Apple-Designed 5G Modem to Be Separate From A-Series Chip, Again Rumored to Debut in 2023 iPhones

[deconstruct60]

I didn't actually know about the Nortel deal, so that was a great tip.

I just read up on it. In the deal, Apple bought Nortel's patents, not Nortel's talent.

If you remember, the patent wars between the big tech companies were in full swing around that 2010-2012, and all indications are that Apple outbid Google and others to give themselves leverage against other patent holders.

Not sure what you "read up on", but Apple didn't buy Nortel's patents. A new patent troll company that Apple/Microsoft/RIM created did.

"...
The Department of Justice briefly investigated both Apple's and Google's attempts to bid on the Nortel portfolio for potential antitrust concerns. However, it gave both companies, as well as Intel, the green light to move forward with bids last week.

Bidding began on Monday, and today it was revealed that a group of companies comprised of Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, RIM, and Sony won the auction for $4.5 billion. ..."

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2011/07/apple-ms-rim-nab-nortel-mobile-patents-for-45-billion/


Apple primarily bought the patents to throw a roadblock in from of Google/Android. That's one reason DOJ was sniffing around this. There is a fig leaf where they join up with other partners to seriously overpay to block because the patents end up being "held" by a subsidiary that gives access to a competitive group of companies. So can hand wave about how this didn't diminish marketplace competitiveness.

I'm skeptical that patent troll company ever made back that money in a timely fashion. I doubt it was ever intended to make that money back.

Google turned around and eventually spent even more to buy up Motorola. That chopped Motorola up into pieces. Google eventually tossed the what they had left of Motorola to Lenovo ( execept for key Moto patents )


Note also in same article.

"... It's worth noting that a similar consortium comprised of Microsoft, Apple, EMC, and Oracle acquired 882 patents from Novell late last year when the company agreed to be acquired by software vendor Attachmate. Those patents gave Apple, Microsoft, and Oracle (embroiled in its own lawsuit with Google over Java) additional leverage against the Android operating system. ..."

Apple isn't biding time to jump into the big time network file server business with those Novell patents. There was some basic client-server processes covered into those that a phone as a client on a network would probably need to do as a "internet connected" device.

When large tech companies are dealing with patents it often boils down to a contest of "My pile of patents is bigger than your pile". For non design patents isn't primarily about more/new products as much as "I've got something in my stack that you are infringing on also so lets talk about swapping infringements or a relatively small payment".

So when a tech company is in decline it can be a contest of who swoops in and buys an add-on to their "big stack" to make it a "bigger stack". These consortium subsidiaries are more so can make "I'll have my side-piece attack dog go after you also ... so effectively my pile is bigger than you think."

Very few big players buy up patents as a segue of entering a business. Most often they just enter and follow a "better to ask forgiveness than permission" path of development ( except for obvious and commonly well know patents ; e.g. a major part of a common standard process)

Those "patent wars" where Apple was pooling money to buy up blocks and stuff them into patent trolls instruments ... that is more about "building bigger moats " around their existing products than creating new ones. More Defensive, not offensive moves. [ there is a relatively small income stream but not the outsized money that these mega pools were paying. ]

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

I didn't actually know that - thanks.

On a cheeky note, if we count co-founding ARM as the beginning of their chip development, goddamn did it take a long time

If we count from the first time that Apple tried to make their own chip we can count back even further https://archive.org/details/scorpius_architecture/mode/2up

 

[ksec]

I find this move timely. On one hand, it should improve Apple’s margins significantly by either reducing the IP fees Apple pays out (down from $90 to $20), though I would impressed if Apple is able to circumvent the fees to Qualcomm altogether.

Where is this idea that Apple reduce their IP licensing fees just because they use their own modem. I see this repeated time and time again and I dont know how and where this originates.

The report lines up with previous rumors that said that Apple's modem chip will be ready to launch in 2023.

MR is pretty self serving. What about all previous report of modem launching in 2020, 2021 and 2022.

