----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: TwR4.41140@fx46.iad>
1a46a79b
@REPLY: 1@dont-email.me> ee6e89be
@REPLYADDR Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 Alan Browne
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-References: 1@dont-email.me>
wGe2.5148@fx03.iad> 1@dont-email.me>
@RFC-Message-ID:
TwR4.41140@fx46.iad>
@TZUTC: -0400
@PID: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X
10.14; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
On 2023-09-30 03:56, Chris wrote:
> Alan Browne <
bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-09-29 13:51, Chris wrote:
>>>
>>> Given the high profile news about the iphone 12, it`s interesting to
>>> note that Apple aren`t alone in having released phones that have failed
>>> french RF testing.
>>
>>
>>
>>> And, I just noticed, that of yesterday the iphone 12 with iOS 17.0.1 is
>>> now compliant:
https://data.anfr.fr/explore/dataset/das-telephonie-mobile?sort=-date_pr%C3%A9l%
C3%A8vement&refine.marque=APPLE
>>
>> Chris, you have no respect for the trolls. This will cause them no end
>> of embarrassment.
>>
>> QUOTE
>> *ROTFLSTC*
>> The French authorities used multiple institutes and other authorities
>> have no say in France and Europe.
>> ENDQUOTE by J?rg Lorenz
>>
>> QUOTE
>> Apple has a clear order by the French authorities to rectify the issue
>> within 2 weeks.
>> ENDQUOTE by J?rg Lorenz
>>
>> QUOTE
>> The order of European authorities based on law are non-negotiable.
>> Americans and especially the Fanboys in this group have enormous pain
>> to accept that fact.
>> ENDQUOTE by J?rg Lorenz
>>
>> Hmm - doesn`t look like Apple rectified anything. They did tell ANFR to
>> test properly.
>>
>>> Full report here:
>>> https://www.anfr.fr/das/COM054210042/1-6460_23-30-03.pdf
>>
>> Skimmed it - you can see on page 25 that it was tested by Cetecom
>> Advanced in Germany between 23 and 27 Sept. this year and the client is
>> ANFR (page 1).
>
> As was the original test.
(Other than the dates of course).
>
>> So I guess Apple told them to head in and test correctly.
>
> Or between iOS 14.7.1 and 17.0.1 Apple implemented a change.
Possible.
> Or the random variability between iphones is such that when picking two
> different ones one will pass and the other fails.
Test method is very instrumental in outcomes. And if you go through the
report you`ll see that it is a very involved process with a non-trivial
test setup such that results from different labs would be very unlikely
to yield the same outcome - even at the same facility.
--
"Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent."
- John Maynard Keynes.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1
* Origin: UsenetServer - www.usenetserver.com (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/715
848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 1081 5075/128
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441