Breaking up the Family - Qualcomm ruled a Monopoly, obligations imposed

[Results45]

That's not a satisfying (or hopeful) answer, but that's okay I guess........

[Donut417]

12 minutes ago, Results45 said:

I get why Qualcomm deserves an antitrust lawsuit, but doesn't Apple deserve one too!!!???

 

Half-a-dozen reasons why: 

  Hide contents

.

Don't forget flat out lying to their customers about things. Like whether or not your phone can be recovered or fixed from water damage.

 

*plot twist* It can. It absolutely can. A good place won't charge you unless the recovery succeeds (and they claim a 95% success rate). Apple claims "not physically possible", and will absolutely ban anyone who says otherwise from their community support forums.

 

Apple deserves a class action lawsuit. Potentially the biggest of all time considering their profit margin.

https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1061112-imores-reply-to-linus-on-why-macs-are-slower-than-pcs/?do=findComment&comment=12557047

 

Apple is not a monopoly because there are alternatives to their products. Like the eleventy billion companies making Android phones. OR the fact you have eleventy billion companies making Windows PC's. Anti Trust is mainly used if a company has no other competition. If Apple deserves an anti trust suit so does Comcast, Charter, AT&T and so on for not competing properly. 

 

If a law suit is to hit Apple it should be because of them designing their products to basicly break, because of piss poor designs. Or the fact they know about these problems and refuse to acknowledge them and support their customer base. Basically everything Louis Rossmann complains about. 

 

3 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

I do wish Samsung pushed their Exynos chips more t

Didnt Samsung have some kind of agreement with Qualcomm to use their chips exclusively in NA? I just remember reading about it some where a while ago. 

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, Results45 said:

That's not a satisfying (or hopeful) answer, but that's okay I guess........

*Shrugs*

 

I don't agree with everything Apple does, but I definitely don't subscribe to the anti-Apple hate bandwagon. They're not perfect, but they're certainly no worse than many other companies. They have some products that I think are fantastic. They have some products that I think are stupid or poorly designed.

 

Just like most companies.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

Didnt Samsung have some kind of agreement with Qualcomm to use their chips exclusively in NA? I just remember reading about it some where a while ago. 

This could well explain why they only use them inside their own phones, inside select markets.

[Donut417]

13 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

This could well explain why they only use them inside their own phones, inside select markets.

I do agree. I hope that maybe some day Samsung can compete with their CPU's because they are a pretty innovative company. 

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

I do agree. I hope that maybe some day Samsung can compete with their CPU's because they are a pretty innovative company. 

Indeed. Their fabs aren't bad - they can do good work.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Donut417 said:

How? They have been pushed out of the US. One of the largest selling markets is no longer open to them. They are going to be hurting. Its not like the Chinese cared about patents in the US any way. They would have stolen the technology and used it regardless. 

If this goes through you just need the chips themselves to use them in devices. Huawei can simply buy them. 

 

Its also pretty not OK to say China as a whole were stealing patents. Say it like it is, Huawei we’re doing it. Plenty of great Chinese companies.

[Donut417]

3 minutes ago, floofer said:

If this goes through you just need the chips themselves to use them in devices. Huawei can simply buy them. 

No the point I was making is Huawei cant sell shit in the US any more. Keep in mind they are a major player in Cellular transmitters. They are likely to be the first to have 5G transmitters that actually mean something. But now they cant sell that to US companies. Also Qualcomm is an American company subject to the idiot in the white house. Meaning they can be ordered not to sell to Hauwei. Not saying thats fair, but its most likely the next step. They are going to be hurting. Luckly they have the tax dollars of 2 Billion people supporting them. 

 

4 minutes ago, floofer said:

Plenty of great Chinese companies.

They might be, but remember China is communist. That mean the "State" owns a stake in those companies. The Chinese government is about as trust worthy as the US government. Meaning you can trust them as far as you can throw them. Which is not very far. 

[Drak3]

18 minutes ago, floofer said:

Its also pretty not OK to say China as a whole were stealing patents.

IP theft is an intrinsic part of Chinese business culture.

[Arika]

16 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

IP theft is an intrinsic part of Chinese business culture.

it's like tax loopholes for the largest US Corporations

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

No the point I was making is Huawei cant sell shit in the US any more. Keep in mind they are a major player in Cellular transmitters. They are likely to be the first to have 5G transmitters that actually mean something. But now they cant sell that to US companies. Also Qualcomm is an American company subject to the idiot in the white house. Meaning they can be ordered not to sell to Hauwei. Not saying thats fair, but its most likely the next step. They are going to be hurting. Luckly they have the tax dollars of 2 Billion people supporting them. 

They can just use a vendor. Without the license Huawei can deal indirectly.

35 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

They might be, but remember China is communist. That mean the "State" owns a stake in those companies. The Chinese government is about as trust worthy as the US government. Meaning you can trust them as far as you can throw them. Which is not very far. 

