Hacker News Reader

Comment by Veliladon | Hacker News Reader

They literally have one click pairing to the Wifi hotspot on an iPhone or iPad logged in to the same iCloud account. Everyone has a phone. Why increase the BOM?

View on HN

I use this a lot. It burns two batteries instead of one, is unreliable, and adds latency. I would very much like to buy a laptop from Apple that has a modem builtin like I can get from Dell. Furthermore, I would like a modem in the laptop that is always on and ready, just like in the iPad (zero click).

I wonder how it will work if you attach an iPhone 15 Pro to your laptop with a short USB/Thunderbolt cable. Presumably it will at least save on rebroadcasting the internet connection.

I often do this with my iPhone 11 Pro. It is dumb and works better than having no connection. It is a ridiculous thing to do at a time when watches have LTE modems.

It is not ridiculous. An extra modem is an extra data line. Tethering works perfectly.

Your experience differs from mine. I try to use it quite a lot and fail. When it does succeed, I watch both batteries.

I have the same phone and the performance never seems any better than when using bluetooth PAN. I mentioned the iPhone 15 Pro, because it will be the first one with more than 480mbps over USB. At 10gbps the wired connection should have enough bandwidth to handle anything even 5g will offer for a while.

I am scheduled to pick up an iPhone 15 Pro today. I will see how well that works and report back.

Of course, it connects over usb. It works on windows as well (the easiest way to install the drivers is to install iTunes).

This logic doesn't hold - the same is true of an iPad. To quote you, "Everyone has a phone. Why increase the BOM?" - if it's ok to include cost of a modem for an iPad, it's ok for a MacBook Pro too.

the thing is, historically, if you already make laptops (and they 20 years ago had a pcmcia slot in which a verizon, etc, cellular modem could fit...i had one), and you already later make iPhones, then it's a short jump from iPhone logic board to iPad.

it's a longer jump to get a cellular capable antenna complex in an all metal (think semi faraday cage) aluminium unibody.

point is, it's historical artifact originally.

now, a decade later, perhaps the BOM thing is just enough motivation to not do it, or the ubiquity of "hotspots" via cellular lessens the appeal at scale.

> then it's a short jump from iPhone logic board to iPad.

Its arguably an even shorter jump between iPad and MacBook Pro today - the architecture of both products is incredibly similar now.

> it's a longer jump to get a cellular capable antenna complex in an all metal (think semi faraday cage) aluminium unibody.

You mean just like the aluminium bodies already present on the cellular iPads? Or several generations of iPhone? This excuse doesn't hold either.

cellular ipads have an RF transparent band on their edges.

ipad and iphone also have antenna designs integrated with the body design, which currently is only true for wifi and bluetooth in the above mentioned laptops.

are you wanting a plastic band atop the laptop closing screen, to get a cellular capable antenna in an otherwise metal body? perhaps that's just not a priority with enough customers.

> are you wanting a plastic band atop the laptop closing screen, to get a cellular capable antenna in an otherwise metal body?

I'm almost certain Apple's world class hardware team can integrate a cellular antenna to an aluminum laptop in a way that is visually pleasing, yes. This isn't some insurmountable problem we are positing here.

I mean, that same hardware team designed a fundamentally flawed keyboard to shave like a millimeter from the laptop height.

that's the industrial design group, which was entirely distinct from the rf hardware world.

it probably would help if you'd listen to a person from the world class hardware team in question who worked in exactly this world for years, spanning all the devices discussed. that person might have strongly insinuated the law of nature challenges constraining propagation of RF at widely varying frequencies as they are paired with the esthetics challenges from a different group, if you noticed.

The iPad itself and competing MacBook/MacBook Pro-like aluminum laptops from other vendors (Dell, HP, etc.) are existence proofs.

You didn’t read the discussion of the cellular ipad having the plastic band, or that prioritizing no plastic band is a problem if you want antennas capable for useful cellular reliability

No, the cellular iPad and other devices are indeed proof positive. The exact same cellular window solution could be applied in a redesign of the MacBook. No one is disputing aluminium blocks radio waves - the dispute is your constant argument it can’t be done because it would require a giant RF window - there is no reason a future design can’t neatly incorporate an antenna system, just like it has been done on many other aluminium devices - including iPads, iPhones and Apple Watches.

Having built 5G systems for hobbyist computer boards (Pi etc), the antenna required is not so very large either.

A MacBook is not and has never been a seamless block of aluminium - there are plenty of design choices to be made to help hide or minimise any antennas.

Yes it’s possible IF the case is changed. Bear in mind different bands (as cellular ios devices support) can force a different antenna geometry than a single band (regardless of coding schemes).

Your “plastic band” argument- indeed, most of your arguments on this- fails to acknowledge the pleasant reality of the ipad pro’s.

My 2020 ipad pro 11” does not have that unsightly plastic band, nor the iphone 15 pro.

As far as aesthetic elements, these enclosures appear essentially as metal and glass, an appearance not markedly different than existing macbook appearances.

Even the iphone mini 13 manages to fit effective cellular arrays in its compact form sans the big plastic bands on those ipads you mention. And despite its diminutive size, the mini 13 can still manage a reliable call over cellular for hours at a time. With the greater real estate offered by the macBook form factor, there are broader options for effective antenna arrays and also their power supply versus phones and tablets.

> are you wanting a plastic band atop the laptop closing screen, to get a cellular capable antenna in an otherwise metal body?

Is this why the LTE capable Apple Watch has a red ring on the crown? I assumed it was just a status cue.

Regardless, I would be completely happy with Apple having to make a compromise on the case like they do with the iPad.

Are these cellular antennas really that much different from the wifi antennas that are already found in Apple laptops?

Yes.

it's a huge topic, antennas are tuned in physical geometries for wavelengths, etc.

this is a fun rabbithole

https://antenna-theory.com/

I don’t think the BOM is the issue. It’s a huge cost to have different variations for different regions, and a huge cost to go through certification for various regions. It’s obviously worth it for iPhone and watch, apparently worth it for iPad although most people I know buy the wifi only models. For MacBooks, even though they now share a lot of design with iPhones, I can’t see it being worth it for the few percent of customers that will pay extra for it on a MacBook.

I specifically said MacBook Pro. I agree it is probably not worthwhile for MacBook. I use my MacBook Pro for work travel. I realize other use cases can do without connectivity.

> if it's ok to include cost of a modem for an iPad, it's ok for a MacBook Pro too.

This exactly.

The iPad is already like a smaller MacBook without a built-in keyboard that runs iPadOS.

By that logic, iPads wouldn’t need a cellular variant either.

This is correct.

Tethering is flaky. I was trying to tether my iPad to my iPhone just last night, eventually gave up and just read my book on my iPhone instead. If I depended on tethering for actually getting my work done I'd have an aneurism.

As someone who has, and still does attempt work via iOS tethering it is in fact a complete dumpster fire. Frequent disconnects which force me to constantly revisit the Settings app to disable & reenable is a nightmare. At this point, after many years of the same level behavior, I suspect the disfunction is on purpose (probably a back room deal with cell phone providers)

If you pull down to open Control Centre and then long-press on the WiFi button, you can toggle the hotspot off and on without having to deal with the Settings app. Not sure if you’re having the same problem but that works well for me.

Thanks.

That settings app is not a happy place.

I often have to toggle it to make it work. It doesn't always work. I just end up trying to work on my phone.

to be fair, they don't.

Because hotspot data is always limited compared to a dedicated line. T-mobile's hotspot is all but useless.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com