Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Whenever I see such comments, I can't help but laugh. Some people believe that the current level of technological development is the absolute peak, no one can do anything better without compromise. In a year or two there will be a new, lighter MBP chassis, of course it will overheat and have a very weak battery, the iPhone Air will be a failure due to the battery, Apple's own modems will work poorly, the Mac Mini in the new housing will heat up, and so on. This group of people thinks that the most valuable company in the world does not test anything and can no longer come up with anything new and good. Comical. Have a little more imagination guys.

It's not a tech/engineering problem, it's a patent problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
I think (hope) WiFi is easier than cellular modems (from an engineering perspective). So it would make sense to start here.

I’d still rather this chip NOT be in all iPhone 17 models because I don’t want the first generation of any Apple chip (the M1 was a special case because this was a modification of an existing mobile chip, which Apple had years of experience optimizing and using in real iOS products before they released the M1).

But I’d be more willing to take a chance on an Apple WiFi chip over a new cellular modem. Way less risky IMO.
 
The current half-arsed Wifi 7/6e chips Apple is using are really a shame for such ultra expensive devices. Apple can't even do 320Mhz channel Width for 6Ghz Wifi7. Apple does say that my iPhone 15 Pro and 16 Pro now support 160Mhz channel Width on 5Ghz, but still my phones only connect at 1200 Mbps link speeds on Ubiquiti U7 Pros. Which means they are still limited to 5Ghz 80Mhz width.

I really had hoped that Apple used some competent Wifi7 + Bluetooth 5.4 combo chip like QCNCM865 from Qualcomm or even Intel BE900 to run their iPhones on next gen wireless networks.
I'm impressed when my 15 pro max hits 950 since my Vision Pro is typically under 400 for some reason
 
This also applies to this. Do you really think Apple doesn't know this and will release iPhones with bad connectivity? Delusion.

They did with the Intel modems.

I'm not saying they can't get around it, I'm just saying I wouldn't want to be an early adopter....but I'm not an early adopter anyway, and always like to wait several weeks/months for everyone else to test out devices before buying.
 
The Apple Watch still uses a fairly old Intel wireless chip, that could benefit from the Apple chip too

After the SE4 hopefully every new product announcement after it is switching to it and the next refresh of macs gets it
 
  • Like
Reactions: caribbeanblue
I know this is a bit beside the point, but I wish Apple would get back into making wifi base stations.

If they're serious about being a major player in the smart home, owning the access point would be a valuable asset.
If Apple started selling AirPorts again, they'd all be 802.11AC and Apple would tell us it's analogous to Wi-Fi 7 😂
 
The current half-arsed Wifi 7/6e chips Apple is using are really a shame for such ultra expensive devices. Apple can't even do 320Mhz channel Width for 6Ghz Wifi7. Apple does say that my iPhone 15 Pro and 16 Pro now support 160Mhz channel Width on 5Ghz, but still my phones only connect at 1200 Mbps link speeds on Ubiquiti U7 Pros. Which means they are still limited to 5Ghz 80Mhz width.

I really had hoped that Apple used some competent Wifi7 + Bluetooth 5.4 combo chip like QCNCM865 from Qualcomm or even Intel BE900 to run their iPhones on next gen wireless networks.

I have a U7 Pro and the 15 pro and 16 pro can use 160 MHz channels on 5 Ghz with no problem. Update the AP's firmware to 7.1.29 or greater and it will take care of your problems.
 
I’ve been looking to buy an iPhone since 2007, but each time one is released there are rumors regarding the next one. It happens each year and I tell myself just wait one more year, it’s all coming next year. It’s now been almost 20 years and I am still waiting. Been told iPhone 17 is the one, but someone else said wait for iPhone 20 as it’s going to be huge.

