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."
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
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?
Isn't that the intention of patents? They grant a limited-time monopoly (in exchange for the design details being made public).
No. Patents give you a limited monopoly. It is not illegal to have a monopoly.
It is illegal to ABUSE a monopoly through market manipulation, exclusive distribution deals, coercive licensing, and predatory pricing.