I could count with one hand the few ( JPack if you want me to name one ) on MR actually knows a little about Modem, Business, Silicon and Patents. Despite most of this has been repeated for more than 5 - 6 years on MR, and later proven and shown in court as hard facts, ( not some generated "news" ) The same question and false statement continue to be bumped out again and again. It is disheartening.

 

[chucker23n1]

MR is pretty self serving. What about all previous report of modem launching in 2020, 2021 and 2022.

I could count with one hand the few ( JPack if you want me to name one ) on MR actually knows a little about Modem, Business, Silicon and Patents. Despite most of this has been repeated for more than 5 - 6 years on MR, and later proven and shown in court as hard facts, ( not some generated "news" ) The same question and false statement continue to be bumped out again and again. It is disheartening.

Apple didn’t buy Intel’s modem division out of boredom. They’re absolutely planning to do this.

 

[ksec]

Apple didn’t buy Intel’s modem division out of boredom. They’re absolutely planning to do this.

No one said they are not doing it. But It is impossible they could have their own Modem in 2020, 2021 or even 2022. And yet it was reported again and again, and still vast majority of MR comments believed in it.

 

[Abazigal]

Where is this idea that Apple reduce their IP licensing fees just because they use their own modem. I see this repeated time and time again and I dont know how and where this originates.

I need to go back and find the source (can’t remember where I read it - stratechery?), but each Qualcomm model was estimated to cost Apple about $100-110, and making their own modems would lower this fee to just $20 (for licensing).

I suppose in an ideal world, Apple would find a way to bypass these patents altogether (perhaps by attacking their legitimacy in court), thus doing away with the need to pay Qualcomm anything at all, but simply achieving the first milestone would result in fairly significant savings for Apple.

 

[ksec]

I need to go back and find the source (can’t remember where I read it - stratechery?), but each Qualcomm model was estimated to cost Apple about $100-110, and making their own modems would lower this fee to just $20 (for licensing).

I suppose in an ideal world, Apple would find a way to bypass these patents altogether (perhaps by attacking their legitimacy in court), thus doing away with the need to pay Qualcomm anything at all, but simply achieving the first milestone would result in fairly significant savings for Apple.

My guess is that you mixed up the Qualcomm Snapdragon Cost ( or the most often inaccurately stated rumoured cost of Snapdragon 8xx SoC ) with the Modem Cost. Apple may not need to buy their Modem, and their modem unit sold aren't even their profit centre, as ex Qualcomm CEO put the numbers in court during their first day of Apple vs Qualcomm Trial.

But they will need to paid Qualcomm regardless of using their Modem. Along with a few other patent holder such as Nokia and Ericsson. And that is just on 3GPP ( 3G / 4G / 5G ) SEP Patent Profile. There are implementation patents which Qualcomm hold, which are separate from the standard. And the cost of patents remains the same regardless of you using their modem or not. It is a completely separate issue. It is often funny the argument people on MR make that Apple deserve their cut on App Store because of API, and yet 4G/ 5G companies dont deserve their cut for their R&D.

Tl'dr, Not using Qualcomm Modem simply moves the Modem Cost from BOM to R&D. There are some saving likely in $10-$20 max dollar range depending on how you ( or Apple ) slice and dice it. And a reminder, Intel couldn't even make a profit selling 200M Modem / year at $2x a piece while owning their own Fab.

 

[Abazigal]

My guess is that you mixed up the Qualcomm Snapdragon Cost ( or the most often inaccurately stated rumoured cost of Snapdragon 8xx SoC ) with the Modem Cost. Apple may not need to buy their Modem, and their modem unit sold aren't even their profit centre, as ex Qualcomm CEO put the numbers in court during their first day of Apple vs Qualcomm Trial.

But they will need to paid Qualcomm regardless of using their Modem. Along with a few other patent holder such as Nokia and Ericsson. And that is just on 3GPP ( 3G / 4G / 5G ) SEP Patent Profile. There are implementation patents which Qualcomm hold, which are separate from the standard. And the cost of patents remains the same regardless of you using their modem or not. It is a completely separate issue. It is often funny the argument people on MR make that Apple deserve their cut on App Store because of API, and yet 4G/ 5G companies dont deserve their cut for their R&D.

