Apple's iPhones Trail Samsung, Google Devices in Internet Speeds (bloomberg.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple's iPhones Trail Samsung, Google Devices in Internet Speeds (bloomberg.com)

Posted by msmash on Monday July 23, 2018 @05:20AM from the closer-look dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Apple's iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus and $1,000 iPhone X trail the latest smartphones from Samsung Electronics and Alphabet's Google in download speeds, according to data from Ookla, a company that provides the most popular online service for measuring the speed of an internet connection with its Speedtest app and website. Faster internet data means that users can load websites and start watching movies more quickly, make crisper video calls and get higher-quality video.

[...] Ookla's data are important because they are created by users -- not in a corporate lab -- and encompass the range of random real-world conditions that affect performance like distance from cellular towers and network congestion. Ookla said it hosts millions of tests a day and has done 20 billion in total.

[...] The speed-test data, reviewed by Bloomberg, show that Samsung's Galaxy S9 phones had an average download speed -- across carriers in the U.S. -- of 38.9 megabits per second, based on about 102,000 tests over the past three months. The larger model, the S9+, delivered speeds of 38.4 Mbps, according to a sample size of about 169,000 phone connections. The iPhone X on average downloaded data at 29.7 Mbps, based on a 603,000 tests. The iPhone 8 Plus and iPhone 8 were close behind with speeds of 29.4 Mbps and 28.6 Mbps, respectively.

39 of 75 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Larger sample size by 110010001000 · 2018-07-23 05:25 · Score: 2, Interesting

So the larger the sample size, the slower the average download speed. Conclusion: my Windows Phone has the fastest download speed.
1. Re:Larger sample size by Anonymous Coward · 2018-07-23 05:44 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The majority of people go to speedtest for two reasons.
  1) The internet is being slow, and Ookla is seen as an uninvolved 3rd party.
  2) They bought something new and want to see how fast it's going.
  I would expect that a small sample of a new product will average higher speeds than the total collected data of older products, even if there is no change in the hardware's capabilities.
  Also, the last time I cared, iStuff only had one carrier, while Androids were avaiable with every carrier. If that is still the case, this could just be averaging a 30Mbps carrier that has exclusive deals with Apple alongside 40Mbps carriers that do not carry iPhones.
2. Re:Larger sample size by SeaFox · 2018-07-23 06:54 · Score: 1
  
  Also, the last time I cared, iStuff only had one carrier, while Androids were avaiable with every carrier. If that is still the case, this could just be averaging a 30Mbps carrier that has exclusive deals with Apple alongside 40Mbps carriers that do not carry iPhones.
  iPhones are available on all major carriers and several MVNOs, and have been for some time. You can also buy them carrier-unlocked from the Apple Store.
3. Re: Larger sample size by saloomy · 2018-07-23 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but iPhones have more user engagement. People will reach for their phones more often than do androids. They also update more often, since updates are not dependant on the carrier and OEM. So, it stands to reason that iPhones hit their data caps more often.
  If you want real results, throw out the speeds that fall under the data caps, only include results from the IP blocks of the wireless carriers (to rule out WiFi and VPNs), and analyze those results.
  Also, maybe give a breakdown for the top 1% of results as well, so we can see best case scenario. Everything from housing size and construction material, to population density can affect these results, and it has been well documented that more affluent people buy iPhones, who tend to live in more sparsely populated areas like suburbs.
Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by Arkham · 2018-07-23 05:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

There are several stories of Qualcomm and Samsung trying to produce anti-apple propaganda about this, because really they have nothing compelling to say against the iPhone X.
Turns out, none of these differences are even noticeable because the carriers are the limit, not the modem. Also, nobody downloads huge files on their phone because why would you?
If the cellular is fast enough to stream video and load web pages instantly, the rest is just academic.

