Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intel Exiting 5G Smartphone Modem Business, Won't Make 5G iPhone Chips at All

LovingTeddy said:
What antitrust case has anything to do with this...
Click to expand...

JPack said:
Which has nothing to do with this case. Try to follow the topic.
Click to expand...

You both seem to have difficulty with this.

All those antitrust cases were about Qualcomm’s unfair licensing practices regarding their modems/IP.

This Apple case was about Qualcomm’s unfair licensing practices regarding modems/IP.

How is it possible for you to not see the connection?
 
  • Like
Reactions: FFR
YESSSSSSS!!!!!

No more capping Qualcomm chips performance because of mixed Qualcomm/Intel supply.

Now I am all the more convinced that I won’t be getting a new iPhone before the 2020 edition.

I hate Intel silicon...
 
PickUrPoison said:
1) On what basis do you say Qualcomm wasn’t worried about losing to Apple?
Click to expand...

Well it was obvious by their actions in Chinese, German courts.
If Qualcomm would have been worried they would have played much nicely with Apple and would have settled ages ago.
2) I’m sure all parties knew Intel was running behind, despite their claims they would deliver this year. 5G not being in 2019 iPhones was locked months ago. With a) Apple’s history of a leisurely 4G rollout (for what was a major performance jump) without appreciable sales impact and b) 5G being years from any sort of widespread coverage—let alone the fact that 5G will have very little utility on mobile devices even once coverage is widespread—what makes you think Apple needs 5G support even in 2020? Sure they’d like it, but there was no indication they were willing to be held up at gunpoint by Qualcomm to get it.
Click to expand...

Apple's history with 4g is completely irrelevant.
The smartphone market right now is different, it's way more mature so there no point in making comparisons between the impact of 4g and 5g launches.
Also what I'm saying is that Qualcomm must have had inside information regarding Intel's progress with 5G and that gave them a clear advantage vs Apple. I suppose this is the reason why Qualcomm was so aggressive and tried to ban iphones in China, Germany and so on.

iPhone users aren’t spec chasers, and 5G in iPhones for 2020 is a lot bigger deal to non-Apple MR posters than it is Apple and their actual customers. I think Apple would have been just fine with even a 2021 Intel 5G modem, in the absence of major concessions from Qualcomm. (And I assume Apple will no longer be paying license fees based on the retail value, which Qualcomm had already reduced the cap on assessed value from $500 to $400 last year).
Click to expand...

Irrelevant excuse. In practice it looks like 5G is important enough that Apple signed a 6 year contract with Qualcomm. It also looks like it was crucial for Apple to secure 5G modems for 2020.
You saying that Apple would have been fine with waiting until 2021 is pure unsupported speculation.

3) Sure Apple and Samsung aren’t the best of friends, but business is business. Samsung was no doubt angling for leverage to extract premium pricing from Apple, but there’s no reason to think they wouldn’t have been willing or able to supply the Exynos 5100 to Apple for 2020. Samsung has plenty of capacity at 10nm. What leverage would Qualcomm have over Samsung? Verizon’s shutting down CDMA this year and for all we know Samsung won’t even be using Snapdragon in the US for the S11. Samsung doesn’t have any particular love lost for Qualcomm.
Click to expand...

I already wrote it, the reason was Qualcomm. We don't know what tech tech details about the development of Samsung's 5G modem but it's safe to assume they either collaborated with Qualcomm of used some of Qualcomm's patents to be able to build that 5G modem that fast.

In summary, I don’t see significant leverage over Apple for Qualcomm, and plenty of reasons Qualcomm would like to move on. For the right price, Apple’s all for it... after all, business is business :)
Click to expand...

Of course you don't but nothing you wrote gives any weight to the way you see things.
 
sw1tcher said:
Umm... Apple signed a 6 year licensing deal with Qualcomm with option to extend that for an additional 2 years. So it's a 6-8 year deal.
Click to expand...
They signed a 6 year licensing deal, “and a multiyear chipset supply agreement”... The 6 years will apply to older models they are still manufacturing, when they come out with their own chip they will use that in new phones.
 
PickUrPoison said:
1) On what basis do you say Qualcomm wasn’t worried about losing to Apple?

Sure Apple and Samsung aren’t the best of friends, but business is business. Samsung was no doubt angling for leverage to extract premium pricing from Apple, but there’s no reason to think they wouldn’t have been willing or able to supply the Exynos 5100 to Apple for 2020.
Click to expand...

Do your homework first before you spew out these garbage. Samsung's not willing to sell Apple its 5g modem.
[doublepost=1555503634][/doublepost]
I7guy said:
Conjectures are fun. Or got some proof? It’s more than likely both caved.
Click to expand...

Now both caved??? Lol
 
I7guy said:
Do you think Qualcomm was going to turn down billions in revenue? Do you think they had Apple in a figurative headlock? If you say yes, I would say you are missing a piece of the puzzle. Both sides gave up something. What that something is we will likely never know.
Click to expand...


