Handling Qualcomm's ridiculous patent licensing

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware
Qualcomm has been trying to charge Apple patent licensing fees based on the value of the iPhone - rather than based on the value of the chips using Qualcomm technology.

The EU is currently deliberating on which approach is better - Qualcomm, Nokia and Ericcson want a Value of end product based approach, whereas, rest of the world wants a value of the chip approach. Once you buy a chip that has permission to use Qualcomm IP, why should you pay more depending on where that chip is used?

I have no idea which direction this battle will take. However, I believe it is in the best interest of Apple as well as the rest of the world to protect themselves from such situation.

What if the iPhone does not have ANY technology related to Cellular? What if all it has is a good WiFi antenna - that would connect to a smaller device that creates a portable WiFi network using cellular technology in a secure way? With this approach, the cost of the 4G or LTE modem can be put into a much cheaper MiFi type of box, that each user can carry around separate from the phone. And make that box really really cheap - just $10, so that Qualcomm's patent fees are set based on that $10 box only!

A family of 5 people can share a single such MiFi box. Just put a box in each car, sold separately of course. Put a box in every office and every cafe. With a $10 box, it really doesnt matter - we can put it everywhere.

The load on the 4G and LTE network also will be lower - because fewer devices will connect to these networks. So lesser spectrum will be needed.

Radiation hazards and cancer risks are also reduced, because the 4G/LTE radiation is confined to a box that is now far away from the human body. And only a lower power lower range WiFi radiation is used close to the body.

If each iPhone doesnt have to have 4G/LTE technology, the devices can become much cheaper - so Apple can actually make even more profit. Imagine, instead of selling iPhone for $650, they can sell an iPod Touch device for $400, and let the customer buy as many of the LTE MiFi devices as he needs. Worst case a we need one device PER person, and we carry the device around everywhere.

This would be the best way to turn the screws on this Shylockian company!

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 4
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 1,902administrator
    Your science is bad regarding LTE versus Wi-Fi cancer risks.
  • Reply 2 of 4
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 17,787member
    ... on top of that Qualcomm also collects royalties for Wi-fi essential IP. Not offering cellular connectivity won't sidestep infringing on Qualcomm IP, or paying royalties for licensing to avoid doing so.
    edited October 2017
  • Reply 3 of 4
    Your science is bad regarding LTE versus Wi-Fi cancer risks.
    When your phone connects to a LTE tower, it needs to transmit at a power that can carry the signal as much as 1000 meters. Because thats how far the tower is allowed to be in LTE. With WiFi, the signal needs to only be strong enough for about 10 meters. I am sure even basic maths will make it obvious that the strength of the signal will be much higher in LTE than it will be in WiFi. WiFi has a wider band, but the width of the band is immaterial from perspective of health hazards.

    The stronger the signal, greater the chance of getting fried by it!

    Secondly, it is not the signal coming from the tower that harms us, as most people think, Within 50-100 meters from the tower, the signal is quite weak already. If you are right next to the tower, then you have something to worry about. However, the signal from the phone is a lot more harmful - because you are typically right next to it. It even makes a difference whether you carry the phone in your shirt pocket or pant pocket.
  • Reply 4 of 4
    macarena said:
    Your science is bad regarding LTE versus Wi-Fi cancer risks.
    When your phone connects to a LTE tower, it needs to transmit at a power that can carry the signal as much as 1000 meters. Because thats how far the tower is allowed to be in LTE. With WiFi, the signal needs to only be strong enough for about 10 meters. I am sure even basic maths will make it obvious that the strength of the signal will be much higher in LTE than it will be in WiFi. WiFi has a wider band, but the width of the band is immaterial from perspective of health hazards.

    The stronger the signal, greater the chance of getting fried by it!

    Secondly, it is not the signal coming from the tower that harms us, as most people think, Within 50-100 meters from the tower, the signal is quite weak already. If you are right next to the tower, then you have something to worry about. However, the signal from the phone is a lot more harmful - because you are typically right next to it. It even makes a difference whether you carry the phone in your shirt pocket or pant pocket.
    Except there is no evidence of cancer risks. 
    https://www.cancercouncil.com.au/86093/cancer-information/general-information-cancer-information/cancer-questions-myths/environmental-and-occupational-carcinogens/mobile-phones-do-not-cause-brain-cancer/

Sign In or Register to comment.