Apple Rejects Bloomberg’s Report that Antenna Expert Warned Steve Jobs

| News

Apple has denied a report from earlier on Thursday that an antenna expert within the company warned CEO Steve Jobs that there would be problems with the iPhone 4’s innovative design. The Wall Street Journal reported that the company told the newspaper that Bloomberg’s report was “simply not true.”

Apple had declined to comment on other aspects the iPhone 4 antenna controversy, but categorically rejected the Bloomberg report, saying: “We challenge Bloomberg BusinessWeek to produce anything beyond rumors to back this up. It’s simply not true.”

Citing unnamed sources, Bloomberg had reported that senior engineer and antenna expert Ruben Caballero warned Apple execs that the design could lead to signal degradation and dropped calls.

Apple has called a press conference for Friday to discuss the issue, and the company is largely expected to announce some sort of hardware fix for the problem.

On Thursday, Apple released iOS 4.0.1, a software update for iPhone 3, iPhone 3GS, and iPhone 4 that changes the way reception bars are displayed on the devices. Apple has said that iOS 4 used the wrong algorithm for determining and displaying carrier signal strength, and that the update fixes this to use the same algorithms used by carriers, including AT&T in the U.S.


Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

This is officially out of control. Dave Winer nails it though. What he doesn’t say but clearly means if you’ve followed Dave Winer is that this is Steve Jobs’ snotstorm, not Apple’s.

Oh, and Apple is handling this all wrong. When you are in the middle of a snotstorm, you seek out some Kleenex to cover yourself with. You don’t debate each particle of flying snot. This is the press’s revenge for the War on Flash and the expenses they have had to absorb for no good reason at all to play on the iPad. Pure and simple. They’ve managed to hook into a snot-stormable issue and they’re gonna blow boogers all over Steve until he is green with envy.


Hey, it’s Brad ‘DinerMan’ Hutchings…..again


Apple’s pattern has always been thus when confronted with customer complaints:

1.  Hem, haw, deny, obfuscate or even suppress discussion.

2.  Meanwhile, investigate extent of alleged defect and craft solution if complaints are valid.

3.  If complaints are valid, announce solution while maintaining “a small fraction of devices are defective, but most are fine”.  The solution is generally well received.

4.  Wait it out until the next Apple product intro which guaranteed will make people forgot about the last product defect.

Would have been much better for them if they can skip Step 1.  But this is Apple, actually, Steve Jobs, and he can’t help but take offense when people say his product doesn’t work well (because he’s worked so hard to get it perfect).  What can he do?  It’s his nature.


Suspicions confirmed. I don’t trust unsubstantiated leaks without evidence that release very damaging ‘evidence’ at the worst possible moment. This leak seemed a bit too convenient. I expect better from Bloomberg.


@Bosco writes, ?This is the press?s revenge for the War on Flash??

Where, by ?the press? he means Adobe sycophants, an Adobe employee and some clueless types who just regurgitate areguments that they see others write. But none less than himself ? a tireless poster of attacks on Apple.

Let’s review the bidding. Many times up to 2008, IIRC, Adobe’s CTO was quoted as saying that the firm would have Flash running on a billion mobile devices by 2010, then changed the promise to 2009. As of today, the real number is zero.

This year, after an Adobe published a ?Screw You Apple? rant, Apple responded. Simply said that Flash had failed to make the move to the smartphone technology, that Apple had insufficient resources to make it happen without Adobe and had moved on with hopes that some other path would work. (One key MIA resource is the full spec that Adobe keeps closed.)

Between the two evaluations, Adobe’s is obviously, painfully false, and Apple’s is simply a statement of fact.

My personal guesstimate is that as a desktop-class program, Flash couldn’t run in the ~ 5% to 10% of a desktop’s CPU power that various smartphones have. Needs more RAM than is available out of the best-selling smartphones’ total of 64MB-512MB RAM. (Anybody running a desktop browser with Flash on a 256 MB machine today? Didn’t think so. Why does Bosco think anybody could?) Heck, my laptop runs Flash OK, but has a GPU that’d burn thru the best smartphone batteries in 5 minutes or less. Not a future I want, as they say.

Apple could have built iPhones with 2GB of RAM and maybe Flash would have been possible. Could have doubled the size of the battery. Could have put in a 1.2GHz CPU instead of a 400MHz CPU into the first iPhone. That is, could have created the iLeadWeight at twice the price of the original iPhone, guaranteeing it would not sell.

And Apple could have delayed the iPhone v1.0 until 2010 or 2011 so that Adobe maybe would have their software ready. So in that sense, yes, it’s Apple’s fault that there’s no Flash on the iPhone.

