2018 iPhones to Feature Upgraded Antenna Design to Boost LTE Transmission Speeds

[PBRsg]

If the notch is to continue in all future iPhone design I must keep my 7 Plus the maximum possible time.
When I go to the stores to see if the notch grow in me, nothing happens. Worst when I take a look to the others low bezels brand design.
Yes, it's possible to have low bezels and keep 16:9 screen ratio. I don't mind if the top bezel could be a little bigger to acomodate the 3D TrueDepth.
Also I don't like to see on screen only the battery status. The percentage % plus battery icon is more usefull.

This could get worse. You know how Apple is a trendsetter and everyone copies it? Get ready for notches on non-Apple phones. You heard it here first...

 

[newellj]

It depends on where the bottleneck is. If the backhaul (the connection between the cell site and the carriers upstream network) is insufficient, adding more capacity to the air interface doesn’t help one bit.

If the carriers continue to use unlimited data as a marketing tool to increase subscriber count, they need to upgrade their network infrastructure to keep pace. That includes adding additional cell sites when necessary, but that’s expensive and can take quite some time to implement. The carriers are looking to minimize the need to add more sites, while increasing the bandwidth available to users, by using 5G technology.

I have not tried to keep up with 5G tech. Is it the case that there are two issues in the remote (probably not the right term) part of the network: siting and hardware? So if I understand what you're saying, the carriers are just locating new hardware on existing sites? That saves all the expenses associated with obtaining and setting up new sites, but unless 5G offers better coverage from existing sites (which I would doubt), you'll still have basically the same holes in coverage?

 

[Jimrod]

Have you tried the X (5.8") -- it is a small phone?! Really fits in the hand and in small pockets etc.

Bigger than the iPhone 6/7/8 in every dimension, that's not small. Perhaps when compared to all the phablets that are out there but can you easily reach the top corners one-handed for all those pull down menu's or do you need to shuffle the phone around?

 

[DeepIn2U]

Going forward I’d like to just see the nomenclature resolves as:

iPhone
iPhone Plus
iPhone SE

9/10x a person walks into a store they say “I want an iPhone” initially until sales rep asks which model. Make it easy going forward Apple.

Kill the iPhone 6/6S/7 in stores for sale - hav users order online or in store for shipment or replacements. Product lineup is beginning to look like a mess and confusing to users unknown or new to the platform.

 

[iapplelove]

If you worry about things like that, then hopefully you don't use an iPhone, since they have some of the highest SAR outputs around, (recently almost at the legal threshold).

Instead, try a Samsung, which have some of the lowest.

The good news is that the iPhone X is lower than previous models.

https://www.iphonetricks.org/iphone-x-sar-values-are-lower-than-those-of-its-predecessors/

That said, SAR is all about energy being absorbed, usually in the form of heating up tissue. The big debate is whether or not that actually causes any other problems (beyond the well known one of lowering sperm output if near the testicles... which is why hot baths are supposed to avoided by wannabe fathers).

To be fair, I didn’t mention anything about specific smart phones. So you are kinda catering to your own argument.

I mentioned signal strength and tower output. If you look up individual state laws ( I’m in America ) each state has different laws regarding cell phone towers. Why? Because some states do deem a certain amount of cell towers to be dangerous.

So going back to my oringinal post of when do signals become too strong, I was referencing the future. Once we hit 5g and beyond no one knows the full health ramifications of long term use and close proximity to towers. So you can post as many links as you want lol it doesn’t matter cause no one can answer for sure.

 

[geta]

Have you tried the X (5.8") -- it is a small phone?! Really fits in the hand and in small pockets etc.

I tried the X in the shop the other day, must say its really nice phone (didnt try the FaceID..), and yes its too big for me, even the "smaller" 8 is too big for my liking, can't fully operate them one handed.

 

[tipoo]

Good thing. iPhones have reasonable reception but I do notice that when it drops a signal, it doesn't recover it until a restart, where 4x4 phones I've found recover themselves right away. I'm not entirely sure if that's the OS or the extra streams, but it can't hurt.
[doublepost=1511448465][/doublepost]I still think the 6.1 inch between the X and X Plus is weird. I think people would rather have a smaller SE like form factor with an edge to edge OLED, rather than a normal, big, and bigger X.

Also that image says the 6.1 will be an LCD, but it has the edge to edge design?

 

[lederermc]

Yay...So with this new gigabit modem I would be able to get 40mbps instead of 20mbps?