🤔🤨😆
 
  • Haha
Reactions: CatalinApple
Whenever I see such comments, I can't help but laugh. Some people believe that the current level of technological development is the absolute peak, no one can do anything better without compromise. In a year or two there will be a new, lighter MBP chassis, of course it will overheat and have a very weak battery, the iPhone Air will be a failure due to the battery, Apple's own modems will work poorly, the Mac Mini in the new housing will heat up, and so on. This group of people thinks that the most valuable company in the world does not test anything and can no longer come up with anything new and good. Comical. Have a little more imagination guys.
Even more interesting is that those same people do not use or own Apple products. They simply post negativity for negativity’s sake and the downvotes you are getting confirm this.
 
Apple: You're on notice.

I work in the marketing team of a competitor, and I have to boldly say that this effort is doomed to fail. Popular and pithy online Social Media Accounts and Influencers will persistently rant about how poor Apple wireless features are, similar to how Blackberry and Nokia and Dell and Microsoft and Intel laughed at all of Apple's previous failed endeavors.

Apple, do you really want to do that again? Do you want that click-bait YouTube thumbnail to be directed at you? Stick with the program and we can all maximize our profits.

/s
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: nt5672 and pksv
If Apple did that, the access points would not work with anything else. Remember Apple is now the 80s Microsoft where you can only use Apple stuff with Apple stuff.

I get what you're saying and yet...

...surely you don't actually think Apple would make a base station that wouldn't work with any printers, video game consoles, or smart home devices?

I mean maybe you do, but my guess is that you're just airing your grievances about some of Apple's other proprietary shenanigans of late.
 
If Apple did that, the access points would not work with anything else. Remember Apple is now the 80s Microsoft where you can only use Apple stuff with Apple stuff.

Remember how Apple released the Airport line, and a ton of online personalities and reviewers complained about the price and it being locked down?

Apple left the WiFi device market.

Eight years later and literally the wildly popular WiFi mesh kits are visually similar, far more expensive, and far less customizable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nt5672 and wanha
Some people believe that the current level of technological development is the absolute peak, no one can do anything better without compromise.

I am sure someone can do better and technology will improve, I am just not sure that Apple can. I base this on the software quality Apple delivered in the past years and the number of bugs that are present for years and do not get fixed.

Even more interesting is that those same people do not use or own Apple products. They simply post negativity for negativity’s sake and the downvotes you are getting confirm this.

I am using Apple products since Snow Leopard and this is, what makes me really sad, Apple did much better in the past. Currently I encounter bugs nearly every day...
 
  • Like
Reactions: WarmWinterHat
in principle this is always considered under the idea of run to sleep

the faster you can complete a task the more you save on battery - provided the fast execution has a net saving of energy - which is normally the case

I would be curious to know how often the bottle neck of data is the modem itself and not the network or the server the data is being downloaded from.

In my experience, it is the latter two the vast majority of time.

Considering the speeds we are talking about with WIFI 7, I doubt the phone is very often the bottle neck and hence this theoretical benefit to battery life is just that - theoretical and not actual.
 
Even more interesting is that those same people do not use or own Apple products. They simply post negativity for negativity’s sake and the downvotes you are getting confirm this.
Exactly. These same people have also been fake outraged for the last two days because of the button on the bottom of the Mini. Most Mac users know that the button could be made on a 100m cable placed in a separate building and it still wouldn't make much difference - it's so rarely used.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
I would be curious to know how often the bottle neck of data is the modem itself and not the network or the server the data is being downloaded from.

In my experience, it is the latter two the vast majority of time.

Considering the speeds we are talking about with WIFI 7, I doubt the phone is very often the bottle neck and hence this theoretical benefit to battery life is just that - theoretical and not actual.
I don't have the answer to that either nor do I miss WiFi 7 on any of my devices - but it is worth looking at the bigger picture and the interaction between these devices. On the long run integration of the modem into the SoC will make a huge difference in energy efficiency.

Like we're seeing now with the M-series of SoCs bringing immensely value to Apple's offering.

It can not be stressed enough how important the own silicon is for Apple - that's the game changer they needed to build their mobile devices on such a high level - the WiFi and 5G modes are the icing on the cream now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wanha
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.