Apple's iPhones Trail Samsung, Google Devices in Internet Speeds (bloomberg.com) 75
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.
[...] 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.
Larger sample size (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (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 c
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: Larger sample size (Score:2)
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 result
Samsumg or Qualcomm propoganda (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.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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 want
Re: (Score:2)
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 ar
Re: (Score:2)
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 t
Re: (Score:2)
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
This isn't great, but (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.
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
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 pers
Re: (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 some
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
...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.
So iPhone users are in areas with slower internet. (Score:2)
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 hig
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Wow (Score:3)
> 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 gymnasti
Re:This is stupid (Score:5, 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?
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
The summary was specifically talking about watching videos in higher resolution.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Apple fanboys getting triggered in 3...2...1.... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (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.
YES, BUT... (Score:2)
FTFY (Score:1)
Ooklaâ(TM)s iOS App is to blame (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting - so the "news" might actually be an artifact of Ookla's testing app having a bug? Interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
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 /.
Re: (Score:2)
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 Speedt
Has more to do with your network (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.
Who cares? (Score:2)
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.