I am not making up any facts, Fireman. The E911 GPS in your phone was not a true turn-by-turn GPS and your TeleNav GPS software only worked with an external BlueTooth GPS system if you wanted any thing close to accuracy. That is why your Modders were not successful in "unlocking" the GPS. THERE WERE NO GPS ANTENNAS IN YOUR PHONES and the radio was not GPS capable. It is really that simple.
"yeah but you miss the big picture. a chip isnt worth a hill of silicone if you dont have an antenna to hook to it" Source XDA Developers Forum VX6700, PPC6700 ROM Developers
I have double checked my facts I have posted on here. . . and your facts are the ones that are lacking proof. Just because some myths may disagree with the historical facts, does not make me wrong. I have sources that disagree. . . and I was there, and disagree with your anecdotes and myths. I have provided source material and links. This last post of yours is the first time you have provided any links at all. Bravo for you.
Again, Google, Bing, and DuckDuckGo are your friends. A search of using Telenav GPS with the PPC-6700 revealed this gem in response to the question "Can I use TeleNav GPS Navigator with my new Sprint PPC-6700?":
"no, now that you've dropped 600 bux on your nice new device be prepared to go out and buy an addon GPS unit ...... sucks dont it?"and:
"I tried getting Telenav to work using Microsoft's Webshere which plays java. I think that would have bee nthe only possible way to get it to work. I got it to load the program but it would just hang where it says loading graphics. I couldnt get it past that. So I caved in and purchased a BT reciever and iGuidance. It has worked great so far. I also like that it tells you your ETA throughout the trip. Its a handy feature. Especially when having to get to work. This way you know if you need to speed up or you can start to relax because you will make it with lots of time to spare. It obviously changes as you drive. When you first punch in the addy, the ETA is based on what should be the speed limits for each road. Then as you move it will change throughout based on your speed and location. It might sound like a little feature but, I keep my gps on all the time even when I know where I am going just for this."
Other sources came up with the same results. . . it works with an external Bluetooth GPS unit, not the internal e911 GPS.
I think it is possible that you are making some of these claims without malice... that you simply don't know much of anything about non-Apple products and their development and rely on equally ignorant people for your information about non-Apple products. At least I am hoping that is the explanation. I do not know a great deal about Apple products, but I do know a lot about the non-Apple products that I have years of experience with.
I do not post things about non-Apple equipment without double checking my facts. . . and often triple checking with factory sources. YOU however, believe your own hype. You claim stuff about Apple you know only from myth and second hand information as if it were completely gospel truth. . . even though it has been disproved by many other sources. The Jobs biography has been roundly criticized for many inaccuracies from insider sources. . . and the glass screen story is one of those. FoxConn and its employees claim to this day that none of that story happened. From even the NYT story:
The company (FoxConn) disputed some details of the former Apple executives account, and wrote that a midnight shift, such as the one described, was impossible because we have strict regulations regarding the working hours of our employees based on their designated shifts, and every employee has computerized timecards that would bar them from working at any facility at a time outside of their approved shift. The company said that all shifts began at either 7 a.m. or 7 p.m., and that employees receive at least 12 hours notice of any schedule changes.Foxconn employees, in interviews, have challenged those assertions.
FoxConn and its employees have no reason to argue that they cannot and did not do what was described. It would be a superior marketing claim for management, and a source of pride for its workers that they accomplished this. . . yet they ALL say it never happened.
By the way, the narrative did not come from Steve Jobs it came from an anonymous ex-Apple executive. Good source there? No. Unnamed sources can say anything they want and no one can deny it is true. Apple, as usual, remains mute.
I've told you that I'm an ex-CEO. . . I am intimately familiar with critical path planning. . . and it is very obvious to me that what the New York Times claimed was literally impossible to have happened in the time the unnamed ex-Apple executive claimed it all did.
