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

161–170 of 188 posts

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

#161

Post by fkyoureadthedoc »

mcculley wrote: post #157
bradknowles wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You're certainly not the only person, but who are you to say that there's enough of you to offset the cost? They might very well have determined that they won't make enough money to do it, in which case the market is working perfectly well.

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

#162

Post by woah »

kylehotchkiss wrote: post #70
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 have to imagine part of this is how expensive data in US still is - 5g infra could likely support this but there's no way AT&T or Verizon will give a reasonable amount of data for $25/month which is the most I'd imagine somebody would want to pay for a device specific data plan

I think this is the answer. Mobile OSes have been designed from the ground up to conserve data. Desktop OSes are a free for all.

When a user takes the active step of tethering, they know what they are getting into.

If mobile data was built right into the computer you’d probably see headlines like “MacBook causes $2000 in data overages”

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

#163

Post by mcculley »

fkyoureadthedoc wrote: post #161
mcculley wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You're certainly not the only person, but who are you to say that there's enough of you to offset the cost? They might very well have determined that they won't make enough money to do it, in which case the market is working perfectly well.

I remain unconvinced that this was a free market decision. This is why I asked about any evidence in the patent and royalty situation.

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

#164

Post by qwertimus »

xwolfi wrote: post #33
ikekkdcjkfke wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5G is overrated

5G is absolutely insane. 100Mb/s for 20 USD/mo on a mobile phone in Hong Kong is absolutely mind-blowing. I suppose in low density areas like Tokyo, New York or Paris, it might be slower in some patches ?

Able to get a consistent 1000Mb/s in Aus (Melbourne) outdoors. You're not wrong, it's wild to see in action!

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

#165

Post by mcculley »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #94
giobox wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then it's a short jump from iPhone logic board to iPad. Its arguably an even shorter jump between iPad and MacBook Pro today - the architecture of both products is incredibly similar now. > it's a longer jump to get a cellular capable antenna complex in an all metal (think semi faraday cage) aluminium unibody. You mean just like the aluminium bodies already present on the cellular iPads? Or several generations of i…

cellular ipads have an RF transparent band on their edges. ipad and iphone also have antenna designs integrated with the body design, which currently is only true for wifi and bluetooth in the above mentioned laptops. are you wanting a plastic band atop the laptop closing screen, to get a cellular capable antenna in an otherwise metal body? perhaps that's just not a priority with enough customers.

> are you wanting a plastic band atop the laptop closing screen, to get a cellular capable antenna in an otherwise metal body?

Is this why the LTE capable Apple Watch has a red ring on the crown? I assumed it was just a status cue.

Regardless, I would be completely happy with Apple having to make a compromise on the case like they do with the iPad.

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

#166

Post by bradknowles »

mcculley wrote: post #157
bradknowles wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Can you prove how many people would actually do so? Not the ones who say they would but in the end wouldn't cough up the money, but would actually carry through?

If you can't prove that market is large enough, then it doesn't make sense for Apple to go to that expense.

For example, how many people would pay enough extra to make it profitable for Apple to include a 192GB memory option for the M2 Max laptops and desktops? The current top end model maxes out at 96GB. How many people would pay enough extra to make it worth Apple's time to double that top end RAM value? I'm sure Apple can do it, it's just a matter of including the next level of higher capacity RAM modules.

What is your provable Total Addressable Market? Startups do this kind of evaluation all the time, and they try to wheedle VCs out of money with those numbers. And VCs poke holes in those evaluations all the time. So, let's do the same thing here.

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

#167

Post by theGnuMe »

nier wrote: post #150
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…

Apple would also need to get the software ready. Numerous services would need switches for controlling download and sync behavior when connecting over cellular to conserve data usage.

The already have low data mode on iPhones.

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

#168

Post by mcculley »

bradknowles wrote: post #166
mcculley wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Can you prove how many people would actually do so? Not the ones who say they would but in the end wouldn't cough up the money, but would actually carry through? If you can't prove that market is large enough, then it doesn't make sense for Apple to go to that expense. For example, how many people would pay enough extra to make it profitable for Apple to include a 192GB memory option for the M2 Max laptops and deskto…

Why do you think Dell bothers to put LTE modems in laptops? I asked about evidence regarding the patent and royalty situation that prevents Apple from delivering a similar product.

I am on my fifth MacBook Pro. My first Mac was the 12” PowerBook G4. I bought many more for my employees. I would like to upgrade right now, but it would only be a marginal improvement. If Apple shipped a MacBook Pro today with an LTE modem, I would buy it today, as it would help me with my constant travel.

I would like to open the lid on my MacBook Pro and immediately reply to the email I need to reply to instead of starting up the hotspot and waiting on it to download. iPad and iPhone can do this. That the laptop cannot is ridiculous.

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

#169

Post by bradknowles »

mcculley wrote: post #168
bradknowles wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you prove how many people would actually do so? Not the ones who say they would but in the end wouldn't cough up the money, but would actually carry through? If you can't prove that market is large enough, then it doesn't make sense for Apple to go to that expense. For example, how many people would pay enough extra to make it profitable for Apple to include a 192GB memory option for the M2 Max laptops and deskto…

Why do you think Dell bothers to put LTE modems in laptops? I asked about evidence regarding the patent and royalty situation that prevents Apple from delivering a similar product. I am on my fifth MacBook Pro. My first Mac was the 12” PowerBook G4. I bought many more for my employees. I would like to upgrade right now, but it would only be a marginal improvement. If Apple shipped a MacBook Pro today with an LTE mode…

It has nothing to do with patents or royalties. It's all about the total addressable market and whether or not Apple thinks they could make enough profit from adding such a feature.

Obviously, Apple has decided not.

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

#170

Post by jetanoia »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #146
musicale wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iPad itself and competing MacBook/MacBook Pro-like aluminum laptops from other vendors (Dell, HP, etc.) are existence proofs.

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

Your “plastic band” argument- indeed, most of your arguments on this- fails to acknowledge the pleasant reality of the ipad pro’s.

My 2020 ipad pro 11” does not have that unsightly plastic band, nor the iphone 15 pro.

As far as aesthetic elements, these enclosures appear essentially as metal and glass, an appearance not markedly different than existing macbook appearances.

Even the iphone mini 13 manages to fit effective cellular arrays in its compact form sans the big plastic bands on those ipads you mention. And despite its diminutive size, the mini 13 can still manage a reliable call over cellular for hours at a time. With the greater real estate offered by the macBook form factor, there are broader options for effective antenna arrays and also their power supply versus phones and tablets.

Post reply on HN