Bruce in alaska wrote:
Just remember that Apple isn't particularly adept in the RF Arena, and
the iPhone/iTouch/iPad are their only small products that have RF
Antennas, this small. Also remember that some of their Laptops, of past
years, had some serious Wifi Antenna placement problems, and remember
that Wifi at that time was only a Single Band, not a Three Band System,
like the iPhone4.

Lesson: don't buy a cellphone from a company that doesn't know how to
build one (and wants to be in the business of cellphone design without
hiring the knowledge required).

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

I've never seen a differential RF amp in a cell phone. If so, I would
expect either a balanced antenna feed, or possibly two antenna
connectors.


Things like vector mods (RF2422) have differential in/out, for instance.
Parts like the MAX2510 are similar.

It's true by the time you get to PA stage, that single ended seems to be
more common.

On 7/13/2010 3:30 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:05:54 -0800, Bruce in
wrote:

Issue One. Apple has already admitted that the Signal Level algorithm,
used in the IPhone4 was seriously flawed in how it displayed Signal
Level. (Bars) When the Phone displayed 4 or 5 Bars, it may actually only
be receiving at a 1-2 Bar Level. This they have corrected with a
Software Patch.

Hi Bruce,

Jim's second link (which I quoted in my response to him) gives very
specific signal levels. Aside from that, and as is obvious by the
numbers, the "bars" are merely window (with apologies to M$) dressing
in any phone (except as a RF exposure risk indicator).

Issue Two. The Multi-Band Antenna design in the iPhone4 is a Kludge
Compromise at best, and burying it in the Metal Frame where Left Hand
users put the flesh against it, seriously detunes it. Apple is in the
process of hiring a small group of Engineers, with expertise in this
area.

A bumper would seem to mitigate the risk. Conformal coating would to
some lesser extent. All-in-all, the amount of metal seems to be
consistent with best engineering practices (but, perhaps, not best
consumer packaging practices).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

When is everyone going to wake up. What we need is a USB dongle which
is simply a recvr/xmitter and is software driven. This is the last
"cell phone" you will ever need to purchase. It can incorporate an
onboard antenna, however should also have an external ant connection so
in fringe areas communication is improved.

Isn't it about time we stopped buy a seperate TV, radio, phone, stereo,
etc. A computer with the proper software and attachment(s) are all of
these and more.

It is time to end the stone age of electronics!

Regards,
JS

On 7/13/2010 3:30 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:05:54 -0800, Bruce in
wrote:

Issue One. Apple has already admitted that the Signal Level algorithm,
used in the IPhone4 was seriously flawed in how it displayed Signal
Level. (Bars) When the Phone displayed 4 or 5 Bars, it may actually only
be receiving at a 1-2 Bar Level. This they have corrected with a
Software Patch.

Hi Bruce,

Jim's second link (which I quoted in my response to him) gives very
specific signal levels. Aside from that, and as is obvious by the
numbers, the "bars" are merely window (with apologies to M$) dressing
in any phone (except as a RF exposure risk indicator).

Issue Two. The Multi-Band Antenna design in the iPhone4 is a Kludge
Compromise at best, and burying it in the Metal Frame where Left Hand
users put the flesh against it, seriously detunes it. Apple is in the
process of hiring a small group of Engineers, with expertise in this
area.

A bumper would seem to mitigate the risk. Conformal coating would to
some lesser extent. All-in-all, the amount of metal seems to be
consistent with best engineering practices (but, perhaps, not best
consumer packaging practices).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

When is everyone going to wake up. What we need is a USB dongle which
is simply a recvr/xmitter and is software driven. This is the last
"cell phone" you will ever need to purchase. It can incorporate an
onboard antenna, however should also have an external ant connection so
in fringe areas communication is improved.

Isn't it about time we stopped buy a seperate TV, radio, phone, stereo,
etc. A computer with the proper software and attachment(s) are all of
these and more (all these, except for phone, are available on ebay.)

It is time to end the stone age of electronics!

