Slashdot Mirror


Apple's Internal Hardware Team Is Working On Modems That Will Likely Replace Intel (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Apple will design its own modems in-house, according to sources that spoke with Reuters. In doing so, the company may hope to leave behind Intel modems in its mobile devices, which Apple has used since a recent falling out with Qualcomm. According to the sources, the team working on modem design now reports to Johny Srouji, Apple's senior vice president of hardware technologies. Srouji joined Apple back in 2004 and led development of Apple's first in-house system-on-a-chip, the A4. He has overseen Apple silicon ever since, including the recent A12 and A12X in the new iPhone and iPad Pro models.

Before this move, Apple's modem work ultimately fell under Dan Riccio, who ran engineering for iPhones, iPads, and Macs. As Reuters noted, that division was heavily focused on managing the supply chain and working with externally made components. The fact that the team is moving into the group focused on developing in-house components is a strong signal that Apple will not be looking outside its own walls for modems in the future. In recent years, Apple has been locked in a costly and complex series of legal battles with Qualcomm, the industry's foremost maker of mobile wireless chips. While Apple previously used Qualcomm's chips in its phones, the legal struggles led the tech giant to turn instead to Intel in recent iPhones.

17 of 81 comments (clear)

  1. Best of luck by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll be interested in seeing how this turns out. Apple has had great success with their ARM SoC design, and I don't doubt they can design a modem and baseband, but will they be able to design something that provides similar performance to what Qualcomm produces. Intel hasn't had a lot of success outside of x86, so I don't know how much of their failings can be pinned on the company, but rolling your own hardware is no small task.

    If nothing else, I suspect that there are some Qualcomm on Intel employees who work on these designs that are about to receive some job offers with very attractive salaries.

    1. Re:Best of luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the even bigger question is: can they do it while avoiding the patent minefield that Qualcomm and, presumably, Intel (and the other big players, like Samsung) have laid surrounding cellular modems.

    2. Re: Best of luck by Pascoea · · Score: 2

      Motorola doesn't make anything.

      Fixed that for you. Motorola of old is now just a name slapped on a Chinese box.

    3. Re:Best of luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wireless communication is a pretty tech and research intensive field. Then again, so is microprocessor design.

      There is immense demand for the technology and Qualcomm won't be on the top of the pile for long with the way they keep behaving.

      Intel made a good stab at it, but Intel has severe structural problems as a company that dooms their side ventures to failure.

      Apple has been good at developing first party parts for their products and if anyone has a chance they will- They'll also have the good sense to abandon the venture if it's not working well.

      I've got a hunch this may end up as a partnership between many vendors. Pretty much everyone is itching to get out from underneath Qualcomm's thumb. They're not a good business partner. ..Except, oddly, Microsoft. Of course Microsoft so far has gotten nowhere with their ARM based products (Windows mobile, windows on arm products), which explicitly and exclusively support Qualcomm SoCs.. Maybe this isn't a coincidence.

    4. Re:Best of luck by Solandri · · Score: 3, Informative

      Apple has had great success with their ARM SoC design,

      I suspect a large part of this success is not due to technical superiority, but getting priority at newer (lower power) fabs due to Apple's large volume of orders. Their Ax processors were the first to use the smaller lithography available from fabs, which meant a corresponding reduction in power consumption for the same level of performance (or alternatively, better performance at the same power consumption). Back when they still used Samsung as a fab, even Samsung Semiconductor prioritized Apple's order ahead of Samsung Mobile's own Exynos SoCs.

      If you remember the whole mess over the Nvidia Maxwell GPUs (the 8xx and 9xx series) not performing as expected, it's for the same reason. Nvidia assumed they'd be able to use TSMC's new 16nm and Samsung's new 14nm processes to manufacture Maxwell, and designed Maxwell assuming the thermal limits of those lithographies. But Apple's order for Ax processors bumped them down in the queue. That forced Nvidia to manufacture Maxwell on 28nm, leading it to overheat until they redesigned it with fewer cores, meaning it under-performed. It was so bad they actually re-used the Kepler architecture (700x series) for their higher-end mobile 8xx GPUs, since it was already optimized for the thermals of 28nm. Pascal (10xx series) was manufactured on 14nm and 16nm as expected, and was a success.

    5. Re:Best of luck by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      Apple supposedly opened an office in San Diego right next to where Qualcomm designs its baseband processors.
      You can guess why.

    6. Re:Best of luck by jcr · · Score: 2

      will they be able to design something that provides similar performance to what Qualcomm produces

      Of course they will. They will hire whoever they need to do so.

      Apple didn't know how to run retail stores. They hired Ron Johnson. They didn't know how to do portable devices. They hired Tony Fadell. Whenever they get into any new field, they go on a hiring spree, and they can outbid any competitor for the people they really want.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    7. Re:Best of luck by jcr · · Score: 2

      Are they really doing that well on their ARM Chips though in comparison to other companies?

