for that particular signal, as there is a (faulty?) algorithm to determine the correct width (bars)."

jerf• 16 years ago

My cheap POC phone does that, and I do prefer it.

I think it is because the "varying heights" icon has become part of brand identity. Woe betide the putatively-informational display that becomes part of the "brand identity".

judofyr• 16 years ago

Actually, I think they didn't think the bar algorithm was shit when they implemented it. They just changed what "5 bars" meant: "~100% reception" vs "good enough reception for all uses".

jfager3• 16 years ago

Engineers cry over how many pixels are used in an already simplistic arbitrary visualization of a set of complex analog values?

Really?

Legion• 16 years ago

No. The engineer is crying because fudging the arbitrary visualization is considered the solution instead of "implementing a realistic algorithm, pronto".

huhtenberg• 16 years ago

A friend of mine said that Apple should just switch to showing either 4 bars or no bars (and patent this of course). With proper customer education everyone will soon be able to see the wisdom of this decision. It either works really well (with a some room for improvement) or it doesn't, and it's AT&T fault.

jsz03• 16 years ago

Measuring RF and presenting it in a way a normal person can understand is difficult. I've had first hand experience trying to explain to customers that a 0dB signal is not a problem -- in fact it's ideal in our system, or that there's such thing as too much signal, or that signal quality alone isn't a very good indication of reliability/speed without taking into account other important factors such as SNR or real bit error rates, or that a ~4dB signal range swing due to thermal conditions alone is completely normal. In the wireless world you have to represent all this in a little 20 or 30 pixel wide meter.

A better method than the traditional 5 bar icon meter would be a status icon that could show signal strength, signal quality, and also take into account other experience factors like latency and speed. To you could have 5 orange bars showing strong signal while also acknowledging there was some other factor causing less reliability such as SNR problems or channel congestion. You could have 3 green bars showing good RF and network conditions. More accurate but we'd have to ween people off the old system. Ideally you could the choice in your settings for a basic or advanced meter icon.

Aaronontheweb• 16 years ago

I was thinking about buying an iPhone 4.0 when I qualify for an upgrade later this month, but given all of the issues with the antenna doesn't it seem like they're going to release an upgraded version of the hardware in a relatively short peroid of time?

ttol10• 16 years ago

the antenna issue seems like it indeed is software and really a non-issue. the "feature" to show 50% of signals as 5 bars was introduced in OS 2.1 update back in '08. Here is a graphic to showcase that: http://fscked.co.uk/post/754590440/this-infographic-hopefull...

The fix is to undo that hard-coded reality distortion field into AT&T's recommended formula. In this case, AT&T isn't the bad guy as it seems like apple was trying to show their phones had better signal by misrepresenting the strength.

The other, IMHO bigger, issue is the proximity sensor. To me, that's a NEW issue, and needs to be addressed (hopefully by software patch), since I've had issues with 100% of my calls.

ZeroGravitas• 16 years ago

Is there any evidence either way on whether the proximity sensors problems are hardware or software in nature, and if they're hardware problems whether they can be worked around in software?

rodh257• 16 years ago

but what does any of this have to do with the fact the signal goes down when you hold the phone in a certain way? whether it drops from 4 to 2 bars or 2 to 1 based on whatever algorithm they had surely doesn't change the fact that it is still going down?

masklinn• 16 years ago

> the antenna issue seems like it indeed is software and really a non-issue

Incorrect. Read the text on the page you linked to and the original Anandtech article: the iPhone 4 loses almost 20dB of signal when holding it naturally in your hand, without using a case. By comparison, a Nexus One loses about 10dB, and the 3GS loses about 3dB.

jsz03• 16 years ago

You get a 30 day return period with AT&T or Apple. That's the part of this story that has never jived with me. If lots of people are having this problem we should be seeing lines at AT&T and Apple stores for people waiting to return their phones and, as far as I know, we're not.

