Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Will Reportedly Land Apple As a Modem Chip Customer

Posted by samzenpus on from the new-partners dept.

itwbennett writes After so many years of spinning its wheels, Intel is reportedly about to make a big step into mobile by providing Apple with LTE modem chips for its hot-selling iPhone. The news comes courtesy of VentureBeat, which cites two separate sources of the plans. The story says Apple will begin using Intel's new 7360 LTE modem processor in place of a Qualcomm chip, which has been there for a few generations.

77 comments

  1. guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    FIRST!

  2. Microsoft: Melts in your mouth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    ##

    Story ---> The new Windows is to be called "Windows 10", inexplicably skipping 9. What's funnier is the fact this was "predicted" by InfoWorld over a year ago in an April Fools' article.

    "The reason is simple:

    Call it windows 9 - the 12 announcement stories are lost among the weak wash of windows 9 speculation

    Call it windows 10 - cheap gimmick to make people think they have to upgrade to what is essentially windows 7, and 24 more stories all commenting about how they chose a different fucking number

    Fuck microsoft."

    - https://www.reddit.com/user/fe...
    - http://www.infoworld.com/artic...

    ##

    Story ---> BusinessBill Gates: Bitcoin Is 'Better Than Currency'

    "Fuck you Bill.

    If you hadn't used our own tax dollars against us, holding back the internet for ten years, we might have had bitcoin a decade earlier, IMAGINE how many more learning developments we would have had.

    SO FUCK YOU BILL. FUCK YOU.

    Reasons Bill Gates is an asshole:

    1. Trying to force linux out of the market for decade and a half with FUD, SCO lawsuits, targeting small companies and putting people out of work
    2. Poisoning the well of hundreds of open source projects (see Halloween documents)
    3. Stealing hundreds of billions of tax dollars worldwide with illegal bribes and FUD spread to councils and governments
    4. NSA backdoors into the windows code
    5. Keep pushing the windows 95 source code as a 'new product' every two years
    6. Trying to destroy the console competition by using cash-cow money to buy into exclusives and create and anti-consumer market - exclusives don't benefit consumers
    7. Trying to kill off openoffice, also poisoning the well of open office - disrupting development and communications.
    8. Holding back the internet development for a decade, because they wanted to maintain their "SLoC" business model
    9. Using NSA funds (your tax dollars) to buy skype for an ungodly amount, as an accounting trick, immediately rewiring the peer-to-peer technology of skype to push all calls into a NSA backdoor datacenter of 10000 machines that route all calls (google it)
    10. Becoming patent trolls the last years
    11. Being SHIT. Making shit products, being lazy - not creating something good and exceptional.
    12. Faking upgrade requirements for YEARS on office - pushing broken formats, broken compatibility, lying to 99% of their user install base about needing to upgrade their shitty office suite.
    13. Tying direct X versions to windows versions for no reason (proven by overriding flags) to force people to buy new hardware / licenses for no reason
    14. Forcing OEMs to change netbook configurations, forcing them to stay slow, low resolution and sub full-size keyboard - basically forcing prices higher on hardware for years - otherwise they'd withdraw licensing to them
    15. Forcing countries to pass certain sales laws on operating systems through lobbying
    16. Forcing resellers to sell computers with a windows license, stopping the ability for small stores to supply ready-to-run linux products for fear of not being able to any windows machines people might want
    17. Not innovating for decades, then trying to buy into search and email - because they were deliberately holding back the internet to stop it diminishing their desktop
    18. Internet Explorer 6
    19. Internet Explorer 7
    20. Internet Explorer 8
    21. Internet Explorer 9
    22. That disgraceful way they screwed around with open standards, flip flopping and finally using it as yet another excuse to force people to upgrade (file extension changes)
    23. Buying into opengl patents to hedge their bets on directx, trying to keep gaming exclusive to windows through lock-in
    24. TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS of damage, LOST JOBS caused by millions of worm infections caused by WIDE OPEN APIs in outlook - N

    1. Re:Microsoft: Melts in your mouth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Up to your old tricks, eh Twitter? Protip: No one wants to read a wall of text. Follow the KISS principle.

    2. Re:Microsoft: Melts in your mouth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, this takes me back - to think there was once a twitter less annoying than today's Twitter.

      Although one of the 1,812 suggestions appears to be that Gates held back the development of bitcoin - surely a huge compliment.

