Qualcomm and Apple Partnership Crumbled Over Fears Apple Would Leak Qualcomm Software to Competitors

[technole]

CDMA had better voice quality than GSM until VoLTE dropped. Sprint used to run with the "clear alternative to cellular" it wasn't just marketing.

CDMA EVDO was faster than your typical ATT GSM 3G. Then LTE was the one-way ticket out of CDMA, it became a spectrum war at that point.

To say GSM was always superior is just fluffy fanboyism. The technology certainly pushed limits that evolved into some bigger standards today.

Verizon will begin the shutdown on CDMA near the end of 2019. Sprint may be the only holdout pending on the TMO merger. They simply do not have the resources like the other three to begin a CDMA shutdown and convert.

T-Mobile believes it will take three years for Sprint to migrate to their network.

 

[Mascots]

According to legal Qualcomm's filing

Well yes - but that's what I'm getting at - it's quite the allegation from Qualcomm. And from the evidence I've seen so far, there's just not enough to substantiate that yet (excluding things like forum posts - I'll believe 100% when that's written testimony from the Intel engineer). It'll be nice to see more as it comes out.

It's just incredibly too simple, too easily found, and too stupid for Apple who would could dump buckets of cash into undercutting the technology for a longer term victory.

Not saying that I don't believe Apple could be the one at fault here, because it's seems more and more like something did happen, but it's just a little too perfect. This is something that would have to span multiple levels of the hierarchy in a coordinated fashion and would be a massive failure with the company's ability to self regulate.

 

[jeffg1]

Well yes - but that's what I'm getting at - it's quite the allegation from Qualcomm. And from the evidence I've seen so far, there's just not enough to substantiate that yet (excluding things like forum posts - I'll believe 100% when that's written testimony from the Intel engineer). It'll be nice to see more as it comes out.

It's just incredibly too simple, too easily found, and too stupid for Apple who would could dump buckets of cash into undercutting the technology for a longer term victory.

Not saying that I don't believe Apple could be the one at fault here, because it's seems more and more like something did happen, but it's just a little too perfect. This is something that would have to span multiple levels of the hierarchy in a coordinated fashion and would be a massive failure with the company's ability to self regulate.

I don't know, I mean it is a little too perfect yes, but if Apple and Intel did conspire to get QUALCOMM tech, and lets speculate for a second that with apple and intel's deal, apple saves say 5 cents on each modem bought compared to what they were paying to QUALCOMM, it could mount to millions of increased revenue for apple and intel right? So in order for something like that to happen, it would have to span multiple levels of hierarchy.

 

[Mascots]

I don't know, I mean it is a little too perfect yes, but if Apple and Intel did conspire to get QUALCOMM tech, and lets speculate for a second that with apple and intel's deal, apple saves say 5 cents on each modem bought compared to what they were paying to QUALCOMM, it could mount to millions of increased revenue for apple and intel right? So in order for something like that to happen, it would have to span multiple levels of hierarchy.

Exactly. It’s just so obvious it’s unbelievable that they’d believe they wouldn’t be caught. Or even if they don’t care and did this willing to incur the loss and penalties (iBooks or iOS trademark style)... it vastly outweighs any sort of benefit they could get out of it in the long run here. I mean, look at the mess they found themselves in regards to sourcing modems for the current generation lineup of phones - it’d of been a massive bet that backfired.

I just don’t see how no one, especially given the various levels and parties of people needed to enable and then reenforce this sort of theft, could have considered this a net negative or was confident that such a theft wouldn’t be discovered. Or if it was thought, the proper system to trigger red flags internally lapsed or does not exist. It’s mind blowing. And would be really disappointing given Apple’s cash pile they could throw at Intel at an attempt to wrangle control of future standard implementation.

 

[laptech]

Everything related to cellular networks is covered in depth by industry standardisation documents and patents.

They don’t have any trade secrets to protect, it’s all wide open with thousands of companies, universities and government departments involved, with flat rate licensing available for anyone who wants access to them.

Their legal team are trying to create some sympathy for their otherwise weak legal argument.

And remember this is a Bloomberg article, they’ve proven they’ll jump on a chance to publish without reliable sources - who’s to say the quotes are from actual emails? Or if accurate, were they quoted out of context?