I have an old gigabit modem (AP Extreme) and can already get 325 mbps on my iPhone 7+.

 

[and 1989 others]

Remember that thing in the 90s with a massively fragmented product line up? Well here we go again.

 

[rjohnstone]

The iPhone X and 8 chassis don't support 4x4 MIMO antennas either.

That was my point. Apple chose a design that didn't take advantage of the X16's capabilities.
[doublepost=1511473385][/doublepost]

Doesn’t matter what the chip supports if you don’t have enough antennas. Higher order MIMO needs more.

As I stated... Apple chose not to use the modem's capabilities.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Remember that thing in the 90s with a massively fragmented product line up? Well here we go again.

I remember those times and things were a mess. There were 30 or 40 or more Macintosh/Performa models, with many similar configurations and confusing model numbering. There were identical machines save for the model number, positioned to sell into business or education (as Performa), different models available depending on the channel. It was absolutely crazy and nobody could keep track of it all, not users, salesman or even Apple itself.

This is light years from Apple’s iPhone lineup today. Apple releases 2 or 3 phones every year. There’s a small phone at $349 and the newest notched phone at $1,000+.

In between, there are six clearly delineated—by price and generational identifiers—phones that are easily explained, or that people already know: iPhone 6S, 7 and 8. All available in a smaller or larger version. They span price points between $449 and $949.

Those who want a small or the least expensive phone are easily directed to the SE, those who want the latest and greatest to the X and also the 8. The 6S and 7 are older and cheaper, but are still good, capable phones.

Is that really that difficult? Well maybe for a few, but I hope they never go car shopping lol. In any case, massively fragmented is a huge exaggeration, to say the least.

 

[Jimrod]

Those who want a small or the least expensive phone are easily directed to the SE, those who want the latest and greatest to the X and also the 8.

Sadly, despite fragmentation there's nothing for those who want small AND the latest and greatest.

 

[kdarling]

I have not tried to keep up with 5G tech. Is it the case that there are two issues in the remote (probably not the right term) part of the network: siting and hardware? So if I understand what you're saying, the carriers are just locating new hardware on existing sites? That saves all the expenses associated with obtaining and setting up new sites, but unless 5G offers better coverage from existing sites (which I would doubt), you'll still have basically the same holes in coverage?

5G is a huge change from existing longer range cell siting, as it will rely on many more smaller cells. Roughly one or more per an area the size of a half dozen football fields.

(Equipment is smaller too. Each cell site might be a yard long cylinder placed on current poles, street signs, buildings, etc.)

More and smaller cells allows for much higher speeds to more devices at one time. 5G has the potential to radically change things. No more cable lines to each house. Cars all talking to each other to help with traffic. Devices all talking to each other to optimize energy usage. Etc.

So going back to my oringinal post of when do signals become too strong, I was referencing the future. Once we hit 5g and beyond no one knows the full health ramifications of long term use and close proximity to towers.

If there actually are any, such risks should dramatically drop with 5G.

Smaller cells means needing much lower power both at each cell and... more importantly, especially for battery longevity... from the individual devices.

(Remember also that the power hitting us from even major tower cell sites is incredibly small because of their distance from us. Inverse square law! Worrying about towers is like worrying that a tall street lamp will give us sunburn. Conversely, the power coming from our phone is far greater because it's right next to us. Thus it's the phone's output that we really want to lower.)

 

[newellj]

@kdarling - thanks...but does not many more smaller cells imply a huge new effort to get private (and public) property owners to permit or cooperate in site access arrangements? At least in the Northeast, there are significant problems with getting property owners, abutters and the public in general to agree to new cell sites. Do 5G sites have lower visual impact?

 

[kdarling]

At least in the Northeast, there are significant problems with getting property owners, abutters and the public in general to agree to new cell sites.

Because it's considered a public service, Federal law already prevents localities from totally stopping cell sites for most reasons other than having to blend in. And people themselves want and pressure for cell service.

For 5G, the FCC, Congress and carriers have been pushing legislation to similarly prevent towns from attempting to price gouge the more numerous 5G cell locations. Carriers want to pay like $5-$50 per site per year, while towns want to get more like $50-200. Obviously denser user sites are worth more. Negotiations continue.

Do 5G sites have lower visual impact?

In theory, yes, much less. As I mentioned in my post, they're pretty small and can go on top of street sign or traffic light posts, telephone/power poles, building tops, etc. In some neighborhoods, a telephone pole might have to be extended upward a bit.

Think of it kind of like putting low power gigabit WiFi antennas at larger intersections, each with about a 750' range.

