Closest cell tower 1 Km, iPhone 3G, Wi-fi mode, iOS 4.0, Orange network.

With device held gently by edges:

signal avg 90 (outdoors, line of sight to cell tower, same altitude)
signal avg 8O (indoors, line of sight to cell tower, same altitude)
signal avg 60 (indoors, no line of sight to cell tower, same altitude)
signal avg 4O (outdoors, no line of sight to cell tower, ground level)

With device cradled in hand a average decrease of signal by about 20 in all cases and whatever finger configuration.

Turning 3G on causes a average decrease of signal by 5 in all cases.

The connection strength bars shows 5 bars in all cases.

Absolute minimum experienced : 19, absolute maximum 96.

The thing to take away from all this is that if  you already had a very bad connection under 20 and subtract the hand attenuation of about 20 you are left with no signal, and it did not hep that until iOS 4.0.1  a bad connection with a 20 strength would have shown 4 or even 5 bars.

The application used to test gets the signal strength from private calls to apple’s CoreTelephony framework, in a effort to help the iphone signal testing going on share a common base i am providing the application to anyone, please let me know what are the results of your tests and feel free to contribute to the code on github.

The application is named  VAFieldTest , it’s code is under a open source license and can be found at http://github.com/valexa/VAFieldTest , you need Xcode and a iPhone developer account to compile and run it.

iOS 4.0.1 update
same behavior as before, with the difference that now the connection bars properly reflect changes in the strength (I 1-19, II 20-29, III 30-39, IIII 40-49, IIIII 50-99 ) , with previous versions they just show 5 bars for any signal strengths above 25.

I started following Seesmic when it was still a video site, behind it is Loic Lemeur a well known entrepreneur highly involved in social media and the father of the LeWeb conference, when he started Seesmic he even moved to San Francisco getting people like Pierre Omidyar, Reid Hoffman, Stephen Case on board and two series of founding $6M each.

By this time there still was no business model but Loic’s goal was to have a impact and create value and like every investor knows, that eventually blooms into a business, by the end of 2008 however there were already signs of trouble with 1/3 of staff being laid off, early into 2009 a web version of Seesmic’s twitter client was released then silence until early 1010 when Loic used Microsoft’s Professional Developers Conference as a platform to launch Seesmic for Blackberry and Android, which signaled the shift toward Windows, Loic himself switching to Windows after complaining about issues upgrading OSX to Snow Leopard.

The mobile and web versions joined the initial desktop Seesmic twitter client that ran on both Windows and OSX courtesy of Twirl’s Adobe Air codebase, so by now you could say that they had everything covered, except one minor thing, the iPhone, and in two days from now the iPad, which brings me to the reason why i started writing this.

Sure, you could argue that they identified the niche in the lucrative and less competitive Blackberry/Windows space, apparently they quickly hired a bunch of romanian windows developers and eventually even partnered with Microsoft to create a windows only flavor of Seesmic for the masses, Seesmic Look, so they could afford to ignore iPhone and the iPad markets, saturated with independent developers and highly competitive, even if Loic had the founds and the levers to give it a edge over anyone else.

Either way Seesmic makes for a extremely interesting case study, i gave up waiting for a native OSX/iPhone client, but things are not looking good for the days ahead, here is how it will look: people opening seesmic.com from a iPhone and more importantly from the iPad will be thrown into a dead-end with broken image links and suggestions to get the Android and Blackberry clients, even if they know the url to the web based Sesmic client they will be unable to access it from mobile browsers, and there is no native Sesmic in the AppStore either, which brings the options to 0.

rename ~/Library/iTunes/iPhone Carrier Support/Orange_ro.ipcc to Orange_ro.zip extract and enter Payload and bundle dirs , open Carrier.plist

edit the apns section like in the screenshot , optionally edit the other 2 plists changing BundleVersion from 2.5 to 5.0, save and close all plists

compress the Payload dir an rename the archive to .ipcc , alt+click Restore in itunes and select it after typing

defaults write com.apple.iTunes carrier-testing -bool TRUE

in terminal then just reboot the iphone

i have tested both usb and bluetooth , working great , the ipcc file is atached

Jobs’ statements are sure to disappoint Web developers, many of whom are familiar with Flash development

I am a web developer and i am not disappointed at all by his statement which for the record was straight on and amounted to :

“Flash is not yet good enough for the iPhone,”

Now i certainly do not know who advises Jobbs , but i can tell you that a software engineers or web developer will agree with him on that , only the web designers and entrenched corporate entities might differ but that is another story.
And even them benefit from the fact that Jobbs is pushing innovation by forcing adobe to improve the inners of the flash mess and not helping it’s monopoly over web content delivery systems.
Either way the folks at information week could use a touch of pertinence while delivering their comments.
That is to say in plain words that are either idiots or they are pushing agendas like any corporate monkey.
And here are quotes of comments on their own article page from people that probably developed with flash too instead of only looking at flash content as a way to make them experts on it.

Derek commented on Mar 5, 2008 4:13:57 PM Jobs is right – flash sucks. Ever try decompiling a swf file? It’s painful and arcane. Flash is ok from a user experience level and more efficient from a download perspective but the tools and formats for it are voodoo.

Webwin commented on Mar 5, 2008 4:16:24 PM Right on – I’m a developer and HATE dealing with Flash. It’s simply not open enough and as the previous poster mentioned – voodoo to some extent. As a developer I hate blindly writing to formats that aren’t open.

Shane Johnson commented on Mar 5, 2008 4:18:46 PM I’m surprised that so many sites use Flash myself. It’s about time someone stuck a flag in the ground out of defiance. There MUST be a better way to deliver video content than Flash.

kurt Witcher commented on Mar 5, 2008 4:38:18 PM I think a big problem with flash is the huge amount of processing power it takes to run. I’m guessing flash in its current form would drain the iphones battery probably 3 times faste, just so we can watch our online advertising bounce.