Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LeGrande; driftdiver
At 1900 MHz the FCC limits you to 1W maximum output; at 850 MHz it is 1.5W. Most cell phones will transmit up to that power level if required to maintain channel SNR (QOS measurements in-channel to determine required TX power levels or if another cell is better suited for use).

Now let's look at the receive signal attenuation again:

Theoretically, when held naturally, I could use 125mW output from the Nexus One and have the same total channel SNR (TX plus RX) as the iPhone 4 at 1W output, due to the attenuation of the iPhone 4's RX sensitivity. That is a not-inconsequential difference.

It's also interesting to note that the least sensitive phone has the antennas external; those with internal antennas have higher sensitivity. I wonder if this is because of the use of shielding against the front of the phone, creating a ground plane for enhanced directivity of the antennas?

I'd expect a 4-6 dB increase in RX sensitivity from a half-space measurement versus a full-space measurement, and that would be equivalent to an internal antenna with full ground plane behind versus an external antennas on edge without ground plane.

67 posted on 07/03/2010 7:00:36 PM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the Sting of Truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: PugetSoundSoldier

Please please don’t try to bring a rational voice to the discussion. I tried to ask a simple question and they went beserk.


68 posted on 07/03/2010 7:08:50 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

What is your source? Did you just randomly pull quotes from a couple of sources without any attributions or did you do the testing?


69 posted on 07/03/2010 7:51:41 PM PDT by LeGrande (Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: PugetSoundSoldier
Ahh, I went back to your earlier post it seems that you have randomly just selected quotes. That is why I was confused.

At 1900 MHz the FCC limits you to 1W maximum output; at 850 MHz it is 1.5W. Most cell phones will transmit up to that power level if required to maintain channel SNR (QOS measurements in-channel to determine required TX power levels or if another cell is better suited for use).

This is off topic, unless you are alleging that the IPhone 4 isn't transmitting properly. Are you? Do you have any data?

Now let's look at the receive signal attenuation again:

Your signal attenuation data shows clearly that how you hold any cell phone affects the signal. This isn't new. Also from your same source. "From my day of testing, I've determined that the iPhone 4 performs much better than the 3GS in situations where signal is very low, at -113 dBm (1 bar)." and "so it's readily apparent that the new baseband hardware is much more sensitive compared to what was in the 3GS. The difference is that reception is massively better on the iPhone 4 in actual use." Obviously the person who produced the comparison thought that the IPhone 4 was better than the 3GS, after testing.

Theoretically, when held naturally, I could use 125mW output from the Nexus One and have the same total channel SNR (TX plus RX) as the iPhone 4 at 1W output, due to the attenuation of the iPhone 4's RX sensitivity. That is a not-inconsequential difference.

Now we seem to be back to output, and again I am confused as to the point.

It's also interesting to note that the least sensitive phone has the antennas external; those with internal antennas have higher sensitivity. I wonder if this is because of the use of shielding against the front of the phone, creating a ground plane for enhanced directivity of the antennas?

What is the context that this statement is referring to? Without proper context it is a meaningless paragraph.

I'd expect a 4-6 dB increase in RX sensitivity from a half-space measurement versus a full-space measurement, and that would be equivalent to an internal antenna with full ground plane behind versus an external antennas on edge without ground plane.

Yes, and the point is?

PugetSoundSoldier, I am a little confused you have apparently taken 5 quotes out of context without sourcing them and apparently tried to say something.

What are you trying to show?

71 posted on 07/03/2010 8:13:44 PM PDT by LeGrande (Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson