Apple Wanted to Use Qualcomm Chips for 2018 iPhones, But Qualcomm Wouldn't Sell Them

[blcamp]

When vendors try to hold Apple hostage, it's inevitably gonna come back and bite them. Apple eventually finds a way to work around them. Sure, Apple would love to do everything in-house but if it's cheaper for a third-party to handle something, why not let them do it? With Qualcomm though, they've already shown themselves not to be a trustworthy partner. Qualcomm is gonna lose, and lose big.

 

[darksithpro]

When vendors try to hold Apple hostage, it's inevitably gonna come back and bite them. Apple eventually finds a way to work around them. Sure, Apple would love to do everything in-house but if it's cheaper for a third-party to handle something, why not let them do it? With Qualcomm though, they've already shown themselves not to be a trustworthy partner. Qualcomm is gonna lose, and lose big.

On the flip side Apple's partners are starting to see that their relationship is only temporary.

 

[urnotl33t]

Apple and many other Qualcomm partners are involved in Qualcomm's legal battle with the FTC, with the FTC suggesting that Qualcomm has been using anticompetitive tactics to remain the main supplier for baseband processors for smartphones.

Stick a fork in Qualcomm. They're toast. Williams' testimony is damning enough. Next let's move on to the damages trial. Will FTC invoke the Sherman Act here (or is it too late for that)? But damn... Qualcomm is over.

 

[Rob_2811]

On the flip side Apple's partners are starting to see that their relationship is only temporary.

Ask imagination technologies..

 

[dazz87]

Qualcomm stomps their feet and leaves the party. Bye don't miss ya.

Looks like alot of users are missing them..........Apple been cheap again........

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-the-xs-max-even-worse-than-iphone-x.2140854/

 

[rafark]

The issue is that QCOM's patents have been granted as SEP (standard-essential patent). Because the patent is included in an international standard that everyone has to follow, the patent holder must license the technology at a fair and reasonable rate (FRAND).

This was basically the same thing that Samsung tried to pull on Apple many years ago. QCOM is trying to charge users of the CDMA standard a royalty fee based on the entire cost of the device, as opposed to the cost of the component that actually uses the patent.

Some would argue that QCOM is abusing the fact that their patent is part of a standard and they are not making the patent available at FRAND rates. Some would argue the opposite.

I think Apple would be happy (as happy as a company would be paying a supplier Billions of dollars) if QCOM based the royalty on the cost of the chip $30 as opposed to the cost of the iPhone.

And I would be happy if the iPhone was $500.


Does that mean Qualcomm are forced to sell their modems? They have invested in R & D over the years and should have the right to decide what to charge for their products. Apple have the right as well to choose a different provider.

 

[whoisyourdaddy]

Utter nonsense. I've not been able to tell one bit of difference. Current XR actually pulls in a very strong signal.

Your opinion is coming from someone that's in an area which doesn't have a lot of cell switching or on the fringe of a weak cell before dropping to a lower speed base band frequency such as from LTE to CDMA. So, your opinion is utter nonsense. I experienced the same when switching from my 8 Plus Qualcomm modem to an XS. Of course, the reason I experienced it is because I live and commute in areas that some would label the "boondocks". Hence, I can attest and support many of the user's claims that these Intel modems, antenna design, software, or a combination of these factors is contributing to a "weaker" or less dependable signal for data, calls, etc.

 

[Starship67]

Looks like alot of users are missing them..........Apple been cheap again........

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-the-xs-max-even-worse-than-iphone-x.2140854/

Macrumors user FUD is a very small percentage of people, hardly earth shattering stats.

 

[star_nerdy]

Apple stopped paying royalties in April 2017.

Of course Qualcomm wouldn't "sell" them chips for 2018. Apple didn't pay for things in the past, why would Qualcomm give things for free?

Look at the timeline. Apple agreed to terms with another company in January 2017.

Apple likely tried to keep negotiating and then Qualcomm refused to negotiate because they were no longer the iPhone’s exclusive modem provider.

Apple said screw it, if you won’t provide us with product or negotiate in good faith, we’re out.

Qualcomm got mad that Apple stopped paying them because without exclusivity, they were going to lose a huge client. So the lawsuits start.

Qualcomm is basically screwed without Apple and nobody wants to deal with them. They are greedy dicks and even if they win, it’s basically their last payday before the company shuts down.

 

[gavroche]

iPhone suffers because Apple is litigious.

At least wait and make this comment in a thread about Apple litigation. This isn't Apple litigation. Its US government litigation. And I suppose that in addition to not understanding that, ill assume you don't understand the problem with what Qualcomm has been doing.

 

[joueboy]

Apple should just build their own chips..

You make it sound easy, why don't you make the chip and sell it to Apple for $1.50. That's what Apple wants to pay anyway and since you love Apple so much then you would be happily take the $1.50. It's a win, win situation and Apple would never this miserable anymore. Right?

 

[Romeo_Nightfall]

I don't even know what brand of modem is in my phone.

Can you really tell a difference?

Yes You can!
Its tested an certified that qualcomm chips are way superior.
Apple for greedy tim reasons ditched the superior brand, to leave customers with inferior chips

 

[gavroche]

Why would they be in trouble? They're under no obligation to sell to anyone that's the beauty of a free market.

