Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook on 5G: 'We're Excited About Our Pipeline'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Are you listening to yourself? I get it, its better, its faster but its also not needed as much as the hype.
Which IDIOT would need to stream 4K into an iPhone screen? Let alone enjoy it and let alone justify it.
Think about it, if you are watching 4K on an iPhone then 5G is really wasted tech on you (not you specifically, talking in general here). Here is my view, if I care about 4K and need it (which I have at home) then I will watch it at home on my 65" 4K Sony tv with proper sound system and when I can enjoy it.
I would never watch 4K show on an iphone on a crowded tube station. For that I really don't need 5G. EVER!
If someone comes to you and says that then you know what kind of person you are dealing with.
Regardless, 5G might be great tech but the industry is not ready nor the consumers. People will be wasting it on nonsense just like the example you mentioned. That to me is why 5G is not in a rush for a normal (read reasonable) person that has values in the right place.
Do I want 5G? Not now and not for a while. Eventually we will all have it but that is years away. No need to chase the specs as I've said before
All good man, I get it
Which IDIOT would need to stream 4K into an iPhone screen? Let alone enjoy it and let alone justify it.
Think about it, if you are watching 4K on an iPhone then 5G is really wasted tech on you (not you specifically, talking in general here). Here is my view, if I care about 4K and need it (which I have at home) then I will watch it at home on my 65" 4K Sony tv with proper sound system and when I can enjoy it.
I would never watch 4K show on an iphone on a crowded tube station. For that I really don't need 5G. EVER!
If someone comes to you and says that then you know what kind of person you are dealing with.
Regardless, 5G might be great tech but the industry is not ready nor the consumers. People will be wasting it on nonsense just like the example you mentioned. That to me is why 5G is not in a rush for a normal (read reasonable) person that has values in the right place.
Do I want 5G? Not now and not for a while. Eventually we will all have it but that is years away. No need to chase the specs as I've said before
All good man, I get it
I don't blame Apple for not commenting on future products.
It seems like often when they do comment on future products, it usually bad news for the consumer of these products (2011 MP to the 2012 and 2013 MP), or in some cases they just don't materialize (AirPower).
You don't get out much, do you. I see so many people, face down, enjoying 'content' who would give their left arms for faster delivery. No matter the costs. Fast access is more important to many than healthcare. *shrug* Predictable I suppose.
Sorry, my take was on the 4K part, ie. you don't need 4K on such a small screen as you will not notice the difference.
Are you listening to yourself? I get it, its better, its faster but its also not needed as much as the hype.
Which IDIOT would need to stream 4K into an iPhone screen? Let alone enjoy it and let alone justify it.
Think about it, if you are watching 4K on an iPhone then 5G is really wasted tech on you (not you specifically, talking in general here). Here is my view, if I care about 4K and need it (which I have at home) then I will watch it at home on my 65" 4K Sony tv with proper sound system and when I can enjoy it.
I would never watch 4K show on an iphone on a crowded tube station. For that I really don't need 5G. EVER!
If someone comes to you and says that then you know what kind of person you are dealing with.
Regardless, 5G might be great tech but the industry is not ready nor the consumers. People will be wasting it on nonsense just like the example you mentioned. That to me is why 5G is not in a rush for a normal (read reasonable) person that has values in the right place.
Do I want 5G? Not now and not for a while. Eventually we will all have it but that is years away. No need to chase the specs as I've said before
All good man, I get it
4K is about more than just resolution, you're getting improved color compared to 1080.
Is 4K needed? No.
Does iPhone need 4K recording, HDR10 playback, P3 colors, or Dolby sound? No.
Apple is a leading edge tech company and they're concerned with pushing the envelope.
Sorry, my take was on the 4K part, ie. you don't need 4K on such a small screen as you will not notice the difference.
Sorry myself for grabbing what I thought you said and running to the end zone. Um... Yikes? MORE COFFEE, STAT!!!
5G is just a big marketing scheme to get people pumped and make them buy new products. Its in the infancy stage, there is no need to accelerate adoption.
Its better in every way, but it won't fix a problem, so we can just gradually wait for it to happen.
