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

First Smartphones With Faster Wi-Fi 7 Coming as Early as 2024

Kottu said:
Are we going to notice any difference in speed when we use Wifi 5 or 6 or 7 on a mobile phone?
Click to expand...
It’s quite a difference. I recently upgraded from a Wifi 5 router to a 6E router. The reliability and range were instantly noticeable. We had also just before that upgraded our internet to 450 Mbps, but would never break 320 on the old router. New router hits the max 99% of the time. Wireless transfers go a bit faster too, but still not as fast as I would like on Apple hardware.
 
CIA said:
As I said, I can't personally see why pocketable devices would need faster wifi, but as I also said, just because I can't imagine a use, doesn't mean there isn't one.

I'd love to know who NEEDS multi-gigabit wifi on a phone and why. :cool:
Click to expand...
Trying to transfer a 10+ GB file through AirDrop is painful and fails like 9/10 times. The fact that Apple doesn’t allow wired transfers to the Files app on both the iPhone and the iPad is ridiculous. A lot of video editors on the iPad also don’t allow it for some reason. If Apple is going to push all wireless in the future, we need more speed and reliability. Maybe not so much for the iPhone, but definitely for the iPad.
 
Well, I haven’t noticed any issues with wifi for quite a while, almost a decade since it was last an issue. Seems like one of those upgrades which affects just a few power users.
 
5GHz doesn't work in brick buildings. It will also be super congested in appartment situations. Also the phone will be a 2x2 mimo most likely. Marketing solutions to non-existing problems. Everything I have is hard wired. The phone is just fine the way it is. Also, if everybody is on unlimited 5G plans, why even bother with wifi? Cap.

detailed read
 
That is going to make a HUGE difference on my 80/20 Internet at home.

Even in our office of 300 people we only have 100Mbps internet.
 
At this point, considering how fast wifi 6 is, the 7th gen will make sense only for professionals. We reached a point where loading a 4k video on the web is way faster than watching it, so unless you need to regularly upload huge files on the web, then you won't need wifi 7, 8 or whatever it'll be.
 
AppleFan1998 said:
Hopefully they put in WiFi 7 capable next year, but could only hope. Phones haven’t improved much in functionality these few years, hopefully we see a quantum jump soon.
Click to expand...
How would wifi 7 improve your iPhone usage?
 
PsykX said:
Does Apple really have this reputation?

My iMac Late 2013 was one of the first computers in the world to have Wi-Fi 802.11ac (Wi-Fi 5). So much that it was an antenna based on draft spec.
Click to expand...

No, they don't. They were also the first to introduce USB-C on laptops, to the cries and complaints of many about needing dongles. Just like they've had WiFi 6 since it was released.

bobcomer said:
Do they support Wifi 6E? ('nuff said)


That was a long time ago and under different management.
Click to expand...

We really need to stop this, it's total nonsense. WiFi 6 has the same speed and features as WiFi 6E. The E means extended frequency - it adds 6 ghz to the available channels you can select from, nothing more, nothing else. It isn't some game changing feature whatsoever. It's become some buzzword and sets some expectations for what it isn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Scrip and Student of Life
Remember the days when Apple used to adopt new or un-released technology before most others? That's one thing I miss from the Jobs era.
Apple now seems to go by the reasoning/excuse of 'if we're going to do it, then we're going to do it right, no matter how long it takes'.
But that was so not what Apple was about. Shame.
 
BuffaloTF said:
We really need to stop this, it's total nonsense. WiFi 6 has the same speed and features as WiFi 6E.
Click to expand...
Not quite. While Wifi6 and Wifi6E both have 3 channels, 24Ghz, 5Ghz, and 6Ghz, Wifi6 brings fatter channels and considerably more bandwidth. Also it brings a more useable 6Ghz channel.

Read this:

www.tomsguide.com

Wi-Fi 6 vs Wi-Fi 6e: What's the difference?

Which wireless network standard is better for you?
www.tomsguide.com www.tomsguide.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarAnalogy
jav6454 said:
So basically, you’ll never see those speeds, as rarely will you ever use 320Mhz or 160Mhz channel slices.
Click to expand...

But this will also support greater capacity in crowded areas by allowing more channels of 80 or 40 MHz.

And in areas without crowding I don’t see why you wouldn’t use 160 or 320 MHz channels.
 
SactoGuy18 said:
WiFi 7 (801.11be) is not useful if your ISP can't support above 1 gigabit per second download speeds easily.
Click to expand...

It is if you live in an apartment building or work in an area where there are 50 APs visible around you. The extra spectrum alone will help immensely until that is inevitably overcrowded as well.
 
bobcomer said:
Not quite. While Wifi6 and Wifi6E both have 3 channels, 24Ghz, 5Ghz, and 6Ghz, Wifi6 brings fatter channels and considerably more bandwidth. Also it brings a more useable 6Ghz channel.