If what you write was true then why hasn't any other company managed to achieve the same level of quality of Qualcomm's modems if they have access to the same information. Many have reported how inferior Intel modems are to Qualcomm so if what you said is true and Intel has access to the same information as Qualcomm does, why hasn't Intel matched Qualcomm for quality?

Maybe it's because what you write is not true and not all the information is available to each company.

 

[technole]

If what you write was true then why hasn't any other company managed to achieve the same level of quality of Qualcomm's modems if they have access to the same information. Many have reported how inferior Intel modems are to Qualcomm so if what you said is true and Intel has access to the same information as Qualcomm does, why hasn't Intel matched Qualcomm for quality?

Maybe it's because what you write is not true and not all the information is available to each company.

What's inferior about intel? Most can't even answer that.

Second a lot of things are improved via software updates which apparently was modem related in 12.1.

 

[Mascots]

What's inferior about intel? Most can't even answer that.

Second a lot of things are improved via software updates which apparently was modem related in 12.1.

Intel modems are generally slower and higher latency than their Qualcomm equivalents. While the hardware in many cases is capable, it also has to do with software implementation and Qualcomm has an admirable lead in both departments. These are real-world usages and not some numbers game, though the amount one cares can be subjective.

 

[KevinN206]

How is that software a secret though? You just measure packet loss and battery drain at various power levels, then draw a chart with the results.

There’s nothing there a company like Intel would bother stealing.

You do realize that you can have the same spec but different implementation? That's why you have JavaScript having the same specifications and yet Apple implementation is FAR superior to the Chrome and Firefox. Do you realize also that Apple and Qualcomm both have the same licenses to ARM architecture and yet Apple's implementation is MUCH faster.

Sure you can measure packet loss and battery drain, but then what do you do with it? Where is your inefficiency in your implementation? How do you increase performance without increasing battery usage? All of these depends on your hardware and software implementations even though they come from the same specification. This is EXACTLY like Apple A12X vs. Snapdragon 855 using the same ARM architecture yet A12X is faster for CPU.

Further point: If it's not a secret then why Intel and Samsung modems are so far behind in bandwidth, latency, power usage, and new standards?

 

[JPack]

What's inferior about intel? Most can't even answer that.

Second a lot of things are improved via software updates which apparently was modem related in 12.1.

Intel's baseband is so good, they don't have a single design win apart from Apple.

 

[technole]

Intel's baseband is so good, they don't have a single design win apart from Apple.

They have only been in the market for half the time that Qualcomm has, and lets be real Samsung isn't a diverse as Apple.

 

[JPack]

They have only been in the market for half the time that Qualcomm has, and lets be real Samsung isn't a diverse as Apple.

1.4 billion smartphones were shipped in 2018. It's not a small market and Intel is negotiating from a position of weakness. If Intel basebands were great, they would have won business from the countless other big and small smartphone manufacturers, Xiaomi, LG, Google, Sony, Nokia, etc. The fact that Intel doesn't have a single design win apart from Apple tells you a lot.

 

[0388631]

T-Mobile believes it will take three years for Sprint to migrate to their network.

And that's pending on the shutdown, I believe.

 

[Mascots]

1.4 billion smartphones were shipped in 2018. It's not a small market and Intel is negotiating from a position of weakness. If Intel basebands were great, they would have won business from the countless other big and small smartphone manufacturers, Xiaomi, LG, Google, Sony, Nokia, etc. The fact that Intel doesn't have a single design win apart from Apple tells you a lot.

To be fair, though, we’ve seen some of Qualcomm’s licensing terms and it requires a massive investment to use Intel modems since it not only increases the cost of licensing but also reduces reimbursements of any actual Qualcomm components you use, which as part of that agreement is at least 50%. It’s not simply just because “they’re better”.

There’s also the fact that Qualcomm has often prevented Samsung’s Exynos from the markets through some creative licensing and patent deals, which means investment in their pipeline requires dual sourcing by any competitor who can even get access at all.

There’s a lot of muddy grey in this. Qualcomm does have the best chips, but imo I believe that is because they attempt to hamper competitors by ramping up the investment in a way that Qual benefit and their competition is slowed down.

