Man, if this happens I hope they pull it off. Their success with the A-series chips suggests they can, but it also sounds like Intel was struggling to pull it together. Does it make sense to go through the effort if the end game is a standards compliant chip with only yourself as a customer?
Not much room for differentiation or deeper integration into the software stack as far as I can tell, or am I missing something? Seems foolish if the only points of differentiation are power consumption and reception quality-- Qualcomm the existing players have a huge lead on experience in those areas. And unlike Samsung, Intel and Qualcomm, if Apple doesn't source the parts to 3rd parties they can't amortize the R&D expense across as many parts...
I get both of these points, but why stop here? Why not make their own memory? Roll their own steel? Is the plan, in effect, to pull a reverse-Samsung?
Samsung makes commodity parts, and uses their smartphones to showcase them. Is Apple planning to showcase smartphones and simply produce the parts to build them?
And I'm not sure I'd assume they can even reach parity with Qualcomm. At some point, I'd imagine that monopoly power will degrade Qualcomm's technical dominance, but I see no sign of it yet.
The usual logic is to specialize and focus on your core competence and places where you can differentiate. If it's something that someone else can do as well or better than you, let them. Apple has been pretty disciplined in following that approach, at least in hardware. Software could be debated, I suppose.
It may be because there are too few players in the modem space for this to be a truly commodity part but, if so, someone out there missed an opportunity and Apple is taking a huge risk. You're saying they'll make it up on product margin, but they'll be paying multiples of the R&D cost per unit that the commodity players do-- it seems a strange place to spend it. It seems like it would make more sense for Apple, Samsung, and a few others to go in on a joint venture.
Who else out there is capable of making 5G chips? Qualcomm, Huawei, Samsung? Intel dropped out, obviously. Anyone else in the game?
Cook is an operations guy, I'm sure he's thought this through, but it still seems an odd move.
Because you can differentiate your products with the processor design. I'm not sure how you do that with the modem-- it has to talk to the tower, so it has to be standards compliant. If it's standards compliant, then it's not functionally different from any other standards compliant modem.
Maybe I'm thinking about the wrong device. Maybe I shouldn't be thinking about the phone, but the watch. There might be more room to innovate there?
If they can make a chip on par or better. There's a lot to say against Qualcomm, but technically inept is not on that list. Both Infineon and Intel are world class companies with experience in these types of components and they failed to compete.
It is nice to see finally 1 person asking the right question.
Let's put some number into prospective.
Samsung made roughly 250M Smartphone a year, Huawei made roughly 200M Smartphones, Apple roughly 200M. These three are the top 3 smartphone vendors. However Apple also ships 40M Tablet a year, the largest Tablet Vendor.
This hopefully answer your amortize question. Samsung cant sell their modem or SoC with modem to others as per the agreement with Qualcomm. However it should be noted that both Samsung and Huawei are in the telecom equipment industry, making testing slightly easier for their Modem Design Team.
There are plenty of 5G or even 4G designs. And Intel didn't drop out ( yet ), There is also Mediatek, Spreadtrum, and a few others. The problem isn't making a modem that is difficult, it is like making ARM SoC is dead easy if you buy the blueprint. Making a well tested, performant Modem is extremely difficult. And if anyone has actually read the 233 page of the case between Qualcomm and Apple, you might be surprised Qualcomm isn't the monopoly as you might imagined.
( It is actually easy to read, and don't believe everything what ever that FOSS guy has to say )
Intel and Infineon, ( which is basically the same since Intel acquired them ), had difficulties for number of reasons. 1. Intel's culture has so far meant they have not had any successful acquisition that makes synergy. 2. Intel has had little to no experience in Fabbing Modem, which is quite different to CPU and GPU. And as you can tell by their progress on Custom Foundry and 10nm, things haven't been working out well. ( Modem is done on 14nm Intel Custom Foundry ). 3. Intel decide to change whatever they had with Infineon Modem ( either ARM or MIPS ) with their own IP, mini x86 Core and FPGA. That saves cost, but you are basically throwing away lots of things and rebuilding them. And one reason why Apple only wants to buy *part* of the Modem IP, and not everything. They have no need for x86 core. 4. Being Intel doesn't have anything to test with. Modem is really about Trial and Error. And it is the testing that is the most expensive. Qualcomm listed as spending additional $200M every year on standalone modem chip just for design and testing. That is reusing their existing IP. You can imagine Intel will need a lot more than that. Qualcomm has many partners to filed test all their modem, Intel? none? Or Relying on Apple.
The question of whether Apple should or should not fab their modem is hard, but it does make financial sense for Apple. If Apple leave $10 per iPhone on R&D for Modem, that is $2B. With the scale of Apple it certainly make sense for them to not only make their Modem, but also their own WiFI and Bluetooth Chip. Apple has been slowly working on WiFi and Bluetooth, but whether Apple can make a Desktop / Tablet Class WiFi Chip and Qualcomm Modem remains to be seen. I am personally skeptics.