Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
RedRound2

Apple and Qualcomm agree to become BFFs for next 6 years, Intel officially exiting out of 5G modem development

Recommended Posts

Posted · Original PosterOP

5G-iPhones.jpg

 

So in an extremely surprising news this morning, Apple and Qualcomm have decided to settle their infamous worldwide court battle and has agreed to drop all litigations against each other.

Quote

Despite day one of the trial not having wrapped up yet, Qualcomm and Apple have reached a settlement in their royalty dispute. CNBC first cited sources in saying that the two companies have reached an agreement. Apple has now published a press release detailing the agreement. 
Apple says it has reached a deal with Qualcomm that will see it make a settlement payment to the chipmaker.

This is extremely surprising (or not so much?) since Apple was basically at qualcomm throat for their royalty charges, and especially after reports of Tim Cook's extremely hostile meeting with Qualcomm CEO . In addition to all this, Apple has also decided to to sign a 6-year agreement, extendable to two more years to use qualcomm chips in iPhone, starting with the 2020 iPhone

Quote

Qualcomm and Apple today announced an agreement to dismiss all litigation between the two companies worldwide. The settlement includes a payment from Apple to Qualcomm. The companies also have reached a six-year license agreement, effective as of April 1, 2019, including a two-year option to extend, and a multiyear chipset supply agreement

Furthermore, Intel announced, just hours after that they're officially exiting from the 5G modem business (hence, why this isn't too surprising after all)

Quote

Intel Corporation today announced its intention to exit the 5G smartphone modem business and complete an assessment of the opportunities for 4G and 5G modems in PCs, internet of things devices and other data-centric devices. Intel will also continue to invest in its 5G network infrastructure business.

The company will continue to meet current customer commitments for its existing 4G smartphone modem product line, but does not expect to launch 5G modem products in the smartphone space, including those originally planned for launches in 2020.

According to Intel CEO Bob Swan "We are very excited about the opportunity in 5G and the ‘cloudification’ of the network, but in the smartphone modem business it has become apparent that there is no clear path to profitability and positive returns"

 

Looks like Qualcomm holds way too many obvious 5G patents for the competition to be able to make anything remotely competitive, forcing Apple to settle with them. Well, but I'm pretty sure Apple's investment in developing their own 5G modem chips has probably quadrupled behind the scenes, to complete within 6 years and to start having a viable and healthy competition in this particular sector, similar to what they have done with their mobile CPUs and GPUs 

 

Source 1: https://9to5mac.com/2019/04/16/apple-qualcomm-settlement/

Source 2: https://9to5mac.com/2019/04/16/apple-qualcomm-5g-iphone-2020/

Source 3: https://9to5mac.com/2019/04/16/intel-leaves-5g-modem-business/

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was most definitely unexpected, considering their drama in the recent years. 

 

14 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Looks like Qualcomm holds way too many obvious 5G patents for the competition to be able to make anything remotely competitive, forcing Apple to settle with them.

And that right there is a huge, and I can not stress enough how huge of a problem for everyone. 

People shit on Samsung for using Exynos chips, and even developing them, but this right here is the reason why. Patents and royalties are fucking everyone up, and Qualcomm is misusing their position as hands down the industry leader in this regard. I just hope that Samsung with Exynos, Huawei with Kirin and Apple for that matter comes with their solution just to push Qualcomm back a bit. Quite a shame that Intel is stepping back, what seems to be their usual strategy in mobile market, since they are one of few companies that could actually introduce competition to the market, but they always went half-arsed in. 


The ability to google properly is a skill of its own. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"... intel can't commit enough output"

"our past earnings were mostly from you"

"can't say i'm sorry, but shall we make peace?"

"let's make up"

*romance violins*

 

"... boy this isn't worthwhile anymore" *throws hat to ground and walks away*

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

That was most definitely unexpected, considering their drama in the recent years. 

 

And that right there is a huge, and I can not stress enough how huge of a problem for everyone. 

People shit on Samsung for using Exynos chips, and even developing them, but this right here is the reason why. Patents and royalties are fucking everyone up, and Qualcomm is misusing their position as hands down the industry leader in this regard. I just hope that Samsung with Exynos, Huawei with Kirin and Apple for that matter comes with their solution just to push Qualcomm back a bit. Quite a shame that Intel is stepping back, what seems to be their usual strategy in mobile market, since they are one of few companies that could actually introduce competition to the market, but they always went half-arsed in. 

