Apple's Chip Choices May Leave Some iPhone Users in Slow Lane (bloomberg.com) 35
Not all iPhone 7s are created equal, it turns out. The latest flagship smartphones from Apple that run on Verizon's network are technically capable of downloading data faster than those from AT&T. Yet in testing, the two phones perform about the same, according to researchers at Twin Prime Inc. and Cellular Insights. From a Bloomberg report: Neither firm is clear on the reason, but Twin Prime says it may be because Apple isn't using all the potential of a crucial component in the Verizon version. "The data indicates that the iPhone 7 is not taking advantage of all of Verizon's network capabilities," said Gabriel Tavridis, head of product at Twin Prime. "I doubt that Apple is throttling each bit on the Verizon iPhone, but it could have chosen to not enable certain features of the network chip." "Every iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus meets or exceeds all of Apple's wireless performance standards, quality metrics, and reliability testing," Apple spokeswoman Trudy Muller said. "In all of our rigorous lab tests based on wireless industry standards, in thousands of hours of real-world field testing, and in extensive carrier partner testing, the data shows there is no discernible difference in the wireless performance of any of the models." It would be an unusual step for a major phone company to restrain its devices. Normally, companies battle to make the fastest, most reliable handsets. Apple may be doing this because it wants to ensure a uniform iPhone experience, according to analysts.
Is it? (Score:2)
Apple isn't using all the potential of a crucial component in the Verizon version
Oh! Is it the barometric pressure sensor? It's the barometric pressure sensor isn't it?
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed, and the suggestion that "It would be an unusual step for a major phone company to restrain its devices" is obviously incorrect as well. Apple already underclocks its processors and limits the types of background processing that can take place because they think the tradeoff is worthwhile in order to get something else (e.g. extra battery life). Or look into how binning works with virtually every processor manufacturer. They artificially limit the performance of the chip.
The practice of "restraining"
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, but there's a big difference between restraining performance in favor of another desirable attribute (like battery life), and restraining performance for some undesirable attribute (like making more money). Binning is all about making more money: chips are artificially limited in performance (after testing to see what they really can do) so that higher-performing ones can be sold for more; it's solely to increase prices. Otherwise, they'd only sort chips by their actual performance capabilities, bu
Apple is screwed either way (Score:5, Interesting)
They're trying to break free of Qualcomm's draconian licensing costs for their modem chipsets, which is understandable from a business perspective. However the replacement Intel chips that can only power the GSM/UMTS/LTE versions of the phones aren't quite as capable as those Qualcomm units used in the CDMA and SIM-free versions.
So that leaves them with two options, a CDMA model that has better LTE performance than the GSM version, in which case people would absolutely scream bloody murder, or disable the advanced functionality of the CDMA version so they both perform similarly, in which case people will absolutely scream bloody murder.
Of course, since there is no cost savings for buying the Intel-modem based version over the Qualcomm-modem based version, anyone in the market for an iPhone should just buy the SIM-free unit that has the better performing chipset. And given the high cost of the iPhone to begin with, all versions should probably have the Qualcomm chipset and benefit from the options that enable faster performance.
Re: (Score:2)
anyone in the market for an iPhone should just buy the SIM-free unit that has the better performing chipset.
Then I would be screwed without a SIM when traveling. Having a phone I can use is more important than restricting myself to one US-only proprietary protocol in return for a marginal download speed increase.
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that "SIM-free" means you purchase it without a SIM and it's compatible with both CDMA and GSM networks and can use any carrier's SIM card, right? There is no iPhone made that is restricted to one "US-only" proprietary protocol.
Re: (Score:2)
The RF band support is different for the two phones which affects your access to 3G and LTE in foreign countries. Having just been through Spain and Barcelona with a US SIM Free iPhone, I can confirm that that is the case.
But I misinterpreted the above comment as SIM-Free as meaning SIM-Less. I spent too much time designing cell phones and chips for cell phones that these terms got used interchangeably by a lot of engineers.
Re: (Score:2)
The memory is the same speed from what I understand, but the throughput is lower on the 32GB version than on the larger versions because the ones with more storage use multiple memory chips which can be written/read in parallel, while the 32GB version uses a single memory chip.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are correct, and I should have made that distinction.
Re: (Score:2)
It would have no bearing whatsoever on network throughput.
That's what we all assumed, then Windows Vista was invented.
One potential reason why (Score:3)
Neither firm is clear on the reason, but Twin Prime says it may be because Apple isn't using all the potential of a crucial component in the Verizon version. "The data indicates that the iPhone 7 is not taking advantage of all of Verizon's network capabilities," said Gabriel Tavridis, head of product at Twin Prime
There is a possible reason for it. Apple has 2 sources for the iPhone 7 - a Qualcomm chipset, that would support the extended capabilities, and an Intel chipset, which won't. It's not that the Intel one won't work w/ Verizon at all, just that it will be incompatible if it has to work w/ the legacy Verizon CDMA network. In order to keep things even so that the 2 part numbers are interchangeable, Apple makes the tests the lowest common denominator.
If they wanted, Verizon could optimize the phones so that they'd go full throttle, except that they would then be supply constrained to use only one part number, instead of either
Dupe news (Score:1)
A bit of a dupe, it was reported before on /. [slashdot.org] though it was citing different sources.
Re: (Score:3)
Not a dupe. That news was reporting that Apple was using different chips with different levels of performance in models intended for different carriers (i.e. you should be upset if you bought the "lesser" model). This news is reporting that despite the differences between the chips, the phones are performing the same, presumably because Apple is bottlenecking the performance of the one (i.e. you should be upset if you bought the "superior" model).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A less conspiracy minded interpretation is that they just didn't do the extra programming to take advantage of the new features.
Indeed. Never attribute to conspiracy that which can be adequately explained by laziness.
"meets or exceeds all of Apple's standards" (Score:2)
So the phone meets or exceeds your undisclosed standards and metrics. That puts the matter to rest.
Re: (Score:2)
The cool thing about people using their phones as the pocket computers that they're intended to be is that if you DON'T use it as such, the battery will generally last days on a charge. I've gotten nearly a week out of my iPhone 6S (not 6S Plus) with minimal usage for just phone calls and a few emails since that's my work-provided phone and I don't really use it for non-work related activities.
I do have a 6S Plus for my personal line, which I use for inane crap all day long, and it's indeed generally dead
Doesn't matter. (Score:2)
This deficit between iPhones is kind of a moot point because if you actually manage to get the top speed for more than a few seconds then you're going to blow through your monthly bandwidth limit.
Re: (Score:2)
This deficit between iPhones is kind of a moot point because if you actually manage to get the top speed for more than a few seconds then you're going to blow through your monthly bandwidth limit.
On the plus side - doing so usually results in Nikki Minaj showing up, if the commercials are to be believed.
They should get a medal. (Score:2)
What incredible courage!
Interesting, but .... (Score:2)
Realistically, I doubt most customers will care. The idea that this will be some kind of revelation that angers people into switching to Android alternatives seems far fetched to me. The people who are hell bent on focusing on specs already chose something other than the iPhone anyway, because "Phone Z has a camera with more megapixels!" or "Phone A has better battery life."
Re: (Score:2)
I have a feature phone because 1: it works wells as a phone and 2: I can swap the battery whenever the charge gets low.
Verizon not technically able to download faster (Score:2)
The Qualcomm modems support LTE modes that Intel's do not, but no network on the planet is currently supporting those modes. You can show a significant different when testing with lab equipment, but no one calls lab equipment.
Bad title (Score:2)
iPhone Users in Slow Lane
vs
the two phones perform about the same
...