Read this:

www.tomsguide.com

Wi-Fi 6 vs Wi-Fi 6e: What's the difference?

Which wireless network standard is better for you?
www.tomsguide.com www.tomsguide.com
Click to expand...

6E only adds 6 ghz to the available spectrum. Speeds are unaffected. It’s greenfield, so you won’t need to split 5 ghz to support legacy ac/Wi-Fi 5 items in the band. So perhaps there’s less interference… but its main benefit is that you can run up to 7 160 mhz channels without DFS. In 5 ghz you can only run 2, and they require DFS. 5.9 ghz is getting opened up to allow for a 3rd channel, and it won’t require the DFS. And now when this Wi-Fi 7 hits, 6 ghz won’t be greenfield and it’ll need to split spectrum with Wi-Fi 6E, which will impact performance of that. 6E is really best left skipped with 7 so close to release next year.
 
  • Love
Reactions: CarAnalogy
CIA said:
If you can't think of a reason you need the current speed, let alone faster speeds, then you are not using the right mindset. While I agree there isn't much need for a phone, or iPad or Apple Watch to have multi-gigabit wifi, there sure is a need for production devices to have it.

There is a lot more to "networking" than internet. Example, an editor working at home may need to move 60GB video files around from a server on to a laptop. Sure the NAS has a 10GBE ethernet jack, and sure your home is wired for 10GBE (I mean 2.5Gbe is the bare minimum these days for home networking, really 10Gbe is the way to go) so finally you can roam around your house and edit from anywhere on your laptop. Finally you can stream multiple 4K or higher videos off that server to multiple TV's at once. Finally wireless 8K is possible without lag. Sure if you're a gamer you will always prefer a hardwire (ping time is always better over copper!) but for most average users finally having speeds that are acceptable will be a welcome change from the drudgery slow wifi 5 & 6 that most of us are on now.

Basically if you can't imagine a use for it, then you probably don't need it. Doesn't mean its bad. Some of us are very excited to finally get potentially useable speed from wifi and no longer be tethered by copper to desks.
Click to expand...

Latency will always be the only real problem. Not sure how to ever get around that one.

It’s good to see wifi moving forward if only to clear up the airwaves from the mess we’ve made with the old protocols.
 
BuffaloTF said:
6E only adds 6 ghz to the available spectrum. Speeds are unaffected. It’s greenfield, so you won’t need to split 5 ghz to support legacy ac/Wi-Fi 5 items in the band. So perhaps there’s less interference… but its main benefit is that you can run up to 7 160 mhz channels without DFS. In 5 ghz you can only run 2, and they require DFS. 5.9 ghz is getting opened up to allow for a 3rd channel, and it won’t require the DFS. And now when this Wi-Fi 7 hits, 6 ghz won’t be greenfield and it’ll need to split spectrum with Wi-Fi 6E, which will impact performance of that. 6E is really best left skipped with 7 so close to release next year.
Click to expand...

In retrospect I’m not sure what they were even thinking with 6E. Like a month after renaming everything to make it simpler, there they go again adding letters and apparently confusing manufacturers as well considering how poorly 6E was adopted, and how swiftly 7 was announced anyway.
 
CarAnalogy said:
But this will also support greater capacity in crowded areas by allowing more channels of 80 or 40 MHz.

And in areas without crowding I don’t see why you wouldn’t use 160 or 320 MHz channels.
Click to expand...
Agreed, yet, people will think 30Gb/a should be the standard on a 20MHz channel.

Remember, the average joe doesn’t understand how bandwidth will behave according to modulation, number of antennas and channel width used.

For me, Wi-Fi 7 should be marketed with actual more real life speeds versus the theoretical maximums. It just drives misinformation to post maximums.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarAnalogy
BuffaloTF said:
6E is really best left skipped with 7 so close to release next year.
Click to expand...

I don't really disagree, I haven't upgraded to 6E either, but I can certainly understand the viewpoint of faster is better, and 6E is faster overall than 6. If one needs something faster, then the only thing available now is 6E. Waiting for the next best thing, and you're behind already, only makes sure you don't have the best now.
 
Apple does many things well, but networking hardware and software stacks for networks are not one of them. They've famously lagged in supporting new WiFi standards and I don't expect Wi-Fi 7 to make an appearance in Apple products until WiFi 9 is widespread.

I wish Apple would adopt these faster, especially b/c we are left with USB 2.0 speeds through Lightning and we aren't going to get USB-C until a government forces the issue (thank you EU...).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back