Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 188 posts

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#151

Post by jjtheblunt »

giobox wrote: post #147
jjtheblunt wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn’t read the discussion of the cellular ipad having the plastic band, or that prioritizing no plastic band is a problem if you want antennas capable for useful cellular reliability

No, the cellular iPad and other devices are indeed proof positive. The exact same cellular window solution could be applied in a redesign of the MacBook. No one is disputing aluminium blocks radio waves - the dispute is your constant argument it can’t be done because it would require a giant RF window - there is no reason a future design can’t neatly incorporate an antenna system, just like it has been done on many o…

Yes it’s possible IF the case is changed. Bear in mind different bands (as cellular ios devices support) can force a different antenna geometry than a single band (regardless of coding schemes).

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#152

Post by bsder »

zdyn5 wrote: post #5

What’s the fundamental reason why SOTA modems are more challenging than microprocessors for Apple? Intuitively I would’ve guessed the opposite was true.

Carriers are complete and utter shit.

Getting your modem "certified" with a carrier network requires an absolutely Byzantine set of testing that would stagger your imagination.

And the carriers all like it very much since it enforces their monopoly position just like the old "You must use Ma Bell phones on the Ma Bell lines."

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#153

Post by Schiendelman »

8fingerlouie wrote: post #122
sixstringtheory wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I ran a company where someone tried to release a 19K page spec I'd keep firing people until someone could produce a spec that I could actually review and sign off on, that could also still be reproduced in working technology. How does this kind of thing fly at all?

The thing is, GSM is not a single specification. It is layered like the OSI model, and each layer has multiple specifications for different subsystems. When GSM was originally specified, there was serious doubt if it would work at all on the hardware available at the time. A GSM call has a 3.62us send window, a 3x3.62us waiting period, and a 3.62us receive slot. That’s probably hard enough to achieve on a single cell…

Incredible reply, thank you. People like you are why I come here every day.

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#154

Post by bradknowles »

lostlogin wrote: post #98
baggy_trough wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not what a market failure is.

Well it’s not a success, so what it is?

One person does not a market failure make.

In order to be a market failure, a whole shitload of people have to want the feature in question, and yet although it could easily be made to happen, the feature is still not delivered. That's a market failure.

Give us a reasoned and researched piece of evidence as to how large this potential market is. Like, how many people would actually buy it, as opposed to all the people who say they'd buy it but then don't actually put up the cash when the feature is delivered.

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#155

Post by Zetobal »

mcculley wrote: post #135
jononomo wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet you could get what you want if you are willing to pay $10 billion.

Walk through this process. Who would I pay $10 billion to in order to get a MacBook Pro with an integrated LTE modem that works as well as it does in an iPad?

I'll do it.

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#156

Post by makeitdouble »

mcculley wrote: post #134
mcculley wrote: post #51

Every time a new MacBook Pro is released, I check to see if they have figured out how to put a modem in it like they manage to with watches, phones, and tablets. This is an obvious example where the market is failing. The best explanation I heard is that the Apple deal with Qualcomm pays Qualcomm a royalty as a function of the price of the device and Apple does not want to give that much money to Qualcomm and/or rais…

I am amused by some of the responses to this. I am traveling right now and needed to stop at a rest area and deal with some email. I just tried to tether my MacBook Pro to my iPhone and once again got “Failed to enable Personal Hotspot”. Those who keep defending Apple’s choices because tethering is “flawless” seem to live in a different universe.

It might feel less "magic" that what Apple promises, but doing regular hotspot through wifi might work better. I do it a lot with a pixel phone and it's pretty reliable.

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#157

Post by mcculley »

bradknowles wrote: post #154
lostlogin wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it’s not a success, so what it is?

One person does not a market failure make. In order to be a market failure, a whole shitload of people have to want the feature in question, and yet although it could easily be made to happen, the feature is still not delivered. That's a market failure. Give us a reasoned and researched piece of evidence as to how large this potential market is. Like, how many people would actually buy it, as opposed to all the peopl…

A market does not require a “shitload”. I am certain that I am not the only person who would buy a MacBook Pro with the connectivity of a Dell.

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#158

Post by mcculley »

makeitdouble wrote: post #156
mcculley wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am amused by some of the responses to this. I am traveling right now and needed to stop at a rest area and deal with some email. I just tried to tether my MacBook Pro to my iPhone and once again got “Failed to enable Personal Hotspot”. Those who keep defending Apple’s choices because tethering is “flawless” seem to live in a different universe.

It might feel less "magic" that what Apple promises, but doing regular hotspot through wifi might work better. I do it a lot with a pixel phone and it's pretty reliable.

I am unsure of the distinction you are making. In the case I described, I was trying to connect my MacBook Pro to my iPhone 11 Pro via WiFi. After I wrote the above comment, I tried a couple more times and it eventually connected.

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#159

Post by makeitdouble »

mcculley wrote: post #158
makeitdouble wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might feel less "magic" that what Apple promises, but doing regular hotspot through wifi might work better. I do it a lot with a pixel phone and it's pretty reliable.

I am unsure of the distinction you are making. In the case I described, I was trying to connect my MacBook Pro to my iPhone 11 Pro via WiFi. After I wrote the above comment, I tried a couple more times and it eventually connected.

For me by default the MacBook would bridge the phone connection through bluetooth. And I think there's still some custom stuff happening when choosing the phone in the wi-fi dropdown when the mac identifies that the phone is on the same account and connects without password prompt.

In the iPhone days I "force" connected to the phone hotspot through the standard password required procedure and it did better than the other more convenient options.

Re: Apple’s failure to build a key part for its new iPhones

#160

Post by mcculley »

rz2k wrote: post #144
mcculley wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I often do this with my iPhone 11 Pro. It is dumb and works better than having no connection. It is a ridiculous thing to do at a time when watches have LTE modems.

I have the same phone and the performance never seems any better than when using bluetooth PAN. I mentioned the iPhone 15 Pro, because it will be the first one with more than 480mbps over USB. At 10gbps the wired connection should have enough bandwidth to handle anything even 5g will offer for a while.

I am scheduled to pick up an iPhone 15 Pro today. I will see how well that works and report back.
Post reply on HN