ttol10• 16 years ago

I didn't do a return because of the antenna issue. I did do an exchange because of the proximity sensor issue though. And, the replacement phone still has the problem. All my calls get are affected by this. Randomly detects my face as input and initiates facetime, puts calls on hold, randomly tries to SMS people, or just ends the call. The real issue is the proximity sensor as that is a bug killing calls now.

flogic• 16 years ago

I'm not an iPhone user but I imagine most people would just suck it up and get a case. All the other options tend to suck more.

xenophanes• 16 years ago

If the iPhone does 95% of what they want, and they return it, now they get 0% of what they wanted (and they can go buy some other phone and get 80%). What they really want is Apple to improve it, that's their best outcome.

ttol10• 16 years ago

Seems like Apple put the algorithm in place via OS 2.1 update back in '08. http://www.newsoxy.com/technology/apple-iphone/article11156....

If you don't remember, back then every blogger was saying things like "my signal has improved drastically with this update!!11!!1one".

AT&T's recommendation = more accuracy and less reality distortion. (Look at the graph Gruber linked to for what iPhone 4 currently uses for algorithm -- ~50% = 5 bars: http://fscked.co.uk/post/754590440/this-infographic-hopefull...)

Next update, you should see OS 2.1's 3g signal update reversed to what it used to be. Let's hope they fix the bigger (read: REAL) issue related to the proximity sensor that actually kills calls.

Greyface2• 16 years ago

Huh? Apple's PR letter specifically says that their 'mistake' has been there since the "original iPhone". And the 'grip of death' can kill calls and more importantly, IMO, affects data transfer rates (as I use my iPhone more as a browser than a phone and naturally hold it the 'wrong way') so I'm not sure why you conclude it's not a real issue.

Gruber has never tired of making jokes at AT&T's expense even though he personally has great service in Philly and AT&T has the fastest network. Let's see if he brings the same level of snark to his Apple and Jobs posts henceforth.

ttol10• 16 years ago

Well played, sir. My emphasis on REAL in the parent comment was meant as proximity sensor bug being more severe/higher priority (IMHO) than antenna bug in terms of dropped calls.

ck2• 16 years ago

Corporations have reached the masterstroke of PR where they don't even have to lie about how they are lying to you.

They just tell you outright how they are going to fool you.

Next BP will issue a press release admitting how they are moving around sand to cover up oily sand to improve perception and how people should appreciate that.

stcredzero• 16 years ago

The dispersants were already all about perception. Oh, and the exact sand thing you describe was already done after the Exxon Valdez.

lukifer• 16 years ago

This has been happening in politics for quite a while now. Serious pundits and campaign advisers openly discuss issues of narrative, image, and perception on mainstream news programs, with little regard to how well that perception matches reality, and without any concern that viewers will read between the lines and realize that they're being sold an illusion.

Meanwhile, everyone knows that no politician writes their own speeches anymore, but clap and cheer anyway when they're told what they want to hear by a professional marketer whose job is to create warm fuzzies around a brand.

Entlin2• 16 years ago

That letter is a distraction. It's not about the bar display. The iPhone 4 drops signal by 19.8dB when held normally (compared to not being touched at all), while the previous one drops by 1.9 when held normally. http://www.anandtech.com/show/3794/the-iphone-4-review/2

No software update will be able to fix this. Externalizing the antenna was a fun idea in theory, but badly realized in practice.

I bet iPhone 5 will have a yet again redesigned antenna.

marze• 16 years ago

I wonder if the fake-3GS case the real-world test units were encased in (as in the phone found in the bar) masked the issue during testing.

jfager3• 16 years ago

Except that same article explicitly says real-world antenna performance is actually better, despite the increased drop.

Can this whole stupid nonstory please go away?

MrFoof• 16 years ago

The reality is Apple will likely insulate the antenna bridge with a non-conductive coating, i.e. using diamond vapor-phase deposition like Anand and Brian mentioned.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple followed his (their) recommendation exactly. SSD manufacturers actually switched/redesigned controllers for future models based on Anand's findings and recommendations before. The man (and Brian Klug) is usually spot on in his (their) analysis.