--
- Vincit qui patitur.
1. Re:Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by Luthair · 2018-07-23 05:32 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  Wow you really drank the koolaid. The X is apple catching up to what Android phones have been offering in many cases for years.
2. Re:Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by Anonymous Coward · 2018-07-23 05:48 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Is your Android still vulnerable to the Broadcom hack, BTW? Play store still riddle with malware even after all these years? Millions of malware apps downloaded each month? Two stage droppers adding malware to even "clean" apps after you've downloaded them?
  Good luck with all that.
3. Re:Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by tlhIngan · 2018-07-23 06:43 · Score: 1
  
  There are several stories of Qualcomm and Samsung trying to produce anti-apple propaganda about this, because really they have nothing compelling to say against the iPhone X.
  Qualcomm is doing it because Apple does deliberately slow down the Qualcomm chipsets. Apple does it to minimize differences between phone models (there's not really "one" iPhone X, but a couple of them, and depending on the carrier, they get one or the other).
  This is in part because of the Apple-Qualcomm lawsuit. Qualcomm obviously wants Apple to go all Qualcomm, but Apple doesn't want to be beholden to a single supplier - they've been down that road before (Motorola, IBM both failed to deliver the product Apple wanted on time, leading to many shortages in the past).
  Samsung's doing it because their Galaxy S10 is coming out sooner or later, so they need to ramp up their advertising.
  Of course, one wonders if the many Android bootlooping problems could be solved with Apple's "performance management" solution. I know it kicks in if the phone fails to boot because of the battery (i.e., what would've been a boot loop is then managed by the OS so instead of a dead rebooting phone, you have a working, but slower, phone). Some phones that bootloop were solved by simply reloading a kernel that disabled the high-power cores, a crude form of performance limiting, really.
4. Re:Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by Targon · 2018-07-23 08:26 · Score: 1
  
  You may have missed how much people are doing with their phones. Apple users are often the ones saying how much faster they feel their web browsers are and such, so speed DOES make a difference to them. If the average download speed is faster on the Galaxy S9, that doesn't work well with the Apple people who insist their phones must be faster because of some sort of Apple magic.
  People do more with their phones these days, and they DO find that there are differences in terms of data speeds in the same area on the same carrier between different brand phones. As far as your "none of these differences are even noticeable..." comment, when streaming video, the source will often adjust quality based on speed of connection, and the difference between data speeds between phones CAN be seen in some cases.
  You probably see "broadband" and accept the same sort of thing where phone company DSL which tops out at 6Mbps in many areas is still considered broadband, compared to cable or fiber. What you might notice and what others might notice WILL be different, and trying to downplay where Apple may very well be slower is what people are jumping on. Apple just isn't "the best", even if it may be the best in some areas.
  Yes, there are going to be those that come from competition in the industry, but there will be a number of good and objective reasons why Apple isn't as good in various areas. Don't defend a company that claims they are the best if they are not.
5. Re:Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by Targon · 2018-07-23 08:31 · Score: 1
  
  Are you stupid enough to download malware from whatever source? Do you need big brother watching out for you like a babysitter? It would be good to not have these things out there, but honestly, there are weaknesses in any platform, so pointing out problems with one platform just to deflect from the weaknesses of yours is pretty Trumpian of you.
6. Re:Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by Luthair · 2018-07-23 15:14 · Score: 1
  
  Interesting that is your argument when Slashdot just covered malware in the Apple store.
7. Re:Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by AmiMoJo · 2018-07-23 20:09 · Score: 1
  
  Actually this issue was first discovered years ago by Apple fans. Apple uses two different radio systems in the iPhone, to prevent them becoming dependent on one supplier. One is Intel, the other is Qualcomm. Because the Intel one is slower they cripple the speed of the Qualcomm one to match, so that there is no "fast iPhone lottery".
  Thus they will be slower than any manufacturer that doesn't cripple their radios. Samsung, for example, sells different configurations to different parts of the world so that they are not dependent on one supplier but each market only gets one model. Not just radios either, often they will do things like give Europe a better CPU but give the US an extra gig of RAM.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
8. Re:Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda by thegarbz · 2018-07-23 20:42 · Score: 1
  
  because really they have nothing compelling to say against the iPhone X.
  It's always interesting when something doesn't fit your world view it suddenly becomes "nothing compelling". But talk something truly irrelevant like CPU speed and I'm sure you would start to salivate along with the rest of the fanbois.
  
  because the carriers are the limit
  Yeah those damn common carries that only serve Apple and not Samsung.
  