While patents matter, Intel can't yield the 10nm parts well enough at volume for Apple. That's what drove Apple's move, beyond Qualcomm's strangehold on a lot of IP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

While patents matter, Intel can't yield the 10nm parts well enough at volume for Apple. That's what drove Apple's move, beyond Qualcomm's strangehold on a lot of IP.

Do you have a source on that?

 

 

 

I hope that Exynos modems catches on. It would be great to have more competition in the modem space. Samsung has some great modems too, and have had for quite some time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So then a 2020 5G iPhone will definitely happen though Apple should still try to do it in 2019 since now that Qualcomm will provide them with 5G chips, it would be possible for Apple to release a 5G iPhone in 2019. 


CPU: i5-4690K OC @ 4.7 Ghz 

CPU Cooler: NZXT Kraken X42 
Motherboard: ASUS B85-PRO GAMER
RAM: ADATA XPG 16GB (2x8GB) DDR3 CL9 1600MHz

SSD: Samsung EVO 860 (500GB)

HDD: 1TB 
GPU: RTX 2070 FE
Case: Cooler Master Elite 430
Power Supply: Cooler Master B600 ver.2
Monitor: ROG Swift PG278QR G-Sync 165Hz

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ne0tic said:

So then a 2020 5G iPhone will definitely happen though Apple should still try to do it in 2019 since now that Qualcomm will provide them with 5G chips, it would be possible for Apple to release a 5G iPhone in 2019. 

Why though when the 5G infrastructure won’t be there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, floofer said:

Why though when the 5G infrastructure won’t be there.

So that people that only upgrade their phone every 4 years or so would still be able to use 5G in maybe 2 years when they buy the iPhone 2019 for example. Better to be ready for 5G early then get 5G when it’s already out in some cities/countries. Though it’s really unlikely that the 2019 iPhones will get 5G but you can always hope. Though yeah, agree that it’s quite unnecessary to add 5G this early, would be better to focus on getting 4G (or even 3G) to more parts of the world :) 


CPU: i5-4690K OC @ 4.7 Ghz 

CPU Cooler: NZXT Kraken X42 
Motherboard: ASUS B85-PRO GAMER
RAM: ADATA XPG 16GB (2x8GB) DDR3 CL9 1600MHz

SSD: Samsung EVO 860 (500GB)

HDD: 1TB 
GPU: RTX 2070 FE
Case: Cooler Master Elite 430
Power Supply: Cooler Master B600 ver.2
Monitor: ROG Swift PG278QR G-Sync 165Hz

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, floofer said:

Why though when the 5G infrastructure won’t be there.

Leading Brands need Leading Tech.  And if they don't have it by 2020, then 2021's model (which is about 18 months away from now) will have an entire cycle of "Apple finally has 5G" and "Apple was holding back 5G adoption" and so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
1 hour ago, ne0tic said:

So then a 2020 5G iPhone will definitely happen though Apple should still try to do it in 2019 since now that Qualcomm will provide them with 5G chips, it would be possible for Apple to release a 5G iPhone in 2019. 

Ignoring the basically non existent infrastructure (and from history, the extremely slow rollout compounded with notorious 5G mm wave range issues), the initial 5G devices doesn't seem to be great. S10 5G has so many network issues. Plus, just like 4G initially, Apple would have to make different versions of 5G phones for different countries due to the different frequencies different countries woube be using for 5G (heck, I don't think a lot of countries even have fully decided on that yet)

 

Plus 4G/4G+ today are plenty fast enough for basically 99% of the things you'd do with your capped data plan, unlike 3G. So, I'm in no hurry for 5G, and quite frankly I don't really understand the industry's over the top excitement about 5G

 

Edit: Whoops, I didn't reply to your main point. The new iPhones would be by now in late stages of testing and debugging, before ramping up mass production. So I don't think it would be possible for Apple to completely redesign the iPhone right now, to get in time for September.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, forgive me if I'm wrong... but I see it like this:-

 

People that have good/great 4G reception don't care as they get great speed already.

People that don't have good reception, would actually benefit from 5G because 2 bars on 5G beats 2 bars on 4G for internet speed?


Please quote my post, or put @paddy-stone if you want me to respond to you, I may not see your post otherwise.

