Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Iphone Communications Intel Network Apple Technology

Apple's First 5G iPhone Will Arrive In 2020, Says Report (fastcompany.com) 47

Fast Company reports that Apple is working on a 5G iPhone that will come to market in 2020, according to a source familiar with the matter. From the report: Apple plans to use Intel's 8161 5G modem chip in its 2020 phones. Intel hopes to fabricate the 8161 using its 10-nanometer process, which increases transistor density for more speed and efficiency. If everything goes as planned, Intel will be the sole provider of iPhone modems. Intel has been working on a precursor to the 8161 called the 8060, which will be used for prototyping and testing the 5G iPhone.

Apple, our source says, has been unhappy with Intel lately. The most likely reason relates to the challenge of solving heat dissipation issues caused by the 8060 modem chip. Many wireless carriers, including Verizon and AT&T in the U.S., will initially rely on millimeter-wave spectrum (between 28 gigahertz and 39 Ghz) to connect the first 5G phones. But millimeter-wave signal requires some heavy lifting from the modem chips and RF chains, our source explains. This causes the release of higher-than-normal levels of thermal energy inside the phone -- so much so that the heat can be felt on the outside of the phone. The problem also affects battery life.
The alternative is for Apple to source its modems from Qualcomm, but Fast Company's source "says Apple's current issues with Intel are not serious enough to cause Apple to reopen conversations with Qualcomm." Also, Qualcomm's X50 modem has heat dissipation issues of its own. MediaTek is reportedly a distant "Plan B."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple's First 5G iPhone Will Arrive In 2020, Says Report

Comments Filter:
  • by Black.Shuck ( 704538 ) on Sunday November 04, 2018 @03:38PM (#57590556)

    "If me tell someone me idea, 'ow does I know they ain't gonna nick it?"

    "Um, that's tough, they usually do."

    "'cause, like, when the Playstation 1 came out, me was tellin' me Julie; what would be wicked would be if they brought out something that was better than this! And then 2 years later what come out? Playstation 2! 'ow does you think they got the idea from me?"

    "Maybe Julie told them, I don't know..."

    -- Ali G [youtu.be]

  • 5G frequencies (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Streetlight ( 1102081 ) on Sunday November 04, 2018 @04:10PM (#57590646) Journal
    5G will use spectrum in the existing LTE frequency range (600 MHz to 6 GHz) and also in millimeter wave bands (24–86 GHz). (Quote from a Google Search result.)

    The lower frequency will be pretty good in terms of distance from phone to tower and building penetration. 6 GHz, not so much. I'm wondering if the highest frequencies will require a "tower" on each city block with an open window or an outside antenna to pick up 5g. Maybe the highest frequencies will be used for video programming, i.e., cable and satellite replacement TV.

    Can someone comment on data throughput as a function of frequency. Do lower frequencies limit tower data rates?
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by nicwi ( 1126551 )

      Can someone comment on data throughput as a function of frequency. Do lower frequencies limit tower data rates?

      There is more bandwidth available at the higher frequencies. More bandwidth allows for higher capacity.

      • Re:5G frequencies (Score:5, Informative)

        by Zocalo ( 252965 ) on Sunday November 04, 2018 @05:31PM (#57590890) Homepage
        In general, yes, but for radio there's also signal attenuation and power requirements to take into account. Higher frequencies might be able carry more data, but they are also more likely to suffer from signal loss due to intervening structures like buildings and so on, which is often at least partly offset by using more power at the transmitter. 5G is going to try and get around that by using multiple antenna systems, similar to MIMO for WiFi, but realistically usage of the higher frequencies is likely to be mostly in the form of nano/picocell type devices located in dense urban environments or large structures such as office blocks and retail/entertainment complexes.
    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      Can someone comment on data throughput as a function of frequency. Do lower frequencies limit tower data rates?

      Do you really have to ask? Double the frequency = double bits transferred/second, all other things being equal. But yes mmWave range is absolutely terrible, it's almost exclusively line-of-sight and suffers from rain fade too. Even in the best of conditions the maximum range of a mmWave tower is just 2-300 meters. Practically it's to give large crowds more bandwidth like stadiums, parks, big events and celebrations and maybe you'll see general deployment in city centers. The rest will be "normal" 4G frequen

      • Hmmm... I thought double the bandwidth allowed double the bits, and it's kind of independent of the carrier frequency. A 1 MHz bandwidth at 10 MHz, 1 GHz, and 100 GHz has the same information capacity - 1 MHz of data (and you can use encoding and quadrature to increase that, but it's equivalent regardless of baseband carrier).
        • I believe you are correct in theory. But in practice, the higher frequency carrier waves will suffer from a increased error rates when compared to carrier waves at lower frequencies. A certain amount of additional bandwidth will be required for error detection and correction. As a result, throughput of a given bandwidth at higher frequencies will be reduced when compared to the same bandwidth at lower frequencies due to increased overhead associated with communicating at higher frequencies.

          But the Sha [wikipedia.org]

      • by Anonymous Coward

        "Double the frequency = double bits transferred/second"

        Absolute rubbish. You clearly do not RF or cellular.

        For the original question - in the context of cellular technologies there is no correlation between frequency and bandwidth. Same data rates are achievable with 700MHz as with 28GHz given the same amount of spectrum. What does change is the propagation - its gets worse the higher the frequency. 28GHz will struggle to get through a thin pane of glass - it is pretty much line of site only. The advantage

    • Sorry to create a controversy here about the throughput as a function of frequency. It also seems to me that it's a fair question for a /. topic, as 5G is going to come, is starting up by a US carriers in limited experiments, and it would be useful to understand the situation.

      Sounds like there's a bit of disagreement by some of you. In the end, we'll certainly find out when we see what users' experiences are.
  • Remember that thermal energy in a chip always comes from electrical energy and the Joule effect. If the modem overheats, it probably consumes too much power, impacting battery life.

  • Add another bigger notch.
    The correct way to hold the phone has to be tested for this time.
    Then staff have to draw the art to show how the phone should be held.
    So the consumer can enjoy the speed of the connection.
    Ensure PRISM v 2.0 is fully supported for more governments.
  • Wait a sec... if Apple are releasing one in the next year or two, shouldn't we have had an Android phone with the same technology a few years ago? This news is very confusing.

  • Minor correction: A modem chip takes in digital data and converts it to a serial analog baseband data stream. Then a RF mixer up-converts the baseband analog spectrum up to RF frequencies, in this case REALLY high analog RF frequencies, like six times higher than a typical CPU clock rate. It's a bit of a stretch to call something that puts out 39GHz a "modem" chip.

  • by tsa ( 15680 )

    My iPhone 6 is up by then. Now I have to save €2500,- to be able to buy the 5G phone...

"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android

Working...