That still leaves Bosco without an explanation for how the RDF has infected every other smarthphone manufacturer. Why, in 2009?2010, WebOS came and went without Flash. Not that Palm’s earlier OS, available since 2002, had it, either. Why Nokia, the world’s largest seller of phones hasn’t yet qualified as ?worth the effort? for Adobe. Why the number one US smartphone, BlackBerry has the same Flashless experience. Ditto on Windows Mobile. All of ‘em either grossly incompetent or infected by the RDF, because Bosco says Adobe is perfect.

But the killer: why Android, with its execs putting their reputations on the line and working with Adobe, still has only a feature-incomplete, balky “beta” that’s not ready for inclusion in standard Froyo. How has Google allowed Jobs to tell them what not to do???

So, to change the subject from actual capabilities, the ad hominem attacks came next. Many have said that Apple was against Flash not for the obvious technical reasons but because they were pushing proprietary alternatives. Never mind that Apple has exactly one competitor today, Google. (All the rest are struggling in 2010 to do what Apple & Google did in 2005 and 2006. They are out of the game. Dead.) And Google emphasizes web app (javascript & HTML5) performance bigtime; see their I/O conference. If Apple wanted to maximize its competitive stance, it would offer the Flash that no other smartphone does, and deprecate one of the greatest strengths of a competitor by de-emphasizing open standards. So the “business reasons” argument by the pro-Flash warriors is bogus, too.

(If Apple thought to respond to such trash in kind, it would raise questions into Adobe’s timing of their broadside: after years of sitting with its collective thumb up its butt, Adobe made all this noise about breaking Apple, the sole obstacle to Flash on smartphones (hah!), just before it wanted to talk its developers into multi-thousand dollar upgrades to CS5. After the upgrades roll out the door, Adobe continues with its previous leisurely ?schedule.?

So, a long history of refusing to deal with technical issues that readers of blogs like this seek out, followed up with insinuations that actually make no sense. Done? Not at all: While most of us gave up our fascination with boogers some time before age 10, this piece is part of a recent stream that called Apple Nazis because he thought it relevant to a teapot tempest where a would-be app vendor is trying to pressure Apple to carry his dishonest, break-several-rules app. So now he gives up all his illogic and just spouts names. Kinda sad. I sure wonder why somebody would sacrifice what I presume used to be personal integrity and self-respect for the self-inflicted failing at Adobe.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

I suppose Lauren is going to tag Walt’s post as inappropriate… Check your private email Walt. Personal insults are not allowed here. My personal integrity will be more than intact when Jobs is run out of town grin.

But Flash is simply about economics. Publishers have used it because it is cheap to develop for and deploy to multiple contexts. There are over a million active Flash developers. On the Windows side, it’s been quite stable for more than a decade. One might wonder why Adobe would focus efforts on the 90% of the market that has exactly one graphics model to support users all the way back to XP, when the Mac offers less than 10% of the user base and now has 5 models just to get back to 10.4 users.

Of course, this techie crap is stuff that publishers do not care about. What they want is a single model that will withstand the fads that come and go with form factors, operating systems, and vendors. They want to create rich internet apps (not just video) that perform well, protect their content, and work consistently across platforms. They don’t want format wars. And they resent people who start them, because all the format wars do is cost publishers extra money to do redundant work. They want the various players to work together to sort these things out.

But all this aside… Jobs started this war. He arrogantly walked into the WSJ and told them how to run their business and deliver their content. Whether he was wrong or right in his assessment, is he such a social retard that he doesn’t get that when you tell people they have to spend millions to get on your platform when your platform is perfectly capable of hosting their existing content model that those people are going to hold a grudge? Or when you purge developer’s apps, that developers start talking and feeding all the gossip to the blogs and press?

I’m just telling you guys what’s behind this. It seems since January, we’ve done one of these every month, and I keep telling you there will be another one next month. How do I know this? Because Jobs is a jerk, people know it, they can quantify it better now, and they’re lining up to kick him in the nuts. Sell your Apple stock and buy Orville Redenbacher. Seriously. It will only get more entertaining and more vicious until he leaves. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if tomorrow’s press conference dropped a bombshell about his involvement with the company.


As someone who consults TMO at best once a day, just to keep track of what’s new, I am mystified by the untold number of snotty posts (pun intended) from bosco that one finds on virtually every thread.  I mean, for those of us who actually have a life, one wonders: is someone paying you, bosco, to drop your nasty comments all over this forum, or are you providing this service on your own time for the better good of humankind?

Log in to comment (TMO, Twitter or Facebook) or Register for a TMO account