If you judge a 'big deal' about whether or not it's reported by the media, then ... yikes! Sounds like a fun bubble to be in!
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 Hunting for Wireless Modem Engineers Near Qualcomm's San Diego Headquarters
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you judge a 'big deal' about whether or not it's reported by the media, then ... yikes! Sounds like a fun bubble to be in!
same thing could be said about the butterfly keyboards, people like you thousands of posts on a forum doesn't amount to much, and that apple has sold millions and only couple thousands on a forum complained, well look at it now, couple law suits and national headlines later, apple made gen 3 and revised their design philosophy for the macbook air, coincidence?
moral of the point, the complaint gotta start somewhere to get apple's attention to fix its flaws, when you shoot them down your not helping yourself since u too are a consumer and are effected by this directly or indirectly
If you can’t beat em, steal their employees!
Stealing? How's that?
If Apple offers better wages/benefits, and provides opportunities that are more challenging, it's the employee's decision to make, looking out for his/her best interests.
If Qualcomm is concerned, then offer employees better work and pay.
Not really. Apple objects to what they claim is an unfair licensing structure. Current tech hasn't advanced beyond Qualcomm patents. Their portfolio of SEP and non-SEP patents cover 2, 3, 4, and now 5G patents. Outside of illegal behavior, there is no getting around Qualcomm. Apple has no problem paying licensing fees. Apple has a problem over-paying for licensing fees. Qualcomm may not own wireless tech til eternity, but for the foreseeable future, all roads lead to Qualcomm.
Last edited:
Yes... good point. But wouldn't you think these Qualcomm engineers would have been involved in that same next gen research at Qualcomm though? I'm not saying these people are worthless to Apple, because they are very likely skilled and knowledgeable, but I feel like their utility will be limited versus someone without the Qualcomm baggage. I can just imagine Qualcomm dragging these poor people into depositions endlessly.
A lot of complications with inbreeding.
It wasn’t a hardware issue. It was software. Apple fixed in iOS 12.1. I have the Max and I’ve never had any reception or WiFi issues.
What are you facts to support it being a big deal?
[doublepost=1542306534][/doublepost]
No one disputed room for improvement. However, people were saying hardware issue, design flaw, etc and that’s now been debunked.
If it's only thousands of phones I'd consider it pretty good QA considering how many millions of phones Apple sells each year.
Once Apple decided to get into the wireless chip business, what has followed is no surprise. Of course they want to hire experienced wireless engineers.
Hiring away Qualcomm’s engineers has several advantages as others such as @gavroche have said. One, they need the personnel to support a new effort. Two, it makes it easier for the Apple engineering team to understand exactly what technology Qualcomm has patented without waiting on lawyers. Kind of a ‘go no-go’ test. And three, in the long term it deprives Qualcomm of talent, and if I were Apple, I’d be after the technology that Qualcomm has NOT patented (yet). Apple patent lawyers standing by.... If I were Apple I’d hire their lawyers too - if Qualcomm don’t have the best engineers and lawyers, they’re in a bad way.
But all this could be resolved of course. Throughout the Samsung legal thingy, Samsung continued to be a major component supplier to Apple (and still is of course) and they seem to be doing business together just fine. If Samsung and Apple can do business, so can Apple and Qualcomm. They just have to make a deal.
Hiring away Qualcomm’s engineers has several advantages as others such as @gavroche have said. One, they need the personnel to support a new effort. Two, it makes it easier for the Apple engineering team to understand exactly what technology Qualcomm has patented without waiting on lawyers. Kind of a ‘go no-go’ test. And three, in the long term it deprives Qualcomm of talent, and if I were Apple, I’d be after the technology that Qualcomm has NOT patented (yet). Apple patent lawyers standing by.... If I were Apple I’d hire their lawyers too - if Qualcomm don’t have the best engineers and lawyers, they’re in a bad way.
But all this could be resolved of course. Throughout the Samsung legal thingy, Samsung continued to be a major component supplier to Apple (and still is of course) and they seem to be doing business together just fine. If Samsung and Apple can do business, so can Apple and Qualcomm. They just have to make a deal.
It all get so confusing so fast.
Well.... the Chargers played in Qualcomm stadium... and it was crap, so now the Chargers play in Los Angeles (sort of). So Qualcomm can kiss my butt
Supermicro
Still waiting to see the Apple data centers filled with Mac Minis running MacOS Server
Last edited:
My bet is that it will be like the iPhone X issues with the screen .I had problems early on and have done replacements for others for it and it took Apple until the a year after the launch to say that it had issues and of course it's a phone you can't even buy anymore. I just want my phone to work normally again I've permanently switched to the XR because no XS device given to me on any carrier in multiple different areas of the country has been trouble free and I've totally given up on their dismissal (referring to Apple, all actual employee interactions have been wonderful but they unfortunately can only do what Apple tells them to do and right now they are denying any issues).