    3. Re:Microsoft: Melts in your mouth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      It's great that Microsoft are no longer the biggest player, and they can't get away with such anti-competitive actions anymore.

      Say what you will about Apple but they're the most profitable company in the world, yet they haven't broken laws to get 90+ percent marketshare in the process.

    4. Re: Microsoft: Melts in your mouth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TLDR - some dude doesn't like Microsoft, seats and rants a LOT

  3. Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am posting this question because I am not a hardware engineer. Apple's switching from Qualcomm chip to one from Intel ... does that mean Intel's chip is better?

    If the answer is yes, then in what way Intel's chip is better?

    Does it have better reception? Does it run faster? Does it use less power?

    1. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably cheaper. Apple is shaving a few cents off which are not passed to the customers.

    2. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The chips are probably on par, more or less, for real world application, but Apple probably can extract a much better price from intel in this arena where they are the second tier to Qualcomm. Plus after the whole samsung/android thing, they never want to be in position to rely on one king supplier on the market in case relations sour. They were playing catch up with the screens for a while and still are imo because no one could touch samsung there.

      Better to divide and conquor suppliers and never let them get too comfortable.

    3. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, it's certainly in some ways better:
      Max speed 150 Mbps -> 450 Mbps through more aggregation.
      Supported bands from "up to" 20 to "up to" 29.
      Reception? No idea.
      Power consumption? No idea.
      Size? No idea.
      Price? No idea, but clearly it's a premium chip.

      But I'm guessing Intel really wants to break into this market so they might have given Apple a good price, after all they get to ship in a huge volume. Assuming this is actually true though, I'll call it speculation until it actually launches.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am posting this question because I am not a hardware engineer. Apple's switching from Qualcomm chip to one from Intel ... does that mean Intel's chip is better?

      If the answer is yes, then in what way Intel's chip is better?

      Does it have better reception? Does it run faster? Does it use less power?

      Since when is cost not the primary driver when making hundreds of millions of anything?

      Funny how you don't see the lifeblood of capitalism when referencing America's largest public corporation.

    5. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think the cost matters much. They make $500 profit per phone, or $500.01.

    6. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Apple is shaving a few cents off which are not passed to the customers.

      Exactly! Apple is always cheaping out on manufacturing.

    7. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Reception? No idea.

      Has nothing to do with the chip, genius.

    8. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The beancounters will cut the costs as long as the people still keep buying the crappier products. Greed will eventually destroy the company, but in the meanwhile they can show some good quarterly results and management gets their bonuses for ruining the company reputation.

    9. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      To rely on a rival SoC vendor for parts undermines Apple's commitment to develop their own chip, as opposed to using an off-the-shelf component such as Qualcomm's Snapdragon, Exynos or Tegra.

    10. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course it doesn't. Because, you know - the chip doesn't have to filter out noise and stuff that isn't a relevant part of the signal on accompanying bands/harmonics.

      Genius indeed.

    11. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by chowdahhead · · Score: 1

      Qualcomm still seems to be at the forefront of cell modem design but the alternatives like Intel are probably becoming good enough at this point. They showed off some stuff at MWC: http://www.anandtech.com/show/...

    12. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Tell me about it. The machines doing all the manufacturing aren't even gold-plated.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    13. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      You are a douche for replying to the first post...

      Fuck you.

    14. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I believe the Intel modem is cat 10 and the current iPhone runs on lower than that. This, so far, is a rumor and haven't been confirmed by either company.

    15. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by macs4all · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Probably cheaper. Apple is shaving a few cents off which are not passed to the customers.

      "Cost Reduction" in a BOM is NEVER directly passed-on to customers.

      Stop with the hate, will ya?

    16. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or more accurately, the marketing types assess the "price point" of the device they want to sell. The engineers job is to figure out how to maximize the profit (difference between cost of goods, and "price point"). The price point MAY drop, if price wars are a factor and companies think they have a chance to profit enough to run their competitor out of the market, believing their engineers/supply chain have "innovated" more than the other guy.

      That's not the apple market though, they are happy being luxury goods and letting the chinese shitshops duke it out on price and destroy each other.

    17. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by macs4all · · Score: 0

      Or more accurately, the marketing types assess the "price point" of the device they want to sell. The engineers job is to figure out how to maximize the profit (difference between cost of goods, and "price point"). The price point MAY drop, if price wars are a factor and companies think they have a chance to profit enough to run their competitor out of the market, believing their engineers/supply chain have "innovated" more than the other guy.