 

Spoiler
  • PCs:-
  • AM4 1700 build https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/user/paddy.stone/saved/XyXyXL
  • ASUS x53e  - i7 2670QM / Sony BD writer x8 / Win 10, Elemetary OS, Ubuntu/ Samsung 830 SSD
  • Lenovo G50 - 8Gb RAM - Samsung 860 Evo 250GB SSD - DVD writer
  •  
  • Displays:-
  • Panasonic 55" 4k TV
  • LG 29" Ultrawide
  •  
  • Storage/NAS/Servers:-
  • Main Server - ASrock AB350M Pro 4 - AMD Athlon 200GE - 16GB DDR4 2133Mhz RAM - 240GB Crucial M500 SSD Boot Drive, running Windows 10, plex server - 4x 4TB Seagate Ironwolf HDDs.
  • Backup server - HP Proliant Gen 8 4 bay NAS running FreeNAS ZFS striped 3x3TiB WD reds
  • HP ProLiant G6 Server SE316M1 Twin Hex Core Intel Xeon E5645 2.40GHz 48GB RAM
  •  
  • Gaming/Tablets etc:-
  • Xbox One S 500GB + 2TB HDD
  • PS4
  • Nvidia Shield TV
  • Xiaomi/Pocaphone F1 128GB 6GB RAM
  • Xiaomi Redmi Note 4
  • Lenovo k3 note
  • Windows tablet
  •  
  • Unused Hardware currently :-
  •  
  • i7 6700K  b250 mobo - Thermaltake Core V21-  EVGA Supernova G2 650W Gold PSU
  • AMD phenom II 1055t / 8GB RAM / DVD writer
  • Zotac GTX 1060 6GB Amp! edition x2
  • Zotac GTX 1050 mini
  • Nvidia Shield K1 tablet

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
19 minutes ago, paddy-stone said:

OK, forgive me if I'm wrong... but I see it like this:-

 

People that have good/great 4G reception don't care as they get great speed already.

People that don't have good reception, would actually benefit from 5G because 2 bars on 5G beats 2 bars on 4G for internet speed?

If you are going to get a a low 5G signal, there is close to zero chance of you not getting a better 4G signal, at least in the way which carriers are deploying their networks. Have you ever come across an issue, where you get 4G, but not 3G?

 

From physics standpoint, the higher the G, the higher frequency waves are being used, which also inherently means it would have lower range. So multiple 5G antennas would be required to fully cover an area with 4G served by 1 tower. That's the reason why 5G antennas have been proposed to be put into street lamps every corner, rather than dedicating towers for it 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RedRound2 said:

If you are going to get a a low 5G signal, there is close to zero chance of you not getting a better 4G signal, at least in the way which carriers are deploying their networks. Have you ever come across an issue, where you get 4G, but not 3G?

 

From physics standpoint, the higher the G, the higher frequency waves are being used, which also inherently means it would have lower range. So multiple 5G antennas would be required to fully cover an area with 4G served by 1 tower. That's the reason why 5G antennas have been proposed to be put into street lamps every corner, rather than dedicating towers for it 

I see what you're saying, but yes here in the countryside we have had instances of not getting 3G signal, but can get 4G - just. It's not so bad now, years later, but was a problem for a while. Anyway, it still didn't answer my question, would a 2 bar signal on 5G be faster than 2 bar signal on 4G?  also where do you live? as here in the countryside of the UK, there might not BE any streetlamps for them to put the 5G antennas in.... so don't know what they have planned (if anything).


Please quote my post, or put @paddy-stone if you want me to respond to you, I may not see your post otherwise.

 

Spoiler
  • PCs:-
  • AM4 1700 build https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/user/paddy.stone/saved/XyXyXL
  • ASUS x53e  - i7 2670QM / Sony BD writer x8 / Win 10, Elemetary OS, Ubuntu/ Samsung 830 SSD
  • Lenovo G50 - 8Gb RAM - Samsung 860 Evo 250GB SSD - DVD writer
  •  
  • Displays:-
  • Panasonic 55" 4k TV
  • LG 29" Ultrawide
  •  
  • Storage/NAS/Servers:-
  • Main Server - ASrock AB350M Pro 4 - AMD Athlon 200GE - 16GB DDR4 2133Mhz RAM - 240GB Crucial M500 SSD Boot Drive, running Windows 10, plex server - 4x 4TB Seagate Ironwolf HDDs.
  • Backup server - HP Proliant Gen 8 4 bay NAS running FreeNAS ZFS striped 3x3TiB WD reds
  • HP ProLiant G6 Server SE316M1 Twin Hex Core Intel Xeon E5645 2.40GHz 48GB RAM
  •  
  • Gaming/Tablets etc:-
  • Xbox One S 500GB + 2TB HDD
  • PS4
  • Nvidia Shield TV
  • Xiaomi/Pocaphone F1 128GB 6GB RAM
  • Xiaomi Redmi Note 4
  • Lenovo k3 note
  • Windows tablet
  •  
  • Unused Hardware currently :-
  •  
  • i7 6700K  b250 mobo - Thermaltake Core V21-  EVGA Supernova G2 650W Gold PSU
  • AMD phenom II 1055t / 8GB RAM / DVD writer
  • Zotac GTX 1060 6GB Amp! edition x2
  • Zotac GTX 1050 mini
  • Nvidia Shield K1 tablet