Encosia2• 16 years ago

The "real-world" performance is only better if you don't hold it in your left hand.

I can't hear very well out of my right ear, so I've always used my left hand to hold phones to my left ear. I never had any trouble with my 3GS, but my iPhone 4 is almost instantly transformed into an iPod Touch 4 when I hold it normally (i.e. the "wrong" way).

Personally, I like the rest of the phone's new features enough to adapt my grip during non-voice usage (which is most of what I use it for anyway). However, people aren't exaggerating the attenuation issue at all.

Entlin2• 16 years ago

Yeah but is the real-world antenna performance more than 18dB better? Probably not, because that would be revolutionary. So the net result is still negative.

sp332• 16 years ago

It's radio performance, not antenna performance. The electronics attached to the antenna are more sensitive, so the SNR is better even though the total power delivered to the electronics by the antenna might not be.

jazzdev• 16 years ago

It's not about the bar display.

That page you linked to explains why the bar display matters:

If your phone is at -60dB (5 bars) a 24dB drop is -84dB (5 bars) If your phone is at -84db (5 bars) a 24db drop is -108 (1 bar)

Worst case:

If your phone is at -90db (5 bars) a 24db drop is -114 (0 bars)

That can be fixed with software. Given that the article says the iPhone 4 performs better than the 3GS at -113dB, the perception of the problem is twice as bad as the actual problem.

So it might be worthwhile to fix that perception, though the fix will have other side-effects (a perception of worse reception overall).

aresant• 16 years ago

Guys, give up the conspiracy / corporate overlord theories please.

Conclusive data already out there from independent sources:

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/07/iphone-4-anandtech/

"the iPhone 4 did show a greater dropoff in signal strength in every holding position compared to the iPhone 3GS."

"However. . . the iPhone 4’s reception is definitely better in low-signal situations than the other two phones."

“Reception is absolutely definitely improved,” AnandTech wrote. "There’s no doubt in my mind this iPhone gets the best cellular reception yet, even though measured signal is lower than the 3GS."

alexfarran• 16 years ago

It's all gone a bit spinal tap hasn't it. Why not just add a sixth bar.

hoprocker• 16 years ago

This letter illuminates an important question: what the hell do those bars actually mean, and who watches to make sure there's fairness-in-advertising when an AT&T commercials makes claims about "5-bar reception"?

Naga• 16 years ago

I'm pretty sure bars don't actually mean anything, and that they are just arbitrary.

doron2• 16 years ago

Solutions aboundhttp://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?device=iphone&#...

fserb• 16 years ago

Translation from Apple's PR-Speak to Mac-fanboy PR-Blog-Speak.

p0ppe• 16 years ago

Yeah. Such as "We decided from the outset to set the formula for our bars-of-signal strength indicator to make the iPhone look good - to make it look as if it "gets more bars". That decision has now bitten us on our ass."

TrevorBramble• 16 years ago

Hilarious. I read bits of the letter to my wife this morning as she dashed about before work (she ordered her iPhone 4 a few days ago) and after the bit about bar display I said "the subtext here is that this is AT&T's fault!"

The blame-shifting approaches subliminal. If you aren't looking for the hidden message, you probably won't see it.

ttol10• 16 years ago

I'll probably get downvoted for this comment but in this case, I think Apple tried to hard-code in a reality distortion field with the bars and it backfired..

A heavily-biased 3G signal meter that shows 5 bars for over half the signal range seems to have been implemented in iPhone OS 2.1 back in 2008. Problems show up with that display implementation due to antenna being on the outside on iPhone 4 and crossing the threshold from 5 bars to "other".

AT&T on the other hand is recommending a more accurate approach instead of interpretting 50% as 5 bars.

Not sure why people are reading this as an AT&T issue.

jokermatt999• 16 years ago

>I'll probably get downvoted for this comment but in this case,

Good post except for this bit. Please don't bring that phrase to HNs. Good posts can stand on their own.