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:

When is everyone going to wake up. What we need is a USB dongle which
is simply a recvr/xmitter and is software driven. This is the last
"cell phone" you will ever need to purchase. It can incorporate an
onboard antenna, however should also have an external ant connection so
in fringe areas communication is improved.

Isn't it about time we stopped buy a seperate TV, radio, phone, stereo,
etc. A computer with the proper software and attachment(s) are all of
these and more.

No it isn't. I don't want to take calls on my television. The XYL will
talk for hours with friends. Seems like a bad thing to tie the TV up for
that time. I don't want my telephone to be my computer either, or listen
to my music on my telephone.

It's for the same reason that I don't want to keep my frozen meat in my
car. A whole lot of us prefer our devices to be purpose built instead of
the myriad of compromises in having all in one instruments. History has
shown that all in one devices tend to perform poorly or mediocre at best
in all their functions.

They kind of remind me of the Escalade SUV/Pickup trucks. Horrible
pickup truck, poor SUV, and ugly as sin.


It is time to end the stone age of electronics!

I want faster, better looking, and higher performance. I don't want
all-in wonders, which are always compromises.

- Mike -

On 8/3/2010 1:25 PM, Michael Coslo wrote:
John Smith wrote:

No it isn't. I don't want to take calls on my television. The XYL will
talk for hours with friends. Seems like a bad thing to tie the TV up for
that time. I don't want my telephone to be my computer either, or listen
to my music on my telephone.


Only a damn fool would make a phone call on their TV, or even think
about it. But, if the case is you and the wife can't afford seperate
hand-helds/netbooks, well, get a better job!

It's for the same reason that I don't want to keep my frozen meat in my
car. A whole lot of us prefer our devices to be purpose built instead of
the myriad of compromises in having all in one instruments. History has
shown that all in one devices tend to perform poorly or mediocre at best
in all their functions.


Again, only a damn fool would think about keeping food in their
palm-top/ereader/netbook, or even think about it. Hmmm, my computer is
not a printer, but an external printer hooked up workes just fine. My
computer is not a netcard, but a USB dongle netcard works just
fine--plugged in, my computer is not a TV, but an USB dongle HD TV works
fine--plugged in, etc. In fact, I have never noticed any problems with
them running all at once. Perhaps you need new hardware.

They kind of remind me of the Escalade SUV/Pickup trucks. Horrible
pickup truck, poor SUV, and ugly as sin.


Never seen wheels, steering wheel, gearshift, headlights, etc. on a
palm-top/ereader/netbook/laptop/computer. This sounds more of mental
condition and/or drugs.


It is time to end the stone age of electronics!

I want faster, better looking, and higher performance. I don't want
all-in wonders, which are always compromises.


Must be boring never using any USB or ported peripherals, as your post
indicates! Try it, you will find that "all-in-one-wonders" are great!

- Mike -

Regards,
JS

On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 16:25:44 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote:

John Smith wrote:

It is time to end the stone age of electronics!

I want faster, better looking, and higher performance. I don't want
all-in wonders, which are always compromises.


Amen brother! The reality of 'one size fits all' is 'one size fits no
one especially well'.

On 8/3/2010 4:03 PM, Registered User wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 16:25:44 -0400, Michael
wrote:

John Smith wrote:

It is time to end the stone age of electronics!

I want faster, better looking, and higher performance. I don't want
all-in wonders, which are always compromises.


Amen brother! The reality of 'one size fits all' is 'one size fits no
one especially well'.

You are a godsend to the hardware manufacturers, they love you!

My TV, radio, stereo, MP3 player, DVD recorder/player, etc. all travel
in my briefcase as USB Dongles or software. That size fits me well! ROFLOL

To each his/her own,
regards,
JS

On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:21:08 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

On 8/3/2010 1:25 PM, Michael Coslo wrote:
John Smith wrote:

No it isn't. I don't want to take calls on my television. The XYL will
talk for hours with friends. Seems like a bad thing to tie the TV up for
that time. I don't want my telephone to be my computer either, or listen
to my music on my telephone.


Only a damn fool would make a phone call on their TV, or even think
about it.

But if as was suggested the computer is the TV and is the telephone
and is the ... abstractly they are all one device.

