Slashdot Mirror
Apple Wanted To Use Qualcomm Chips For Its 2018 iPhones, But Qualcomm Refused Because of Companies' Licensing Dispute (cnet.com)
Apple's operating chief said on Monday that Qualcomm refused to sell its 4G LTE processors to the company due to the companies' licensing dispute. According to CNET, that decision "had a ripple effect on how quickly Apple can make the shift to 5G." From the report: Qualcomm continues to provide Apple with chips for its older iPhones, including the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus, Apple COO Jeff Williams testified Monday during the US Federal Trade Commission's trial against Qualcomm. But it won't provide Apple with processors for the newest iPhones, designed since the two began fighting over patents, he said. And Williams believes the royalty rate Apple paid for using Qualcomm patents -- $7.50 per iPhone -- is too high.
The FTC has accused Qualcomm of operating a monopoly in wireless chips, forcing customers like Apple to work with it exclusively and charging excessive licensing fees for its technology. The FTC has said that Qualcomm forced Apple to pay licensing fees for its technology in exchange for using its chips in iPhones. The trial kicked off Jan. 4 in US District Court in San Jose, California. Testimony covers negotiations and events that occurred before March 2018 and can't encompass anything after that date. Apple is expected to only use Intel chips in its next iPhones, something that will make Apple late to the market for 5G phones. "By the 2019 holiday season, every major Android vendor in the U.S. will have a 5G phone available," reports CNET. "But Intel's 5G modem isn't expected to hit phones until 2020."
The FTC has accused Qualcomm of operating a monopoly in wireless chips, forcing customers like Apple to work with it exclusively and charging excessive licensing fees for its technology. The FTC has said that Qualcomm forced Apple to pay licensing fees for its technology in exchange for using its chips in iPhones. The trial kicked off Jan. 4 in US District Court in San Jose, California. Testimony covers negotiations and events that occurred before March 2018 and can't encompass anything after that date. Apple is expected to only use Intel chips in its next iPhones, something that will make Apple late to the market for 5G phones. "By the 2019 holiday season, every major Android vendor in the U.S. will have a 5G phone available," reports CNET. "But Intel's 5G modem isn't expected to hit phones until 2020."
Am super ampathetic toward a company with such a stringent stance on any sort of openness to its own ecosystem.. having to play by anothers rules based on protecting their own ip...
It seems like the whole 5G rollout thing is becoming a bit of a mess, maybe delivering 5G in 2020 is not so bad as most people are pretty happy with LTE speeds now and the question of you are getting 5G or not will have been resolved by then, along with somewhat expanded networks.
I will say that Qualcom chips did seem like they were more stable though, so from that aspect Apple has been hurt by this...
It's proven for sure that Apple is right to want to take all chip design in-house.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
5G will be limited to cities and areas of concentrated populations. I expect the 5G roll-out, to consumers, won't begin in earnest until the big ISP's determine how costly it actually will be. This won't hurt Apple very much at all. "Wait 'till next year" - Ernie Banks
Can we ever survive without 5G on iphone 9? Crapdroids will have it! OMG OMG! How can the world survive without 5G on iphones??? no gigabit speed!!! no 8k!!!
Isn't that the intention of patents? They grant a limited-time monopoly (in exchange for the design details being made public).
I mean Apple, which made I don't know a metric ton of profit last year (don't ask me how much because I'm too lazy to look it up), doesn't want to pay the royalties on parts used in a product that made them tons of money. The supplier then cut them off for non payment of said royalties. Now Apple is all but hurt that they have to go to another vendor who won't have the same type of parts for them for at least another year? Does that about sum it up? If so, go cry me a fricking river Apple. Open your rusted shut wallet and pay your bills; while your at it why not pay your US tax bill too?
Also, typical Apple. Didn't Jobs do this when he changed the video card in the Cube because the video card company released a few shots of the Cube days before the launch? Jobs seemed to like spiting anyone that dare upstage or damage his ego, usually at the cost of hurting the company. Somehow, this doesn't feel any different.
The FTC has said that Qualcomm forced Apple to pay licensing fees for its technology in exchange for using its chips in iPhones.
Am I missing something? Isn't that how licensing works?
What? You don't think companies that specialize in a specific area are better at it than generalists?
That depends.
I agree that specialists can be better.
But don't you think it's also true with that specialists without strong competition can grow weak and lazy until suddenly someone comes along with better tech?