  Also, nobody downloads huge files on their phone because why would you?
  No one. On the other hand my phone's battery life is longer on account of not running a high-powered wireless receiver for as long as you do, when we both use the same amount of data.
  
  If the cellular is fast enough to stream video and load web pages instantly, the rest is just academic.
  That is completely wrong. It's like saying the only spec that matters on a HDD is continuous unfragmented read performance. The benefits of a faster connection on your phone run very deep from overal responsiveness, to less active time, to less impact from background tasks, or and you can download files faster too. No one downloads huge files? I just got pushed some 280MB. The only notice I got about it is "Google Play has installed updates".
  Mind you I also tether my laptop when I'm working, so having a 33% faster internet connection helps a lot there (or it would if I had the phone in question).
This isn't great, but by Dixie_Flatline · 2018-07-23 05:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

...Does anyone actually buy phones based on their max LTE download speed? Most of us have quotas and are trying as hard as possible not to burn through them. I've got a 6GB plan, which is big for Canada (I know how sad it is in comparison to Europe's download caps, don't @ me) so I spend a lot of time making sure I do my downloads over wifi, and even then, LTE on my iPhone 7 is usually faster than whatever burdened wifi network I'm on.
I mean, definitely Intel's modems aren't as good, but I'd be really interested to see how many people rate this as a first-tier, dealbreaker feature. Honestly, if this is you, please speak up, I'm honestly curious as to what you're doing on your phone.
1. Re:This isn't great, but by Anonymous Coward · 2018-07-23 05:37 · Score: 1
  
  The same can be said for most of the metrics that reviewers and OEM use in comparing phones; it's something for them to talk about in trying to differentiate their products, but makes minimal real-world difference.
2. Re:This isn't great, but by Dixie_Flatline · 2018-07-23 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  Wow, rabid Apple-hater much?
  I said that *I* didn't need it, and I specifically asked if ANYONE DOES need it, without casting aspersions on someone that might and indeed, made a point of asking what someone who DOES need this sort of feature is actually doing because I would find that interesting. It would be very surprising to me that this would be the sort of thing that someone would actually choose to buy or not buy a phone over, so I specifically asked if someone does do this because that's a useful perspective to me.
  I agree that Intel modems are crap. Intel is sort of crap across the board right now. That's not the point.
  Anyway, congratulations on adding basically nothing to this conversation. You must be very proud to have typed so many words for nothing.
3. Re:This isn't great, but by Dixie_Flatline · 2018-07-23 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  That's actually a really good point, and I wish THAT were in the articles covering this, rather than the focus on just the speed.
4. Re:This isn't great, but by sglewis100 · 2018-07-23 09:02 · Score: 1
  
  apple jewed itself for $5 BOM
  Unfortunately, I stopped paying any attention to you when you took the opportunity to turn an Apple vs Android flame war into an anti-semitic statement.
5. Re:This isn't great, but by thegarbz · 2018-07-23 20:46 · Score: 1
  
  ...Does anyone actually buy phones based on their max LTE download speed? Most of us have quotas and are trying as hard as possible not to burn through them.
  Yes. Quotas are irrelevant. Pretty much everything we do on our phones accesses data in small chunks. This data access happening faster is good for not only phone responsiveness but also improved battery life since your wireless components aren't active as long.
  Admittedly this is a small incremental change.
  That said outside of the USA where banning the use of tethering isn't actually a thing, the max LTE speeds can be relevant for some.
6. Re:This isn't great, but by Tsolias · 2018-07-24 01:38 · Score: 1
  
  I explicitly told you that you need the faster modem, because the better modem consumes less due to better lithography, regardless of the speed it's set at. ...and less power consumption is what everyone needs in battery powered devices.
  
  rabid Apple-hater much
  and how am I an apple hater when I am stating the obvious with facts and sources?
  would I be rude to call you an iDiot now?
  Apple did the worst move(it isn't the first time this month) and screwed over its customers.
  If you are lucky your $1k bought you a better phone than someone else who also paid the exact same amount.
7. Re:This isn't great, but by Tsolias · 2018-07-24 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  anti-semitic statement
  I like to bait idiots.
  
  I stopped
  It seems to me that not only you stopped, but you pressed the reply(possibly had to log-in also), then opened your drawer, took the kippah, wore it, stretched your arms and cracked your fingers and did what every jidf officer would do.
  0.02 shekels have been deposited to your account.
So iPhone users are in areas with slower internet. by jellomizer · 2018-07-23 05:32 · Score: 1

Much like Coke and Pepsi. You have areas where there are more Android users and areas with more iPhone users.
I can see a case where City people may be more Android focused, (higher cost of living, meaning less money for a phone) would get a cheaper but good quality Android phone. But being in the City they have access to faster internet speeds.
While the Suburban and Rural users who have lower cost of living, may be willing to splurge more on an iPhone. However those area they don't have access to such high speeds.
This isn't a case of iPhone being slower with networking with an Android. But more to the case that iPhone users have a slower internet connection.
I know I can get an Ookla speed over 100mbs from an iDevice so it isn't the hardware.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Re:This is stupid by Calydor · 2018-07-23 05:40 · Score: 4, Interesting

Did you read all the numbers? The only 0.3 mbps difference in the summary is between different kinds of iPhones, while Android phones are getting roughly 10 mbps more.
That said, who cares when data plans are capped and it's a constant struggle to not max out. What kind of movie can you watch that requires more than 30 mbps and is short enough that there'll be data left on your plan when it's done?

--
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Re:So iPhone users are in areas with slower intern by Anonymous Coward · 2018-07-23 05:50 · Score: 1

People on suburban/rural areas might not only have lower cost of living but also smaller disposable money. So they might not be able/want to buy the expensive iPhones. And the reverse for city dwellers.
YES, BUT... by Anne+Thwacks · 2018-07-23 05:59 · Score: 1

It may be slow, but its iData ... which makes it worth the wait!

--
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Wow by Frankie70 · 2018-07-23 06:01 · Score: 2

> I can see a case where City people may be more Android focused, (higher cost of living, meaning less money for a phone) would get a cheaper but good quality Android phone. But being in the City they have access to faster internet speeds.
> While the Suburban and Rural users who have lower cost of living, may be willing to splurge more on an iPhone. However those area they don't have access to such high speeds.
While the article (and their conclusion) itself is not that meaningful, your mental gymnastics deserve a medal the size of a dinner plate.
Re:Apple fanboys getting triggered in 3...2...1... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-07-23 06:08 · Score: 1

How do you know when you run into an Apple fanboy?
They ramble on how great their iPhone is without you asking.
How do know when you run into an Android fanboy?
They ramble on how much the iPhone and Apple sucks without you asking.
FTFY by DredJohn · 2018-07-23 06:30 · Score: 1

Apple's iPhones Trail Samsung, Google Devices, and the Pony Express in Internet Speeds
Ooklaâ(TM)s iOS App is to blame by solid_liq · 2018-07-23 06:30 · Score: 3, Interesting

I have the iPhone X, and I stopped using the Ookla app months ago after I discovered that it was giving me incorrectly slow results. When I use the dslreports speed test, I consistently get the speeds I expect to see on any given wifi network; however, the Ookla app shows a much slower speed (consistently) on those same networks. When running these speed tests over cellular, I observe the same issue. This observation led me to conclude that the software was no longer useful, and possibly had gone unmaintained. However, if theyâ(TM)re advertising this data as factual, it leads me to believe they may be doing this as an anti Apple campaign. This makes me wonder if Samsung (or another company) has paid them under the table to do this.
1. Re:Ooklaâ(TM)s iOS App is to blame by SeaFox · 2018-07-23 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  I have the iPhone X, and I stopped using the Ookla app months ago after I discovered that it was giving me incorrectly slow results. When I use the dslreports speed test, I consistently get the speeds I expect to see on any given wifi network; however, the Ookla app shows a much slower speed (consistently) on those same networks.
  