Its better in every way, but it won't fix a problem, so we can just gradually wait for it to happen.
Why are we all acting like this 5G rollout is just for cell phones. Unless we can open our minds a little, you won't see all the other things that this tech will be used for. Your future autonomous cars cannot do what is necessary on 4G. 5G will allow cars to communicate with each other in almost real time. Many, many, other uses for 5G. Stop thinking about just your cell phone, there's a big world of possibilities out there.
Just because your region doesn't have good coverage doesn't doesn't mean other countries can't enjoy their better speeds and coverage.
Everyone keeps saying Apple will be last to go 5G. They went Wifi 6 with barely anything on the market ready to use it....
Products with 5G have been available since last year. If Apple releases 5G iPhones this fall, they will be using the second generation of 5G, a year after the 1st gen 5G products.
One of the biggest potential uses for 5G is mobile hotspots, which could replace your cable modem, or other internet service. 4G versions of these devices have been readily available for many years, and the price of the service makes them niche products, BUT 5G has the potential to replace home internet service with its faster speeds and higher capacity. Where people now have one or two choices for home internet service, they would see additional competition from wireless carriers. With 6 or more providers competing for your dollars, prices should get better.
No, you can't really say "no question"
1. That deal was likely a strategic move for Apple to acquire Intel's business. Also, Qualcomm's LTE modem generally performs better and (with the deal) costs less to use.
2. iPhone major redesigns take two or more years to develop. It's possible they were designing around Intel's 5G modem, but since that's been cancelled last year, they'll need to go back to the drawing board and design around Qualcomm's specs which means there's probably a delay in 5G iPhones. Maybe looking at a 2021 iPhone revision with 5G.
3. 5G rollout won't be useful until a substantial percentage of the population can use it. Apple has been late in adopting plenty of standards. We saw this with LTE on iPhone 5, MacBook Pros haven't adopted Wifi 6, no USB-C on iPhones currently, took several years for Apple to adopt NFC, etc... Also, if you look at other markets, they aren't seeing substantial availability until 2023-2025.
Last thing I'll say is that Tim has been pretty bad at keeping secrets. If you've listened to that interview he did with Walt Mossberg, he pretty much gave away that Apple was working on a smart watch before they even announced it on stage. He also hinted a lot about Apple TV several years before TV+ was announced.
Last edited:
I'll tell you, I hope Apple is ready for this. I had a OnePlus 7T Pro 5G McLaren and it ran hot. So hot it shut off on day one of using it. I returned it the next with no regrets. The battery life was beyond abysmal and this Pro Max is hands down the best battery life of any iOS device I've ever owned. I'm holding back to see how 5G affects these iPhones.
5G still has a lot of room to grow and kinks to be worked out. If you're an early adopter, please go for it. I'm not going to dissuade anyone. I just think that for those who would like to wait, it's totally reasonable.
Most plans will charge more for 5G access, it's not everywhere, and the pricing model might end up being an even bigger gap than this years models (11/Pro/Pro Max).
5G still has a lot of room to grow and kinks to be worked out. If you're an early adopter, please go for it. I'm not going to dissuade anyone. I just think that for those who would like to wait, it's totally reasonable.
Most plans will charge more for 5G access, it's not everywhere, and the pricing model might end up being an even bigger gap than this years models (11/Pro/Pro Max).
Uh wut?!? Paying Qualcomm $4.5-$4.7 billion isn’t a “strategic move for Apple to acquire Intel's business”. That statement makes no sense whatsoever.
There’s no question. The fall iPhones will be 5G, using Qualcomm’s (2nd generation) modem.
BTW, Qualcomm already pretty much confirmed it last year.
Qualcomm Just Teased Apple’s Secret 5G iPhone
Apple's plans for a radical new iPhone just became a lot clearer...
www.forbes.com
Speaking at Qualcomm’s earnings reveal, Palkhiwala revealed the company would ship a massive 200 million units of its 5G smartphone chip next year thanks to "two inflection points" in 2020. The first comes from the launch of Samsung’s heavily leaked Galaxy S11 in February, while the second comes “in the fall time frame when another set of flagship devices will adopt 5G.”