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

well given that Intel's only modem customer was Apple, i dont see this as a surprise that they pulled out. what IS surprising is that Apple and Qualcomm came to an agreement and dropping all suits. i would love to be a fly on the wall of that meeting to see what the hell actually happened

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Arika S said:

i would love to be a fly on the wall of that meeting to see what the hell actually happened

Qualcomm: You know, Tim Apple, Intel isn't going to have 5G chips ready by 2020 and by then you will be left behind in the mobile marketplace.
Tim Apple: You're right, and people hate the intel modems in our most recent phones. How about 6 years.

Qualcomm: 👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
50 minutes ago, paddy-stone said:

I see what you're saying, but yes here in the countryside we have had instances of not getting 3G signal, but can get 4G - just. It's not so bad now, years later, but was a problem for a while. Anyway, it still didn't answer my question, would a 2 bar signal on 5G be faster than 2 bar signal on 4G?  also where do you live? as here in the countryside of the UK, there might not BE any streetlamps for them to put the 5G antennas in.... so don't know what they have planned (if anything).

Don't quote me on this but theoretically, yes. 2 bar 5G will be faster than 2 bar 4G, just because mm waves can carry more information at a time than 4G RF signals. Although a number of other factors can also be at play, like the number of users connected to the router, etc.

 

It doesn't necessarily have to be street lamps. They can also put in top of buildings in every corner. Street lamp would just be easier

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, paddy-stone said:

OK, forgive me if I'm wrong... but I see it like this:-

 

People that have good/great 4G reception don't care as they get great speed already.

People that don't have good reception, would actually benefit from 5G because 2 bars on 5G beats 2 bars on 4G for internet speed? 

It depends.

 

7 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

If you are going to get a a low 5G signal, there is close to zero chance of you not getting a better 4G signal, at least in the way which carriers are deploying their networks. Have you ever come across an issue, where you get 4G, but not 3G? 

 

From physics standpoint, the higher the G, the higher frequency waves are being used, which also inherently means it would have lower range. So multiple 5G antennas would be required to fully cover an area with 4G served by 1 tower. That's the reason why 5G antennas have been proposed to be put into street lamps every corner, rather than dedicating towers for it 

You're somewhat right, but somewhat wrong.

 

4G operates between 450MHz and 5900 MHz (depending on band). In Sweden it's mostly band 20 (800MHz), band 8 (900MHz) and band 3 (1800MHz) that are used.

 

3G operates between 699MHz and 3590MHz (again, depending on band).

 

AT&T uses 850MHz for their EDGE network, which means that my 4G connection here in Sweden is often at the same or lower frequency than Edge (2.5G) for AT&T customers.

 

 

The reason why you often get a better 3G signal than 4G signal is because the newer generations often use more granular modulation, which in turn requires a cleaner signal. The higher the speed, the more prone to interference the signal is. So it drops the modulation precision (and thus speed) until the tolerances are big enough to support the noise on the signal.

So even if you were to use 3G and 4G at the same frequency, in order for 4G speeds you would need a cleaner signal than for 3G.

 

 

 

5G has two parts to it.

One is called RF1, which uses frequencies below 6GHz to send data. This will work the same way as current 4G implementations, but with slightly higher speeds.

 

The second one, which is the really interesting one, is called RF2 (also known as mmWave or EHF which stands for extremely high frequency). It uses 24GHz to 52GHz frequency (which is, as the name suggests, extremely high). The drawback of these high frequencies is that they are terrible at penetrating objects. It most likely won't be able to go through a wall.

The benefit is that these high frequencies is that they are terrible at penetrating objects! Which means that the radiowaves from one carrier or tower will not be able to interference with the signals from another carrier or tower. This in turn means that once you do get a signal, it will be extremely clean, allowing for very precise modulation, with very large channels and thus very high speeds.

 

Basically, right now we have a problem where there are so many 2G, 3G and 4G signals everywhere (at least in the cities) that the signals are really unclean and hard for our phones to decipher. mmWave fixes this by making the signals have terrible reach, but once you're in reach they are excellent. The new problem (terrible reach) will be overcome by installing small, low power mmWave 5G antennas everywhere.

