Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If this is true:

then Qualcomm's CEO might not have been inaccurate in his claims about Cook being misleading regarding settlement talks.
https://www.macrumors.com/2019/01/09/qualcomm-tim-cook-settlement-talks-misleading/

Those claims are from January. The Nikkei article refers to testing only in the past few weeks. Probably started testing around the same time settlement negotiations began a few weeks before trial. Doesn't seem like they were talking for months prior.
 
This is a complete non-news item! If you bother to research 5G you’ll discover it can use any one of 3 frequencies. It’s only the highest frequency that gives the 100MB /sec download but only if there are mobile towers every 100 meters!! The medium & low frequencies are barely any better than 4G. As New Scientist put it in a recent article - “5G is a technology looking for a application”! Don’t panic about 5G it’s a waste of time!
5G is only going to be useful for in-home high speed Internet and the tower is on the utility pole within sight and the ISP doesn't want to drop a line into your house. Basically, the fibre only needs to go down the street in front of your house... not into your house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wide opeN
Apple justed wanted to bully their way to a free handout from Qualcomm all this time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger67
This is a complete non-news item! If you bother to research 5G you’ll discover it can use any one of 3 frequencies. It’s only the highest frequency that gives the 100MB /sec download but only if there are mobile towers every 100 meters!! The medium & low frequencies are barely any better than 4G. As New Scientist put it in a recent article - “5G is a technology looking for a application”! Don’t panic about 5G it’s a waste of time!
Yeah, was not excited about 5g for this reason. But Qualcomm modems will still be better than Intel and hopefully latency improvements will help new applications such as self driving cars. Bandwidth gains will not be very noticeable if at all
 
This is very good news for Apple. Intel's baseband is inferior to Qualcomms, and it has hurt iPhones. The switch to 5G will put Intel even further behind. And although Apple is going to ship its own in-house baseband, it will take them years to get it up to snuff. The term of this contract gives Apple time to get it right. They just avoided another Apple Maps fiasco in non-upgradable hardware.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Intellectua1



Apple is planning to purchase 5G modem chips from Qualcomm for use in its 2020 iPhones, according to a source with knowledge of today's settlement plans that spoke to Nikkei.

What else can we conclude other than Apple was forced to cave to Qualcomm's onerous terms due to Intel's usual inability to keep up their pace of innovation. Based on desktop chips, Apple knows better than waiting on Intel. I sure hate seeing Qualcomm win this, but as others have said, maybe in six years Apple will break free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: martyjmclean
Why is it to late for 2019, don't they start producing the iPhones sometime between May and June every year, or is something else causing the issue?

As noted, Apple has already completed major development of the 2019 iPhone, including the systemboard and its components (including the modem). And that all needs to be submitted for certification (FCC and foreign authorities) which would require a complete phone design by now to meet the production dates.
 
Yea since intel modems suck...

And don’t forget 5G is the new cellular replacement , for home (or office) it’s wi-fi 6 aka 802.11ax.
 
Amazing news! I’m glad Apple have chosen the smart way! Another reason for me to hold on to my X with the Qualcomm modem for another year. I tried the Intel equipped iPhones (8 Plus and X) and they were plain terrible!
[doublepost=1555454425][/doublepost]
In the business world, the delay is due to lots of lots of meetings and emails before anything is started or done.
Let alone all those FCC approvals/patents that they have to file for and get to begin with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nhwhazup
I bet the guys over at Qualcomm were just waiting for the day Apple would cave in and come crawling back...they know Intel aren't as good and Apple isn't in a position to develop its own modems yet.

I agree, Apple came crawling back. That's what happened.

Congratulations Qualcomm... you bastards.
 
See how business works guys? Kiss and make up and it’s all business as usual again.
[doublepost=1555454970][/doublepost]
I agree, Apple came crawling back. That's what happened.

Congratulations Qualcomm... you bastards.
You have no clue. Apple was dug in and had plenty of money to fight. The settlement appears to me to be a concession and admission from Qualcomm that too much of their business was at risk to continue. Everything dropped?

Apple: “OK look, we will buy your chips if you agree to new, more fair, terms.”
Qualcomm: “Done.”

Qualcomm’s stock up 20%. You think the market didn’t recognize what a big deal this is for QCOM? Apple didn’t even move on the news. They are fine either way.
 
2020 is early enough. By then, the chipsets won't suck your battery dry in no-time and the the networks will be sufficiently widely deployed so that it's not just a show-off gimmick.
At the same time, LTE coverage will still be good because the majority of people will still be using non-5G phones and carriers will need to cater to them.

On top of that, 5G still isn't really cleared of any long-term health-hazards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tomaszk
if the 2019 iPhones don't have 5G modems and now it's confirmed that the 2020 iPhones will have the state of the art Qualcomm 5G modems... who's gunna want to buy a 2019 model unless they're yearly upgraders? Just another camera lens for 2019 isn't gunna cut it.
The "next feature to get" will be a 5G iPhone
 
Not to break out my (admittedly dusty) tinfoil hat, but thoughts on the concern about the harmful effects of 5G frequencies? This is compelling: https://ehtrust.org/key-issues/cell...s-iot-scientific-overview-human-health-risks/

That article is BS, the main ‘peer reviewed’ Journal it links to doesn’t mention 5G at all and is a generic radio frequency report published in 2015. Additionally, the article later states that China has strict laws banning 5G. Does it b****cks. Have you heard of Huawei?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Radium226
Why is it to late for 2019, don't they start producing the iPhones sometime between May and June every year, or is something else causing the issue?
Apple most likely already designed the 2019 iPhone and coded the software to work with 4G. 5G chips are bigger and need more space and I'd assume a software rewrite or update to work with 5G.
[doublepost=1555457059][/doublepost]
This is a complete non-news item! If you bother to research 5G you’ll discover it can use any one of 3 frequencies. It’s only the highest frequency that gives the 100MB /sec download but only if there are mobile towers every 100 meters!! The medium & low frequencies are barely any better than 4G. As New Scientist put it in a recent article - “5G is a technology looking for a application”! Don’t panic about 5G it’s a waste of time!
The general public doesn't care about your scientific findings, 5G is the new stuff and everybody wants it whether it's widespread or not. Nobody is going to buy a 4G phone in late 2019 or 2020. Apple would've been dead in the water releasing a 4G phone in 2020
 
  • Like
Reactions: radiologyman
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.