No Apple-Suitable 4G LTE Chips Until Early 2012?

[lilo777]

The fact is, we've been through this before. The iPhone 1 was going to be a huge failure because it didn't have 3G. They were concerned about coverage and battery life. It's the same issue now.

People are saying apple should make those sacrifices now to keep up with technology. But nobody is addressing the fact that apple has historical evidence that this is a sound approach.

So many people just love to see every issue from the Apple perspective. There are people who get paid for that. Should not you - as a consumer - care more about the gadget you want than Apple success?

Using two separate chips eats battery life. Not to mention LTE is still "just" coming out, so it won't be widespread enough to take advantage of it until 2012 anyway.

Apple does not have to use two chips. They could just design separate phone for Verizon (just like iPhone 4) which does not support GSM. Not ideal but that's where technology is today. At least Verizon customers could enjoy iPhone 5 with LTE.

 

[DeathChill]

So many people just love to see every issue from the Apple perspective. There are people who get paid for that. Should not you - as a consumer - care more about the gadget you want than Apple success?

You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.

Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.

Apple does not have to use two chips. They could just design separate phone for Verizon (just like iPhone 4) which does not support GSM. Not ideal but that's where technology is today. At least Verizon customers could enjoy iPhone 5 with LTE.

They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.

 

[res1233]

Apple does not have to use two chips. They could just design separate phone for Verizon (just like iPhone 4) which does not support GSM. Not ideal but that's where technology is today. At least Verizon customers could enjoy iPhone 5 with LTE.

And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.

Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life

This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.

In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.

 

[lilo777]

You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.

Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.

Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.

They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.

I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?

And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.

Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life

This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.

In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.

You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:

"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."

As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.

 

[DeathChill]

Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. You say that it would be stupid for you to care about what Apple thinks or does, yet you're on here berating them left and right. It makes zero sense to me.

Consumer eyes do matter and that's who Apple builds devices for. They don't build them for the spec junkie who has to have everything in the spec list checked off. They want people to have a great experience on their device in areas that matter in their mind.

I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?

It is definitely true currently. No chip supports LTE and the other specifications (CDMA, GSM) yet.

Apple certainly can design a phone that supports LTE, but getting good battery life out of it is another thing. This is an area of focus for Apple so they won't make compromises here.

 

[res1233]

You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:

"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."

As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.

What do you don't seem to understand is that most people would rather not have to keep swapping the battery in their phone throughout the day, nor should anyone have to. There is demand for LTE, yes, but 4 hours of battery life is not what i would call good. What good is your phone to you if the battery is dead? You may be fine with switching your battery twice a day, but i think the majority of us would rather have a phone that we know is reliable and wont die on us. Also, 3G is good enough for me for now, and I know I'm not alone. When LTE/3G hybrid chips are here, i will welcome it.

 

[lilo777]

Apple certainly can design a phone that supports LTE, but getting good battery life out of it is another thing. This is an area of focus for Apple so they won't make compromises here.

And that's exactly what's wrong with Apple philosophy. Consumers make compromises, companies make profits. There are plenty of people who would compromise battery life for speed. Are you saying that Apple does not care about them? Because they believe that battery life is always more important? Obviously the real reason is different. They are just trying to maximize the profits in their own way (i.e. keeping the number of models to a minimum) and that's why smart consumer should chose Android. With Android one can pick the phone they need (not the phone Apple think is best). Different people have different needs and with Android one can find a phone with a set of compromises that fits them best.

What do you don't seem to understand is that most people would rather not have to keep swapping the battery in their phone throughout the day, nor should anyone have to. There is demand for LTE, yes, but 4 hours of battery life is not what i would call good. What good is your phone to you if the battery is dead? You may be fine with switching your battery twice a day, but i think the majority of us would rather have a phone that we know is reliable and wont die on us. Also, 3G is good enough for me for now, and I know I'm not alone. When LTE/3G hybrid chips are here, i will welcome it.

