Their 3 options snookiefromtheblock was hinted at simply point to the possibility that malformed data might elevate "3G stress" or trigger some process to loop which in turn might accentuate battery degradation. Support seem to think that malformed data occurs in order of importance first from mail triggers, then from lack of integrity of the restore and finally from all the settings and apps. I find it quite interesting. And indeed Mark came up to such a conclusion with entirely resetting the device and going through a few full charge/discharge cycles.
Also so interesting are those deductions that Miless came to from that Anandtech piece on the 4S and his review of this thread when he said:
"1. Those on Verizon and Sprint seem to be able to get better battery life than those on AT&T. I am not the other side of the planet, and am using similar GSM 3G network as AT&T as oppose to Verizon and Sprint's CDMA network. And i definitely cannot get 24 hours standby with 4 hours usage and still 60-70% left on the battery like some CDMA network users could.
2. iPhone 4S is a quadband worldphone with the antenna design similar to CDMA Verizon phone but with a microSIM slot. Could it be that Apple optimize the firmware for the CDMA chip and add on GSM 3G as an after thought? Therefore, leaving the battery drain more pronounced on GSM 3G phones than CDMA ones? Or could it be that Qualcomm MDM 6610 chip drains more power for GSM/UMTS users?
A quick read on Anadtech's iPhone 4S review revealed that ...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4971/apple-iphone-4s-review-att-verizon/3
So i guess those on GSM/UMTS, though enjoying higher speed of 14.4mbps from HSDPA ... also suffer from higher battery drain."
I think it's of value to quote a segment of the article on Anandtech:
"It’s likely that this is absent to accommodate the multi-mode nature of the 4S (and thus the lowest common denominator CDMA mode), however the absence of this toggle makes getting connected in congested areas more difficult. In some markets, (I’m looking at you, AT&T in Las Vegas), EDGE is often the only way to get any connectivity, even without a major convention going on. Not having that 3G toggle makes manually selecting that less-used but more reliable connection impossible now, to say nothing of the potential battery savings that this would afford (and that we sadly can’t test now)."
Oh but this is so telling. And because Miless and Mark Posner share the same carrier and both those guys are quite thorough in their testing, this is somewhat confirmed i.e. drainage will vary per carrier/technology. One can even speculate it can further vary according to geography, traffic and equipment even within a carrier's 3G implementation.
Finally, quite a few users today have at last integrated the likelihood that in some instances the battery indicator might not be entirely revealing - and after all that's just a piece of software inside a bigger piece of software that's having issues so why presume that it's entirely reliable? I've also seen users acknowledging the fact that they need to bring the device to a full shutoff before charging and put aside extrapolations and preemptive charging.
I don't want to say "I told you so" and I said I'd shut the eff up once and for all lolll but so much of this is pointing towards this "3G stress" idea I came up with in my prior "last" post, although I'll concede it doesn't take a genius to come up with such an idea. Puns are not intended. Which is why it was so important to profile the issues by carrier/operator right from the start. Unfortunately you will NEVER hear Apple discuss this I'm sure because at the heart of their 3G is the Qualcomm chip... and what's inside that chip is at the heart of an intense feud between Samsung and Apple i.e. Qualcomm is embedding some knowhow of Samsung in there, and Apple is integrating that chip to their handset "without infringing those patents". So maybe their integration of that silicon is "unconventional". I speculate that's also the reason why you can't really deactivate 3G on the Iphone4s. But I say why should the user take the "heat" of such wars. The consumer should have been informed that the 3G speed would be faster and that battery performance would be better with a certain type of operator. So they would have chosen accordingly. It's Apple who should be taking the "heat" from the operators who would be put at a disadvantage by such an implementation. After all Apple is basically the richest company in the world so they shouldn't be greedy and their device is expensive as it is. If this had been known, then all users would have chosen the same carrier where available and this in turn would have yielded better battery performance for the user base on average. I believe taking the heat from operators was a good trade-off vs. making the users feel as if they're kept in the dark i.e alienating some of them.
It's a real shame that Apple didn't leverage its user base for support. After reading so many posts here, and sure I'll concede the thread is no great support tool, but it really strikes you that aside from Mark and Miless and a very few others, you can't say that the user base is very capable of deductive/inductive reasoning or that they're quite literate in terms of computing. Complaining is only fair and what else can they do? I don't mean that in a condescending way. But what they lack at that level they make up for in terms of devotion and desire to help solve the issue. With proper guidance and assigned tasks - think mechanical turk here - and provided the collaborative tools would have been implemented in the first place - think Google Wave here... what are the collaborative tools Apple offer after all? - Apple could have populated an entire database in real time and see the evolution as sophistication in the tinkering progresses, which in turn they could use internally. One may say that usage statistics do that but a user who thinks by himself, who has a task assigned and a goal, grouped with others, with testing protocols, interacting, can achieve so much more. Some of those people think that some "engineers" contacted them. I mean, if they had ever met an engineer in their life (and I don't mean someone with a few certs, I mean Berkely Ph.D.s and such), they would know they don't talk to end users ever because nobody can understand these guys anyways and they cost way too much for them to make house calls. But if legal prohibited Apple from doing anything that would position them in relation to merchantability, or operator claims or Qualcomm related patent disputes, then they should, in my opinion, have created a little "rogue task force" of "superpowerusers" tackling some tasks in their forums, appearing just like that early on, "by coincidence" to create cohesion and foster support based research. To me Mark is the one who from what I read corresponds the most to that sort of contributor. In my experience, solutions that escape even the most specialized of professionals can be elaborated at the user support level. Because when you pay 800$ for some device you will go at great lengths to make it work. Because first line support can really take the side of the customer and come up with great solutions, even if it's for a short while before a global solution is put together. In any case Apple missed a great opportunity to come clear and open, show that they can operate a shift in corporate vision in relation to their past authoritative "there is no problem" support paradigm, while elevating the thinking of their user base. Bundling Gbrainy with their device comes as a distant second choice. But it's all behind closed doors and one morning you guys will all wake up with 5.0.1 and all of this will be laid to waste. It was time to really "think different". Even as of yesterday some users were reporting support telling them they were not aware of any issues and such. I mean come on. There are so many Apple users worldwide and I'm pretty sure they can contribute. Apple has so much to learn I believe in this respect. It's more than tech.
Apple also needs input from people like me who don't actually like them much at all, but who have some sympathy for users, respect for tech in general and who are "no ********, no compromise, not about brand" people. It's about respect, vindicating the user base, and putting legal in its rightful place (a small place where they litigate when needed to protect and enforce the core IP and not to enforce the "destroy Android" legacy - because he did say until the end and we're past that). So in order to be proactive for what other Igate issue might come next, I'd contemplate offering my services. I think 100 grand and some office in San Francisco with some living accommodations might be a good start...
I'll even consider using an Iphone, provided it's supplied to me as a perk on some data plan with a CDMA carrier lolllll.
You guys know how to contact me.
Thank you and good luck!
Scarface.
Level 1
(86 points)
Jason L
Community Specialists
