Thank you for your detailed explanation, Apple's conduct now seems more understandable. I'm not being sarcastic.
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 Tim Cook's Statement on Settlement Talks 'Misleading'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's kind of easy to avoid falling victim to Cook's price gouging as they don't make anything where you can't buy an alternative product that does the same job just as well if not better. Qualcomm on the other hand likes to gouge everyone who makes a particular type of device thanks to their standards essential patents and have unfortunately done so for decades.
While I am pretty pessimistic about this, I do hope that this spurs Apple to donate money into efforts to weaken protections on standards essential patents and thus at least limit their abuse by companies like Qualcomm.
Just imagine if Qualcomm didn't let Apple use their technology don't you think Apple's phone will not be a "piece of crap" as well? Let that sink in for a minute.
Just don't follow it
I was reading just the other day how Apple profits remained unchanged in the last 7 years, and how they were 25% higher during Jobs, hard numbers pointing to the fact that there is no greed factor, it's just that the current devices Apple sell are more expensive to produce than the ones from years ago. During Jobs you had plastic phones with passcode to enter and single cameras and third party chips, then aluminium and plastic phones with a custom chip, Touch ID, camera and flash. Now you have steel and glass phone with double camera, multiple advanced custom chips (AX, Secure Enclave, the one for machine learning etc.) and a very advanced unlock feature (Face ID).
It would be nice if people stopped just stating as facts things that are not factual at all, and accept that the current Apple line up just isn't good or affordable for them.
and take away any incentive for companies to pour money into R&D to develop said technologies.
Just imagine if Qualcomm hadn’t lured the industry into adopting its own technology by promising to license on a FRAND basis, and the industry picked a different standard that didn’t need Qualcomm technology?
Just imagine: if the moon was made of green cheese then we all had enough to eat.
Last edited:
Just don't follow it
I was reading just the other day how Apple profits remained unchanged in the last 7 years, and how they were 25% higher during Jobs, hard numbers pointing to the fact that there is no greed factor, it's just that the current devices Apple sell are more expensive to produce than the ones from years ago. During Jobs you had plastic phones with passcode to enter and single cameras and third party chips, then aluminium and plastic phones with a custom chip, Touch ID, camera and flash. Now you have steel and glass phone with double camera, multiple advanced custom chips (AX, Secure Enclave, the one for machine learning etc.) and a very advanced unlock feature (Face ID).
It would be nice if people stopped just stating as facts things that are not factual at all, and accept that the current Apple line up just isn't good or affordable for them.
Apple put a sub-1080p LCD in a phone and charged $899 for it. In 2018.
Courage the Cowardly Dog
Oh wait, we’re not supposed to eat dogs, are we? Never mind...
It’s like you are totally ignoring my comment just to repeat the usual misinformed opinion. If it makes you happy... I won’t waste my time this way sorry .
Never did I said Apple doesn't have to pay SEP. The price they are paying to Qualcomm for Patents ( Everything from SEP, to All other SoC and Design Patents ) are double than all the SEP players combined. And it is obvious this is way too much from Apple's perspective. As much as I want Apple to pay the price and forget about it to use Qualcomm, Apple obviously want to fight it for long terms Strategy.
OF course they refused when they don't agree on the pricing. Apple got lower pricing in the end, doesn't that flavours Apple?
Not that much lower and Apple were using their usual business tactic, Ericsson said they would let the court decide the price, Apple refused to, and they agreed a price but I guarantee Ericsson are the winners, Apple has deplorable business ethics and treats major innovators who have genuinely moved human life on as something they’ve stepped in, but you’d probably just call it business..
I can’t wait for it to the same in the medical world...
I was rather hoping it did get to court as Ericsson would have torn Apple to pieces with ease..
I don’t believe a word Apple says about Qualcomm due to this, and seeing as Qualcomm has already won in a major EU court against Apple and had its phones banned from sale, it adds further fuel to that belief.
We're misinformed that the XR display has a sub-1080p resolution and is an LCD?
I thought it started when Qualcomm refused to pay Apple the rebate they had contracted for on the license fees.
And users felt it looked better than the pocophone's 1080p display.
People who complain about this sort of stuff is precisely the sort who clearly doesn't understand Apple. Apple sells an experience, not technology. They aren't about cramming the best specs in a device, but about how to put them together in a manner which offers a great experience for the user.
As it stands, the display is fine for its users, and helps extend battery life.
That's what you are paying for. Apple's expertise in putting them together.
And Qualcomm is under investigation here in the US. So I don’t believe a word Qualcomm has to say.
lol you sound bitter
Qualcomm aren't looking good in the US , wouldn't be surprised if they are a bunch of criminals. Just because I feel the same way about companies as you do .
lol you sound bitter
Qualcomm aren't looking good in the US , wouldn't be surprised if they are a bunch of criminals. Just because I feel the same way about companies as you do .
Well it quite obvious he didn't understand how SEPs, Design Patents, and Other Patents works and valued. And refers to Major Win in EU, which literally kills any motive in further discussions. Apple pays 0.5% of iPhone price ( Not Retail Price ) to Ericsson for access to everything fro 2G -4G patents, and Ericsson was one of the first to come out and said their 5G patents ( inclusive of all previous G ) would be licensed at a fixed price / unit as well.
You don’t understand Apples ethics and how it conducts its business to pay for the tech it uses.
When Apple refuses to pay for technology invented by and developed by Ericsson, like Qualcomm, yet makes billions from that tech in profits, theirs something wrong legally and morally..it all simply comes down to Apples never ending greed.
Seems like two thoughts are in okay:
1. The investigation in the US and,
2. Apples’ never ending greed
Both appear to be on the right track.
I didn't say that FRAND patents should be rendered completely invalid. What Qualcomm is doing is leveraging how they're literally standards essential to force companies to pay out unreasonable royalties. The thing about particularly cellphone-related patents is that the patents are related to implementation specifics while the underlying technology tends to come out of academia.
For example the underlying technology for CDMA was actually developed in the Soviet Union and you can be sure they're not getting a share of Qualcomm's patent royalties.
I should have added the words "not any more", as you may well know Qualcomm gave up on smart watch chips long time ago and haven't made any new ones. Why do you think Android smart watches are large and thick - it needs larger battery with worse chips.