"Tim Crook"
How juvenile, and so very adorable. That alone makes your post safely ignorable.
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 Calls Apple's Claims 'Baseless' in Response to $1 Billion Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"Tim Crook"
How juvenile, and so very adorable. That alone makes your post safely ignorable.
Does Apple need to write a check to each engineer personally or does Qualcomm have a way to make sure the extra money goes to the employees responsible?
Oh wait. They are chips not tips. Apple is licensing IP not the engineers.
Lol, I've actually read 10 articles this month. Would you mind sharing what it says?
Contract is void if based on something illegal (licensing IP that's in the standard at non FRAND rates)
Dig on the forum and you'll see where Apple asked it's suppliers to lower cost so they could make their profit margins. I'm with Qualcomm in this one.
Wrong place to talk about consumers' benefit. The only matter in here is big companies' cash pile growth.
I still believe both companies want to push each other around, being they refuse to admit whose right or wrong. Either way, this actually one law suit that will interesting to see how this plays out. Likely this will be a lengthy process.
Last edited:
The report from the other day said the FTC group of Korea (what ever their name) had started the investigation before the US FTC.
And I did say to take the post light heartedly
Tough to tell if Apple is just playing games to creatively increase profit margins.
They do such a botch job on the new MBP, that it stinks of unethical activities. For those MacRumors readers who say the new MBP is a great laptop, remember that it's meant to be a PRO device, not just an email reader and web browser. The battery can't be replaced, so now it's a throw away device like an iPhone. There's no magsafe. Batter life sucks if you do a PRO activity on it.
They do such a botch job on the new MBP, that it stinks of unethical activities. For those MacRumors readers who say the new MBP is a great laptop, remember that it's meant to be a PRO device, not just an email reader and web browser. The battery can't be replaced, so now it's a throw away device like an iPhone. There's no magsafe. Batter life sucks if you do a PRO activity on it.
Or in other words, Apple likes it when they can save money and they dislikes it when they're forced to pay more. I don't see anything wrong with this.
The first sentence of the quote: "While we are still in the process of reviewing the complaint in detail, it is quite clear that Apple's claims are baseless."
Following news yesterday that Apple has filed suit against LTE modem supplier Qualcomm for engaging in anticompetitive licensing practices, the chipmaker hit back on Sunday by calling Apple's claims "baseless" and accusing it of "encouraging regulatory attacks".
Apple shared a statement with several news sites on Friday announcing the lawsuit, which argued that Qualcomm used its position as the sole supplier of a key iPhone component to drive up patent licensing fees. This morning Qualcomm responded in a statement on its website in which it claimed that Apple "intentionally mischaracterized our agreements and negotiations".
Qualcomm was the sole supplier of LTE modems used in iPhones up until 2016, when Intel also began providing the component with the launch of the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus. Apple claims Qualcomm forced it to use the LTE chips and pay back a percentage of the selling price of the phone in return for access to its patents.
Apple wants $1 billion in rebate payments, which were withheld by Qualcomm after Apple became involved in an antitrust investigation against the company in South Korea.
Article Link: Qualcomm Calls Apple's Claims 'Baseless' in Response to $1 Billion Lawsuit
Haven't reviewed the complaint, but yeah, it's baseless.
[doublepost=1485038854][/doublepost]
"Gitmo" should not exist at all. I'm not saying you are wrong about Tim Cook but I would like to know what qualifies him as an expert on bankrupting US suppliers. Tim Cook, a threat to national security? Also want you to elaborate on that.
Edit for moderators, it's not political to ask questions, or to support closing down an illegal offshores torture center.
[doublepost=1485039768][/doublepost]
What don't you like about your new MBP? I'm going out on a limb and assuming you don't have one. What the hell is a pro activity?
I realize this isn't what you want to hear but when did Apple say that their computer could be used for every profession? It says pro and sadly I believe that means prosumer.
Last edited:
Tim Crook's restrictive supplier terms are designed to low ball a company into bankruptcy to squander their intellectual properties to build overseas for less. It happened with US based GT Advanced. Now, he wants to repeat with US based Qualcomm that is manufactured by US Global Foundry/Samsung foundries. All while compensating himself $135 million and hiding profits off-shore to avoid paying fair tax share makes him more dangerous to national security than all inmates at Gitmo combined.
http://iphone.appleinsider.com/arti...l-identified-as-apple-watch-sapphire-supplier
Last edited:
We will benefit from this by paying more next time because whoever looses will of course pass the losses onto the consumers. They would never take the hit themselves and eat the losses. They always pass them onto us, the consumers. Great hey.