- quote -
Isn't it about time we stopped buy a seperate TV, radio, phone,
stereo, etc. A computer with the proper software and attachment(s)
are all of these and more (all these, except for phone, are available
on ebay.)
- end quote -

Literally by both connection and dependency they all become one
device. No USB device is especially useful without a computer's USB
port.

But, if the case is you and the wife can't afford seperate
hand-helds/netbooks, well, get a better job!


It's a functionality question not a financial question. Should a
second computer with all the USB peripherals be required just so
Mike's Mrs. can use the telephone while he watches television? Being
able to do something doesn't validate its worth. Using USB devices for
the sake of using USB devices gains no efficiencies.

It's for the same reason that I don't want to keep my frozen meat in my
car. A whole lot of us prefer our devices to be purpose built instead of
the myriad of compromises in having all in one instruments. History has
shown that all in one devices tend to perform poorly or mediocre at best
in all their functions.


Again, only a damn fool would think about keeping food in their
palm-top/ereader/netbook, or even think about it.
Hmmm, my computer is

Is this discussion about appliances with limited functionality such as
"palm-top/ereader/netbook" or a fully functional computer? How well do
the USB devices mentioned below work within the
"palm-top/ereader/netbook" trifeca?

not a printer, but an external printer hooked up workes just fine. My
computer is not a netcard, but a USB dongle netcard works just
fine--plugged in, my computer is not a TV, but an USB dongle HD TV works
fine--plugged in, etc. In fact, I have never noticed any problems with
them running all at once. Perhaps you need new hardware.


Yourself as well, your USB spell-checker doesn't appear working
properly

Your initial post alluded to convergence but all you're doing is daisy
chaining peripheral devices. The only visible difference between now
and ten years ago is the number and types of available USB devices.

All those peripherals may work well together until disk, bus and/or
processor activity becomes intensive. Regardless of optimism there are
always limitations.

They kind of remind me of the Escalade SUV/Pickup trucks. Horrible
pickup truck, poor SUV, and ugly as sin.


Never seen wheels, steering wheel, gearshift, headlights, etc. on a
palm-top/ereader/netbook/laptop/computer. This sounds more of mental
condition and/or drugs.

You missed the point and taking a second cheap shot won't help you
find it. The Escalade is an analogy about multi-purpose devices in
general, not about using a computer as a multi-purpose device.

If you've never seen wheels, steering wheel, gearshift, headlights,
etc. on a computer you haven't looked at today's passenger vehicles.
There's more processor power there than on/under your desk.

palm-top/ereader/netbook/laptop/computer

It is time to end the stone age of electronics!

I want faster, better looking, and higher performance. I don't want
all-in wonders, which are always compromises.


Must be boring never using any USB or ported peripherals, as your post
indicates! Try it, you will find that "all-in-one-wonders" are great!

Pure conjecture. Mike's post provides no insights concerning his use
or non-use of USB devices. For all you know his computer might be
surrounded by cluster of USB devices.

On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:10:33 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

On 8/3/2010 4:03 PM, Registered User wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 16:25:44 -0400, Michael
wrote:

John Smith wrote:

It is time to end the stone age of electronics!

I want faster, better looking, and higher performance. I don't want
all-in wonders, which are always compromises.


Amen brother! The reality of 'one size fits all' is 'one size fits no
one especially well'.

You are a godsend to the hardware manufacturers, they love you!

Why would that be when you are the one purchasing multiple USB
accessories to fulfill your supposed all-in-one vision.

My TV, radio, stereo, MP3 player, DVD recorder/player, etc. all travel
in my briefcase as USB Dongles or software. That size fits me well! ROFLOL

It sounds like you're describing my 3 y.o. laptop that has all that
hardware built-in. To use the box and all the devices it is simply a
matter of booting up. There is no need to unpack and connect a bunch
of peripherals. When done I can close the lid and go w/o the need to
disconnect and re-pack a bunch of peripherals. It's much closer to
being an all-in-one device than your box with all its external
accessories.

You might want to refrain from using the term 'USB dongle' to describe
anything that plugs into a USB port.

To each his/her own,
regards,
JS