On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 01:20, Sarton O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That assumes the ear piece is the antenna. Not always the case. In the case of
the FR, I don't know if this is the case or not.
the GSM antenna for the Neo is at the bottom (under the mic, not the speaker).
So it is a little
You can see in the test pics - they hold the bottom of the phone away
from the jaw - just like in actual use. You'd expect lower results
from a phone with the antenna down there; the FreeRunner must really
kick out some juice ;)
2008/9/3 Cédric Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at
Joseph Reeves wrote:
You can see in the test pics - they hold the bottom of the phone away
from the jaw - just like in actual use. You'd expect lower results
from a phone with the antenna down there; the FreeRunner must really
kick out some juice ;)
Maybe this accounts for the clicking in
On Tuesday 02 September 2008 15:51:00 Robin Paulson wrote:
i was looking through planet earlier, when i saw this blogpost, which
i'm sure others of you have read:
http://blogs.thehumanjourney.net/finds/entry/20080901
i gather it's a report on the effects of emitted radiation when the
i was looking through planet earlier, when i saw this blogpost, which
i'm sure others of you have read:
http://blogs.thehumanjourney.net/finds/entry/20080901
The Neo FreeRunner SAR tests at 1.07 W/kg GSM and 1.17 W/kg DCS. I would
say that's average, on the high side.
The legal limit 1.6
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] För [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Skickat: den 2 september 2008 08:26
Till: List for Openmoko community discussion
Ämne: Re: specific absorption rate
i was looking through planet earlier, when i saw this blogpost, which
i'm sure others of you have read:
http
2008/9/2 Sarton O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I don't know the specifics now but I looked into it years ago. The end result
was that any mobile with an internal antenna is more damaging to human cells
than one with an external antenna. The theory being that the transmission is
taking place
2008/9/2 Robin Paulson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
is the relationship as simple as:
increase the antenna size, decrease the radiation?
could an external antenna help increase battery life also?
is this something we can choose ourselves, or are there particular
requirements we should be aware of?
On Tuesday 02 September 2008 17:56:26 Robin Paulson wrote:
2008/9/2 Sarton O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The way I see it is, there is a required/acceptable amount of power
required to reach the nearest tower. Anything lower would be unacceptable
and the findings then fall on the antenna
i was looking through planet earlier, when i saw this blogpost, which
i'm sure others of you have read:
http://blogs.thehumanjourney.net/finds/entry/20080901
i gather it's a report on the effects of emitted radiation when the
freerunner is used near to a person's body. is there anyone here who
10 matches
Mail list logo