Tl'dr, Not using Qualcomm Modem simply moves the Modem Cost from BOM to R&D. There are some saving likely in $10-$20 max dollar range depending on how you ( or Apple ) slice and dice it. And a reminder, Intel couldn't even make a profit selling 200M Modem / year at $2x a piece while owning their own Fab.

I found the article, though to my chagrin, it’s kinda different from what I remembered.

Qualcomm Loses Preliminary Judgment; Qualcomm Earnings; More on Netflix and MVPDs

A federal judge rules against Qualcomm in a clear victory for Apple, just another area where Qualcomm is struggling. Then, why is Netflix allowing itself to be commoditized, at least a bit, by MVPD…

stratechery.com

So what happened back then was that instead of buying their modems directly from Qualcomm (and being charged a royalty based on the price of their iPhones), Apple bought intel modems, allowing them to pay less in royalties. I assume Apple will again attempt to do the same, now that they own Intel’s modem business, and I assume that they will ensure their 5G models are more or less comparable in performance before releasing them.

I concede that I don’t know where I got my original numbers, and yes, I didn’t factor in the R&D costs (which I assume would be offset via the sheer volume of iPhones that Apple ships). I believe the net result will be substantially savings for Apple in the long term.

 

[ksec]

I found the article, though to my chagrin, it’s kinda different from what I remembered.

Qualcomm Loses Preliminary Judgment; Qualcomm Earnings; More on Netflix and MVPDs

A federal judge rules against Qualcomm in a clear victory for Apple, just another area where Qualcomm is struggling. Then, why is Netflix allowing itself to be commoditized, at least a bit, by MVPD…

stratechery.com

So what happened back then was that instead of buying their modems directly from Qualcomm (and being charged a royalty based on the price of their iPhones), Apple bought intel modems, allowing them to pay less in royalties. I assume Apple will again attempt to do the same, now that they own Intel’s modem business, and I assume that they will ensure their 5G models are more or less comparable in performance before releasing them.

I concede that I don’t know where I got my original numbers, and yes, I didn’t factor in the R&D costs (which I assume would be offset via the sheer volume of iPhones that Apple ships). I believe the net result will be substantially savings for Apple in the long term.

That is where stratechery got it wrong. ( And I have lots of respect for him ). And it was 2018. Intel don't pay royalty on behalf of Apple. It is actually Foxconn who does all these. That is how Apple ( and most ) contract phone models works. And that is why once Apple and Qualcomm reached settlement Qualcomm was quick to point out for the first time ever Apple has a direct licensing relationship with Qualcomm.

Second is that Qualcomm basically won all appeals ( including the one your linked to ) after those rulings. To the point Judge rules Apple cant appeal after they reached settlement with Qualcomm. Yes that means the final verdict before settlement was that percentage of devices is a valid model and percentage of Modem doesn't make sense. And to make another point, even if Qualcomm hypothetically lost, that Qualcomm can not charges % per devices, Qualcomm could still charges per Smartphone unit. ( Which is what Ericsson did with 5G ) and get roughly the same revenue.

Third is that Qualcomm actually offered fixed price licensing option to Apple. But Apple wasn't interested, this was shown in court. Apple preliminary target was for Qualcomm to reduce their cost of patents. And Apple said the cost were too high. Although Qualcomm's ex CEO did gave some valid explanation to quite literally every part of the cost. Whether We or Apple agree with that price is of course a completely different matter. But it was shown in court it is not some arbitrary number.

We dont know any details on the 6 years agreement, whether Apple is paying by wholesale ( and not retail as many people got it wrong ) phone price or a per unit fixed price. For Qualcomm it didn't matter because their projection and estimate given out in investor notes and meetings matches ( if not better ) the era than when they had Apple as customer. Which could only means they are not giving any special discount to Apple. Everything else stays the same.

