Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I like how the cynics here always downplay and scoff at Apple's effort in bringing certain technologies in-house. It appears to me they are clueless and don't have any sense of history. They said even worse about Apple putting their own chip in the Mac...and here we are! They have nothing to say about that after they have been proven completely wrong so they move to the next one — modem.
It appears like some people just have loud mouths on this forum and cannot learn how to stay mute and see what happens. They are quick to pass judgement on something they have absolutely no knowledge about, only to be put to shame!
We're all here. We'll see how it pans out as the modems will surely be out one day. And let's see what they will say....or move to complaining about something else. Who knows? Maybe their next move will be scoffing at Apple's in-house displays?
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: freedomlinux
I like how the cynics here always downplay and scoff at Apple's effort in bringing certain technologies in-house. It appears to me they are clueless and don't have any sense of history. They said even worse about Apple putting their own chip in the Mac...and here we are! They have nothing to say about that after they have been proven completely wrong so they move to the next one — modem.

For the Mac, Apple had a track record. Indeed, the Mac-transition-kit had a A14Z in it.

The big problem here is that they have shipped a whole lot of nothing for 4 years. Chip dev cycles are not that long if 'hitting on all cylinders, kicking butt'.

And frankly this is harder. Apple usually only has to deal with other Apple stuff. ( native boot Windows on new Macs .. not going to even try. Apple drove off in the direction of a completely different boot system). Apple has to do with well with Nokia/Erricson/Hauwei/etc cellular tower stuff to be creditibly better than Qualcomm. RF spectrum allocations are not the same worldwide ( different countries are on different allocations. ) . There is loads more holistic multi-vendor system work and validation that has to be done here where Apple is not completely in charge.

Apple for a long time pretended that no other SSD but their own could handle the TRIM command. Blue bubble versus RSC (Apple way or the highway. ). There 'works well with other people skills" is highly wanting at times. The primary test of a modem is how well it gets along with others. There isn't going to be a mainstream situation where it is just Apple solely talking to Apple here. (e.g., Apple has GPU that can only get along with Apple's CPU. That is just fine if sole interaction is only inside of Apple stuff. ) . The primarily control Apple is 'buying' is how the modem interfaces with the main Apple die. The 'other side' of the modem they are gaining more overhead and drama that they used to 'outsource' than 'control'.

Modems are also the area where going to "out early access to bleeding edge fab process" is going to buy less and less as the time goes by.

We'll see how it pans out as the modems will surely be out one day.

Some folks keep saying that about the Apple Car too. ( Billions into something that likely won't see light of day.)
There are far better odds for the modem than the car..... but it isn't a sure thing either.
 
Last edited:
You know how this goes by now. Only a "handful" iPhone users experienced this modem issue. Move along.
I was one of those handful of users those intel modems were horrible for use in my neighborhood with weak cell signal for all carriers. These snapdragon 5G modems rock in my weak area of signal for me so nope not wanting a repeat of that experience no thank you
 
  • Like
Reactions: xpxp2002 and t0rqx
For the Mac, Apple had a track record. Indeed, the Mac-transition-kit had a A14Z in it.

The big problem here is that they have shipped a whole lot of nothing for 4 years. Chip dev cycles are not that long if 'hitting on all cylinders, kicking butt'.

And frankly this is harder. Apple usually only has to deal with other Apple stuff. ( native boot Windows on new Macs .. not going to even try. Apple drove off in the direction of a completely different boot system). Apple has to do with well with Nokia/Erricson/Hauwei/etc cellular tower stuff to be creditibly better than Qualcomm. RF spectrum allocations are not the same worldwide ( different countries are on different allocations. ) . There is loads more holistic multi-vendor system work and validation that has to be done here where Apple is not completely in charge.

Apple for a long time pretended that no other SSD but their own could handle the TRIM command. Blue bubble versus RSC (Apple way or the highway. ). There 'works well with other people skills" is highly wanting at times. The primary test of a modem is how well it gets along with others. There isn't going to be a mainstream situation where it is just Apple solely talking to Apple here. (e.g., Apple has GPU that can only get along with Apple's CPU. That is just fine if sole interaction is only inside of Apple stuff. ) . The primarily control Apple is 'buying' is how the modem interfaces with the main Apple die. The 'other side' of the modem they are gaining more overhead and drama that they used to 'outsource' than 'control'.

Modems are also the area where going to "out early access to bleeding edge fab process" is going to buy less and less as the time goes by.



Some folks keep saying that about the Apple Car too. ( Billions into something that likely won't see light of day.)
There are far better odds for the modem than the car..... but it isn't a sure thing either.
So you believe they are investing a lot of money and resources developing their modem only to likely abandon it?
Who says that the complexities and difficulties involved in making modems are a deterrent for Apple?
You know what, don't stress about it. As I said, it's only a matter of time.
 