What do you don't seem to understand is that every individual person does not care what most people need/want. I want to be able to buy the phone I need. If you go with what "most people" need it would be a dumb phone then (with great battery life BTW)

 

[DeathChill]

And that's exactly what's wrong with Apple philosophy. Consumers make compromises, companies make profits. There are plenty of people who would compromise battery life for speed. Are you saying that Apple does not care about them? Because they believe that battery life is always more important? Obviously the real reason is different. They are just trying to maximize the profits in their own way (i.e. keeping the number of models to a minimum) and that's why smart consumer should chose Android. With Android one can pick the phone they need (not the phone Apple think is best). Different people have different needs and with Android one can find a phone with a set of compromises that fits them best.

This is exactly what I am saying. They aren't making devices for people who demand to have the latest and greatest regardless of the consequences. They make devices that work and meet their internal standards.

What do you don't seem to understand is that every individual person does not care what most people need/want. I want to be able to buy the phone I need. If you go with what "most people" need it would be a dumb phone then (with great battery life BTW)

What you don't understand is that Apple makes a device that meets their goals and standards. They don't want to ship a phone that gets four hours of battery life because they know that very few people will be happy with that.

Of course people may want something different, which is why, strangely enough, Apple isn't the only phone manufacturer in the world. You are not forced to buy Apple if you don't like their philosophy.

 

[res1233]

What do you don't seem to understand is that every individual person does not care what most people need/want. I want to be able to buy the phone I need. If you go with what "most people" need it would be a dumb phone then (with great battery life BTW)

Then leave these forums. Clearly apple-related news is not for you. Clearly you want a phone that apple does not provide. Why are you even here? The truth is, nobody is stopping you from buying that android with 4 hours of battery life if it is more suited to your tastes. You are not entitled in any way to force Apple to make a device that suits your needs. Go buy the Thunderbolt. Enjoy it.

 

[lilo777]

This is exactly what I am saying. They aren't making devices for people who demand to have the latest and greatest regardless of the consequences. They make devices that work and meet their internal standards.


What you don't understand is that Apple makes a device that meets their goals and standards. They don't want to ship a phone that gets four hours of battery life because they know that very few people will be happy with that.

Of course people may want something different, which is why, strangely enough, Apple isn't the only phone manufacturer in the world. You are not forced to buy Apple if you don't like their philosophy.

Well, it looks like we actually agree. I just wanted to make this point clear that Apple cares only about profits (as all companies) which puts iOS users in a position where they have very few options: Apple way or highway. It's different with Android.

Then leave these forums. Clearly apple-related news is not for you. Clearly you want a phone that apple does not provide. Why are you even here? The truth is, nobody is stopping you from buying that android with 4 hours of battery life if it is more suited to your tastes. You are not entitled in any way to force Apple to make a device that suits your needs. Go buy the Thunderbolt. Enjoy it.

Are you saying that only people who love each and every Apple decision should post here? Probably not but you sound like it. I thought we were just discussing the merits of tech gadgets here.

 

[DeathChill]

Well, it looks like we actually agree. I just wanted to make this point clear that Apple cares only about profits (as all companies) which puts iOS users in a position where they have very few options: Apple way or highway. It's different with Android.

How did I agree with that? It's quite obvious Apple puts an emphasis on pleasing the regular consumer, not spec junkies. Of course Apple cares about profits, I don't know how a company that doesn't can function.

 

[res1233]

Are you saying that only people who love each and every Apple decision should post here? Probably not but you sound like it. I thought we were just discussing the merits of tech gadgets here.

No, what I'm saying is that there are many Android forums out there that would provide news about products that suit you more than iProducts do. You want a product that dies on you half-way through the day. The majority of us don't.

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

Apple has no interest in making different sizes/models of iPhones. If you don't care for that, apple isn't for you. They are a greatest common denominator company.

Perhaps. But it should be noted that at one time Apple didn't have any interest in making different sizes/models of iPods either. Or CDMA phones. Point being, things change.

 

[chrmjenkins]

Perhaps. But it should be noted that at one time Apple didn't have any interest in making different sizes/models of iPods either. Or CDMA phones. Point being, things change.

Those models have very distinct differences. A nano is very different from a touch, which are both different from a shuffle, etc. For each iDevice paradigm, it has clear differences between the other products and market segments.