This leaves nothing to the imagination. The only major smartphone upgrades which launch in the fall are the new Galaxy Note (which has already adopted 5G in 2019), Google’s Pixel 5 (which will move to 5G but doesn’t sell anywhere near enough units to boost Qualcomm numbers so high). And then there’s Apple’s all-new iPhone 12 and the iPhone 11 range took a risk by skipping 5G this year.
Bernstein analyst Stacy Rasgon immediately pegged this noting that Qualcomm’s huge 200M estimate was not "hugely surprising" because 2020 iPhones will adopt these chips. This follows on from a leak by acclaimed Apple insider Ming-Chi Kuo in July that every 2020 iPhone will get 5G, while Apple has also talked up its 5G plans.
I agree with this, except I would differentiate 4G and 5G "mobile hotspots" and 4G and 5G fixed wireless access.
While they essentially do the same thing, provide internet access, mobile hotspots are just that, mobile, and they tend to have less consistent experience (varying speed, higher latency, and higher jitters) than fixed wireless access.
That said, I agree with you in that I think that 5G fixed wireless access will have a huge impact over the next decade, especially when it comes to ISP competition.
It may have already started impacting competition, as I read somewhere that Comcast will or has started lowering its unlimited internet to $10 a month for areas that are still affected by data caps. This is down from $50, so a pretty big increase from a company that is not know for dropping prices of anything.
There is already 4G fixed wireless access offered by a bunch of companies, and while speeds are not bad, 4G FWA is expensive, usually has data caps, and has extremely high latency making it difficult/impossible for real-time uses (FaceTime, VoIP, gaming).
5G FWA has much lower latency, is cheaper, and can be much faster than 4G FWA, making it a real competitor to conventional home broadband.
It's simple. I'll break the strategy down.
Apple makes a deal to use Qualcomm chips (which they need anyways, whether it's from Intel or Qualcomm).
This lowers volume shipments from Intel for the next 6 years.
This causes Intel to shut down the modem division as it's no longer profitable to the business which greatly devalues the division.
Then Apple is able to buy Intel's division at a huge discount so they can start designing their own modem.
In terms of the amount $4.5-$4.7 billion, the amount is for *settling* the patent dispute. That amount does not include payment for future royalties. So even if Apple continued using Intel exclusively in the future, they would still pay that amount to settle the dispute. So I'm not sure why you're making that connection there.
That article cites AppleInsider. If you clicked the AppleInsider link, the article says "While the executive failed to name the flagship devices in question, analysts are guessing the market estimate includes iPhone".
They're guessing. It's not a confirmation. The 200 million figure that Qualcomm includes Samsung, Chinese manufacturers (One Plus, Xiaomi, Oppo, Huawei, etc...), and possibly Google. Samsung alone shipped over 200 million headsets in 2018. Huwawei shipped 50+ million devices in a single quarter. Xiaomi accounts for 30 million headsets in a quarter. Google accounts for about 10 million in a year. In a highly competitive market, I wouldn't be surprised if all top manufacturers converted their entire line of products to 5G this year which could easily make up the 200 million figure without Apple.
It's a good guess that Apple is part of that figure, but it's definitely not a confirmation.
Your strategy makes zero sense.
It's pretty obvious actually. Apple was perfectly happy to continue fighting Qualcomm... esp. since Qualcomm wanted $7 billion from Apple... until it was clear that Intel couldn't execute and could not produce viable 5G chips in time for a 2020 release. So, Apple just sucked it up and paid the $4.5 billion to gain access to Qualcomm's chips.
It should be noted that Apple tried to access Qualcomm chips before this but Qualcomm flat out refused, so it was either go with Intel or go with nothing.
Apple says Qualcomm refused to sell it chips for the latest iPhones
Apple’s testimony on Qualcomm doesn’t make the chipmaker look good
www.theverge.com
Unfortunately, in 2018 Apple realized it was going to be nothing, because Intel wasn't going to be a viable option, so Apple did finally capitulate.
There are NO other customers that can account for the projected Qualcomm sales for 2020. The ONLY customer that fits this scenario is Apple.
