Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

The Oak

macrumors 6502
Nov 12, 2013
372
249
I dont csre about 5G until AT LEAST 2nd gemeration.

It will be a battery sucker for sure, just like every subsequent update since 2G.

Amen.

Some 5G chipsets only do the lower frequencies also. So then the following year another phone will be released that will have more 5G bands ... and then the following year a few more. With current 5G deployments 4G gets beefed up along the way. Hence, my 11 Pro has no choice but to get better over the next few years. After 5G has gone through a few chipsets ... then I'll hand my 11 Pro down to one of my kids ... and jump on the 5G band wagon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aston441

cocky jeremy

macrumors 603
Jul 12, 2008
6,120
6,372
AKA "Qualcomm is attempting to make as money from Apple as possible in the near future before Apple drops them for their own modems."
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Oak

Baymowe335

Suspended
Oct 6, 2017
6,640
12,451
That's still not proof. People want numbers, facts, data, or anything besides your opinion. That's all you've been giving is your exaggerated opinion. You were all about asking for proof. I and many others see you have nothing.
Where's your proof?
Apple still sells butterfly keyboards. Fact. They sold it 4 years before going to scissor.

Think what you want...

I asked for proof when people called the keyboard defective. If it were defective, they’d have to fix all of them and no longer sell them. Otherwise, it’s manageable.

If you want to be stubborn, I still win because we just say no one knows and then the “disaster” and “defect” posts have to stop bc no one knows.
 

agsystems

macrumors 65816
Aug 1, 2013
1,199
1,140
Will be waiting for thorough examination by the beta testers for this one.
Fool me once with the software which is iOS 13 amounts to Not fooling me twice with the hardware which will be the iPhone 5G.
that's why I pull the trigger and got the iphonemax this year and will be happy to wait out the beta modems - ubiquitous 5G connections might take another 5+ years.
[automerge]1575561995[/automerge]
If I'm "Reading the Tea Leaves" correctly, the 2020 iPhones will NOT be released in Sept 2020 !

They may be announced in Sept 2020, but sounds like release could be months later.

And, it sounds like Qualcomm does NOT want to get blamed for any delay, so they put this out there !

Disclaimer: I am an EE who has worked at Qualcomm.
agreed...very unusual a competitor its talking about Apple internal road map - they have done it before but having a phone shipping on the 2nd/3rd week of September its critical for the stock
 
Last edited:

fmillion

macrumors regular
Jun 16, 2011
144
334
I've gotta say, the push for 5G has me concerned for one specific reason. I'm still on a Verizon non-unlimited plan (12GB), and I have another 12GB in "customer loyalty" bonus GB for "life" (of course, for wireless, this means "life of your plan"). I have family and a couple friends on my plan, and my total bill would actually rise by over $100/month if I were to switch to an unlimited plan. Verizon has made it clear you can't get 5G unless you're on an unlimited plan.

I have no plans to upgrade to unlimited. Even as a mobile device nerd, I still use less than 20GB of data per month - I spend most of my time within reach of Wi-Fi, and when I'm not, I'm also usually not doing high-bandwidth activities. My friends and family are very light data users too. Plus, 5G service isn't in my area and likely won't be for a long time if ever.

I'm hoping that Verizon won't try to force me to upgrade to a "5G Capable" plan just to get a new device next year that has 5G support. Because I don't have any need to go beyond the plan I have especially with the "lifetime" data bonuses. Spending $100 more per month in perpetuity just to get a new device is a hard pill to swallow, especially when that would basically equate to financing a $2400 device every two years IN ADDITION to the actual device I buy!

I suppose time will tell, but even if 5G went online in my area, I just don't see the need for it given that I have ready access to good Wi-Fi at work, at home, at friends' and families' houses, and so on, and when I am not in Wi-Fi range, I'm not doing anything that would benefit from the speed boost of 5G relative to LTE.
 

MattMJB0188

macrumors 68020
Dec 28, 2009
2,032
583
Please keep up. On MR ‘form factor‘ and ‘price point‘ are sexy synonyms for size and price respectively.

They do not mean size, shape, and other physical characteristics or a point on a scale where a product might be marketed.

That’s how I’m going to continue to view it. So I have no more to say to you as you are not pro iPhone 8. Goodbye
 

PickUrPoison

macrumors G3
Sep 12, 2017
8,131
10,720
Sunnyvale, CA
Others who have pondered the issue disagree with your analysis. Consider the challenges facing Apple, who dropped a billion for Intel's modem business. Just look at the challenges Apple faces in the cellular radio business:
The “others who have pondered the issue” start out completely misunderstanding Apple’s 5G implementation strategy:

This begs a question of whether building modem technology in-house is a better investment than continuing to partner with Qualcomm to more quickly achieve parity with the competition, which has already delivered 5G devices.​

Yikes. Where to start. First, it’s not either/or. Apple building their own 5G baseband chip is a multi-year effort, completely independent from their integration of Qualcomm’s upcoming second gen 5G modem. Apple has a multi-year supply agreement with Qualcomm, and will buy parts until they don’t need them, whether that’s 2022, 2025 or longer. Qualcomm will be only too happy to sell every modem Apple’s willing to buy.

But Apple never had any interest in Qualcomm’s first gen 5G battery killer, and is waiting on an appropriate Qualcomm part. The X55 has yet to ship in any smartphone.

However, that’s really not particularly relevant to my comment you quoted, which was directed at the RF front end, not the baseband modem.

Contrary to your conclusion, this article raises several factually valid reasons why it could be an enormous challenge -- engineering, technical, and financial -- for competitors to "come up with" "better components."
You mis-read my comment completely. As I already mentioned, I was clearly referencing the RF front end components. Though you chopped it from my post you quoted, I began that paragraph with: “Of course Qualcomm is pushing their RF front end solution, I’d expect nothing less.”

The article you quoted in an attempt to contradict me has absolutely zero to do with the RF front end. There are plenty of long-time suppliers of those components, and Apple has never used any of Qualcomm’s front end tech. (Apparently at least one iPhone will use Qualcomm’s mmWave antenna module.)

Though I’m sure Qualcomm would love to sell those components to Apple, Apple apparently has no interest in most of them, as they’ve chosen other suppliers.
 
Last edited:

PickUrPoison

macrumors G3
Sep 12, 2017
8,131
10,720
Sunnyvale, CA
it might not include all of Qualcomm's RF front end.

thats a show stopper
Might not? More like will not. As Amon said, “We're setting no expectations on front end....”

Apple has already informed Qualcomm they’re using other suppliers, and the last thing he would want to do is lie to investors about Apple’s interest in their front end components. He just told investors: expect zero revenue for front end components from Apple.

And it’s not a show stopper, it’s a doesn’t matter.
 

name99

macrumors 68020
Jun 21, 2004
2,188
1,997
Apple's #1 priority -- launching a non-Qualcomm phone as fast as possible

I absolutely agree. But it's also hard, when looking at the way QC is talking about this, not to wonder if QC is in trouble -- did they over promise to Apple (perhaps when it comes to the volume required to support 5G, or the power requirements)?

I expect the 5G iPhone will ship -- but if QC can't deliver exactly what they promised Apple, QC won't be making any profit on the deal! It's hard not to see all this talk about "eking out the best signal requires Qualcomm-created RF front-end components" as getting ready to spin a not exactly stunning iPhone 1st gen 5G experience...
Apple may, for example, throttle back some features to limit the power draw; and QC wants to be able to say "yeah, well, their performance sucks because they're not using our TOTAL solution" rather than the conversation being about why Apple made that particular configuration choice...
 
  • Like
Reactions: incoherent_1

unplugme71

macrumors 68030
May 20, 2011
2,827
754
Earth
Can’t even get 5G coverage with AT&T in most of NJ yet. Will likely skip next iPhone and get the 2021 model.

Upgrading every year is moot at this point.
 

cmaier

Suspended
Jul 25, 2007
25,405
33,471
California
They felt the heat but....... Apple settled with them? Does that really make sense to you?
Almost all commercial and patent litigation settles. When one side or the other “feels the heat,” that seldom changes that fact. What changes is the details of the settlement agreement.
 

Septembersrain

Cancelled
Dec 14, 2013
4,347
5,451
Please Apple, don't gut the Qualcomm offerings. I'm sure I'm not the only one still pissed at you over the iPhone 7/7 Plus.

I tried the XS, the 11. It literally gave me no benefit over my 7 Plus. Why? Intel.

Both my V30+ and now G8 can hold onto a signal better. Hell, my old 5C works better! If I still had my 6s it would be better too. That's pretty crap I have to say.

I don't understand why the newer Intel modems just can't do the job. It's like Intel is the KIA of the modem world. I say that with disgust because my KIA was junk.

Stop giving us junk for stupid high prices.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.