And yeah, I think the main issue is that the RDF algorithm is collapsing. It was originally a great way to alter perception about AT&T's service, but it backfired due to the issues the 4 may or may not be having with the antenna. The problem of sudden dropping calls at low has been there all along, but with the antenna holding issue (or "issue"), the bubble has been popped.

Out of curiosity, is Apple the only company that does this? Does anyone else display <100% as 5 bars, or is that strictly an iPhone thing?

doron2• 16 years ago

I keep wondering, If the iPhone 4 does indeed have better reception than previous models, doesn't that mean that previous model (3g, 3gs) antenna design is partly to blame for dropped calls and not just AT&T?

nuclear_eclipse• 16 years ago

Shhh, don't question Apple.

ajkirwin• 16 years ago

And once again, John Gruber has his lips firmly wedged into Apple's asscrack.

threepointone• 16 years ago

Wow, you didn't read the article at all, did you? If anything, he's being rather critical of apple's PR team here.

mirkules2• 16 years ago

One thing nobody is questioning: why does the perceived signal strength (what is displayed) affected by how users hold the phone? If the displayed signal strength doesn't correlate well with actual signal strength, I don't see how gripping it a certain way should make any difference??

ynniv2• 16 years ago

The little bar diagram that phones display is an oversimplification and generally wrong. It's a bit like downsampling your monitor to 5 pixels and complaining that they don't accurately represent the original. Most bar displays compute some form of signal or signal to noise ratio, but even that is a joke compared to the complexity of modern digital multiplexing, shared control channels, inter-tower hopping, and that doesn't even consider what happens to your voice packets after they are on the ground at a tower. Your phone doesn't even have the proper instruments to deduce the likely hood that you will have a clean connection.

If people want to complain about actual dropped calls, thats one thing. To nitpick the weather prediction that is your reception "bars" is absurd.

mirkules2• 16 years ago

My question has nothing to do with the formula used to render the display, or the accuracy of visualization of signal strength.

What I'm questioning is: if it's truly just a display (software) issue, why is it affected by gripping the phone in a certain way? The software problem (incorrect visualization) is seemingly triggered by a hardware issue (gripping the phone). They describe the problem as if it is strictly a software issue, but it is clearly triggered by a hardware issue.

jamesseda• 16 years ago

If you are in favor of the capitalist system you have to respect Job's attitude of: "I think we have the best products. If you don't think so please return it for a full refund, and buy a competitor's. Thanks, bye"

jrockway• 16 years ago

Many people want one product that works really well instead of 1000 that are all flawed in different ways. Capitalism isn't helping us much there.

blantonl• 16 years ago

Um, yes it is. Return it for a refund after 30 days or don't purchase the product.

zacharypinter• 16 years ago

Enjoyable read, but this didn't seem like much of a translation to (plain) English:

"...wherein it can suffer from unintended attenuation when you bridge the lower-left antenna gap with your skin..."

CamperBob3• 16 years ago

Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong.

"Oh, and we also disabled the Field Test mode so that you can no longer obtain a quantitative RSSI reading in dBm. Because if somebody were to, say, hack the phone to re-enable it, they might notice that holding the phone by the antenna could degrade its noise figure by as much as 24 dB (http://www.anandtech.com/show/3794/the-iphone-4-review/2), killing all but about 1/250th of the signal power seen by the front end. And we don't know about you, but that just wouldn't be magical enough for us.

"Not only that, but we've either fired the RF engineers who designed our 'magical' antenna, or we're just now getting around to hiring our first ones. Sure, we only release one or two new products a year, but we apparently need three full-time PhD-level antenna engineers ( http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/30/apple-hiring-iphone-anten... ).

"You know, to put the magic in."

I now literally feel ill after reading that.

Translation From Apple's PR-Speak to English of the Letter Regarding iPhone 4

Related Stories