      That's not the apple market though, they are happy being luxury goods and letting the chinese shitshops duke it out on price and destroy each other.

      spoken by not only an Apple-Hater, but someone who has absolutely no idea how product development actually works.

      But as an Embedded Developer with nearly 4 decades of paid product design and development experience, I have been in that rodeo many, many times.

    18. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Magnus+Pym · · Score: 4, Informative

      This. The modem performance of the latest Qualcomm chips are pretty close to channel capacity and at least 3dB better than the best from either Intel's or MediaTeks according to reports I've seen. That means roughtly that the modem part of the phone spends double the energy to attain the same speeds, and under power-limited conditions would provide far less throughput.

      It is pretty difficult to get perfect performance out of a cell modem, the underlying theory is pretty complex, and translating these complex algorithms into a practical working implementation is incredibly difficult. Neither Intel nor Mediatek know how to close the gap. Qualcomm is probably the only company in the world that has the knowhow and brainpower to do this.

      But here is the thing: there was a time before the advent of the iPhone when consumers actually cared about the quality of the modem or underlying wireless technology. They don't any more. Or at least, not enough to vote with their wallets and do anything that the phone-makers care about. No-one who likes the iPhone will ever switch away to Samsung or similar because the cell modem is better... especially since they are on Wifi more than 50% of the time.

      This is why Mediatek has become a unbelievable success in Asia and now biting into Qualcomm's profit at the high end. This is also why Intel (after struggling to make a viable cell modem for years and years) is finally getting a shot at the big time. And this spells really bad news for Qualcomm... another case of the market picking a demonstrably inferior product.

    19. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am posting this question because I am not a hardware engineer. Apple's switching from Qualcomm chip to one from Intel ... does that mean Intel's chip is better?

      If the answer is yes, then in what way Intel's chip is better?

      Does it have better reception? Does it run faster? Does it use less power?

      I am a hardware engineer. The answer is multi-fold
      1) It's technically better. Smaller, lower power, more integrated for the same functions set. You wouldn't notice a difference when using the phone.
      2) Security of supply. Qualcomm is a fab customer like everyone else. Intel have many fabs and plenty of capacity.
      2) It's cheaper. Qualcomm charges a premium because they are fabless so manufacturing costs are higher.
      3) It's not Qualcomm. No one likes working with Qualcomm. People work with Qualcomm because they don't have a choice.

    20. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by default+luser · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly, people din't care about peak LTE speeds going over some insane 300 MBps level. As long as they can get a few MBps to load a webpage as fast as their moble processor (and limited ram) can handle it, they don't care about super-high speeds.

      This is why Mediatek became a thing with nothing but 3G parts in China, and it's the same reason why Mediatek's (and Intel, and Samsung) early 4G entry to the market rings the death knell for Qualcomm.

      That's why they have introduced the Snapdragon 410 - 4 Cortex A53 processors, a passable GPU with 720p support, and 150Mbps LTE! All selling at a bargain price competitive with all the other entry-level parts.

      LTE is not a premium feature anymore, so unless Qualcomm comes up with some other must-have technology, they're going to have to transform their business to work better with commodity margins, or else do like everyone else and start making their own phones?

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    21. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by JasonGoatcher · · Score: 0

      I am posting this question because I am not a hardware engineer. Apple's switching from Qualcomm chip to one from Intel ... does that mean Intel's chip is better?

      If the answer is yes, then in what way Intel's chip is better?

      Does it have better reception? Does it run faster? Does it use less power?

      I don't think it matters if Intel is better, I think they're circling the wagons to protect themselves from competition. Moore's Law is stuttering and at some point people will realize that more expensive doesn't always equate to better.

      Intel and Apple are 2 companies that like to charge a ton for slightly better hardware and software and that ability is like a drug to them. They want just...one...more...toke...off the pipe of high prices.

    22. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More specifically he/she is a douche for "replying" to the first post with a comment that has nothing to do with it.

      Even if the first post itself was obvious crap (as is the case here), it's still an obnoxious and cynical excuse to jump the queue and have one's comment gain far more prominence than other, earlier comments which would otherwise appear above it, if it had been placed at the end of the thread where it would be expected to go.

      But the OC is *far* more important than everyone else here and (self-)entitled to have *their* comment go first.

      Tosser.

    23. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I am posting this question because I am not a hardware engineer. Apple's switching from Qualcomm chip to one from Intel ... does that mean Intel's chip is better?