 

[gavroche]

Apple is a joke.....they think they are the only company that can milk their customers?

What! Apple never milks their customers. They charge very modest profit margins on..

OK, I tried to say that with a straight face...
[doublepost=1548053444][/doublepost]

I like reading people say they can't wait for CDMA to be gone but don't realize that Qualcomm makes the best modems hands down running every single band.

Can't it be both? Can't you want CDMA to be gone (for reasons wholly separate from this whole dispute).... AND still recognize that Qualcomm is the best?

 

[Apache1]

I like reading people say they can't wait for CDMA to be gone but don't realize that Qualcomm makes the best modems hands down running every single band.

Apple customers are so invested in the eco system that they are happy to be saddled with slower tech as long as everything else works modestly together. 90% don't know the difference and don't care.

 

[techwhiz]

Qualcomm is a joke. The sooner the CDMA tech isn’t used in the US, the better.

You show your lack of understanding.
Qualcomm patents are required for LTE and 5G. (SEP and FRAND).
LTE had more in common with CDAM than GSM.
Qualcomm has a portfolio of some 120,000 patents related to communication and computer technology.
Things like software compression, DSP algorithms, battery management and antennae configuration.

I'ts difficult to make anything wireless today without running into a patent from Qualcomm.
[doublepost=1548093013][/doublepost]

Qualcomm's software requires an NDA to use and is more than just measuring packet loss and battery drain.
Intel would love to get their hands on Qualcomm's testing/diagnostics suite of software. Qualcomm doesn't allow other modem manufacturers to use it. Period.
It's not sold, it's "loaned" to vendors (like Apple) under NDA. Qualcomm does not sell it.

Talking to people around here about technology is tantamount to spitting in the wind.
They just don't get it.

They think Qualcomm doesn't innovate, but 120,000+ patents would say otherwise.

 

[metoo5]

To be fair, though, we’ve seen some of Qualcomm’s licensing terms and it requires a massive investment to use Intel modems since it not only increases the cost of licensing but also reduces reimbursements of any actual Qualcomm components you use, which as part of that agreement is at least 50%. It’s not simply just because “they’re better”.

There’s also the fact that Qualcomm has often prevented Samsung’s Exynos from the markets through some creative licensing and patent deals, which means investment in their pipeline requires dual sourcing by any competitor who can even get access at all.

There’s a lot of muddy grey in this. Qualcomm does have the best chips, but imo I believe that is because they attempt to hamper competitors by ramping up the investment in a way that Qual benefit and their competition is slowed down.

Exactly. That is why the FTC and Apple suits are targeting their *licensing and contract practices*. QC's licensing terms keep Samsung and Huawei from selling their SoC (and Apple from making their own) with embedded modems to outside companies, which limits the money they can make and the R&D they can do. If QC's modems are really so much better, why is that? Is it a natural monopoly, or one borne of their licensing and business practices, which are highly idiosyncratic and now under attack all over the world. It seems to me the latter. If so, and they're forced to changed their licensing and business practices, they competition will quickly catch up. The assumption that QC has some natural monopoly on talent isn't very plausible.

Look, QC acts like the communications swallowed the computer, but it was the other way around. Yesterdays product is today's feature. The phone used to be hardware and now its an app. The modems used to be thin and now they're part of an SoC. The idea that QC can stop the future and prevent embedded modems in SoC from various vendors who can compete with snapdragon and sell to whomever they want is crazy. It's what they call progress. QC can and will get paid for their patents but they're trying to control far more than those patents would ordinarily suggest.

Beginning with the 2013 Microsoft vs Motorola (Google) decision, litigation over licensing practices involving SEPs (as well as FRAND royalty rates) has exploded. And step back and consider that in communication we're still in reasonably early days. QC acts as if the business practices that were developed during the Wild West days of communications protocol development have been enshrined in stone. In fact, they probably won't withstand the light of day, which is why QC depends on byzantine contracts, secrecy, and playing their competitors off against each other.

 

[raghu8912]

How is that software a secret though? You just measure packet loss and battery drain at various power levels, then draw a chart with the results.

There’s nothing there a company like Intel would bother stealing.

It is not that simple, if this was that simple then there would be 20 more companies competing with Qualcomm.