MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
54,146
15,953



iphone5_image-250x250.jpeg
Apple is planning on creating an R&D team to develop baseband chips, which are used to control a device's radio functions like modulation, signal generation and more, for future iPhones in-house, according to a new report from DigiTimes. The baseband chip is separate from the A7 processor, which Apple already designs with an in-house team.
Apple reportedly plans to form a R&D team to develop baseband processors for use in iPhones to be released in 2015 and will place the baseband chip orders with Samsung Electronics and Globalfoundries, according to industry sources.
Qualcomm is currently the company that Apple acquires its baseband chips from, although they're produced in mass quantities at Apple manufacturing partner Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company.

Recently, Apple has made moves to bring more chip development in-house, including rumors of an effort to purchase a unit of Renesas Electronics that creates chips for smartphone displays. It also acquired low-power wireless chip provider Passif Semiconductor, whose chips could be used to improve battery life in wearables, like Apple's rumored iWatch.

The moves are a part of Apple's effort to control its own production supplies and core technologies, and include partnerships like Apple's deal with GT Advanced, which will provide the Cupertino company with massive supplies of sapphire displays.

Article Link: Apple Bringing More Chip Development In House
 

Michaelgtrusa

macrumors 604
Oct 13, 2008
7,900
1,821
Where will they make these chips? like Tim said, in terms of made in USA " I think we can do more"
 
Comment

afin

macrumors member
Feb 17, 2012
98
1
Although I love that apple exerts such care and control over their hardware, I do wonder if it's a bit dangerous for them to be investing so heavily in the R/D for such specific components (stretching themselves too thin?). Then again, the hardware software combo is one of their strengths and they should be focusing on it.
 
Comment

businezguy

macrumors 6502
Jun 23, 2003
389
456
Although I love that apple exerts such care and control over their hardware, I do wonder if it's a bit dangerous for them to be investing so heavily in the R/D for such specific components (stretching themselves too thin?). Then again, the hardware software combo is one of their strengths and they should be focusing on it.

I agree there's a bit of a concern here, but I don't know that Apple has a choice. This is more then an attempt at more control. Apple needs to do this to make unique products their competitors can't offer. Are they stretching themselves thin? I think so, but that's what happens when you need to find more growth in a company that has such a high valuation.
 
Comment

WallToWallMacs

macrumors regular
Jan 26, 2014
166
0
Although I love that apple exerts such care and control over their hardware, I do wonder if it's a bit dangerous for them to be investing so heavily in the R/D for such specific components (stretching themselves too thin?). Then again, the hardware software combo is one of their strengths and they should be focusing on it.

Bringing it all in house does bring benefits especially if the can get software based modulation working which means a single product line supporting every frequency imaginable out of the box.
 
Comment

smulji

macrumors 68020
Feb 21, 2011
2,031
1,683
I agree there's a bit of a concern here, but I don't know that Apple has a choice. This is more then an attempt at more control. Apple needs to do this to make unique products their competitors can't offer. Are they stretching themselves thin? I think so, but that's what happens when you need to find more growth in a company that has such a high valuation.

On the hardware side, Apple is doing great. It's the software side they've stretched themselves a bit too thin.
 
Comment

hchung

macrumors 6502a
Oct 2, 2008
689
1
This article has a blatant error.
Apple did NOT purchase Renesas Electronics.

Aside from that, designing your own baseband? Doesn't seem like a good use of their resources. Didn't pretty much every single phone manufacturer who is/was also a baseband manufacturer end up shipping their highest end phones with Qualcomm basebands?
 
Comment

chrmjenkins

macrumors 603
Oct 29, 2007
5,322
154
CA
Bringing it all in house does bring benefits especially if the can get software based modulation working which means a single product line supporting every frequency imaginable out of the box.

An optimized hardware solution is almost always going to be better than a software one, as a general rule.

Apple doesn't have the expertise for this kind of thing, moreover licensing it all will be a nightmare.
 