That's not what I'm saying...
This
I7guy said: ↑
"Sounds like Qualcomm caved, they have been hurting for apple's lost revenue."

seriously though got to handed to you die hard apple apologist (There's a few of you here) Sometimes I think you guys are from a different universe.;):D
 
Last edited:
I7guy said:
Do you think Qualcomm was going to turn down billions in revenue? Do you think they had Apple in a figurative headlock? If you say yes, I would say you are missing a piece of the puzzle. Both sides gave up something. What that something is we will likely never know.
Click to expand...
Well this was the situation before this very fresh settlement:

Taiwan’s Electronic Times reports that both Qualcomm and Samsung have turned down the opportunity to supply 5G modems for Apple. Given the global patent war between Apple and Qualcomm, the San Diego company’s snub is not a huge surprise.

So it looks like Qualcomm was prepared to turn down billions in revenue from Apple.
The fact that they reconsidered means something must have changed in their favor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kaikai830
ROGmaster said:
Well it was obvious by their actions in Chinese, German courts.
If Qualcomm would have been worried they would have played much nicely with Apple and would have settled ages ago.
Click to expand...
Qualcomm’s suits against Apple were nothing more than poor attempts to gain leverage and were rather inconsequential. That’s not evidence at all that they weren’t worried about this Apple suit.

On the contrary, if Qualcomm wasn’t worried they would have had absolutely no reason to settle, they would have let the jury find in their favor. You do realize what the consequences would be if Qualcomm lost, don’t you?
ROGmaster said:
Apple's history with 4g is completely irrelevant.
The smartphone market right now is different, it's way more mature so there no point in making comparisons between the impact of 4g and 5g launches.
Click to expand...
Apple’s history with 4G is of course meaningful. It shows they were willing to wait for several years for more widespread 4G network support, even in the face of Android phones offering 4G. Even though the 3G ==> 4G upgrade was a huge performance jump (much more significant than 4==>5), Apple knew their customers wouldn’t switch to Android just to get 4G. If Apple customers didn’t care when it was a significant upgrade, why would they care now when it’s a rather meaningless upgrade?
ROGmaster said:
Also what I'm saying is that Qualcomm must have had inside information regarding Intel's progress with 5G and that gave them a clear advantage vs Apple. I suppose this is the reason why Qualcomm was so aggressive and tried to ban iphones in China, Germany and so on.
Click to expand...
Unsupported speculation.
ROGmaster said:
Irrelevant excuse. In practice it looks like 5G is important enough that Apple signed a 6 year contract with Qualcomm. It also looks like it was crucial for Apple to secure 5G modems for 2020.
Click to expand...
No, what it looks like is Qualcomm finally offered Apple an acceptable deal. And the fact that Apple customers aren’t spec chasers is absolutely relevant, because it contradicts your assertion that 5G for 2020 was “crucial”.
ROGmaster said:
You saying that Apple would have been fine with waiting until 2021 is pure unsupported speculation.
Click to expand...
No, it is my opinion for which I gave reasons why I think it’s relatively unimportant. You don’t have to like it or agree with it, but it would help your point to say why you think Apple wouldn’t be fine waiting. The only reason you’ve offered is that the smartphone market is more mature now. So what? How is that evidence that Apple wouldn’t be fine waiting?

ROGmaster said:
I already wrote it, the reason was Qualcomm. We don't know what tech tech details about the development of Samsung's 5G modem but it's safe to assume they either collaborated with Qualcomm of used some of Qualcomm's patents to be able to build that 5G modem that fast.
Click to expand...
Are you saying Samsung doesn’t have the right to sell their modem to Apple? That Qualcomm would somehow prevent that or not allow it? Samsung didn’t claim that; rather they said “we can’t make enough right now.” Presumably for the right price they could have supplied them next year, no?

ROGmaster said:
Of course you don't but nothing you wrote gives any weight to the way you see things.
Click to expand...
Your refusal to acknowledge valid arguments doesn’t make them any less valid, it just means you won’t be swayed by logic. Apple-hate has clouded your thinking and closed your mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: digitalexplr and FFR
PickUrPoison said:
Qualcomm’s suits against Apple were nothing more than poor attempts to gain leverage and were rather inconsequential. That’s not evidence at all that they weren’t worried about this Apple suit.

On the contrary, if Qualcomm wasn’t worried they would have had absolutely no reason to settle, they would have let the jury find in their favor. You do realize what the consequences would be if Qualcomm lost, don’t you?

Apple’s history with 4G is of course meaningful. It shows they were willing to wait for several years for more widespread 4G network support, even in the face of Android phones offering 4G. Even though the 3G ==> 4G upgrade was a huge performance jump (much more significant than 4==>5), Apple knew their customers wouldn’t switch to Android just to get 4G. If Apple customers didn’t care when it was a significant upgrade, why would they care now when it’s a rather meaningless upgrade?

Unsupported speculation.

No, what it looks like is Qualcomm finally offered Apple an acceptable deal. And the fact that Apple customers aren’t spec chasers is absolutely relevant, because it contradicts your assertion that 5G for 2020 was “crucial”.