      If the answer is yes, then in what way Intel's chip is better?

      Does it have better reception? Does it run faster? Does it use less power?

      Might it be Intel's fab advantages over Qualcomm? Or anyone else Qualcomm is using?

    24. Re: Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody works with Intel for their warmth and charm.

    25. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      It is pretty difficult to get perfect performance out of a cell modem, the underlying theory is pretty complex, and translating these complex algorithms into a practical working implementation is incredibly difficult. Neither Intel nor Mediatek know how to close the gap. Qualcomm is probably the only company in the world that has the knowhow and brainpower to do this.

      Actually, Intel probably has plenty of experience making modems - Intel's chips aren't their own designs, they purchased Infineon, one of the big modem chip manufacturers out there - if it wasn't Qualcomm, it's Infineon.

      In fact, the first iPhones use Infineon modems. Though, one reason to use Infineon was extreme power management - so much so that it was responsible for killing AT&T's network. Basically the modems immediately killed the data channel when the transfer was over, so if you're websurfing, it would open a bunch of data channels, transfer the content, then shut them down. The end result was an overloaded control channel (opening and closing data channels is a control message). With enough iPhones, this consumed all control channel bandwidth. End result? Dropped calls because a tower with a full control channel mean the phone cannot do a handoff. It's why AT&T, despite having the worst call drop history, had some of the best data transfer rates (because a full control channel doesn't have a relation to how many voice/data channels are available).

      As for Intel, maybe Intel is trying to court Apple - with modem chips at first, then maybe with SoC business.

    26. Re:Intel chip better than Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intel recruited a boatload of old Nokias hardware engineers to work on, most likely, on these. Guess they got something done.

  4. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    First Samsung stopped using Qualcomm's mobile CPU's. Now Apple is no longer using their LTE chips. It'll be fun watching the descent of a company that doesn't hire white people for engineering positions.

    1. Re: Hmm by io333 · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      H1Bs? That would explain a lot. Qualcomm until the early 2000s did incredible stuff. Now they pump out a stream of crap that destroyed voice comm by imprinting over compressing badly designed codecs causing voice to be unintelligible unless the speaker is Asian.

  5. Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    H1Bs? That would explain a lot. Qualcomm until the early 2000s did incredible stuff. Now they pump out a stream of crap that destroyed voice comm by imprinting over compressing badly designed codecs causing voice to be unintelligible unless the speaker is Asian.

    Can you please provide the citation for :

    1. Qualcomm chips comes with badly designed codecs which cause voice to be unintelligible

    and

    2. ... and that the same badly designed codecs are intelligent enough to let not degrading Asians' voices

    Thank you for your cooperation !

    1. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You can lop off highs above 3000Hz and Chinese, Korean and Japanese languages are still perfectly understandable. Vietnamese a little less so. The European languages become so garbled without highs over 3000Hz (really need about 5500Hz) to distinguish between B T C D E sounds. Cell phones made with Qualcomm tech pushed to about 4700Hz until 2002. Then, inexplicably they lopped off all frequencies above 3300 until the iPhone 4s came out, which pushed up to 4200Hz... So SIRI would work at least some of the time.

      If all the Qualcomm engineers being hired were from eastern Asia I could see how they thought loping off the top of the frequency spectrum didn't affect intelligibility. When Qualcomm did that, by for years later everyone quit talking to each other... At least European descent people's... And started texting. It was the only reliable way to convey info. Voice became cumbersome, annoying, and imprecise.

    2. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      This guy. Right on the money. I have an old oscilloscope and can confirm.

    3. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Could you explain why POTS lines were cut off over 3.3kHz, then? Decades of use... digital sampling rates are about 8kHz, including guard bands.

    4. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well 3.3kHz would be analog 3db down. So the roll off would still carry for high energy consonant sounds. ISDN/digital trunks do sound slightly shittier.

    5. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sampling rates yes. Nevertheless compression codecs until recently dumped the high energy high frequencies because they are data intensive ultimately requiring construction of more cells for more subscribers, or keeping the same cell density, adding more subscribers anyway and making everything sound like shit. Since the compression destroys the voice quality anyway, companies like Samsung and Apple went the extra step and used shit microphones too. Why put in a good mic if what it picks up is dumped by compression anyway?

      Motorola tried to keep voice quality up, but that didn't save them.