Comment

mr.bee

macrumors 6502a
May 24, 2007
727
428
Brussels, belgium
It would be naive to think there's merely a strategy behind to 'keep things in house'.
I wonder if this chip, or part of this production process might also serve another purpose to create synergy. In another device maybe?
 
Comment

2457282

Suspended
Dec 6, 2012
3,327
3,014
It would be naive to think there's merely a strategy behind to 'keep things in house'.
I wonder if this chip, or part of this production process might also serve another purpose to create synergy. In another device maybe?

Qualcomm is the standard everyone uses. So by bringing it in-house, they can create their own standard. Another point of separation/differentiation from the rest. On the phone side it seems they have done this at every component.

I remember when they were late to LTE, because they did not think the Qualcomm chip was small enough or energy efficient enough. By controlling the chip they can get ahead of this and maybe integrate into their SoC to gain efficiencies.
 
Comment

businezguy

macrumors 6502
Jun 23, 2003
389
456
On the hardware side, Apple is doing great. It's the software side they've stretched themselves a bit too thin.

I don't know, I feel they should have offered a larger iPhone screen by now. It looks like we'll finally get one with the iPhone 6.
 
Comment

FatMax

macrumors 6502
Jun 28, 2007
399
106
Norway
The Qualcomm chips they use, together with the screen, is by far the most power hungry part of the iPhone especially. Maybe they are trying to reduce that power usage by doing this.
 
Comment

iTycho

macrumors newbie
Apr 7, 2014
22
0
I agree there's a bit of a concern here, but I don't know that Apple has a choice. This is more then an attempt at more control. Apple needs to do this to make unique products their competitors can't offer. Are they stretching themselves thin? I think so, but that's what happens when you need to find more growth in a company that has such a high valuation.

Lol @ "stretching themselves thin". For serious; I don't think you know what that phrase means!!! I'm pretty sure it refers to leaving yourself as a company with a lack of either employees or money, as either get diverted to a different area or areas.
Umm.... Apple has over 80,000 full-time employees & over $160 billion in cash.
How in the wildest stretch of imagination putting a team of a dozen engineers at most to work on a project that can only improve reception & battery life would somehow be a detriment to the company is beyond me...
Perhaps one of you posters that are so "worried" can explain to me wtf you're talking about?
 
Comment

kdarling

macrumors P6
Qualcomm is the standard everyone uses. So by bringing it in-house, they can create their own standard. Another point of separation/differentiation from the rest. On the phone side it seems they have done this at every component.

Qualcomm is the standard because they own some major patents.

Currently, Apple pays Qualcomm between $16 - $30 for broadband chips, PLUS another ~3.2% of the cost of each iPhone from Foxconn... about $8... for license fees.

Apple might be able to save money on the silicon, but the license fees would be at least the same, and actually probably go UP since there'd be no discount for also buying the chip.

I remember when they were late to LTE, because they did not think the Qualcomm chip was small enough or energy efficient enough. By controlling the chip they can get ahead of this and maybe integrate into their SoC to gain efficiencies.

Apple was late to LTE for the same reason they didn't include 3G in the first iPhone: they wanted to keep their build costs down. Nothing changed as far as power requirements in between.
 
Comment

businezguy

macrumors 6502
Jun 23, 2003
389
456
Lol @ "stretching themselves thin". For serious; I don't think you know what that phrase means!!! I'm pretty sure it refers to leaving yourself as a company with a lack of either employees or money, as either get diverted to a different area or areas.
Umm.... Apple has over 80,000 full-time employees & over $160 billion in cash.
How in the wildest stretch of imagination putting a team of a dozen engineers at most to work on a project that can only improve reception & battery life would somehow be a detriment to the company is beyond me...
Perhaps one of you posters that are so "worried" can explain to me wtf you're talking about?