I am still mad about this because no media reported any of these during the Apple vs Qualcomm Trial. Only one reporter from Financial Times and one reporter from Cnet who live tweeted all these during hearing. And their final pieces were all somehow editorialised. I had to dig up the document myself to read about it. And to put more colour to the story, I was on Apple side in 2017 and even questioned on MR how Qualcomm get away with it, when Tim Cook said and quote Qualcomm is charging "at least five times more in payments than all the other cellular patent licensors we have agreements with combined." Which later turns out to be a spin, misleading or lying by omission.

 

[Philip_S]

My guess is that you mixed up the Qualcomm Snapdragon Cost ( or the most often inaccurately stated rumoured cost of Snapdragon 8xx SoC ) with the Modem Cost. Apple may not need to buy their Modem, and their modem unit sold aren't even their profit centre, as ex Qualcomm CEO put the numbers in court during their first day of Apple vs Qualcomm Trial.

But they will need to paid Qualcomm regardless of using their Modem. Along with a few other patent holder such as Nokia and Ericsson. And that is just on 3GPP ( 3G / 4G / 5G ) SEP Patent Profile. There are implementation patents which Qualcomm hold, which are separate from the standard. And the cost of patents remains the same regardless of you using their modem or not. It is a completely separate issue. It is often funny the argument people on MR make that Apple deserve their cut on App Store because of API, and yet 4G/ 5G companies dont deserve their cut for their R&D.

Tl'dr, Not using Qualcomm Modem simply moves the Modem Cost from BOM to R&D. There are some saving likely in $10-$20 max dollar range depending on how you ( or Apple ) slice and dice it. And a reminder, Intel couldn't even make a profit selling 200M Modem / year at $2x a piece while owning their own Fab.

IMO they shouldn’t be allowed to charge patent fees for any technology required to fully implement a standard specified for licenced use on the public spectrum, unless they patent is held by a party which can prove it is and always was totally unconnected to any part of the standard’s development process . (Low power unlicensed users can do what they like). For that matter I don’t think OS vendors deserve a cut of the profits from applications built on top: those applications are what makes the OS and hardware valuable, not the other way around.

 

[Adarna]

Why separate it?

 

[CarlJ]

IMO they shouldn’t be allowed to charge patent fees for any technology required to fully implement a standard specified for licenced use on the public spectrum, unless they patent is held by a party which can prove it is and always was totally unconnected to any part of the standard’s development process .

But this is the entire point behind FRAND (FRee And Non Discriminatory) pricing - it’s the standards committee saying, “we won’t use your patented technique in the standard unless you promise to license it to anyone who asks at a reasonable price” (many of these lawsuits are the parties arguing over the definition of “reasonable”). If patent holders have most/all the good ways of implementing a thing sewed up tight, this approach is necessary, because otherwise you end up giving the end user an objectively worse device/standard (“It’s patent free! Oh, but it does lose connection a lot, oh well”).

 

[name99]

No one said they are not doing it. But It is impossible they could have their own Modem in 2020, 2021 or even 2022. And yet it was reported again and again, and still vast majority of MR comments believed in it.

I think you are misremembering these claims. In 2020 there were a number of reports of Apple *eventually* creating their own modems, spurred by Johnny Srouji saying precisely this. None gave an expected date of 2020 or even 2021.
Examples:

Apple Developing In-House Modem That Will Eventually Replace Qualcomm Chips

Apple is now developing its own cellular modem that will be used in future devices and that will eventually replace modem components sourced from...

www.macrumors.com

Apple Starts Work on Its Own Cellular Modem, Chip Chief Says

Apple Inc. has started building its own cellular modem for future devices, a move that would replace components from Qualcomm Inc., Apple’s top chip executive told staff on Thursday.

www.bloomberg.com

Apple Is Building Its Own 5G Modem - ExtremeTech

What was rumored is now official -- Apple is building its own 5G modem.

www.extremetech.com

In 2021 the report become more definite -- in that they say expect these modems for 2023!