 

mmWave will be especially useful for areas with large crowds (like concerts, town squares, etc).

For the most part when you're out and about, you will probably be connected to RF1 (sub 6GHz) frequency though, and at that point 5G is just a slightly improved 4G variant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LAwLz said:

It depends.

 

You're somewhat right, but somewhat wrong.

 

4G operates between 450MHz and 5900 MHz (depending on band). In Sweden it's mostly band 20 (800MHz), band 8 (900MHz) and band 3 (1800MHz) that are used.

 

3G operates between 699MHz and 3590MHz (again, depending on band).

 

AT&T uses 850MHz for their EDGE network, which means that my 4G connection here in Sweden is often at the same or lower frequency than Edge (2.5G) for AT&T customers.

 

 

The reason why you often get a better 3G signal than 4G signal is because the newer generations often use more granular modulation, which in turn requires a cleaner signal. The higher the speed, the more prone to interference the signal is. So it drops the modulation precision (and thus speed) until the tolerances are big enough to support the noise on the signal.

So even if you were to use 3G and 4G at the same frequency, in order for 4G speeds you would need a cleaner signal than for 3G.

 

 

 

5G has two parts to it.

One is called RF1, which uses frequencies below 6GHz to send data. This will work the same way as current 4G implementations, but with slightly higher speeds.

 

The second one, which is the really interesting one, is called RF2 (also known as mmWave or EHF which stands for extremely high frequency). It uses 24GHz to 52GHz frequency (which is, as the name suggests, extremely high). The drawback of these high frequencies is that they are terrible at penetrating objects. It most likely won't be able to go through a wall.

The benefit is that these high frequencies is that they are terrible at penetrating objects! Which means that the radiowaves from one carrier or tower will not be able to interference with the signals from another carrier or tower. This in turn means that once you do get a signal, it will be extremely clean, allowing for very precise modulation, with very large channels and thus very high speeds.

 

Basically, right now we have a problem where there are so many 2G, 3G and 4G signals everywhere (at least in the cities) that the signals are really unclean and hard for our phones to decipher. mmWave fixes this by making the signals have terrible reach, but once you're in reach they are excellent. The new problem (terrible reach) will be overcome by installing small, low power mmWave 5G antennas everywhere.

 

mmWave will be especially useful for areas with large crowds (like concerts, town squares, etc).

For the most part when you're out and about, you will probably be connected to RF1 (sub 6GHz) frequency though, and at that point 5G is just a slightly improved 4G variant.

Thanks for that, appreciate the info.

 

I don't get a great 4G or 3G signal where I live ATM. But around 100-200Yds away the signal is full bore, so at least if I'm out walking I can get a signal.... the worst for us is whilst driving, we have dead spots on the main road to the nearest big town, so basically useless for phone calls even with 2G, and always a chance of losing the signal with them too.

Unfortuantely I can't think of anywhere they would be able to put 5G antennas, it's literally country roads, single lane sometimes and with hedgerows each side, that get bombarded with huge trucks, and farmers trimming the hedgerows that technically they own, so don't see that being an option.

So even with 5G depending on how far they will reach might still have dead spots in the UK countryside.

 

I'm really hoping that the mini satellites will be a good solution to things like this being a problem, someday hopefully.


Please quote my post, or put @paddy-stone if you want me to respond to you, I may not see your post otherwise.

 

Spoiler
  • PCs:-
  • AM4 1700 build https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/user/paddy.stone/saved/XyXyXL
  • ASUS x53e  - i7 2670QM / Sony BD writer x8 / Win 10, Elemetary OS, Ubuntu/ Samsung 830 SSD
  • Lenovo G50 - 8Gb RAM - Samsung 860 Evo 250GB SSD - DVD writer
  •  
  • Displays:-
  • Panasonic 55" 4k TV
  • LG 29" Ultrawide
  •  
  • Storage/NAS/Servers:-
  • Main Server - ASrock AB350M Pro 4 - AMD Athlon 200GE - 16GB DDR4 2133Mhz RAM - 240GB Crucial M500 SSD Boot Drive, running Windows 10, plex server - 4x 4TB Seagate Ironwolf HDDs.
  • Backup server - HP Proliant Gen 8 4 bay NAS running FreeNAS ZFS striped 3x3TiB WD reds
  • HP ProLiant G6 Server SE316M1 Twin Hex Core Intel Xeon E5645 2.40GHz 48GB RAM
  •  
  • Gaming/Tablets etc:-
  • Xbox One S 500GB + 2TB HDD
  • PS4
  • Nvidia Shield TV
  • Xiaomi/Pocaphone F1 128GB 6GB RAM
  • Xiaomi Redmi Note 4
  • Lenovo k3 note
  • Windows tablet
  •  
  • Unused Hardware currently :-
  •  
  • i7 6700K  b250 mobo - Thermaltake Core V21-  EVGA Supernova G2 650W Gold PSU
  • AMD phenom II 1055t / 8GB RAM / DVD writer
  • Zotac GTX 1060 6GB Amp! edition x2
  • Zotac GTX 1050 mini
  • Nvidia Shield K1 tablet