Fireman15, think very, very critically about the so-called timeline in the New York Times story, which was part of an "exposé" of so called Apple failings, many of which later turned out to be from false narratives, including quotations from multiply discredited Michael Daisey whose documentary on this same topic was PULLED from NPR for creating quotations, mis-representing facts, falsifying videos taken at a manufacturer as being from FoxConn when they were not, etc., and when confronted with these lies, claimed he wasn't a journalist, but a performance artiste and was using artistic license in falsifying facts to get to the underlying truths as he knew they must be true, even though he had no evidence!. Examine their story about the change in iPhone screens from the view point of a businessman making that decision and see if it is at ALL feasible to do. As an ex-CEO, I did, and frankly the NYT story stinks like six week old fish.
Just six weeks before the June 29th release date, in the middle of the initial production of iPhones, the main screen, a major component of the iPhone is going to be completely re-designed from the ground up. It makes absolutely no technological sense! It is not as if Apple had not had issues with scratched screens before.
No, Apple had their share of such problems on the iPod Nano, and in fact in 2005 a class action lawsuit was filed against Apple for just such scratches on the iPod Nano screens, which Apple settled for around $30 million ($25 per iPod Nano).
All of this had to be accomplished in the six week time frame in time for delivery of up to 500,000 iPhones on the weekend of June 29th to expectant customers waiting in line at Apple Stores and to customers via FedEx.
The timeline doesn't work at all. Using conservative business estimates, using critical path reasoning, it takes SIX MONTHS to change the screens on the iPhone! It didn't happen. If you disagree, try to squeeze all those steps into the six weeks of the New York Times timeline. . . and I do not think anyone could do it. Frankly, it is impossible. . . even with Apple's miraculous abilities in organization and just in time inventory control. There are just somethings one cannot change about how business is done, no matter WHO the business is. Six months is miraculous to accomplish all this.
More evidence: The weight of the iPhone as announced on January 9, 2007 is exactly the same as the iPhone that shipped on June 29, 2007. . . yet glass is much heavier than plastic. In fact, the glass is at least three times as heavy as plastic. Oops, how can you replace a lightweight plastic screen with a heavier glass screen of the same size and thickness and NOT gain weight? Answer: You either completely re-engineer the device to lose weight somewhere else, or you cannot do it. Ergo, there was no change in materials between January and June. . . only software improvements and waiting for FCC regulatory approvals.
Wow! Quite a post! Unfortunately I do not have time to go through point by point right now. I will start off however by addressing the first thing that you said, which is absolutely false. It is quite obvious that you do not take a look at any of the links that I provide. Or believe what I tell you of my first hand experiences. So there really is not much point in continuing this conversation.
That is simply not true. I used the phone with the Sprint GPS navigation software that was provided with the phone. It was very accurate and worked well for turn by turn navigation. Unfortunately, it was a pay service using the phone's Qualcomms msm6500 chipset which came standard with GPS... The GPS was locked using a proprietary method to get people to pay for the navigation service. In addition to the chipset there is a GPS antenna inside the case; navigation was not dependent on cell tower triangulation.
Here is a link to the specs for the Qualcomm MSM6500 which I know you will not bother reading:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a6500&c=qualcomm_msm6500
For the third or fourth time here is the other link you can't be bothered to look at that shows Sprint was advertising the feature. I am sure no one would have complained if the phone didn't have GPS navigation available when Sprint advertised it /sarc:
http://www.sprint.com/dealerrewards/PPC6700SP_flier.pdf
There were people who claimed to have found a work-around, but nothing was ever released to the public to get the internal GPS to work with unauthorized GPS software. The very first generation of phones did not have the GPS locked and people who had those phones and did not have difficulty using GPS navigation software available at the time up until they took the first firmware update.
There is some conflicting and erroneous information out there posted by people like you I suppose so if your only goal is to continue to deluding yourself then there is probably not much more that I will be able to do for you. I have done my best to provide you with accurate info and links to documentation. I am sorry that it conflicts with your world view.
Actually, I think that you might have told someone else that; but it does explain a lot, so thank you.