I agree, Apple has stepped over the line here. /s
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Qualcomm Accuses Apple of Helping Intel Using Qualcomm Software
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I honestly didn't know that Qualcomm is in such a bad shape ... sound like they are very desperate looking for a new business model and try to blame failures on Apple.
Bravo Apple for standing up to this bully. It's ridiculous for you to even ask those questions. Have you even studied what's going on, or reacting to a headline?
Or worse....do you own Qualcomm stock?
What I haven't seen in reporting on this story (as of yet) is any mention of what grounds Qualcomm has for the suit. Do they have evidence, or is this an annoyance suit based on the supposition that it must have happened (i.e., "How could they possibly have done what they have without this?").
Bottom line is that, if the suit is allowed to go forward, both Apple and Intel will be burdened with a discovery process that can, potentially, harm future product development by distracting researchers from their day-to-day. It's likely to be a bargaining chip to be used in the inevitable settlement discussions.
Bottom line is that, if the suit is allowed to go forward, both Apple and Intel will be burdened with a discovery process that can, potentially, harm future product development by distracting researchers from their day-to-day. It's likely to be a bargaining chip to be used in the inevitable settlement discussions.
Even if the claim in the article is true, it's not a black and white situation. I doubt you'll find any evidence that Apple just handed over licensed software to Intel. They know they'd be strung up for that. But perhaps they used knowledge of the software to influence Intel's development efforts. With something that subtle, it'll come down to years of legal disputes and arguing microscopic legal meanings to sort out any license infringement. The rest of the world will lose interest long before this case is resolved.
Yeah because that worked so well for Uber who hired that ex-Google employee who stole all that stuff from Google.
Who Apple?
They decided the terms they agreed to in the past aren't good for them anymore.
Apple withheld payment as a leverage tactic to force Qualcomm to negotiate.
If Apple, in fact used Qualcomm software to help Intel, that is a problem for both Apple and Intel.
Fundamental breach by Apple and theft of intellectual property by Intel.
I'll tell ya what it is.
Qualcomm saw that Apple was switching to Intel chips and knew they would lose a LOT of money.
So. What do you do ?
SUE.
Qualcomm saw that Apple was switching to Intel chips and knew they would lose a LOT of money.
So. What do you do ?
SUE.
Great. So Apple would basically be selling phones with the same chips used by iPhone clones in China.
Can you imagine Apple's reaction if their own retailers decided to stop making payments for millions of iPhones they've taken delivery of and sold, until "new fees had been worked out"???
It doesn't matter whose chips they use. They still have to pay Qualcomm (and Nokia, Ericsson, LG, Samsung, etc) royalties for the IP involved.
Forget that Qualcomm makes chips on the side. That's just a small part of their profit stream.
You've got it backwards. It's Apple who is acting like they cannot pay a few bucks royalty on phones they charge customers hundreds for.
Qualcomm basically invented the core of 3G, and is a major contributor to 4G (LTE) and beyond.
They spend billions each year on R&D, and get about 3,000 patents per year.
In other words, you can greatly thank them for the high data speeds you enjoy today and in the future.
I think Qualcomm is doing fine. Let’s not forget the snapdragon processors in a majority of Android phones sold around the world are made by, or licensed by them.
That being said,
Qualcomm’s biggest enemy is it’s own nature of being inflexible, and expensive to work with. Correct me if I am wrong folks, but I believe that their not allowing phone makers to modify the reference design has caused companies like Google to work on developing their own Silicon (the Pixel core) for extra image processing. Reminds me of what apple did, when they first started modifying design with the A4 chip, then branched off with their own motion co-processor.
That being said,
Qualcomm’s biggest enemy is it’s own nature of being inflexible, and expensive to work with. Correct me if I am wrong folks, but I believe that their not allowing phone makers to modify the reference design has caused companies like Google to work on developing their own Silicon (the Pixel core) for extra image processing. Reminds me of what apple did, when they first started modifying design with the A4 chip, then branched off with their own motion co-processor.
And then gets put down, possibly. But I fear this simile might get a little muddled.
I don’t know the intricacies of dog politics, though from your profile picture I’ll take your word on anything you say!
Hahaha touche. He was a very good boy so never an issue with him but unfortunately my best bud passed in July
. He now immortally lives on via Macrumors.
Ding ding ding
I'm not even going to lie, but whenever Qualcomm topics get brought up, i look forward to seeing your responses, as your one of the very few that actually has factual knowledge about what's going on, and had been keeping up with the legal battles between companies.
What did I just watch... And when did Ballmer literally copycat how Gates talks?
Why on earth would it make ANY business sense to rely on a SINGLE vendor that charges a percentage on the ENTIRE COST of the phone?
Pretty sure even if they do build their own, they would still be paying Qualcomm for the IP to run the hardware.
It's like that bitter ex girlfriend you had that is so psychotic that she can't get over the fact that you broke it off...
All time high? It's currently at $55 coming down from $80 in mid-2014 and down almost 16% for the year.
https://finance.google.com/finance?q=Qualcomm&hl=en&ei=L2j7WbGiGdWxjAHbnJe4CA
Check the 5 year time frame.
Last edited: