They didn’t have the money, it was probably in escrow. They (Qualcomm)wanted a settlement.No question of “wanting”. They already had the money. It was only a matter of time as no one can give Apple 5G except Qualcomm.
They didn’t have the money, it was probably in escrow. They (Qualcomm)wanted a settlement.No question of “wanting”. They already had the money. It was only a matter of time as no one can give Apple 5G except Qualcomm.
They didn’t have the money, it was probably in escrow. They (Qualcomm)wanted a settlement.
Apple actually won as I think Qualcomm was desperate for the money. A Qualcomm ceo who willing turns down billions of dollars for a personal vendetta probably will be fired.They as good as recieved the money because as of right now no one can make that particular component for Apple but Qualcomm. Qualcomm has nothing to fear. And Qualcomm was not the one to settle. Apple paid more per phone. They lost.
Apple actually won as I think Qualcomm was desperate for the money. A Qualcomm ceo who willing turns down billions of dollars for a personal vendetta probably will be fired.
Since the timeline of what happened is not known, one conjecture is as good as another.There is nothing to be desperate about as Qualcomm knows for a fact that no one can provide Apple with 5G modems other than them. Those billions were as good as theirs the moment Intel failed. I don't see any other alternative in sight. DO you?
I am ecstatic that you get such a great download speed with 4G, but not everybody gets close to those speeds. I just ran mine and got 18.5 down/2.25 up. I imagine my speeds are more typical of more phones than yours. Further, I've had nothing but problems with the Intel modem(Xs) inside of office buildings. I never had those same problems with the Qualcomm modems in my 6.You are right. At least IMHO.
For most, 5G is a checkbox on a marketing slide.
Let's face it, 4G/LTE is plenty fast enough for a handheld device.
I just ran a test. I'm getting 107Mbps down and 17Mbps up.
Most video streams even at 4K are under 10Mbps.
All 5G is going to do is have you hit those carrier caps sooner.
For fixed installations that rival cable and DSL (U-Verse, etc) 5G is a big deal.
Getting gigabit rates to houses typically involved fiber. Actually anything above 50Mbps requires something other than the standard two pair that you can use to bond DSL. Cable tops out higher but you are sharing resources with your neighbors and usually no QOS guarantee.
So for a handset, 5G gives you what?
I don't need it and don't care if a handset has it. It's a marketing checkbox on a cellular phone.
The public rhetoric from Apple was much more hardcore. Qualcomm’s CEO has been saying this will be settled out of court for years.Apple actually won as I think Qualcomm was desperate for the money. A Qualcomm ceo who willing turns down billions of dollars for a personal vendetta probably will be fired.
Rhetoric was bad on both sides.The public rhetoric from Apple was much more hardcore. Qualcomm’s CEO has been saying this will be settled out of court for years.
It was not even close. Apple’s (from Tim Cook, no less) public statements against Qualcomm included them being a patent troll and operating illegally.Rhetoric was bad on both sides.
Well the operating illegally wasn’t far from why there are ongoing investigations into Qualcomm’s business practices.It was not even close. Apple’s (from Tim Cook, no less) public statements against Qualcomm included them being a patent troll and operating illegally.
Possibly, but it may be Apple decided to get in the gutter with them. The end of this may not end well for either company when it comes to the EU and the FCC.Well the operating illegally wasn’t far from why there are ongoing investigations into Qualcomm’s business practices.
People will have varied takes on this statement.... But, if Apple or anyone else thinks this fight didn’t damage their brand, their image of invulnerability, they are mistaken.
? You don't make any sense.Reality is all you know for sure without making any assumptions to fill in the gaps.
Since the timeline of what happened is not known, one conjecture is as good as another.
Again the bar for proof is notoriously low.Qualcomm and Huawei had showcased workable demos of 5G. Intel was absent. This shows Qualcomm knew Intel wasn’t going to make it.
Dangerous handing one country all the power
Or the results Intel choked out prompted Apple’s deal.
it's more like intel had known this all along but apple would have told intel to not announce this until after the litigation settles... because if the litigation doesn't go through then apple would've no choice but to float intel to keep the 5g project alive.
I think it's the other way around, Apple caught wind of intel decision so that was one more reason for them to settle
wow. You're rightActually it was how I said it. Apples deal with Qualcomm pushed Intel to cancel their mobile modems as said by their CEO today: https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/25/...prise-settlement-pushed-exit-mobile-5g-modems
Sometimes things really are just how they seem.