Slashdot Mirror


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

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."

47 comments

  1. People who care, won't arreive until 2024 though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    This time, Jobs can't save them again.
    They're already in the process of being ruined by the standard issue management grease rags.

  2. And by then...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    And by then, providers are going to be on 7G.
    But the iDiots will be ponying up $2,000 for the iPhone xTra Massively Kool.
    I've been a fan of their computers since 1981 (well, not so much the mid to late 90s crap), but this consumeristic strategy is getting a bit old.

    1. Re: And by then...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thought exactly.

    2. Re:And by then...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you are joking! It takes way longer than that to establish a new standard.

    3. Re:And by then...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iCrap is for wimmins and fags anyway, but you're a dumbshit, with each "G" gen the price of a gigabyte or megabyte goes like 20x or 50x lower.
      Now, the spying will go up too but not too fundamentally different. Permanently disable bluetooth, and disable wifi when you go 5 meters further from where you beat your meat and fall asleep.

  3. Apple's innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    This is typical of Apple's innovation :

    "Third-party partners fall in line with our fashion requirements for ultra thin accessories or we'll drop your lucrative contracts."

    There's nothing wrong with that, but it's not exactly lighting the world on fire as the cult would have you believe.

  4. Re:FIRST POST FROM THE FUTURE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You lose again, m'bitch.

  5. Technology progresses. News at 11.. by Black.Shuck · · Score: 2

    "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

    1. Re: Technology progresses. News at 11.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RESTECP, give the man 'is money

  6. Re: No iphones in FEDERAL PRISON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump will use android. The prisoners choice of phone.

  7. Guess creimer's 2020 Christmas bonus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    will be used for buying a 5G phone?

  8. Re: No iphones in FEDERAL PRISON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too big to put in your anus.

  9. Stupids! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In theory, highest frequencies imply highest dissipation unless that lowest voltages help to reduce the highest dissipation.

  10. Re: No iphones in FEDERAL PRISON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'd insert a walled-garden joke here, rather than try to smuggle an XS MAX up my ass like Trump Jr. might...

  11. 5G frequencies by Streetlight · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    1. Re:5G frequencies by nicwi · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    2. Re:5G frequencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      Maybe Slashdot isn't the right site for you?

    3. Re:5G frequencies by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    4. Re:5G frequencies by Kjella · · Score: 2

      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 frequencies upgraded with a bit better signal processing. I think it's been extremely over-hyped. I mean why don't we have 24-86 GHz WiFi? Because we'd have to install an antenna in every room...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:5G frequencies by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      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).

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    6. Re:5G frequencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "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 of mmWave is that there is a crapload of available free spectrum - 10x or more than the sub6 range

    7. Re: 5G frequencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But at 10Mhz you can have 10 separate 1MHz channels, at 100MHz you can have 100 ... so the available bandwidth is a multiple of the carrier after all.

    8. Re:5G frequencies by willy_me · · Score: 1

      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 Shannon-Hartley theorem does demonstrate that you are correct in theory.

    9. Re:5G frequencies by Streetlight · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    10. Re: 5G frequencies by dknj · · Score: 1

      Currently have a -90db signal of 28ghz mmwave, through a building, to the 5G base station.

      Do you wish to run your lips some more?

    11. Re:5G frequencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a fair question, no one was born knowing any of this stuff. Some people just like to be a dick.

    12. Re:5G frequencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And as an extra bonus they'll have your location down to a 100m radius or so. Nice!

    13. Re: 5G frequencies by Nethead · · Score: 1

      No, that's not how it works in the real world. Those frequencies are already in use.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    14. Re:5G frequencies by Nethead · · Score: 1

      This A/C has the correct answer. Yes, I use to be a rad-did-ie-o engineer.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    15. Re:5G frequencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    16. Re:5G frequencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to think it was much closer than that for 2G but recent reading made me reconsider. Like, you may "resync" every half hour or so and this shit is not that precise.. but if you're being watched, they can send an "empty" SMS of sorts and reveal your immediate imprecise location. Still scary (why not ping you a dozen times and send the party van)

      With 5G or even 4G I've no idea what goes on.

  12. Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cellphones are more trouble than they're worth.

  13. Only in the rare case, that ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there is absolutely nothing in-between the antennas though.

    At 86GHz, it won’t even work in the same room, most of the time, and you might as well just use some kind of IRDA.

  14. Thermal energy by enriquevagu · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Thermal energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please explain the technical problem. HF transistors have always been harder to make, gold fins, screw in heatsink sort. At that frequency teflon PCB's, stray capacitance, drift. 2.4 gig heats microwave water. So would a plastic case absorb 28ghz? I suspect Intel does not want to use exotic materials or bake ceramics. I would expect that issue would be well known.

  15. How to make a new phone by AHuxley · · Score: 0

    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.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  16. So there’s agreement on what 5G means, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I’m mean seriously. It’s just one more than 4G, right?

  17. Wait... by dohzer · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Wait... by rkordmaa · · Score: 1
      Well.... there sort of is an 5g Android phone. https://bgr.com/2018/08/03/mot...

      But more seriously, the phones will be coming when the networks start actully coming online, which will by and large be next year.

  18. Re: People who care, won't arreive until 2024 thou by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't underestimate the power of n1gger faggot amalgamation.

    Next year's $2,000 iJunk will sell like hot cakes (according to Tim Cocksucker).

  19. Re:Bowl of dick? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am building a 5G detector then, already have the pole.

  20. It's not a "modem" chip. by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:It's not a "modem" chip. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it is a "modem". Anyone using the handle "Ancient_Hacker" should know modem stands for modulator/demodulator. When digital data the modem "takes in" is "converted to analog baseband", to use your lingo, it is modulating the data. When it receives analog data and digitizes it, it is demodulating the data.

      The frequency is irrelevant to this, the modulation/demodulation would occur even if the digital data was received with a center frequency of 0 Hz (i.e. already at baseband) Mixers are used whether you are dealing with the new 600 MHz cellular bands, or 5G's future 28, 39 and 60 GHz bands.

  21. Cool by tsa · · Score: 1

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

    --

    -- Cheers!