      Yes, they are.

      Just because Apple stands on stage and says how awesome their hardware is, doesn't always make it true..

      If you don't trust the sites that run and publish the benchmarks, you can always do it yourself to be sure.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  2. Inevitable, yet interesting by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After they moved chip production in-house with their A-series, which has routinely been benchmarking far ahead of contemporary chips from Qualcomm, people started wondering when they'd do the same with cellular modems. Their recent spat with Qualcomm and their reliance on a lesser product from Intel may have hastened their decision to take it on themselves.

    It'll be interesting to see if, when, and how it pans out. With their processors and GPUs, they were able to build on top of ARM and Imagination tech, respectively (though they're now doing their own thing with the latter), but what do they build on with modems? And how will they avoid Qualcomm's prodigious patent portfolio covering the technology?

    1. Re:Inevitable, yet interesting by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Insightful

      they're trying to compete with hardware companies on hardware chips. This will not end well.... for Apple.

      Given that it’s already going well for Apple with their A-series chips, I’m inclined to think you’re a bit out of touch with reality. Please re-sync with reality at your earliest convenience.

    2. Re:Inevitable, yet interesting by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      What they are doing is licensing a 3rd party technology from someone else and bolting it together like Lego while at the same time using their market power and huge orders to be the first in line for the latest technologies fabs can provide which gives them a nice edge.

      This is very different from designing a modem, a task which far more experienced companies than Apple are doing poorly at.

    3. Re:Inevitable, yet interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sorry, no. Their cores are fully custom and designed from scratch. They haven't licensed other people's technology and bolted them together since the A5 over seven years ago.

      The idea that first access to fabs is the only reason their ARM cores beat everyone else's is laughable, considering that Huawei's core was out on the same process as the A12 within a month or two but only half as fast. In fact, Apple's two year old A10 is pretty comparable to the Huawei's latest, and Qualcomm's upcoming Snapdragon 855 (which also uses the same process as the A12)

    4. Re:Inevitable, yet interesting by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Sorry, no. Their cores are fully custom and designed from scratch.

      There's an entire universe of difference between "fully custom and designed from scratch" and licensing the entire architecture from ARM.

    5. Re:Inevitable, yet interesting by gnasher719 · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's an entire universe of difference between "fully custom and designed from scratch" and licensing the entire architecture from ARM.

      Apple needs a license to build anything using the ARM aarch64 instruction set. The implementation is pure Apple.

    6. Re:Inevitable, yet interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      All they are licensing is the iSA. That's a definition of what the opcodes are and what the opcode is supposed to do, it is just text. Apple's engineers laid out the entire CPU, deciding where every transistor and wire goes, they didn't get any of that from ARM. Neither did Samsung for their latest Exynos, it also had fully custom cores. Qualcomm, on the other hand, licenses an ARM core like the A76 and makes a few modifications, and Huawei just licenses the straight core and doesn't make any changes of their own.

  3. This is not the same as Apple and its A-series SoC by NimbleSquirrel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is not the same as Apple and its A-series SoCs. Apple purchased licenses from ARM Holdings to produce their own ARM-based CPUs. There is no one single company Apple can go to to license the technology to produce its own baseband chipsets. Additionally, Apple is in a very public battle with Qualcomm about the very patents and licenses that underpin 3G/4G/5G baseband technology.

    The patent licensing aside, one of the other Qualcomm lawsuits involves the violation of NDAs and Apple violating Qualcomm's baseband technology trade secrets. In order to integrate Qualcomm's chipsets into the iPhone, Apple entered into NDAs with Qualcomm for detailed technical information. Qualcomm alleges that Apple shared these secrets with Intel after Apple dumped Qualcomm chipsets. Even if Qualcomm cannot prove that Apple did this, it is going to be impossible for Apple to prove that they somehow did not use this same information to produce their own baseband chipsets. I believe this is a much bigger issue for Apple than the patent licensing issue. Undoubtedly there will be direct non-compete clauses in these NDAs.

    Short of actually purchasing Qualcomm, or some other baseband chipset manufacturer, it will be impossible for Apple to show that they have come up with their own cleanroom implementation of baseband chipsets that is unencumbered by some kind of patent or licensing issue or NDA contractual issue.

  4. Re:I hope Apple fixes bufferbloat in LTE & 5G by thegarbz · · Score: 2

    In wifi, now, at least, uplinks are easily controlled at the user device (phone), which is what I was mostly measuring.

    And how does that fix the monumental amount of equipment that results in buffer bloat between your phone and the target you're accessing?

    The user is not in control in this in the slightest. All they can do is not make it worse than the many hops already in the system. Apple won't fix your buffer bloat. They can't. All you can ask them to do is not make it worse.