They aren’t obligated to steal US patents or designs. Huawei is the only company with proof of doing so.

 

 

[TOMPPIX]

i'm sitting here hoping my pocophone will get more lte advanced support now.

[Donut417]

57 minutes ago, floofer said:

They can just use a vendor. Without the license Huawei can deal indirectly.

They aren’t obligated to steal US patents or designs. Huawei is the only company with proof of doing so.

  

  

Firstly Qualcomm could be ordered not to sell to vendors who sell to Chinese companies. 

 

Secondly Ninebot was accused of copying Segway's designs. Though Ninebot purchased Segaway to ensure they didnt get hit with a lawsuit. Also, the Chinese government signed in to law a piece of legislation that makes it mandatory for companies to help Chinese intelligence gather Intel. So if Chinese intelligence need info, they go to the company and that company has to give it up. That is the reason why the US banned their equipment. If they can do that, then there is nothing stopping the Chinese from saying " Steal that tech". 

 

China has been caught numerous times being dishonest. Im not say the US is honest in any degree, but China is equal as dishonest as the US government. The only difference is, The US government doesn't own private business. Private Business have a legal right to tell the government to fuck off, thru the use of the Federal Courts and the media. Company executive in China were to do this, they probably would be shot. 

[mr moose]

19 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Firstly Qualcomm could be ordered not to sell to vendors who sell to Chinese companies. 

 

Secondly Ninebot was accused of copying Segway's designs. Though Ninebot purchased Segaway to ensure they didnt get hit with a lawsuit. Also, the Chinese government signed in to law a piece of legislation that makes it mandatory for companies to help Chinese intelligence gather Intel. So if Chinese intelligence need info, they go to the company and that company has to give it up. That is the reason why the US banned their equipment. If they can do that, then there is nothing stopping the Chinese from saying " Steal that tech". 

 

China has been caught numerous times being dishonest. Im not say the US is honest in any degree, but China is equal as dishonest as the US government. The only difference is, The US government doesn't own private business. Private Business have a legal right to tell the government to fuck off, thru the use of the Federal Courts and the media. Company executive in China were to do this, they probably would be shot. 

pretty much how I see it, although we don't know what sort of shenanigans goes on behind thee scenes (government goons making specific suggestions while winking and talking about completely unrelated IRA audits etc),  For the most part we have seen MS and Apple both publicly and through the courts challenge the US governments desire to demand information.  

[williamcll]

At this rate mobile phones will be banned in the US

[LAwLz]

Sounds like a great decision. Hopefully it will lead to a more diverse SoC market in the US.

It might also mean that we will get better modems inside laptops. Right now we've been kind of limited because Qualcomm did not want their latest and best modems being paired with for example an Intel or AMD processor.

 

14 hours ago, huilun02 said:

As a result of greater accessibility to modem chips, Apple and Samsung phones will now cost more

Why do you think that?

 

11 hours ago, floofer said:

This could be great for Huawei 

This ruling does not affect Huawei since they are still blacklisted.

Huawei is pretty much dead unless they can settle with the US government. Huawei aren't even allowed to use ARM anymore (not even if Huawei uses their own Kirin SoCs) because according to ARM their instruction set and designs contains patented things originating from the US.

 

 

8 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Not at all. They're considerably worse. Performance is somewhat similar in CPU (finally) but it uses like 50% more power. It's ridiculous. The Mali GPUs are still far behind (although it seems the newly announced core design is much better) as well.  

 

It saddens me to say but Qualcomm simply has the best platform and the best ecosystem. That's why there has been some tolerance to their antics. You can get away with a less than stellar reputation if you're the best option in town.

It's not that bad. 50% more power is the worst case scenario Anandtech measured. Other measurements were in the region of like 20% if I recall correctly. That's still bad, but not as bad as 50% would have been.

But it's worth remembering that the SD855 has a node advantage over the Exynos 9820 as well (Samsung's 8nm LPP vs TSMC's 7nm). It doesn't make up for the large difference, but it does change things slightly.

 

So in a more apples-to-apple comparison the difference in efficiency at a given performance target is probably more like 15-20% advantage to the Snapdragon CPU.

 

 

And the Mali setup in the Galaxy S10 is really good. It matches that of the Snapdragon 855 variant, and the efficiency isn't far off either.

[Trixanity]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Sounds like a great decision. Hopefully it will lead to a more diverse SoC market in the US.

It might also mean that we will get better modems inside laptops. Right now we've been kind of limited because Qualcomm did not want their latest and best modems being paired with for example an Intel or AMD processor.

 

Why do you think that?

 

This ruling does not affect Huawei since they are still blacklisted.

Huawei is pretty much dead unless they can settle with the US government. Huawei aren't even allowed to use ARM anymore (not even if Huawei uses their own Kirin SoCs) because according to ARM their instruction set and designs contains patented things originating from the US.