It's strange you're bringing Huawei into this, since Huawei makes its own 5G chipset. In fact, Huawei had wanted to sell 5G modems to Apple, but Apple wasn't interested. I suspect it was both for technical reasons and for political reasons.
And no, Xiaomi will not be going all 5G this year. Not a chance in Hades. That would be stupid, since a lot of their market is inexpensive low end phones.
Last edited:
It makes perfect sense. It's pretty common in hostile takeovers (not saying this was one, but the strategy is commonly used).
It's pretty obvious actually. Apple was perfectly happy to continue fighting Qualcomm... esp. since Qualcomm wanted $7 billion from Apple... until it was clear that Intel couldn't execute and could not produce viable 5G chips in time for a 2020 release. So, Apple just sucked it up and paid the $4.5 billion to gain access to Qualcomm's chips.
It should be noted that Apple tried to access Qualcomm chips before this but Qualcomm flat out refused, so it was either go with Intel or go with nothing.
Apple says Qualcomm refused to sell it chips for the latest iPhones
Apple’s testimony on Qualcomm doesn’t make the chipmaker look good
Unfortunately, in 2018 Apple realized it was going to be nothing, because Intel wasn't going to be a viable option, so Apple did finally capitulate.
You're contradicting yourself. You said in the first part that Apple waited "until it was clear that Intel couldn't execute", so you're basically saying Apple waited until the day after the trial began in April 2019 to settle. But then you said in the second part that Apple in 2018 "realized it was going to be nothing". So which is it? Was it clear to them in 2018 or 2019?
If they knew in 2018, then why wait until April 2019 to settle? Once the trial starts, settlement cost likely exponentially increased for Apple.
If they knew at the last minute in April 2019, then my reasoning makes sense. They knew Intel was going to crap, so they made a deal with Qualcomm to devalue and acquire the division at a discount.
Wrong. Samsung sells more units than Apple.
Subtracting Huawei still yields more than 200 million units.
Their flagships are still responsible for a large volume. Combined with the other Apple competitors' flagships, it hits 200 million easily.
Fact is you and I don't know what these companies are cooking up. So to say that Apple is "confirmed" to be the driving force behind 200 million units for Qualcomm is factually false.
Agreed that 5G will be in the fall lineup. But Qualcomm settling $7B in withheld royalties for $4.5B wasn’t exactly Apple sucking it up. Qualcomm needed the settlement as much or even more than Apple.Your strategy makes zero sense.
It's pretty obvious actually. Apple was perfectly happy to continue fighting Qualcomm... esp. since Qualcomm wanted $7 billion from Apple... until it was clear that Intel couldn't execute and could not produce viable 5G chips in time for a 2020 release. So, Apple just sucked it up and paid the $4.5 billion to gain access to Qualcomm's chips.
It should be noted that Apple tried to access Qualcomm chips before this but Qualcomm flat out refused, so it was either go with Intel or go with nothing.
Apple says Qualcomm refused to sell it chips for the latest iPhones
Apple’s testimony on Qualcomm doesn’t make the chipmaker look good
Unfortunately, in 2018 Apple realized it was going to be nothing, because Intel wasn't going to be a viable option, so Apple did finally capitulate.
There are NO other customers that can account for the projected Qualcomm sales for 2020. The ONLY customer that fits this scenario is Apple.
It's strange you're bringing Huawei into this, since Huawei makes its own 5G chipset. In fact, Huawei had wanted to sell 5G modems to Apple, but Apple wasn't interested. I suspect it was both for technical reasons and for political reasons.
And no, Xiaomi will not be going all 5G this year. Not a chance in Hades. That would be stupid, since a lot of their market is inexpensive low end phones.
Both sides had a lot to gain and a lot to lose. That’s how you finally end up with a settlement—when both sides want it.
Yes, Qualcomm was very pleased to get $4.5 billion even though it wasn’t the $7 billion it asked for.
However, I don’t think Qualcomm ever expected to get anywhere close to $7 billion. I was actually surprised Apple had to pay as much as it did, and I think it reflects just how desperate Apple’s situation was.
Even the press release posted on Apple’s website sounded embarrassing for Apple as it specifically mentioned that Apple had to pay Qualcomm money.
Last edited: