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.
Intel to Produce 'Significant Portion' of LTE Modem Chips for iPhone 7
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think you need to speak to the laws of physics, not Apple, on this one. The constant bumping up against those laws is why battery tech hasn't improved for decades.
Never understood why the iPhone needs to be so thin.
Perhaps his is overcompensating for something else. Who knows why he likes iPhones so thin…
I think that it would still be too thick for JonyYou mean transparent, maybe....
I'm not apportioning blame; rather, I'm musing that battery life is the biggest restriction on technological improvement for all mobile devices. It has a huge detrimental impact on everything, and that is worth noting.
There are all kinds of things I would be able to do with my iPhone and iPad like background activity and GPS that I can't due to battery limitations. Without any battery advances, we will eventually hit a brick wall because we won't have enough battery to power faster chips.
Last edited:
That's not what bottle neck means. It refers to the most limiting point in a system, and there can only be one "bottle neck" at any time. It is rarely going to be the chip in your phone (at least for phones manufactured in the past 3ish years).
Fast network means, less time sending and more time resting, thus battery life is improved; using a new process pushes this further.
You're confusing and misunderstanding a bunch of things there. LTE is 4G. It's always been 4G, from the very start. What AT&T is calling "4G" and what they lobbied for is HSPA+, which is an extension of UMTS (i.e. 3G).
LTE, after all, is a completely new radio technology. Hence, the term "4G".
They're linked together, because more faster/more efficient transmission translates in longer use of your battery.
It's the good old race to rest for CPU/CPU and comm chips;
making them faster improves battery even if all you do is browse your emails.
Some people, like me, like to have thin and light phones. My phone is something that I carry around with me the whole day. The thicker and heavier it gets, the more inconvenient it is. I am not planning any trips through the desert for the foreseeable future, so I am usually able to charge my phone once a day, which is definitely good enough.
Now some people are away from civilization for a longer period of time, so they understandably need more battery life. They can buy battery cases for their phone or bring portable batteries. As they are apparently willing to sacrifice size and weight for battery life, that should not be an issue.
So I really don't see what the problem is.
If Apple increases the battery size, then everyone will have a thicker and heavier phone. Now with the smaller battery size, the people who want a thin and light phone can have it, while the people who want a thick and heavy phone can have that as well. It's called "choice".
Good Grief! Two chip vendors for your LTE Modem! Two chip vendors for your processor!....Does anyone else but myself see something wrong with having too many cooks in the kitchen with this? Imaging the quality control that has to happen here.....Hoping nothing goes wrong if they go this route...
Yes, yes, that's all fine, but at one point, why do you still want to make it thinner?
Just go back a decade or two, and remember those mobile phones that existed. Did that prevent anyone carrying them around, and work with them? I think not. Seven millimetres are thin enough.
But Apple would offer a battery case with a cool hump, just for extra $$$Rest assured that even if we have an absolute amazing battery tech ready, with double power capacity in same size, we can be certain that Sir Jony will slice the iPhone for his anorexic behavioural pattern to achieve thinness and give us same or less battery life as the last iPhone.
No Mac is using wireless NIC's from Intel. It's all Broadcom for the past five or so years, and some Atheros / Qualcomm-Atheros combined with Broadcom the years before.
Knowing MR people, it's going to be another "OMG I got stuck with a crappy Samsung A9 chip on my iPhone 6s!! Arrrgh! Everyone said that the Taiwanese chip was like 0.0005% better!! I got ripped!!"
Prepare for another round of drama-queening. This time they will be upset if they get an Intel vs Qualcomm modem chip.
Actually sourcing parts from multiple manufacturers is a common practice and a good one. It keeps suppliers competitive, and diversifies the supply, so if one supplier has problems, your entire product line isn't shot.
"the remaining orders"... nice spin there. Makes it sound like Qualcomm is getting the leftovers when they're still doing the majority share.
I wonder how they'll divide the component usage out... or are we going to get a "radio-gate" -- iPhones with brand-x chip get 2% better LTE speed / better reception / battery life silliness again?