 

 

It's not that bad. 50% more power is the worst case scenario Anandtech measured. Other measurements were in the region of like 20% if I recall correctly. That's still bad, but not as bad as 50% would have been.

But it's worth remembering that the SD855 has a node advantage over the Exynos 9820 as well (Samsung's 8nm LPP vs TSMC's 7nm). It doesn't make up for the large difference, but it does change things slightly.

 

So in a more apples-to-apple comparison the difference in efficiency at a given performance target is probably more like 15-20% advantage to the Snapdragon CPU.

 

 

And the Mali setup in the Galaxy S10 is really good. It matches that of the Snapdragon 855 variant, and the efficiency isn't far off either.

You forget a few key points. The 50% is in integer workloads at roughly performance parity. The 20% you speak of is in floating point. There's a catch though. It's 10% slower as well.

 

Let's expand the problem as well: the M4 cores are fucking huge. They're supposed to be like 50% faster than A76. Yet they're not. They're barely hanging in there while guzzling power. It's a failure.

 

The Mali setup doesn't quite match. It's closer than it's ever been but still a bit off. The next generation core will surpass Adreno 640 from the data provided but honestly Qualcomm did quite little between 630 and 640 so they do need to stop sandbagging and I think they might realize that ARM is catching up so we might see Qualcomm roll out the big guns either next gen or the one after. I'm quite sure that the Adreno GPU is also smaller than the G76 configuration in the Exynos. They're usually quite tiny but I can't find a die shot right now.

 

Anyway, the summary is much bigger chips performing worse and using more power doing so. All bad things in mobile.

[D13H4RD]

18 hours ago, rcmaehl said:

As much as Mediatek isn't the best. XDA devs really don't seem to give a crap about the chips as nothing flagship uses them. I'd hope this gives them a bit of a kick in the rear and helps bring LineageOS and other ROMs to a larger number of devices?

The main issue stems from MediaTek just being a dick when it comes to complying with the GPL license. It's not really the devs not giving a shit about MediaTek. It's MediaTek somehow just completely not giving a fuck about complying with GPL regulations regarding the release of their source code. 

 

It's not much of an issue these days with Treble, evident by how development popularity with the Kirin devices surged just until Huawei shut down the bootloader unlocking programme (much to the chagrin of the XDA community), but by the time this came about, MediaTek was as good as dead as most newer phones came with a Snapdragon SoC of some kind. 

[Bouzoo]

13 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

On top of that, nothing you quoted would be reason for an antitrust lawsuit, or specifically, one about being a monopoly.

With Blackberry basically dead, they are the only fruit left in the basket. Take that you person with logic. 

[linkboy]

14 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Didnt Samsung have some kind of agreement with Qualcomm to use their chips exclusively in NA? I just remember reading about it some where a while ago. 

 

I believe it has to do with the CDMA patents that Qualocomm holds. With Verizon and Sprint still having their 3G networks up, phones have to support those networks. It's easier (and cheaper) for Samsung just to go with the Snapdragon CPUs in their North American phones and just make one model instead of making a Snapdragon for Verizon/Sprint and a Exynos for AT&T/T-Mobile.

 

Hopefully, we'll start to see that change as CDMA starts to die off.

[Donut417]

7 hours ago, linkboy said:

at change as CDMA starts to die off.

Verizon confirmed that by the end of the year it should be done on their end. 

[linkboy]

5 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Verizon confirmed that by the end of the year it should be done on their end. 

Yep, and with Sprint/T-Mobile merger looking like it'll be approved, T-Mobile will start to close that network down as well (they've done it before when they bought MetroPCS).

[Brooksie359]

On 5/27/2019 at 12:54 PM, seoz said:

I remember back when I was about 9 and playing Monopoly with the family, I thought it was a wholesome family friendly boardgame.

That was, until I took business class in high school and learnt the cold hard truth of what a 'monopoly' was.

Monopoly was never wholesome. If a monopoly games doesn't end with a fight or tears then you played it wrong. 

[Techstorm970]

On 5/27/2019 at 5:11 PM, Results45 said:

I get why Qualcomm deserves an antitrust lawsuit, but doesn't Apple deserve one too!!!???

 

Half-a-dozen reasons why: 

  Hide contents

.

Don't forget flat out lying to their customers about things. Like whether or not your phone can be recovered or fixed from water damage.

 

*plot twist* It can. It absolutely can. A good place won't charge you unless the recovery succeeds (and they claim a 95% success rate). Apple claims "not physically possible", and will absolutely ban anyone who says otherwise from their community support forums.

 

Apple deserves a class action lawsuit. Potentially the biggest of all time considering their profit margin.

https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1061112-imores-reply-to-linus-on-why-macs-are-slower-than-pcs/?do=findComment&comment=12557047

 

You're missing something important...

 

...which is that all of that has absolutely NOTHING to do with being a trust/monopoly.  Antitrust laws prevent monopolies and nothing else.  Period.