    6. Re:Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2G and 3G CODECS are *all* crap. These codecs were chosen - by standards bodies - for their low data rate capability - NOT for their intelligibility! If you want POTS intelligibility G.711 is what you want. All else is crap. Good news though (sorta) 4G has no voice definition and thus no predefined codecs.

    7. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about CDMA then? Why does Sprint CDMA sound very good, while Verizon CDMA sounds worse than even the worst GSM, when using identical handsets?

    8. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you recommend a current cellphone manufacturer that cares about voice call sound quality?

    9. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is none. Motorola was the last. They are just a brand name now.

    10. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      "Well 3.3kHz would be analog 3db down"

      Okay, seriously, what the hell are you talking about? KHz is frequency, dB is power. The only way those two things are related is when dealing with attenuation, but there's about a million factors at play beyond just frequency when talking about attenuation.

    11. Re:Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LTE in the latest version of the standard (or maybe the version before the latest, there's so many it's hard to keep straight) does define a voip standard. Including which codecs to use. It's kind of an important part if you'd like networks to be able to talk to each other. And actually, the codecs are very good. Some of the best when it comes to voice quality vs data rate. You seem to forget that the bandwidth was a design constraint since that was the best they could do. GSM is a very old standard. And UTMS has a design requirement of being 100% compatible with GSM core, so it has to operate on the same limitations. LTE is really the first chance they've had since the 80s to redefine this stuff.

    12. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Verizon specifies for the handset to use a lower bitrate for the codec than Sprint. Within voice standards there is flexibility in bitrate selection. Verizon prioritized coverage and density over quality.

      This will all change in the next 3-5 years when VoLTE becomes the norm. For now, I use FaceTime Audio for most of my calls and it sounds fantastic.

    13. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      What stupid motherfucker modded this as troll? Grow a pair of balls, you pathetic bitch.

    14. Re: Citation please by trparky · · Score: 1

      So that's why I always had people tell me that I sounded like I was either under water or in a tunnel when I was on Verizon. I switched to AT&T and everyone said I sounded better on their end, I told them I switched carriers.

    15. Re: Citation please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only way those two things are related is when dealing with attenuation

      Please get a clue before implying you know about a subject.

  6. ....X..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here be dragons

  7. Mo-Dem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    I got a plan! We'll call any communication dongle a modem now! Duh-huh-huh mo-dem iz a com-puter thing-y lolgasm.

    1. Re:Mo-Dem? by ledow · · Score: 5, Informative

      Modulator-demodulator. It doesn't have any particular meaning and is the more generic word.

      Your Ethernet port is a modem.
      Your wireless card is a modem.
      Technically, things like TV cards are modems.

      A modem does not equate to something that only talks over a telephone landline.

      But then, even so, the last few generations of GPRS, 3G chips actually speak an AT Hayes *MODEM* command set in order to ring, send text messages, dial-up to the Internet etc. I can't speak for 4G but I'd be shocked if your 4G dongle doesn't actually just present itself as a very fast modem.

    2. Re:Mo-Dem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT HAND

    3. Re:Mo-Dem? by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Modulator-demodulator.

      The illudium Q-36?

      Where's the kaboom?

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    4. Re:Mo-Dem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The 4G LTE modems I work with can be configured to interface in multiple ways, and one of the setups is to provide a USB interface with multiple endpoints - one for data and one for AT commands.

  8. Integrate the LTE Chip by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would hope this is a step toward Apple integrating the LTE chip into an Intel produced Apple A9 or A10. Intel clearly has the best process for performance per watt and Apple clearly wants to integrate as many things as possible into the package.

    1. Re:Integrate the LTE Chip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Before that can happen Intel needs to start manufacturing their modems using thier factories. Due to the celluar modem IP being acquired, it was originally designed to be built by TSMC factories and Intel hasn't converted it over yet. It seems that changing process tech for that modem must be a non trivial amount of work since with SOFIA they prioritized moving the baseband processor away from ARM to Atom but they are still fabbing SOFIA at TSMC.

      I believe these discrete high end Intel modems are still ARM though I expect now that they have the baseband running on x86 that this 7360 series will be the last family of ARM based modems from Intel. It seems likely given the direction set by SOFIA that converting to x86 is first priority and converting to Intel factories is next after that.

    2. Re:Integrate the LTE Chip by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Yep, the summary clearly doesn't realize that Intel actually supplies much of the hardware used in other manufacturer's modems already. They provide the baseband processing and Java VM that the modem manufacturer then builds their application (AT command processor etc.) on. What is changing now is that they might supply the baseband hardware directly to phone manufacturers, for even higher levels of integration.