Google FRAND....

 

[Romeo_Nightfall]

I have a Intel 8 plus.
Qualcomm SE.
Both on same networks.
Intel 8 plus performs better.

Performs better in which scenario?
Also se with 8 comparison seems not the same generation of chips to me

 

[FriednTested]

I'm sure there was an article on here a couple of years ago where it was found that Apple were intentionally crippling the speeds the Qualcomm devices were getting to be the same as the Intel basebands. Intel could only hit max of 450Mbps whereas the Qualcomm chips were capable of 600Mbps. Qualcomm have always been faster than Intel modems, yet Apple would rather cut off their nose to spite their face.

They already dropped the price of the chip from the $30 price to $7.50, and Apple wanted to pay $1.5? I'd tell Apple to bolt as well!

It is $30 for the chip + $7.50 royalties for the patent.

 

[kennyt72]

Google FRAND....

That explains the patent, they're under no obligation to sell them chips, the fact Apple are buying Intel chips and putting them in the new phones proves this.

 

[lederermc]

Apple stopped paying royalties in April 2017.

Of course Qualcomm wouldn't "sell" them chips for 2018. Apple didn't pay for things in the past, why would Qualcomm give things for free?

Apple is waiting for the courts to issue a ruling on what the fair price is.

 

[darksithpro]

It is $30 for the chip + $7.50 royalties for the patent.

So if Apple ships 200 millions phones a year, all with Qualcomm modems, they loose 7.5 billion dollars in profit a year.

 

[HobbesInVA]

Your opinion is coming from someone that's in an area which doesn't have a lot of cell switching or on the fringe of a weak cell before dropping to a lower speed base band frequency such as from LTE to CDMA. So, your opinion is utter nonsense. I experienced the same when switching from my 8 Plus Qualcomm modem to an XS. Of course, the reason I experienced it is because I live and commute in areas that some would label the "boondocks". Hence, I can attest and support many of the user's claims that these Intel modems, antenna design, software, or a combination of these factors is contributing to a "weaker" or less dependable signal for data, calls, etc.

You experience the quality difference between an Intel and Qualcomm Chip when you're distant from Tower A but not close enough to be handed off to Tower B. That's my scenario at my home. Or when you are in the middle of a Big Box Store, and those with Qualcomm gets 1-2 bars and those with Intel gets "No Service".

 

[gavroche]

This is just bad Karma on Apple's part. If Apple is going to eventually do everything in house and alienate all their partners, then it should be expected stuff like this is happening. What good does it do for Intel to sell Apple modems, when 3 years from now Apple is going to give them the boot and provide their own silicon?

Apple almost always has sought to source components from multiple sources. This gives them more flexibility, less risk in supplier problems, and better bargaining power for price. I really doubt Apple wants to completely displace Intel or anyone. More likely just give them incentive to keep advancing, and be reasonable with price.

 

[harvester32]

Apple don't want to pay their asking prices. Why would they expect Qualcomm to sell them even more?

Because it isn’t a price. It’s a license and licensing fees are regulated to ensure fair access, fair use, and fair pricing across vendors. If it was a price then yes Apple would have to pay or lose out just like us when buying a new TV. But because QC failed to sell them the chips for a price, QC backed themselves into a bad situation that most likely will not end well for them or their shareholders.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

Wait, am I reading this right?

Qualcomm charges people $30 for their chips normally. Apple insisted on paying just $1.50 instead, but ultimately was willing to pay $7.50, and then a few years later was paying $15.

So Apple is screwing Qualcomm over by insisting on paying somewhere between 5 and 50% of the price Qualcomm is charging everyone else, and Apple thinks they're the ones who have been wronged? Apple, the most valuable company in the world, thinks they should be getting a 95% discount, of which they'll be passing not a freaking penny onto consumers?

Apple can go screw themselves (I mean, they already have with the $1500 iPhone.)

 

[themick4u]

And I'm still having issue, on my XS MAX, running beta 12.1.3 and the LTE / WIFI issues

 

[az431]

Apple stopped paying royalties in April 2017.

Of course Qualcomm wouldn't "sell" them chips for 2018. Apple didn't pay for things in the past, why would Qualcomm give things for free?

Do you understand the difference between payment of royalties for use of technology versus payment for a product?

 

[HobbesInVA]

Wait, am I reading this right?

Qualcomm charges people $30 for their chips normally. Apple insisted on paying just $1.50 instead, but ultimately was willing to pay $7.50, and then a few years later was paying $15.

So Apple is screwing Qualcomm over by insisting on paying somewhere between 5 and 50% of the price Qualcomm is charging everyone else, and Apple thinks they're the ones who have been wronged? Apple, the most valuable company in the world, thinks they should be getting a 95% discount, of which they'll be passing not a freaking penny onto consumers?

Apple can go screw themselves (I mean, they already have with the $1500 iPhone.)

Apple is doing this because their 1st obligation is to create profit for their shareholders. One of the ways is to reduce your liabilities, costs, and taxes. I'm not saying Apple is doing the ethical thing but their obligation is not to make Qualcomm rich or provide customers with the best price.