Yeah? How many of those employees work in retail stores. How many of those employees are qualified engineers who can work on this problem to begin with? Obviously we aren't discussing money here so I'm not sure why you'd bring it up.

I think the problem is there are only so many talented engineers to go around.
 
Comment

chrmjenkins

macrumors 603
Oct 29, 2007
5,322
154
CA
Apple was late to LTE for the same reason they didn't include 3G in the first iPhone: they wanted to keep their build costs down. Nothing changed as far as power requirements in between.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but at the time of creating the iPhone 4, there was no single chip radio solution for normal 2G/3G and LTE. The thunderbolt had multiple chips. So yes, it kept build costs down, but it also simplified the PCB and kept it smaller and saved on power consumption. It wasn't only cost.
 
Comment

paul4339

macrumors 65816
Sep 14, 2009
1,408
667
... By controlling the chip they can get ahead of this and maybe integrate into their SoC to gain efficiencies.

Possibly... or it's possible the opposite may be occuring. That is, Qualcomm maybe working on integrating their baseband products closer to Snapdragon, to differentiate itself over it's competitors. And if this is the direction it's going then Apple may need plan ahead by building their own.
 
Comment

tdtran1025

macrumors 6502
Dec 26, 2011
275
0
A team of 10, 15 people at a cost of roughly $5 million/year to control timing and production cycle is not a bad thing. To rely on someone else for something easy as the radio baseband is never a good thing considering what they have accomplished with the A7 chip. It hampers their ability to create certain market niche, such as China.
Next product with in-house chip design might be the MBA in 2015.
 
Comment

MattInOz

macrumors 68030
Jan 19, 2006
2,760
0
Sydney
Possibly... or it's possible the opposite may be occuring. That is, Qualcomm maybe working on integrating their baseband products closer to Snapdragon, to differentiate itself over it's competitors. And if this is the direction it's going then Apple may need plan ahead by building their own.

I wonder if Apple will build full baseband or just common baseband?
They could build all the basic fallback standards for LTE then they could limit second chip to just covering local standards.

Wasn't there an Apple patent of a microslot antennas using micro channels in the casing?
apples-microslot-antennas-are-invisible-to-the-naked-eye-could-see-use-in-future-iphones

I wonder if part of this more is to better interface with a new antenna design.
 
Comment

usarioclave

macrumors 65816
Sep 26, 2003
1,447
1,506
The problem with Apple's approach is interoperability. When a qualcomm chip goes through testing, it's a known quantity that's used by lots and lots of people. If Apple goes its own way it loses that base of testers and troubleshooters.

That would have caused problems back in the day, when iPhones apparently had some incorrect settings. That sort of debugging would be really difficult if Apple went its own way. With a Qualcomm chip, you can at least say that it's not the chip because other people's phones work fine. With Apple having its own chip, you're SOL when it comes to knowing what the issue is.
 
Comment

dumastudetto

macrumors 68040
Aug 28, 2013
3,708
4,725
This is great news for consumers. It proves Apple is committed to bringing us even greater coupling of hardware and software for the best product experiences. I'm excited to see these new technologies in the next generation iPhone and iPad.
 
Comment

theBB

macrumors 68020
Jan 3, 2006
2,453
3
A team of 10, 15 people at a cost of roughly $5 million/year to control timing and production cycle is not a bad thing.
If Apple can have a team of only 10 or 15 people develop and test a chip that takes hundreds of engineers in other companies, it should definitely do it. :)
 
Comment

iTycho

macrumors newbie
Apr 7, 2014
22
0
Yeah? How many of those employees work in retail stores. How many of those employees are qualified engineers who can work on this problem to begin with? Obviously we aren't discussing money here so I'm not sure why you'd bring it up.

I think the problem is there are only so many talented engineers to go around.

Wow...
That didn't take long. Today news breaks that *wait for it.......* Apple is hiring NEW employees to work on this baseband chip!!!!

I guess you'll have to find something else to cry & mope about and get all doomsday with. Cheers.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.