  The app needs to be put out to pasture. It's unnecessary with today's HTML5 browsers. Some ISPs use a carrier-branded Speedtest.net portal for a customer speed test site. These testing sites are nothing more than the speedtest.net site skinned with an ISP logo and color scheme and testing from specific servers. These sites work just fine on mobile browsers while going to speedtest.net will get you blocked and referred to download the app.
2. Re:Ooklaâ(TM)s iOS App is to blame by laird · 2018-07-23 07:03 · Score: 1
  
  Interesting - so the "news" might actually be an artifact of Ookla's testing app having a bug? Interesting.
  
  --
  Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
3. Re: Ooklaâ(TM)s iOS App is to blame by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · 2018-07-23 09:39 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure why people think an "instant high traffic blog post" is necessarily a good thing. I mean, I guess if you blog already, it's nice to have more viewers. I just get all my bitching done pseudonymously on /.
  
  --
  Your ad here. Ask me how!
4. Re:Ooklaâ(TM)s iOS App is to blame by thegarbz · 2018-07-23 20:53 · Score: 1
  
  I have the iPhone X, and I stopped using the Ookla app months ago after I discovered that it was giving me incorrectly slow results. When I use the dslreports speed test, I consistently get the speeds I expect to see on any given wifi network; however, the Ookla app shows a much slower speed (consistently) on those same networks.
  Ookla have put quite a bit of effort into preventing carriers from treating them specially. When doing speed tests across various programs it would be the *slowest* not the fastest that I would believe.
  I can't speak for you or your observation but I gave up on dslreports after I was torrenting at 18MB/s ran dslreports and instantly got shown my theoretical max transfer rate while my torrents suddenly froze. A very clear indication that carriers are artifically prioritising dslreports. In the meantime Speedtest showed my torrents drop to around 10MB/s and then gave me a result a tad below half my actual connected speed.
  YMMV. Bottom line, don't believe anything outright.
Has more to do with your network by WillAffleckUW · 2018-07-23 08:37 · Score: 1

If you have actual Gig speed networks and hold your phone just right, you'll be a lot faster than people who can afford to live in the neighborhoods that won't let you build cell towers.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Who cares? by AbRASiON · 2018-07-23 11:38 · Score: 1

I'm an Android guy and I know which phone feels consistently snappier is to work with, and it's not the Android phones.
33Mbit LTE vs 50Mbit won't make much difference in casual browsing.
Re:This is stupid by thegarbz · 2018-07-23 20:47 · Score: 1

That said, who cares when data plans are capped
Everyone. Just because we're not all downloading torrents on our phones doesn't mean a faster internet connection doesn't do wonders for page load times or app responsiveness, not to mention side benefits like reduced battery life due to less active RF time.
Re:This is stupid by Calydor · 2018-07-23 20:54 · Score: 1

The summary was specifically talking about watching videos in higher resolution.

--
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Re:This is stupid by thegarbz · 2018-07-24 01:42 · Score: 1

The summary is as short sighted as a lot of Slashdot posters when it comes to the benefits of speed. Not only that it's actively ignoring the fact that many carriers now specifically degrade video anyway.
Re:So iPhone users are in areas with slower intern by jellomizer · 2018-07-24 01:53 · Score: 1

It isn't all or nothing. It is call trends. The richest person in the world hooked up to gigbit network can have an Android phone, because he likes it better then the Apple. A poor person with no money, may sacrifice 2 meals a day to get an iPhone with some slow shared Network.
But trending will show that people with more money will pay more for stuff vs people with less money.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.