Apple-Designed 5G Modem Said to Debut in All 2023 iPhone Models

Apple's custom-designed 5G cellular modem will likely debut in all 2023 iPhone models, according to Barclays analysts Blayne Curtis and Thomas...

www.macrumors.com

Kuo: Apple-Designed 5G Modem May Debut in iPhones as Early as 2023

Apple plans to adopt its own custom-designed 5G baseband chip starting with the 2023 iPhones, meaning it'll no longer need to rely on Qualcomm to...

www.macrumors.com

It's fine to be irritated by rumors (though if you are, reading a site called MacRumors seems a strange activity...)
But it's not fine to criticize something that simply doesn't exist, a behavior pattern that's present only in your mind but not in the real world.

 

[M3gatron]

Snapdragon 865 + external X55 offers better battery life on 4G than 855 with integrated X24 modem. This fact comes straight from the CEO of Qualcomm.

Actualy the point was that: Integration is more efficient, but Qualcomm is targeting maximum performance for both its processor and modem. They uses a external modem because their design with the integrated one wasn't ready.
The better efficiency from the X55 on 4G is explain by the improved architecture and manufacturing.
Also OEMs actually prefer chips with integrated modems because it allows them to reduce costs complexity. It's not like One Plus would ever try to pair a Snadragon SOC with a Samsung or Mediatek 5G modem, that wouldn't make any sense from a cost/efficiency/performance perspective.

 

[ksec]

think you are misremembering these claims. In 2020

They started well before 2020.

Apple Reportedly Wants to Have a Custom 5G Modem Ready for Use in Some Products by 2021

Apple yesterday announced that it has agreed to acquire the majority of Intel's smartphone modem business. The $1 billion transaction is...

www.macrumors.com

Future iPhones Could Have Apple-Designed Cellular Modems, But Possibly Not Until 2021

Apple is actively building its own cellular modem chip for future iPhones, according to a paywalled report by The Information today. The report,...

www.macrumors.com

It's fine to be irritated by rumors (though if you are, reading a site called MacRumors

The rumours has to make sense. And 99% of them dont.

a behavior pattern that's present only in your mind but not in the real world.

Plenty of MR comments has been suggesting Modem appearing in 2021 because Apple can move mountains. That was before the settlement note being reported on MSM. It is interesting that people decide to forget about it and then blame it on me being delusional.

 

[name99]

They started well before 2020.

Apple Reportedly Wants to Have a Custom 5G Modem Ready for Use in Some Products by 2021

Apple yesterday announced that it has agreed to acquire the majority of Intel's smartphone modem business. The $1 billion transaction is...

www.macrumors.com

Future iPhones Could Have Apple-Designed Cellular Modems, But Possibly Not Until 2021

Apple is actively building its own cellular modem chip for future iPhones, according to a paywalled report by The Information today. The report,...

www.macrumors.com

The rumours has to make sense. And 99% of them dont.



Plenty of MR comments has been suggesting Modem appearing in 2021 because Apple can move mountains. That was before the settlement note being reported on MSM. It is interesting that people decide to forget about it and then blame it on me being delusional.

Fair enough.
Perhaps the difference is as somewhat who actually understands something of the tech I immediately skip over the clearly idiot rumors and claims so they don't even register in my brain?

 

[bn-7bc]

Yeah I wouldn't count on it, there's never been an Apple laptop with cellular connectivity.

It's something I can't wrap my head around. They are ignoring a whole segment of industry that issue laptops to field techs & other personnel that need secure access back to the office, with everything preconfigured.

Well some things have chsnhed noepw, if the numbers qouted by others here are correct apple will need to lay only $20 in ip licensing with their own modem as opposed to the cost of a complete qualcomm chipset at $90 ( ok manufacturing+r&d aint theap but with bigger valume the unit costs go down. And now that e-sims are geting more prevalent there us a limitid timespan in winch an externally accessible sim card slot will be needed, thus freing up then hw designers. Apple might just think it worth their while. One factor ( given their privacy stance) might be to iffer laptops wher your data never tuches a non apple piece if hw until it actually leaves the device ( at that point everyone has to trust third parties anyway)