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

131–140 of 188 posts

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

#131

Post by johnwalkr »

rz2k wrote: post #103
mcculley wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use this a lot. It burns two batteries instead of one, is unreliable, and adds latency. I would very much like to buy a laptop from Apple that has a modem builtin like I can get from Dell. Furthermore, I would like a modem in the laptop that is always on and ready, just like in the iPad (zero click).

I wonder how it will work if you attach an iPhone 15 Pro to your laptop with a short USB/Thunderbolt cable. Presumably it will at least save on rebroadcasting the internet connection.

Of course, it connects over usb. It works on windows as well (the easiest way to install the drivers is to install iTunes).

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

#132

Post by johnwalkr »

giobox wrote: post #64
Veliladon wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They literally have one click pairing to the Wifi hotspot on an iPhone or iPad logged in to the same iCloud account. Everyone has a phone. Why increase the BOM?

This logic doesn't hold - the same is true of an iPad. To quote you, "Everyone has a phone. Why increase the BOM?" - if it's ok to include cost of a modem for an iPad, it's ok for a MacBook Pro too.

I don’t think the BOM is the issue. It’s a huge cost to have different variations for different regions, and a huge cost to go through certification for various regions. It’s obviously worth it for iPhone and watch, apparently worth it for iPad although most people I know buy the wifi only models. For MacBooks, even though they now share a lot of design with iPhones, I can’t see it being worth it for the few percent of customers that will pay extra for it on a MacBook.

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

#133

Post by PeterisP »

drevil-v2 wrote: post #40
xwolfi wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ?

What are you doing on a handheld device screen that would blow your mind once the novelty of seeing the big numbers on speedtest app wore off? Genuinely curious- what can you do on 5G phone that you can’t on your 4G phone?

A reasonably frequent usage of this speed is for families to switch over to mobile internet as the primary service for your home, having multiple people watch "TV" and videoconference all while someone is gaming (or dowloading a 40 Gb game) all through a single 5G modem.

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

#134

Post by mcculley »

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.

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

#135

Post by mcculley »

jononomo wrote: post #108
mcculley wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No matter how much I am willing to pay, I cannot buy what I want. That is a market failure.

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?

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

#137

Post by jjtheblunt »

mrguyorama wrote: post #121
giobox wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are you wanting a plastic band atop the laptop closing screen, to get a cellular capable antenna in an otherwise metal body? I'm almost certain Apple's world class hardware team can integrate a cellular antenna to an aluminum laptop in a way that is visually pleasing, yes. This isn't some insurmountable problem we are positing here.

I mean, that same hardware team designed a fundamentally flawed keyboard to shave like a millimeter from the laptop height.

that's the industrial design group, which was entirely distinct from the rf hardware world.

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

#138

Post by jjtheblunt »

giobox wrote: post #102
jjtheblunt wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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? I'm almost certain Apple's world class hardware team can integrate a cellular antenna to an aluminum laptop in a way that is visually pleasing, yes. This isn't some insurmountable problem we are positing here.

it probably would help if you'd listen to a person from the world class hardware team in question who worked in exactly this world for years, spanning all the devices discussed. that person might have strongly insinuated the law of nature challenges constraining propagation of RF at widely varying frequencies as they are paired with the esthetics challenges from a different group, if you noticed.

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

#139

Post by [deleted] »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #138
giobox wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are you wanting a plastic band atop the laptop closing screen, to get a cellular capable antenna in an otherwise metal body? I'm almost certain Apple's world class hardware team can integrate a cellular antenna to an aluminum laptop in a way that is visually pleasing, yes. This isn't some insurmountable problem we are positing here.

it probably would help if you'd listen to a person from the world class hardware team in question who worked in exactly this world for years, spanning all the devices discussed. that person might have strongly insinuated the law of nature challenges constraining propagation of RF at widely varying frequencies as they are paired with the esthetics challenges from a different group, if you noticed.

[deleted]

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

#140

Post by sixstringtheory »

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…

Thanks for taking time to write such detailed replies. I realize my reply was off the cuff; it's just astonishing that that much information was able to be absorbed and operationalized. Hats off to folks that were able to make it happen at all!
Post reply on HN