Radio communication is one of these dark engineering arts, where many times one doesn’t know why things work and is incredibly built on top of itself in an empirical manner.
You don’t close this gap easily. The first generations of the apple modem will not do anything more than very simple frequency aggregation. There won’t be 5+ GHz frequencies for some time.
It’s very good to have some competition to Qualcomm but I would rather that it comes from someone else than apple. The concentration of power from apple will not benefit the consumer as we have seen many times in the past.
 
The only potential customer benefit I can think of is efficiency for better battery life. Otherwise this has to simply be an effort to maintain/boost margins.

Curious why you'd think this way?

Is this what you thought when Apple bought PA Semi?
 
Should I dig out all the Macrumors comments that Apple can move mountains, and will have their modem in 2020, 21, 22, 23, 24.... and it will be better than Qualcomm?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: rjjacobson
Some folks keep saying that about the Apple Car too. ( Billions into something that likely won't see light of day.)
There are far better odds for the modem than the car..... but it isn't a sure thing either.
So you believe they are investing a lot of money and resources developing their modem only to likely abandon it?

The ole MR 'claim you said something you never said ' defense.

' Better odds for the modem than the car ' means the odds for the modem getting done is higher than the car. That is actually the opposite direction from 'likely abandon' because the odds for not doing it are relatively much smaller. ( not getting bigger as you claim. )


The money Apple has spent is a sunk costs. Just because you sunk costs are high doesn't mean that the probability goes up. Sometimes it is better not to keep throwing money into a pit that isn't going to pay off.

Apple got up on stage to talked to AirPower concept. Rumors here on this site says they even got to point they had printed up boxes to put the product into. .... And it never shipped.


Apple can walk away from a $2B hole in the ground and it won't be a major disaster for them. They are not trying to do that, but if there better ways to spend a limited set of funds... there are other more strategic issues they may pursue.


Who says that the complexities and difficulties involved in making modems are a deterrent for Apple?

They are deterrent for everyone. The handwaving being done here is the Apple walks-on-water and nothing is any hindrance to them ever. That is smoke.

Market conditions change. In 2019 when Apple bought the Intel modem business.

1. iPhone sales were going up year over year.... not down.

2. The Chinese government was not banning iPhones in their offices and casting 'shade' on them elsewhere in China.

3. The EU was not about to push major disruptions to their bundled apps and App store revenues.

4. Most vendors were not doing 3D packaging of chiplets into packages at modestly high volumes.
There was no standard interface between chiplets ( like UCIe ).

5. Arm wasn't pushing Qualcomm toward higher decoupling between their IP and Qualcomms modem .

6. Interest were so low it is an effective tax shelter to borrow all the money to pay dividends and just horde more cash on the books to pump the stock price higher.

7. Siri looked like competitive AI.

8. Intel/AMD/Nvidia had relatively less completive products than the do now.

9. The real additional silicon R&D ( R1 and follow on work ) costs for the augment relatively headset hand no been fully realized.

10. Apple was hiring contractors instead of laying them off. ( and didn't have dozens of individual unions to negotiate with).


In 2-3 years pretty good chance Qualcomm has a standard chiplet die can toss into a package that meets most low power objectives and works with the lastest standards. If standard way of intergrating chiplets from different fab processes then don't have to buy everything 'in house'. [ Even if Apple doesn't. Google. Samsung, etc call all get major blocks made by best in category vendor ( e.g., MediaTek+Nvidia GPU+Qualcomm modem. )

The level of competition across the whole silicon scope Apple is engadget with is likely going to be better , not worse over time.


You know what, don't stress about it. As I said, it's only a matter of time.

' Eventually' is a problem that pushes down the probability of them pulling this off. You can try to hand wave around it , but reality ...

Qualcomm is doing such a 'bad job' of delivering the technical goods that Apple just signed up for three more years.

https://www.macrumors.com/2023/09/11/apple-extends-deal-with-qualcomm-as-modem-delayed/

(i.e., what Qualcomm is making is totally viable as a modem subsystem. )

All Qualcomm has to do here is lower their prices to a level that Apple considers acceptable and the 'game' is largely over at that point. It wasn't a technical problem as the core issue here. It was pricing.

There are some techincal challeges of doing high end 3D chiplet packaging at iPhone like volumes. But there is also lots of money and effort being thrown and cranking up the volume. Don't really need it right away. That is a core issue. If wait for technology to change over 10 years lots of things that didn't look possible... get possible.

Is the Apple modem 'doomed' ? No. Is it an inevitable , 'sure thing' ? Also no.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.