This is typical of the new Apple under Tim Cook. Nobody is watching the hen house.
My next phone will be a Pixel.
My next phone will be a Pixel.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple May Be Throttling Verizon iPhone 7 LTE Performance
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think very many people here understand that this isn't *THAT* big of an issue and will likely NEVER affect you negatively IRL.
The Qualcomm X12 modem (which is in CDMA/SIM-free variant iPhones) is capable of these technologies:
- LTE Category 12/13 for DL/UL respectively (600 Mbps theoretical max DL and 150 Mbps theoretical max UL)
- 4x4 MIMO (basically 4 antennas in the phone instead of 1 or 2 like normal, by having more antennas [and thus more connections to the cell site] you get better data speeds)
- 256QAM (very intricate and hard to dumb-down, just know it involves how data is sent between your phone and the cell site and also improves data speeds)
- LTE-U (LTE service on the unlicensed 5 GHz bands we use now for Wi-Fi)
- Enhanced Voice Services (EVS) - improves VoLTE call quality even more, and improves VoLTE call reliability in poor signal areas.
First off, NO CDMA carrier in the United States (looking right at you, Verizon) is using ANY of these services right now. So you aren't missing out on anything.
Secondly, the Intel modem in AT&T and T-Mobile variant iPhones do not support any of the features I just named off. Apple wouldn't want half of the iPhone supply chain to be vastly superior to the other half, so those features on the X12-variant iPhones were disabled.
Thirdly, they will more than likely be enabled with next year's iPhone. The new Intel chips do support those features, so they wouldn't have a reason to disable them on Qualcomm-equipped iPhones.
Regardless, LTE in the U.S. isn't breathtakingly fast. We have some of the slowest LTE in the world. Just use your iPhone and enjoy it, while understanding we have come a long way from GPRS and EDGE.
The Qualcomm X12 modem (which is in CDMA/SIM-free variant iPhones) is capable of these technologies:
- LTE Category 12/13 for DL/UL respectively (600 Mbps theoretical max DL and 150 Mbps theoretical max UL)
- 4x4 MIMO (basically 4 antennas in the phone instead of 1 or 2 like normal, by having more antennas [and thus more connections to the cell site] you get better data speeds)
- 256QAM (very intricate and hard to dumb-down, just know it involves how data is sent between your phone and the cell site and also improves data speeds)
- LTE-U (LTE service on the unlicensed 5 GHz bands we use now for Wi-Fi)
- Enhanced Voice Services (EVS) - improves VoLTE call quality even more, and improves VoLTE call reliability in poor signal areas.
First off, NO CDMA carrier in the United States (looking right at you, Verizon) is using ANY of these services right now. So you aren't missing out on anything.
Secondly, the Intel modem in AT&T and T-Mobile variant iPhones do not support any of the features I just named off. Apple wouldn't want half of the iPhone supply chain to be vastly superior to the other half, so those features on the X12-variant iPhones were disabled.
Thirdly, they will more than likely be enabled with next year's iPhone. The new Intel chips do support those features, so they wouldn't have a reason to disable them on Qualcomm-equipped iPhones.
Regardless, LTE in the U.S. isn't breathtakingly fast. We have some of the slowest LTE in the world. Just use your iPhone and enjoy it, while understanding we have come a long way from GPRS and EDGE.
That's because there is no universal Android phone, they have the north America model and the international models with different bands, it's not that Android phones can't and apple amazingly can have more bands, the phone manufacturers prefer to separate manufacturing and sales that way.
Sigh. Another "Apple is doomed" post. It seems there has been one per day since they opened their doors.The Jobsis gone, and long term that means Apple's stock is going to be like other giants of past - Cisco, Microsoft, etc. No longer a darling growth tech stock for sure.
No stock can remain a growth stock over the long term. That anyone thinks (however irrationally) that one of the largest companies in the world (by market cap) can or should be a growth stock is a testament to Apple's enormous success.
No. I have access to millions of speed test results. I run a very large Speed Test App.
Other than the Bloomberg article I'm not seeing an original data or report on this from the original researchers (Cellular Insights and Twin Prime). Cellular Insights has nothing on this, they only have the article for their reception analysis, and Twin Prime only has a blog post that just links the Bloomberg article.
Given that the graph shows only ~1Mbps difference between the two phones, without any type of error analysis these results are useless. Either way though, the conclusion that Apple may be throttling at the hardware level is extreme sensationalism.
Given that the graph shows only ~1Mbps difference between the two phones, without any type of error analysis these results are useless. Either way though, the conclusion that Apple may be throttling at the hardware level is extreme sensationalism.
