Want fast internet? Don't buy apple

[nelson61]

Samsung and Google significantly better than newest apple phones for download speeds

.Apple's iPhones Trail Samsung, Google Devices in Internet Speeds Terms of Service Violation

Sent from my SM-G955U1 using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[harshness]

Apple is again "massaging" things in software to make up for differences in hardware.

AT&T and T-Mobile locked phones are equipped with Intel modems while Verizon phones use Qualcomm modems. The software drags the Verizon phones down to approximately the same performance level as the Intel modems.

In implementing this equalization in software, I imagine that even the Intel modems are compromised.

The Ookla data is pretty telling when it comes to Sprint's claims and surely casts a pall on how new modulation technologies (such as 5G) may not be all that -- especially when it comes to the Apple products and the games they play to make everyone happy.

 

[EarDemon]

It's not a downfall, its a feature.

Apple knows whats best for you, so don't question their choices of components they buy for slaves to assemble at Foxconn factories.

Does this surprise anyone? Wasn't Apple one of the last major phone manufactures to support LTE? Aren't their latest phones typically missing support for a band or two, when other manufactures have support?

Don't forget Apple is the company that lied about 'miscalculated' signal strength, probably to try to cover up their poor RF performance.

Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong. Our formula, in many instances, mistakenly displays 2 more bars than it should for a given signal strength. For example, we sometimes display 4 bars when we should be displaying as few as 2 bars. Users observing a drop of several bars when they grip their iPhone in a certain way are most likely in an area with very weak signal strength, but they don’t know it because we are erroneously displaying 4 or 5 bars. Their big drop in bars is because their high bars were never real in the first place.

Letter from Apple Regarding iPhone 4

 

[dsmith0429]

I blame the carriers for the modifications they do to the phones, all smart phones should be unlocked, not locked to a specific carrier. I think that the issues users are having are linked to the device being locked somehow. , My factory unlocked iPhone has no problems, neither did a factory unlocked Android I had. However, personally I've had better reliability with my iPhone vs. my former Android phone... however I don't think all Android devices are bad, or all iPhones are good... it's just a tool...

 

[navychop]

They’re not slaves. If they were slaves, they’d be chained to their workstation, instead of all those nets strung up outside the buildings.

I’m guessing the nets are cheaper than chains and manacles.


Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[Foxbat]

I think that Apple will reach the point where they cut Intel out of the supply chain all together. Intel cellular modems are dragging the iPhones down, and someone made the decision to cripple the iPhones with Qualcomm radios so everyone wouldn't buy the Verizon/Sprint version and then unlock it. I'm $ure $ome rea$on wa$ found to ju$tify thi$ de$cision...

Really, I'm surprised Apple hasn't acquired some RF engineers and started designing their own radio chips by now. The T2 chips in the new iMac Pro and MacBook Pro computers show huge performance gains in I/O operations by offloading the CPU from encryption and disk tasks. There is an advantage to designing hardware to execute your OS and software, IBM did that, as did DEC. Apple had a chance with the PowerPC, but Motorola had their design goals and so did IBM. Apple went with Intel and saw improvements in power consumption and performance, but Intel is now stuck trying to go to 10nm while others have moved on to 7nm chip fabrication. And Apple has a history of moving between CPU architectures so it wouldn't surprise me if they abandon the Intel x86 platform in the next five years.

So yes, some will say no matter what Apple does that it's just a way to shake their customers' pockets free of money. After all, why buy an Audi when a Hyundai will take you to the same destination?

(oh, and that Intel LTE Modem chip? I don't have it in my 3 year old phone...)

 

[navychop]

Apple is having legal difficulties with Qualcomm and tried to move to Intel. But now Intel has delayed their product due to various difficulties. So Qualcomm may get more business. There is another company vying for the business, but they are smaller.

Apple IS developing their own chips, but are years away from final product.


Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[harshness]

I think that Apple will reach the point where they cut Intel out of the supply chain all together.

That's what you get for thinking. Apple is of a mind that Qualcomm is holding them hostage in much the same way that Apple holds their own customers hostage.

The move to Intel was entirely because Intel isn't Qualcomm. That Intel couldn't provide what Apple needed to competently handle Verizon's technology is the only reason the move wasn't complete. Even if Apple develops their own chips, they're still going to need a fab house that can pump out relatively large quantities of product.

Qualcomm offers the best modem package (this includes the performance as well as their ability to deliver large quantities) and Apple doesn't feel they should have to pay such a premium to get them.

 

[harshness]

As a follow-up to my post #8, Qualcomm said in their most recent conference call that they anticipate that Apple will go entirely non-Qualcomm this year.

This is something they're likely to take a PR bath on. Samsung is doing a whole lot of negative campaigning already (notch, storage expansion and multitasking on phones) and they're readying a modem slam commercial.