Qualcomm will find a way to extort some fee out of it on the basis of pushing bits over a phone is their invention.
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 Developing In-House Modem That Will Eventually Replace Qualcomm Chips
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Didn't we basically know this already?
Yeah, I think Apple's purchase of Intels modem business was a big clue...
Apple might end up still needing licensing even with their own modems. Maybe not for the entire thing but specific patents. QC will no doubt be thirsty for a reason to sue when the new Apple modems come out so they can keep some sort of cash-flow going from Apple's gargantuan coffers, if they can build a case for it.
But then, if QC does have patents on some of the stuff that makes them better than the Intel modems were then it might be good for us if Apple licenses it. In any case the fight will be fun to watch.
Really interested in seeing if they will include this in the MacBook Pro / Air / MacBook line as well.
Please put it in portable Macs, not just iDevices (might be time to retire the “i” anyway, along with the cheesy “Max” designation).
This is what I am wondering too. From what I understood the whole Apple vs QC fight was about the fact that QC was charging exorbitant (according to Apple) fees for some of their patents which were essential to the tech and which Apple could not get around. Unless Apple finds a way to totally avoid those patents in their own modems (is that likely?) they'll still have to shell up. Does it still make sense for Apple to design their own modems in this case? Either way a six year licensing deal signed in 2019 means that this is a long term project at best.
I have noticed the difference going from an Intel modem to a Qualcomm one. The Qualcomm nippier.
It's called vertical integration, and it's a common strategy even in traditional businesses.
What is your basis for this? They are the best in the business, their chips deliver the best reception and (at least before 5G) great power efficiency.
I do not agree with Qualcomm’s licensing practices but that is another issue, besides it is not that different than Apple’s Made-for-iPhone charges and 30% App Store fee.
I was thinking it's possible that Apple might build on top of existing licensed Qualcomm connectivity technologies instead of replace it completely. Much like W1/H1 for bluetooth and the proprietary features in their AirPort base stations.
If they work as poorly as the intel modem in my XS Max did, I'll be an Android user....again.
Well we all knew this was coming. I wonder which device will get it first? Probably an iPad but maybe we can see it make its way into some MacBooks now...
I hope Apple does to cellular modems what they did with the A and M line of chips.
We did, but Bloomberg has never been very knowledgeable about Apple's business.
I wonder what silicon component Apple will bring in-house next after this. Will it be RAM? Here's ifixit's list of the chips they found in the M1 Air and MBP (https://www.ifixit.com/News/46884/m1-macbook-teardowns-something-old-something-new). You can see there are still quite a few non-Apple components:
A 5G modem that works. Put it in a Mac Mini, or anything at all, and goodbye cable biz. The only thing standing in the way of this disruption is the love people have for their cable companies. 🍸😹 All best && cheers!
When a company tries to do it all it ends up contracting in the end.
Can’t remember if it was Apple 100%, but back before Steve died their had been talk about Apple using blimps to provide WiFi connections for the iPhones, as I believe Apple was having a hard time getting carriers on board, as the carriers didn’t have any control on the hardware or software.Now all we need is for Apple to launch their own satellites into space and create their own wireless Apple network as well.
Apple simply wishes to control as much of the core technology underpinning their products so they can continue to offer a sufficiently differentiated user experience. This is what will allow them to continue to thrive for a good long time to come, vs other companies who are often reduced to using off-the-shelf parts by third parties.
(I am assuming - as I have no first hand knowledge, just going off what I remember from the lawsuit post)
And when it comes to Qcoms fees - I think their patents are based on FRAND when it comes to just the tech. Their fees were/are crazy from the physical chip side. Now the issue as I felt was - the modem would be bought at like 10$, but the licensing fee to use the chip was base on the total cost of the device. So the more the device cost the more the fee was, which is what all the lawsuits were about if I remember right.
In the end, Apple can get the patents it needs for its own chips under FRAND rates, but not have to deal with the double dipping cost of the modem.
And when it comes to Qcoms fees - I think their patents are based on FRAND when it comes to just the tech. Their fees were/are crazy from the physical chip side. Now the issue as I felt was - the modem would be bought at like 10$, but the licensing fee to use the chip was base on the total cost of the device. So the more the device cost the more the fee was, which is what all the lawsuits were about if I remember right.
In the end, Apple can get the patents it needs for its own chips under FRAND rates, but not have to deal with the double dipping cost of the modem.
I'am still curious to see when Apple will hit the borderline for being anti competitive by going all in-house. I'am talking about hardware and not software monopoly.
2nd that. I had an Intel iPhone X, it was garbage. The Intel modem crashed all the time. Luckily the iPhone X had a Qualcomm version. I switched to the Qualcomm version, no more crashing, works like a charm. Hopefully Apple can polish the Intel turd, and make it a great modem.