Why would a Verizon customer feel that Verizon ripped them off when a Samsung s7 downloads 2x as fast on Verizon vs an iPhone 7 on same carrier, Verizon. With both phones having the same modem from Qualcomm, clearly it is the iPhone 7 performing at below the max potential.
Doesn't seem the ATT network is as good as Verizon's is more the overriding issue. Is there a real difference in actual usage between 75 and 100? Except for bragging rights.
I now get 200 down on my home internet, for a few bucks more I could go to the next tier, which I decided against doing because it would have no impact on my day to day usage.
Last edited:
Is there anything Apple can do RIGHT these days? My god, it's turned into such a JOKE of a company.
That might be true, but our LTE coverage every other country. Even in UK, it's common to see 2G/EDGE outside of cities, whereas with Verizon/AT&T, you often see LTE almost everywhere. Countries like South Korea and Japan have faster LTE networks because they have less people and much less land-mass to cover with towers.
Not to mention, we are leading the world in adopting LTE-A technologies, such as CA/VoLTE/VoWiFi/etc.
[doublepost=1479578287][/doublepost]
Ok, but no one uses SpeedSmart. Not to mention, I routinely get slower tests on SpeedSmart versus Ookla's app.
[doublepost=1479578433][/doublepost]
Meh, not as seamless as iPhones. The unlocked S7/S7e might work on all carriers, but it doesn't support VoLTE/VoWiFi across all the carriers. Same with the various Nexus/Pixel devices.
Apple's experience is the most seamless. I could buy a sim-unlocked iPhone 7 today and use it on all 4 carriers, while getting support for the different LTE-A features.
Uh... I just asked my friend who lives in the East Midlands and he told me he hasn't seen 2G/EDGE in eons. 3G perhaps outside of city centres, but certainly not EDGE.
Regardless of what it is, the US carriers offer a higher depth of LTE coverage.
What a short-sighted comment.
What's the point of having fast speeds if there is no LTE coverage outside of major cities?
No, the onus is on them to prove their findings which publishing the data and methodology does (or at least provides a basis for someone else to debunk) and then other groups are free to try and recreate their experiment if they so desire. The onus is on *you* to prove *your* claim that they are some sort of shill.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_hominem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergo_decedo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_motive
Again, I'm not saying it's impossible or even improbable that what you state is true but given just the facts presented one side has provided data and methodology and the other has just made accusations. Cite some real data or you're simply asserting a conspiracy theory.
Apple are unable to offer any rebuttal because currently Cupertino is on an extended fashion show circuit trip.
That might be the case in the UK, but in Spain, I haven't seen 2G/EDGE in almost two years, even remote places have 3G/HSDPA+ service, and all around urban areas I have LTE service. With my Intel equipped iPhone 7+ I get 25mbps/10mbps with just one bar of service, and with 4-5 bars I get consistently over 80-100mbps down and 25-50mbps up. Spain is a deserted country, but almost all the country has service from the three main carriers.
My question is: If there's any kind of throttling, applies only to VZ and Sprint, or also to overseas carriers?
There is no throttling. It's all non-sense. Verizon's network (or any North American network) is not capable of those theoretical speeds anyways.
Depends how long you intend to keep your phone for. CA will get enabled eventually and those speeds won't be so theoretical then. I clocked 225 on my 6s over a year ago.
I think the real limiting factor is the shittty data limits imposed on us. 5-10gig a month be it 100 or 600mbit isn't going to last long no matter how you dice it.
People have gotten off topic here.
It's not about theoretical speeds.
It's about tests saying that a non-Apple phone can communicate twice as fast in real life as the iPhone, using the same modem on the same carrier.
And then it's about speculation that the reason, is that Apple deliberately gimped their Verizon modem to keep it from making AT&T look bad.
I suppose it would be better for them to make a single world phone model, with every available cellular band, and charge an additional $50 - $250 per unit. That would be much easier for Apple, and could potentially make everyone happy.
As I said in an earlier post, there are too many variables to come to this conclusion.
All the carriers use load-balancing. Two different devices next to each other in the same location will not get the same speeds. That is not the rule. One device might be on B4 for its PCC and use B13 for its SCC. The other device might not use CA and only use B13 as its PCC.
This speculation has no merit... especially since T-Mobile uses the same model as AT&T and they claim to have the fastest LTE network (per Ookla).
You think you are punishing Tim Cook, but you are only punishing yourself.
[doublepost=1479588734][/doublepost]
Maybe they did it for power savings.
Maybe not.