No, it is my opinion for which I gave reasons why I think it’s relatively unimportant. You don’t have to like it or agree with it, but it would help your point to say why you think Apple wouldn’t be fine waiting. The only reason you’ve offered is that the smartphone market is more mature now. So what? How is that evidence that Apple wouldn’t be fine waiting?


Are you saying Samsung doesn’t have the right to sell their modem to Apple? That Qualcomm would somehow prevent that or not allow it? Samsung didn’t claim that; rather they said “we can’t make enough right now.” Presumably for the right price they could have supplied them next year, no?


Your refusal to acknowledge valid arguments doesn’t make them any less valid, it just means you won’t be swayed by logic. Apple-hate has clouded your thinking and closed your mind.
Click to expand...

Great post
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
ROGmaster said:
Well this was the situation before this very fresh settlement:

Taiwan’s Electronic Times reports that both Qualcomm and Samsung have turned down the opportunity to supply 5G modems for Apple. Given the global patent war between Apple and Qualcomm, the San Diego company’s snub is not a huge surprise.

So it looks like Qualcomm was prepared to turn down billions in revenue from Apple.
The fact that they reconsidered means something must have changed in their favor.
Click to expand...
We can conjecture all we want, we likely won’t ever know what the settlement is, no matter what the press reports (or believes they are reporting)
 
kaikai830 said:
Do your homework first before you spew out these garbage. Samsung's not willing to sell Apple its 5g modem.
Click to expand...
You should take your own advice. Samsung said they needed their current production for S10 (and probably Note 10.) They never said they couldn’t increase production for next year, of course at the higher rate that they were angling for.
 
kaikai830 said:
That's not what I'm saying...
This
I7guy said: ↑
"Sounds like Qualcomm caved, they have been hurting for apple's lost revenue."

seriously though got to handed to you die hard apple apologist (There's a few of you here) Sometimes I think you guys are from a different universe.;):D
Click to expand...
Yeah you caught me, I forgot the /s.;) However it still doesn’t change that all there is are some conjectures and theories that eventually will be a “fact”.
 
I7guy said:
Yeah you caught me, I forgot the /s.;) However it still doesn’t change that all there is are some conjectures and theories that eventually will be a “fact”.
Click to expand...


PickUrPoison said:
You should take your own advice. Samsung said they needed their current production for S10 (and probably Note 10.) They never said they couldn’t increase production for next year, of course at the higher rate that they were angling for.
Click to expand...

:);):)
 
ROGmaster said:
Well this was the situation before this very fresh settlement:

Taiwan’s Electronic Times reports that both Qualcomm and Samsung have turned down the opportunity to supply 5G modems for Apple. Given the global patent war between Apple and Qualcomm, the San Diego company’s snub is not a huge surprise.

So it looks like Qualcomm was prepared to turn down billions in revenue from Apple.
The fact that they reconsidered means something must have changed in their favor.
Click to expand...
Don’t believe everything you read, even if it supports your world view. The Electronic Times can report whatever they want. But here’s what Qualcomm’s President said a couple weeks ago:
When asked whether or not Qualcomm would work with Apple despite the legal battle between the two, Amon was straight to the point: “We’re still in San Diego, they have our phone number,” he said. “If they call, we’ll support them.”
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: digitalexplr
JPack said:
Qualcomm gets to announce they will be paid royalties, will get a one-time payment from Apple, along with a multiyear chipset supply agreement. All litigation dropped.

Apple, the $900B company, gets to say nothing. Not even to say that the agreement was "updated." Or that the new agreement was "meaningful" or any number of PR platitudes.

QCOM's price had every right to jump high. Any objective observer will be under the impression Apple blinked at the last second.
Click to expand...
It’s pointless to discuss any further with you. It’s over now, but neither of us really know what happened. Logically, I don’t think Apple just decided to change their stance and get nothing.
 
PickUrPoison said:
Your refusal to acknowledge valid arguments doesn’t make them any less valid, it just means you won’t be swayed bylogic. Apple-hate has clouded your thinking and closed your mind.
Click to expand...
I'm ready to acknowledge valid arguments but I haven't seen anything like that from you.
And why am I a hater? Because I'm fair and you don't like what I write?

The logic is as it follows:

The best case for Apple would have been
-To win the trial in the US against Qualcomm(many users here act like it was sure thing anyway so why give it up?). Prove that they were right.
-According to you, they had various other options for 5G anyway(Intel, only later, or Smasung) and Apple is also "willing to wait" so it's not a problem.
-Completely cut Qualcomm as a potential chip supplier for ever(they have no need for Qualcomm anyway nooo?)

What happens was:

-The trial was dropped
-Apple signed a 6 years contract with Qualcomm(and Apple is the one paying money to Qualcomm) and will want to get from them 5G modems as soon as possible.

So it doesn't look like things happened like Apple would have hopped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Intellectua1 and kaikai830
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back