The business you're referring to is the reason why people like Bernard Madoff is in prison for 150 years.
So the Apple Watch uses synthetic sapphire? GT advanced wasn't run by Apple, they just had agreed to a contract they couldn't fill and it costed them everything.(my understanding) It was going to be synthetic sapphire either way.
He is the CEO of a multi billion dollar company, it's not like he gave himself a raise, he sold stock worth 135 million. I have no reason to defend him and you can hate him but you have made some pretty serious accusations based on 1 article about synthetic sapphire and 1 company that filed bankruptcy.
When you say squander their intellectual property, what exactly does that mean? Please respond with a relevant source if you have one.
Companies keep their money overseas for good reasons. It makes sense financially to store your money where it's cheapest to do so. Seems like USA would want that money but all signs point to no.
Last edited:
Well, back in September, it was reported that Apple is throttling the speeds on Apple phones featuring Qualcomm Chips. Apple allegedly slowed Qualcomm Chips down so they performed similarly to slower intel chipsets. This way, the phones performed similarly.
In addition to that, I know several people that switched cellular providers (they went to Verizon and Sprint) because the iPhone 7 with intel chips dropped calls while driving and in areas their older iPhone 6s had no problems. Qualcomm is simply a better product, and it performs better because of R&D investment, which Qualcomm invested into and Apple doesn't feel it should pay royalties on. In the end, Amerca-based Qualcomm can justify it's price it's a better performing product just like a car manufacturer can charge more for a design that is faster.
What we know for a fact is that Apple wants to find $1B and is willing to sue a vendor to get it. Could they actually be forecasting a $1B loss in company value or sales..? We all know that Apple doesn't release products at a lower price point resulting from better royalty rates or more favorable contracts, cheaper parts.
So when my own iPhone 6 (with a Qualcomm chip) started turning off when it had a 30% charge, I asked friends about their new phone (missing the headphone jack). After a few people responded, I decided to get a new battery and keep my own phone because their new iPhone 7 with intel chips drop calls more frequently.
So to recap my research concluded iPhone 7 has cheaper intel chips, which used to be a company called Infineon. Infineon made the chips used in iPhone 1,2 and 3, when they were notorious for dropping calls on AT&T. They're cheaper than Qualcomm, when Intel bought Infineon it made "Steve Jobs 'Happy'", and the pursuit of profit while making a dead guy happy is more important than a high-quality and reliable phone.
In addition to that, I know several people that switched cellular providers (they went to Verizon and Sprint) because the iPhone 7 with intel chips dropped calls while driving and in areas their older iPhone 6s had no problems. Qualcomm is simply a better product, and it performs better because of R&D investment, which Qualcomm invested into and Apple doesn't feel it should pay royalties on. In the end, Amerca-based Qualcomm can justify it's price it's a better performing product just like a car manufacturer can charge more for a design that is faster.
What we know for a fact is that Apple wants to find $1B and is willing to sue a vendor to get it. Could they actually be forecasting a $1B loss in company value or sales..? We all know that Apple doesn't release products at a lower price point resulting from better royalty rates or more favorable contracts, cheaper parts.
So when my own iPhone 6 (with a Qualcomm chip) started turning off when it had a 30% charge, I asked friends about their new phone (missing the headphone jack). After a few people responded, I decided to get a new battery and keep my own phone because their new iPhone 7 with intel chips drop calls more frequently.
So to recap my research concluded iPhone 7 has cheaper intel chips, which used to be a company called Infineon. Infineon made the chips used in iPhone 1,2 and 3, when they were notorious for dropping calls on AT&T. They're cheaper than Qualcomm, when Intel bought Infineon it made "Steve Jobs 'Happy'", and the pursuit of profit while making a dead guy happy is more important than a high-quality and reliable phone.
It says Qualcomm is laying off 15% of it workforce. The main reason cited is that Samsung dropped them as a supplier.