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, while I like that Apple now has the "best" tech for 5G modems again, and this seems like a win for both companies…this smells fishy in a couple ways, despite the positives…and mainly as a negative for Qualcom.

 

1) Apple is reported to have paid a significant amount here as part of the settlement.  They did already have money set aside for this, but that strikes me as odd, based on the relatively strong position Apple was in.  I would make a guess that the money paid also includes a deposit towards 5G modems and/or licensing of the IP needed to use those.

2) This is the media frenzy hand that people have been noticing and seeing the most, because Apple products and big business money.  What not as many have been reporting on is the SECOND set of investigations and lawsuites going on in several countries where the countries themselves are going after Qualcom for anti-competitive business practices, anti-trust, monopolistic abuse, FRAND abuse, etc.  Apple has been on record in many cases saying they were forced to do business with Qualcom, and this would actually BOLSTER all of those lawsuits and investigations, and with one less modem manufacturer, also bolster the anti-competitive monopolistic/trust based portions as well.  While there may be some sort of "we won't say anything bad while under this agreement" thing, it will still hurt Qualcom, and possibly open up the standards, and licensing there of, in the future.

3) Everybody knows Apple has been designing modems for future use in house.  Intel would've known they were basically a stop gap measure, and were hoping to get others on board because of Apple's use.  This agreement time frame gives us an idea as to when Apple thinks their in house modem will be fully ready…and/or when they believe the IP will be opened up due to regulatory bodies in various countries attacking Qualcom.

 

So…this is "the story is over folks"…pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Arika S said:

well given that Intel's only modem customer was Apple, i dont see this as a surprise that they pulled out. what IS surprising is that Apple and Qualcomm came to an agreement and dropping all suits. i would love to be a fly on the wall of that meeting to see what the hell actually happened

true that interesting on what all the other terms are going to be wonder if cross patent things took place

did you see intels shares skyrocketed too lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, justpoet said:

So, while I like that Apple now has the "best" tech for 5G modems again, and this seems like a win for both companies…this smells fishy in a couple ways, despite the positives…and mainly as a negative for Qualcom.

 

1) Apple is reported to have paid a significant amount here as part of the settlement.  They did already have money set aside for this, but that strikes me as odd, based on the relatively strong position Apple was in.  I would make a guess that the money paid also includes a deposit towards 5G modems and/or licensing of the IP needed to use those.

2) This is the media frenzy hand that people have been noticing and seeing the most, because Apple products and big business money.  What not as many have been reporting on is the SECOND set of investigations and lawsuites going on in several countries where the countries themselves are going after Qualcom for anti-competitive business practices, anti-trust, monopolistic abuse, FRAND abuse, etc.  Apple has been on record in many cases saying they were forced to do business with Qualcom, and this would actually BOLSTER all of those lawsuits and investigations, and with one less modem manufacturer, also bolster the anti-competitive monopolistic/trust based portions as well.  While there may be some sort of "we won't say anything bad while under this agreement" thing, it will still hurt Qualcom, and possibly open up the standards, and licensing there of, in the future.

3) Everybody knows Apple has been designing modems for future use in house.  Intel would've known they were basically a stop gap measure, and were hoping to get others on board because of Apple's use.  This agreement time frame gives us an idea as to when Apple thinks their in house modem will be fully ready…and/or when they believe the IP will be opened up due to regulatory bodies in various countries attacking Qualcom.

 

So…this is "the story is over folks"…pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Oh, I don't think numbers two and three, at least, were all that secret.  Apple needs Qualcomm's hardware, but I'll bet it would be happy if the FTC slapped Qualcomm down for any antitrust abuses.  And even Qualcomm is going to be keenly aware that this is a short-term deal.  It just beats the abrupt exit that Apple made earlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×