      It's an interesting move but the summary doesn't seem to get it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re: Integrate the LTE Chip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2017-2018 is when Intel starts fanning it's own modems.

    4. Re:Integrate the LTE Chip by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      It's possible, but not in any of Intel's Fabs.
      The huge price Intel charge for their foundry services eliminates any chance that Apple would ever manufacture their SoCs there.

    5. Re:Integrate the LTE Chip by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      It's also a possiblity that Intel haven't transitioned to their own fabs because of the cost structure. Remember Intel's fabs have always been designed for the manufacture of high margin CPU's, where performance is more important than cost. Low margin mobile products require a different philosophy and TSMC fabs are better suited for low cost manufacture.

    6. Re:Integrate the LTE Chip by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      As long as there is no 'Intel Inside' sticker, I don't really care.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  9. I thought Samsung had the edge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    There have been so many news about Samsung's super top ultra hightech single-digit nanometer chip manufacturing process that one can't help but thinking that the South Korean company is the champion of the world, with Intel running a distant 2nd

  10. Buy INTC by amightywind · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Intel stock is a screaming buy. P/E of 13, yielding 3%, great growth prospects, and the best chip foundry on the planet.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
    1. Re:Buy INTC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how much money did their mobile chip division lose last year, before they folded it into the main business to mask the size of those losses?

    2. Re:Buy INTC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they were winning in every segment the multiple wouldn't be as low. Rumor is they have a modem chip on the new iPhone. The Atom continues to improve.

  11. Qualcomm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought Qualcomm only made chips for CDMA digital voice. I didn't know that Qualcomm made data chips for 4G LTE as well.

    1. Re:Qualcomm? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2

      I thought Qualcomm only made chips for CDMA digital voice. I didn't know that Qualcomm made data chips for 4G LTE as well.

      They make chips for CDMA2000 EV-DO, the "DO" indicating that they're most definitely for data, not just voice. Realizing that cdmaONE/CDMA2000 has no future, they're also making W-CDMA/HSPA and LTE chips.

  12. So much Fail in the story and the summary.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Urmmmm....one wonders if samzenpus has been hoodwinked by Intel's PR minions. Among other things:

    1) The quoted IT World article references a single source, a posting in online mag VentureBeat - not generally a well-known news provider when it comes to internal chipset-sourcing decisions (as would be EE Times or the like). And while, that original VB article claims two sources for its information, it doesn't identify either. So classify this from the start as "interesting rumor, might be partially true" at best and "planted story" at the worst.

    2) Regardless of the veracity of said rumor, you have to get down to the fourth paragraph of TFA before you see:

      "The one caveat is that the 7360 chip will be used in a special version of the iPhone that will be sold in emerging markets in Asia and Latin America."

    So...not replacing all Qualcomm modem chips in all iPhones (as the summary implies). Not even replacing existing ones. Just a new slot in a new, low-cost phone for emerging markets. Exactly where you'd want a chip that might not perform as well, but for which the manufacturer is bleeding money in their mobile biz and is desperate to give you a ridiculously low price to win the slot for the positive PR and Apple-approval-halo-effect it would give.

    Finally....even if the summary was true as written and Qualcomm lost the modem slot everywhere, that still would leave it with 5-6 other chips in every iPhone at present. I'm pretty sure after referencing the teardown videos, they're the largest single vendor in terms of the revenue of any supplier of iPhone parts - and that's before the patent royalties on LTE they get from Foxconn.

    1. Re:So much Fail in the story and the summary.... by thatseattleguy · · Score: 1
      That's mine just above - did not mean to be an AC when I posted. (Damn you, Sunday-morning cookie-clearing!!)

      /tsg/

  13. KERN ME by crywalt · · Score: 1

    Is that a M O D E M chip or a M O D E R N chip? KERNING MATTERS

    1. Re:KERN ME by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      Not with Chrome on Windows it doesn't.

    2. Re:KERN ME by crywalt · · Score: 1

      That's actually what I'm using.

    3. Re:KERN ME by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      yup, that one takes an interesting approach to kerning. it doesn't do it.

  14. Qualcomm always had the lead in modem performance. by edxwelch · · Score: 1

    Less power consumption and better reception:
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/...
    On top of that they are a node ahead of Intel modems, which still use 28nm.