CDMA is a poor example because it's transparent to the user. It has almost 0 effect on user experience and does not even begin to identify a product category.

 

[silentnite]

There is a phone for everyone, apple may not make it. That does not mean this is the end for you. If you can't wait find another means. Simple fix!

 

[southernpaws]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

The fact is, we've been through this before. The iPhone 1 was going to be a huge failure because it didn't have 3G. They were concerned about coverage and battery life. It's the same issue now.

People are saying apple should make those sacrifices now to keep up with technology. But nobody is addressing the fact that apple has historical evidence that this is a sound approach.

So many people just love to see every issue from the Apple perspective. There are people who get paid for that. Should not you - as a consumer - care more about the gadget you want than Apple success?

Using two separate chips eats battery life. Not to mention LTE is still "just" coming out, so it won't be widespread enough to take advantage of it until 2012 anyway.

Apple does not have to use two chips. They could just design separate phone for Verizon (just like iPhone 4) which does not support GSM. Not ideal but that's where technology is today. At least Verizon customers could enjoy iPhone 5 with LTE.

Im a shareholder. Similar to many others here that you mindlessly dismiss

 

[southernpaws]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.

Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.

Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.

They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.

I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?

And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.

Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life

This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.

In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.

You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:

"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."

As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.

Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you

 

[AppleScruff1]

So many people just love to see every issue from the Apple perspective. There are people who get paid for that. Should not you - as a consumer - care more about the gadget you want than Apple success?

But you're dealing with Apple customers, they sacrifice themselves for the good of the company.

 

[DeathChill]

But you're dealing with Apple customers, they sacrifice themselves for the good of the company.

Yes, Apple tricks everyone into loving them. That's what is happening; it couldn't be their focus on creating products that people love. Nope.

 

[lilo777]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)



Im a shareholder. Similar to many others here that you mindlessly dismiss

I have nothing against Apple shareholders (both shorts and longs ). It's just this is not a forum for them. This is their forum: http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/mb/AAPL

 

[DeathChill]

I have nothing against Apple shareholders (both shorts and longs ). It's just this is not a forum for them. This is their forum: http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/mb/AAPL

This is my new favorite post. You, the guy who owns no Apple products (save for a battery charger) and quite clearly dislikes Apple, telling someone they are on the wrong forum.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Yes, Apple tricks everyone into loving them. That's what is happening; it couldn't be their focus on creating products that people love. Nope.

Were you happy when Exxon was making record profits quarter after quarter? Did you go post about it on an oil forum? Did you laugh when they were spanking Shell? As a consumer, not as an investor.

 

[DeathChill]

Were you happy when Exxon was making record profits quarter after quarter? Did you go post about it on an oil forum? Did you laugh when they were spanking Shell? As a consumer, not as an investor.

You're reaching pretty hard there. Apple makes consumer electronics that I enjoy using everyday. They're creating new markets and innovating existing ones. I don't understand how you can think that enjoying that is a bad thing.

 

[AppleScruff1]

You're reaching pretty hard there. Apple makes consumer electronics that I enjoy using everyday. They're creating new markets and innovating existing ones. I don't understand how you can think that enjoying that is a bad thing.

I don't think that enjoying the products is a bad thing at all. I think I provide a good analogy. I never head a non investing bragging about how much money the electric company makes or how happy they were that their health insurance company had a record year. I just find it strange.

 

[DeathChill]

I don't think that enjoying the products is a bad thing at all. I think I provide a good analogy. I never head a non investing bragging about how much money the electric company makes or how happy they were that their health insurance company had a record year. I just find it strange.

Those are companies people don't get attached to. Apple and other tech companies are a much more personal choice, generally. It probably also helps because those people are excited that Apple is making more money, allowing them to deliver more new and innovative products then would be possible with lower cash flow.

EDIT: Also, it's not a good analogy. You are comparing two completely different types of companies and asking why people don't care about them on the same level.

Think of it this way: why do people care so much about their favorite hockey team winning? Can't they just be happy that they're playing? Of course not, the goal is to win.