Too bad this tech will be soon available on WP but not on iPhone.
I love how they use 41MP sensor to shoot a 5MP pic but remember, len also plays as big a part as sensor and Apple could top that by using a better and faster len.
Apple curiously calls it 2100 instead of AWS in the iPad specs.
Very disappointed there's no band III (LTE 1800) for Australia, Europe and Asia.
The problem is how it's being shown. UMTS band 4 is what T-mobile (US), Wind and Mobilicity(Canada) use which is 1700/2100 for 3.5G UMTS(HSPA+), not LTE.
AT&T, T-Mobile may have LTE on 1700/2100 (band 4) or band 2(1900Mhz) and 5(850Mhz)
Verizon is on band 13(700Mhz), AT&T band 17(700Mhz), Sprint band 18 (800Mhz band) and 25 (1900Mhz)
What it boils down to is that you'd need many separate parts for each band, which just creates more balkanized MNO's than there really needs to be. There may come a time when they can implement all the bands purely in software, but that won't be any mobile device. The most likely outcome is that handset's will only support the GSM bands + one or two LTE Advanced bands locally. If the MNO's decide to roll out LTE on the GSM bands, then everyone wins and LTE is available to everyone, but until such time, LTE will be limited to whatever local MNO uses, and if you're an international traveler, you'll just have to put up with 20Mbps instead of 100Mbps, oh boo hoo.
Maybe in like 2020, there will be devices that have all bands, because there won't be any legacy tech to support, and the devices will be less complex. Till then, you at least have a fallback option as opposed to "nil" which is what you'd get back in 2004 if you didn't have quadband GSM and went traveling.
Read the diagram again. All required component are not on one chip.
I never wrote, nor even implied, that they were.
What I see in the diagram is "Band 4 PA" connected to a "SAW filter," represented in exactly the same way as Band 13 and Band 17. It's not clear from the diagram, but as they are not being included in blocks like the "Band 2/5 Dual PAD" and "Band 1/8 Dual PAD" boxes above them I would imagine that this indicates that separate components would be required for all three of these bands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
As noted, Apple had the 5th band tested but it was never active. Inactive does not mean non-existent.
1. 850
2. 900
3. 1800
4. 1900
5. 2100
I count five bands, above. Which is the one that's "inactive"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
If Apple could have put Verizon and AT&T's LTE bands on one device they could halved the number of cellular iPads this year. That is a cost savings on many levels so it would seem to me there were technical reasons preventing it.
If the Band 13 and Band 17 support components are still discrete parts Apple would be saving some small amount of money by not putting them all in every cellular iPad. Even a few pennies saved across millions of devices (probably tens of millions by the time the 4th gen iPad is out) adds up.
Since LTE is being supported on only a limited number of carriers at this time Apple probably calculated that the costs of engineering, testing, and stocking separate AT&T and Verzion iPads in the U.S. is less than the costs they'll save by not including all the same components in each one.
Comments
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...one-camera.ars
Main benefits:
-Noise reduction
-Loosless zoom
-Better color reproduction
Too bad this tech will be soon available on WP but not on iPhone.
I love how they use 41MP sensor to shoot a 5MP pic but remember, len also plays as big a part as sensor and Apple could top that by using a better and faster len.
Band 4 is used by AT&T, Telus and Bell for LTE.
Apple curiously calls it 2100 instead of AWS in the iPad specs.
Very disappointed there's no band III (LTE 1800) for Australia, Europe and Asia.
The problem is how it's being shown. UMTS band 4 is what T-mobile (US), Wind and Mobilicity(Canada) use which is 1700/2100 for 3.5G UMTS(HSPA+), not LTE.
When you then look at LTE instead of UMTS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-UTRA#...nel_bandwidths
AT&T, T-Mobile may have LTE on 1700/2100 (band 4) or band 2(1900Mhz) and 5(850Mhz)
Verizon is on band 13(700Mhz), AT&T band 17(700Mhz), Sprint band 18 (800Mhz band) and 25 (1900Mhz)
What it boils down to is that you'd need many separate parts for each band, which just creates more balkanized MNO's than there really needs to be. There may come a time when they can implement all the bands purely in software, but that won't be any mobile device. The most likely outcome is that handset's will only support the GSM bands + one or two LTE Advanced bands locally. If the MNO's decide to roll out LTE on the GSM bands, then everyone wins and LTE is available to everyone, but until such time, LTE will be limited to whatever local MNO uses, and if you're an international traveler, you'll just have to put up with 20Mbps instead of 100Mbps, oh boo hoo.
Maybe in like 2020, there will be devices that have all bands, because there won't be any legacy tech to support, and the devices will be less complex. Till then, you at least have a fallback option as opposed to "nil" which is what you'd get back in 2004 if you didn't have quadband GSM and went traveling.
Read the diagram again. All required component are not on one chip.
I never wrote, nor even implied, that they were.
What I see in the diagram is "Band 4 PA" connected to a "SAW filter," represented in exactly the same way as Band 13 and Band 17. It's not clear from the diagram, but as they are not being included in blocks like the "Band 2/5 Dual PAD" and "Band 1/8 Dual PAD" boxes above them I would imagine that this indicates that separate components would be required for all three of these bands.
As noted, Apple had the 5th band tested but it was never active. Inactive does not mean non-existent.
1. 850
2. 900
3. 1800
4. 1900
5. 2100
I count five bands, above. Which is the one that's "inactive"?
If Apple could have put Verizon and AT&T's LTE bands on one device they could halved the number of cellular iPads this year. That is a cost savings on many levels so it would seem to me there were technical reasons preventing it.
If the Band 13 and Band 17 support components are still discrete parts Apple would be saving some small amount of money by not putting them all in every cellular iPad. Even a few pennies saved across millions of devices (probably tens of millions by the time the 4th gen iPad is out) adds up.
Since LTE is being supported on only a limited number of carriers at this time Apple probably calculated that the costs of engineering, testing, and stocking separate AT&T and Verzion iPads in the U.S. is less than the costs they'll save by not including all the same components in each one.
I'm not getting off the kick until the camera at the back of the iPad is 9.7 MP, to match the screen size!
The screen size is 3.1 megapixels. We're way beyond that already.