Familiar story.
I stopped paying Apple for their products because they were charging unfair premiums on RAM and SSD technologies they had nothing to do with developing.
I stopped paying Apple for their products because they were charging unfair premiums on RAM and SSD technologies they had nothing to do with developing.
It is the next step of Jony Ive's mission to impose his personal preferences on everyone and everything.
It started with his hardware designs.
Then it creeped into software UI (excessive use of blurring effects in iOS and now MacOS).
Now Ive is spreading his personal preferences to people themselves:
Molding AirPods to fit his own ears and saying "screw everyone else".
Rendering iPhone camera photos to give people his desired appearance.
Apple Car interior will be designed around Ive's own body measurements. All seats will be permanently molded to fit Ive's own body.
Next will be Apple fertility clinics overseen by Ive himself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/91...red-600-children-at-own-fertility-clinic.html
Last edited:
Apple is not a ‘dirty’ company - they’re very good at capitalism and leveraging their position, just as all capitalist companies do. You may define this as dirty, but that’s a topic for a different discussion.
About those premiums for RAM and SSD - there’s another side to that too. I bought a 2017 iMac with minimum RAM, everyone said ‘oh, do this, the money you’ll save upgrading yourself!’. Not exactly. You CAN save a lot of money by buying the cheapest no-name RAM you can, but I’ve built computers and I want good RAM in my new iMac. By the time that you buy Crucial, Micron, Kingston HyperX, Corsair, etc, the difference is actually pretty small. Same for SSDs, yes you can get them dirt cheap but why settle for slower and less reliable?
About those premiums for RAM and SSD - there’s another side to that too. I bought a 2017 iMac with minimum RAM, everyone said ‘oh, do this, the money you’ll save upgrading yourself!’. Not exactly. You CAN save a lot of money by buying the cheapest no-name RAM you can, but I’ve built computers and I want good RAM in my new iMac. By the time that you buy Crucial, Micron, Kingston HyperX, Corsair, etc, the difference is actually pretty small. Same for SSDs, yes you can get them dirt cheap but why settle for slower and less reliable?
Apple has squashed several patent holding suppliers in their quest to achieve a larger margin share for themselves from iPhone. Imagination Technologies has apparently called off their lawsuit claiming Apple has violated their mobile GPU patents after Apple cut the PowerVR GPU out of the A11. Apple is clearly trying to get out of their modem patent responsibilities to Qualcomm using corporate espionage. This is dirty corporate maneuvering, and will make Apple harder to compete with as they continue to raise their prices.
In CA an employee is protected from their NDA after a year. 2 years from now Apple will have a proprietary 5G wireless modem with post AC WiFi. They still have to get patents and respect those that are not FRAND.
Intel is a workaround for Qualcomm because compliance is Intel's problem not Apple's.
Jerry
Intel is a workaround for Qualcomm because compliance is Intel's problem not Apple's.
Jerry
There's over 600 threads on Apple support forum for the same issue.
https://discussions.apple.com/search.jspa?q=iphone+xs+reception+issues
I believe that it is clear that Apple is not going to allow a third party supplier, either software or hardware, dictate terms to them. If you don’t believe that, go back and read Steve Job’s ‘Thoughts on Flash’ where he says as much (per software). There’s nothing wrong with this, it isn’t dirty it’s smart, especially if the third party is holding you back because of their other customers.
As far as price goes, Steve Jobs said it best at D8 in 2010 (he was talking about iPads and competing tablets. Check out 10:20 to 13:00 here:
TL;DR, paraphrasing, ‘if people like them (iPads), they’ll buy them, and if they don’t, they won’t. And it will all work itself out.’
And the 12.9” gen 3 iPad Pro 256 GB is actually CHEAPER in 2018 dollars than the same 256 GB gen 1 Pro.
If you have time to watch the video you should, especially if you weren’t ‘around’ back then - it explains a lot of things.
As far as price goes, Steve Jobs said it best at D8 in 2010 (he was talking about iPads and competing tablets. Check out 10:20 to 13:00 here:
TL;DR, paraphrasing, ‘if people like them (iPads), they’ll buy them, and if they don’t, they won’t. And it will all work itself out.’
And the 12.9” gen 3 iPad Pro 256 GB is actually CHEAPER in 2018 dollars than the same 256 GB gen 1 Pro.
If you have time to watch the video you should, especially if you weren’t ‘around’ back then - it explains a lot of things.