So 5G makes the most sense in dense cities and suburbs and pocket rural neighborhoods, and likely along highways. Out in the far open countryside we'll still rely on 4G for a long time to come.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Because it's considered a public service, Federal law already prevents localities from totally stopping cell sites for most reasons other than having to blend in. And people themselves want and pressure for cell service.

For 5G, the FCC, Congress and carriers have been pushing legislation to similarly prevent towns from attempting to price gouge the more numerous 5G cell locations. Carriers want to pay like $5-$50 per site per year, while towns want to get more like $50-200. Obviously denser user sites are worth more. Negotiations continue.



In theory, yes, much less. As I mentioned in my post, they're pretty small and can go on top of street sign or traffic light posts, telephone/power poles, building tops, etc. In some neighborhoods, a telephone pole might have to be extended upward a bit.

View attachment 738016

Think of it kind of like putting low power gigabit WiFi antennas at larger intersections, each with about a 750' range.

So 5G makes the most sense in dense cities and suburbs and pocket rural neighborhoods, and likely along highways. Out in the far open countryside we'll still rely on 4G for a long time to come.

Nothing I’ve heard about 5G makes me optimistic it will be available in any significant rollout before three years at the earliest. Next year for standards, then compatibility testing between the various equipment manufacturers, carrier testing and pre-deployment engineering and integration, site location and eventual installation and operational testing. And more.

I also think that people underestimate the difficulties that millimeter-wave technology brings; RF at these frequencies poses very interesting engineering challenges, and it’s going to be hard to guarantee bandwidth while in motion.

There’s a lot of tech that needs to all work well together in order to stitch together ubiquitous 5G tech, even in the limited areas that will be its best initial use case. I just don’t see a significant rollout before 2020 or 2021, and if the carriers past deployment timeframes are at all predictive, probably longer.

 

[FriendlyMackle]

I tried the X in the shop the other day, must say its really nice phone (didnt try the FaceID..), and yes its too big for me, even the "smaller" 8 is too big for my liking, can't fully operate them one handed.

I understand what you're saying. The phone mostly still requires two hands. I can manage some things one-handed on the X, while holding it balanced in my hand with my thumb over the screen (so the radius my thumb can reach is maybe 60% up and down the screen). Not by any means ideal -- but coming from a 6S Plus, this is a major improvement. I would not go back to a 4" or 5" screen. Just too small for me, as i mostly browse, read emails, write emails, and read newspapers online on my phone (when out and about). Very occasionally I'll watch a short video (so the elongated aspect and fitting on the screen isn't a real issue for me). I think that this 5.8" is the smallest I'm happy with, so for me sacrificing one-handed use (largely) is an acceptable trade-off. But I get it that for you and others it still isn't what you want. Here's to hoping that Apple does update the SE to the new format/design and remove the home button - but keep that overall footprint. I am really happy with the new buttonless iOS.

 

[Truefan31]

I’m really curious how they’re going to improve the iPhone X in a year. This thing is a smartphone from the future, a few years ahead of its time. I can’t think of any flagship feature that they introduce in just a year that’ll wow people and make them want to upgrade. Faster LTE speeds on an already blazing fast connection isn’t going to be enough.

The better modem with more band support will help, at least in the US.

But next year you could see upgrades to the camera, better speakers, ip68 rating, better front facing camera, improvements to ARKit will help, 3d camera on the back, ProMotion 120hz display (yes it's a noticeable improvement), more RAM, faster wireless charging, 2nd gen face id that works in landscape mode, always on display, etc. Maybe finally USB 3 transfer speeds too. Oh and the X Plus will be the thing they talk about anyway.

Dual audio would be good too, since it should be capable already with Bluetooth 5.0.

 

[ipedro]

In theory, yes, much less. As I mentioned in my post, they're pretty small and can go on top of street sign or traffic light posts, telephone/power poles, building tops, etc. In some neighborhoods, a telephone pole might have to be extended upward a bit.

View attachment 738016

Think of it kind of like putting low power gigabit WiFi antennas at larger intersections, each with about a 750' range.

So 5G makes the most sense in dense cities and suburbs and pocket rural neighborhoods, and likely along highways. Out in the far open countryside we'll still rely on 4G for a long time to come.

This a compelling reason to change. There's so much clutter on city rooftops with cellular antennae. It's as if we're going back to the days of a UHF antenna (or several) on each house and building. Having them inconspicuously on top of light posts is a far better solution.