But that does require a certain level of “comfort” with the technology. Many users have a strong phobia with adjusting “settings”. I could see a strong desire for a modem in a laptop for many many executive and casual users.They probably figure most people just use their iPhone as a hotspot. I've done it a few times and it works pretty well.
It is a popular paid option on iPads and for the same reason it would probably be popular on MacBooks.I guess Apple figures that most people aren’t going to want to pay an extra $20+ for a cellular line on a notebook when they can just tether from their iPhone for free. And they’d have a point. I guess making it available as an option would be best, but I’m not sure how popular they would be.
Agree.This is starting to remind me of the initial Apple silicon rollout. They started with basic M1 series chips on their cheapest consumer Macs, then used more powerful chips for the pro Macs. And basic M1 still blew Intel out of the water.
I know there have been struggles with Intel’s modem division. But usually when Apple makes bets like this, they don’t miss. Switching from Samsung to Apple-designed processors for iPhones, then switching from Intel to Apple-designed chips for Mac. And I don’t think they would make a decision like this haphazardly with such an important part of their business.
Can be."Merging" does not mean everything on one chip!
The most likely version is analog/RF electronics on one chip tightly coupled to the SoC (eg single package, most likely vertically stacked).
Whether to place the modem electronics on the analog chip or the A chip is less important - A chip gives you higher GHz and lower power, analog chip is cheaper area. May even change from one year to the next going forward.
I guess for the few people who have a data plan without tethering, it would make sense. But for everyone else, it wouldn’t make a lot of sense.It is a popular paid option on iPads and for the same reason it would probably be popular on MacBooks.
Yes for sure.If Apple can disrupt the computer market with Apple Silicon then I’m pretty sure it can deliver a 5G chip that’s at least on par with Qualcomm.
Come on, guys -If anyone has the money and expertise to pull this off then it’s Apple.
Because there is little need to when you can just network with your phone for the rare times it is needed and save the cost of an additional monthly cell account for your Mac.why cant they put 5g modems in Macs ?
People wouldn’t have to be paying for the service in a work laptop. In fact at my work I have been told outright that one reason they won’t allow MacBooks is they don’t have cellular so they can be used on the road. You might say, why not hotspot, yet strangely, at my workplace only the senior people have a work phone and I will be stuffed if I used my service for them.I guess for the few people who have a data plan without tethering, it would make sense. But for everyone else, it wouldn’t make a lot of sense.
But hey, if there’s people who are willing to spend an extra $150 on a MacBook upfront and at least an extra $20/month just for the convenience of not having to click the “join hotspot button”, more power to them.
"Merging" does not mean everything on one chip!
The most likely version is analog/RF electronics on one chip tightly coupled to the SoC (eg single package, most likely vertically stacked).
Whether to place the modem electronics on the analog chip or the A chip is less important - A chip gives you higher GHz and lower power, analog chip is cheaper area. May even change from one year to the next going forward.
But that does require a certain level of “comfort” with the technology. Many users have a strong phobia with adjusting “settings”. I could see a strong desire for a modem in a laptop for many many executive and casual users.
Do not walk, run from this. Never ever get a first gen modem especially one that is designed around Qualcomm’s patent. After the intel modem that pretty much made my daily usage a living hell I will never buy anything but a Qualcomm modem until it is proven.
Trust me fellas don’t buy a first gen apple modem phone no matter how slick the marketing videos are, you can thank me later
So I guess you like standing less than 100ft from a tower to get that mmWave kick, huh?Damn. No mmWave may make me skip the 17 series. That sucks.
Funny how people get stuck on brands like Qualcomm, AMD, Nvidia, as having the be-all end-all of their technology niche. Same goes for Apple’s brand too of course. No one could EVER make a modem better than Qualcomm, right? No one should even try. It’s over, end of story, only Qualcomm for modems, AMD for X86, Nvidia for GPU, Apple Silicon for CPU. When I was in high school it was the gear heads yammering about who made the best carburetor, the best shocks, the best custom camshafts. The Dodge HEMI engine was the cat’s meow that no one could match.If you aren't one who gladly suffers the drawbacks of the bleeding edge in the pursuit of the occasional huge payoffs of early adoption, then heed the above.
How can you say Apple’s modem will have underwhelming performance? Apple has plenty of resources to catch up with QualcommImagine buying a flagship phone in 2026 with underwhelming cellular performance, as is implied for the second generation of Apple’s modem. Yikes.
Keep testing your profit-maximizing modems on the low-end stuff, Apple, until you’ve truly topped Qualcomm’s modems.
Exactly. Most of the times I’m seeing “4G speeds” under 5G coverage anywayExciting stuff to come.
5G download speed even today is good enough for most people, it’s the infrastructure that’s the bottleneck
Do you know which node is used in Qualcomm chip ?"Further out, Apple is said to be discussing merging the modem into the iPhone's A-series chip."
People without knowledge on physics and digital vs analog electronic design.
Look at the red chips, A18 Pro vs Qualcomm modem size:
View attachment 2459514
I will gladly suffer in the name of bleeding edge. But there is no bleeding edge here, in fact it’s worse than Qualcomm and without mmWave. The only innovation is getting around not using Qualcomm patents, as a consumer why do I care about that.If you aren't one who gladly suffers the drawbacks of the bleeding edge in the pursuit of the occasional huge payoffs of early adoption, then heed the above.
I get mmWave in my backyard from a node about 500 feet away. Maybe more. 2.5GBPS+.So I guess you like standing less than 100ft from a tower to get that mmWave kick, huh?
it is not only about profit maximizing, they also want to reduce the footprint, improver energy consumption and just build the better modem. the only thing stopping them from doing the latter is probably qualcomm patents.Imagine buying a flagship phone in 2026 with underwhelming cellular performance, as is implied for the second generation of Apple’s modem. Yikes.
Keep testing your profit-maximizing modems on the low-end stuff, Apple, until you’ve truly topped Qualcomm’s modems.
Just like with iPad, oh wait.They probably figure most people just use their iPhone as a hotspot. I've done it a few times and it works pretty well.
And what do you do with that 2.5gbps+ other than your Ookla Speedcheck app?I get mmWave in my backyard from a node about 500 feet away. Maybe more. 2.5GBPS+.
I agree that not having mmWave would be a huge blow in my opinion.
We have tons of towers because I don't live in the middle of nowhere. We pretty much always have that service here.So I guess you like standing less than 100ft from a tower to get that mmWave kick, huh?