That's kind of where I feel like Qualcomm is at, yes they are clearly the best now, but I'm not at all sure it's impossible to dethrone them.
And there have to be many other companies besides Apple chafing at the bit for a strong competitor so Qualcom cannot hold cell phone makers hostage (not talking just Apple here)...
So please, do take it inhouse to save just $2 off of a $1200 phone.
The cost is not at all why, since with R&D costs it would probably cost way more.
The reason would be is if you could provide equivalent or superior quality of service in your own part, without being at the whims of a chip maker who has proven they are willing to withhold supply... and of course there's the matter of being sure as to what supply could be, rather than being taken out by a sudden shortage.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Wow, poor Applel...that's liable to drain their cash reserves in about 50 million years.
no 8k!!!
Indeed, Apple will be forced to leaving downloading 8k content to watch on 4K screens the size of your hand to all the Android phone makers. :-)
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Just buy from Quectel. Problem solved.
It's like Harvey Dent -- from one side very good hardware and from the other a blood-sucking patent troll. Some even suggesting to split the company in two.
Qualcomm wanted 1.5% of an iPhone Xr ($499).
Which Apple deems to be too much.
But Apple will happily take 15% from a app sale without any negotiation...
Allow third parties to sell computers and phones based on Apple chips.
Whatâ(TM)s good for the goose ought to be good for the gander.
Seriously? On $1000 devices that cost them $300 to make? And I assume this is some sort of actual/essential technology, they are not seeking to license gestures or shapes, correct? And from a company that keeps 30% of developer earnings (a bit more, devs also pay currency conversion, I end up with closer 66% of revenue)?
Apple never ceases to amaze me with their hypocrisy and audacity.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
But it's Intel, we know it will be working 100% and won't be trash. Intel is known for making quality products.
Apple jacks up the price of the iPhone, then raises a stink that one of their parts suppliers is jacking up their prices, too? Oh, the irony.
They're just delivering you more value, or whatever bullshit excuse you used for your price increase, Apple. Capitalism 101, baby.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
With Apple as a paying customer Intel would move that up significantly. Heck they might even hire 3 more engineers.
The really high speed 5G will only be in cities and more densely populated areas. The long range 5G based on existing cell towers will be rolled out everywhere. It will offer marginally faster speeds, though from what I've read the main benefit is better channel management, meaning towers will be able to pump out more speed overall.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
When Intel's modem comes out in 2020, it won't be as good as the 2019 Qualcomm ones either.
They may make decent CPU's but Intel suck at modems.
No problem. Talk to Huawei and they would gladly supply Apple with a more powerful chip at fraction of the cost. The China government may even throw in a green card for Tim Cook
$7.....7 fucking dollars on an $1000 phone is unreasonable. LOL.
If Apple truly wants Qualcomm chip, they would have settled the lawsuit, and agreed to Qualcomm's term.
Did they Russians or Trump write this story?
The more suppliers that tell apple to go fuck off the quicker the cancer that apple is will go away,
Plain and simple. Apple wanted to name their own price ($1.50/device in royalties to Qualcomm) but Qualcomm had a different number in mind ($7.50).
Can you imagine how much Apple would appreciate it if I insisted that they should give me an iPhone Xs for $200 (what I arbitrarily deem to be a reasonable price) and then be surprised that Apple wouldn't give it to me for that price.
This is no different.
Let's say the Qualcomm chip cost $30. If the licencing fee is $7.5 per chip that means the chip really cost $37.5. Why does Qualcomm call it a licencing fee? It's simply the price of the chip.
I think Apple does not have to pay this fee annually or something after they sold the phones to customers.
Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
In my opinion Apple is just as greedy as Qualcomm in wanting to make as much per phone as possible. But hey, there are other options to I guess Apple can either pay the fee's or simply use a different chip. The 5G thing is already a mess, and like 4G it will take time to upgrade systems to it. The phones are the last thing that needs 5G capabilities first.
I wondered at the time if the initial volley of Apple to Samsung was a negotiation tactic to get the components down in price to improve profits. Spend a few million, get Samsung to say "ok, we'll bang down the chips/screen/ram/storage down (x%)" but of course it all went a bit pear shaped. It's strange how much Apple seems to sue their own suppliers. This appears to be another situation where it's all gone non-according to plan.
Waiting for an amusing sig.