What to expect from the Apple versus Qualcomm 'no license, no chips' trial

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 44
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,754administrator
    MacPro said:
    sflocal said:
    modemax said:
    Qualcomm is the best modem technology company in the world. No one should compare Intel and Samsung with them. It costs a lot of money to develop cellular capable products that don't fade. Writing software around the modem for a cellphone is not a science. That's what Apple does and they charge $1000 for it. It is time they pay for the real engineering that Qualcomm is providing. 

    The only thing Apple has got going for them is friends in high places. 


    Before even reading your shill rant, I saw your one-post designation and immediately knew that you were QC’s lap dog.

    Writing software IS a science Einstein, not that you would know anything about that.

    When the judicial hammer drops straight on QC’s head, It’ll be whiners like you that will be wondering where your next shill check will come from.
    It's a shame AI can't check the IP address of these 1 post-anti-Apple comments that are remarkably similar in style to well known ant-Apple posters with higher counts but not as blatant and compare them.  
    We do.
    gatorguymuthuk_vanalingam1st
  • Reply 22 of 44
    Evidently I stepped into a discussion of some opinionated article junkies, not real engineers with proper credentials and hands on knowledge.  I reiterate, writing software is not engineering and you can become a "software engineer " by taking a two-week course in some blueberry college. 
    Do you know that CDMA was invented by Qualcomm's real engineers like Andy Jacobs? Do you understand CDMA?
    What exactly has Tim Apple invented ? Apple is not a real technology company,  it is Marketing.  Understand the meaning, not just labels. Samsung and tens of other Marketing companies have better products than Apple. But no group can match Qualcomm's inventions, none! 
    I am not going to tell you about my credentials.  But I understand the difference between real innovation and pushing up stock price, by hook or crook. Not a company basher, only presenting facts.

    Our political system in place has the habit of shooting itself in the foot, time and again. 

    Qualcomm must be protected at all cost and rewarded accordingly,  to continue producing real technology. 

    Also, stop calling me Einstein and try to understand facts. Resorting to mockery will not advance you career.

    Regards.
  • Reply 23 of 44
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 1,988member
    I have wild theory about 5G iPhone and that reflects Apple's sometime unusual product announcement. Let's say Apple don't have 5G modem chip early in 2020 for usual September iPhone announcement but happens to be later in 2020. Than, Apple builds one 5G iPhone between late 2020 and early 2021 and release in first half of 2021. Than, usual new iPhones follow in September all with 5G capability. Any of such thing depends on how wide spread 5G coverage and timeline.
    edited April 14
  • Reply 24 of 44
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,546member
    modemax said:
    Qualcomm must be protected at all cost and rewarded accordingly,  to continue producing real technology.
    ??? Where the hell does that concept come from? NO company must be protected at all costs. If you bother to review history, you'll find plenty a sordid story of protected monopolies. Do you really think the industry would be better if QC was 'protected at all costs?"

    QC has good engineers and has made some good products. No one disputes that. That does not give them the right to a monopoly and/or to extort money from their customers.

    modemax said:
    I am not going to tell you about my credentials.  
    By your last post, it wold appear that your credentials involve a paycheck from QC
    bestkeptsecretllama
  • Reply 25 of 44
    Good engineering companies are assets to our country. Go learn from the Chinese,  Germans, koreans,  Israelis,  and so on. All we can do is in-fighting without regard to international competition.  We do encourage FTC to drag our best tech company to court in humiliation, just because they ask a fair price for their unique product and intellectual rights.

    What is so fair about Apple's $1000 phone price to the consumer?

    If Qualcomm asks for IP compensation, everyone is up in arms, about monopolistic attitude. 

    Don't forget what the government and short sighted people did to General Electric, the original AT&T, Bell Labs, etc. Read the history and ask the people who know. 

    Do you know why we are mostly a service economy, rather than a production one? Think about that before you go to bed tonight. Service is dime a dozen. 

    I know no one from Qualcomm and not in need of a paycheck like the fellow who commented as such. I have done years of transmission engineering and know some facts that would take most years to grasp. Try to understand what I am saying rather than pull my sentences apart and "expose" me to your readers. 

    It is a disgrace for two American companies, with international competition,  to go at each other like we are witnessing.  Show me one country where such a conduct is allowed. This forum must encourage the parties to realize what is at stake, not to get into war of words and claim short lived victory. 

    Wake up.

    Joke: I better call Tim and ask for a raise. I've been busy in the past 24 hours. started as a one timer. Now I am rubbing elbows with full timers. 



  • Reply 26 of 44
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,894member
    flydog said:

    The news reports like to point out that Apple has no public 5G modem plan in place, but fails to mention several other phone manufacturers who don’t have a 5G phone and only have a commitment to making one. 
    What happens after the trial?
    Lets assume that Apple wins big time.
    Can QC refuse to license their 5G patents to anyone who supplies Apple with 5G capable chips?
    Can QC refuse to license their 5G patents to Apple for their supposed 5G Modem?

    Apple needs at the very least some licenses from QC unless a 3rd party would step in an license everything from QC and take the inevitable Patent lawsuit storm... Somehow I doubt it. QC's practices stink big time but they hold all the patents.
    Even if Apple lose I think that QC will want blood and lots of it from Apple for the hit on their reputation.
    Patent holders cannot refuse to license IP covered by a standard essential patent, and the license must be on fair and non-discriminatory terms. 
    ...and there must be a willing licensee. "Fair" is in the eye of the beholder, or on a per-case basis as decided by a specific court. 
    edited April 14 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 27 of 44
    longfanglongfang Posts: 115member
    modemax said:
    Qualcomm is the best modem technology company in the world. No one should compare Intel and Samsung with them. It costs a lot of money to develop cellular capable products that don't fade. Writing software around the modem for a cellphone is not a science. That's what Apple does and they charge $1000 for it. It is time they pay for the real engineering that Qualcomm is providing. 

    The only thing Apple has got going for them is friends in high places. 


    Apple could always just buy Qualcomm, not like they can’t afford it.
    edited April 15
  • Reply 28 of 44
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,894member
    An aside: I think that some posters are leaning too much on "Troll!" and "Shill!" as a crutch for those times they don't have a counterpoint to share but damn, gotta say something anyway. Really it's a kinda lazy, repetitive way to respond IMHO. Rinse and repeat works for hair and frying pans but gosh...
    edited April 15 muthuk_vanalingam1STnTENDERBITS
  • Reply 29 of 44
    1st1st Posts: 382member
    "Do you know that CDMA was invented by Qualcomm's real engineers like Andy Jacobs? Do you understand CDMA?"
    QC possibly need some income fast to replace CDMA that in the process of shut down (check VZ phase out CDMA).  As std patent, you gain for the large volume of shipment, users, prestiges for future product and define migration path for next 10 or so years.  You lost selectivity who you want to license to and in stringer licensing terms.  To black mail your customer using std path is bite the hands that feed you.  However, using alternative device also come with a risk, for example, as soon as Intel got feasible or compatible device than QC, QC could come and drop all the demand event sweet deal to get Apple  to switch to their device... Intel might lost big if Apple fall for such a scheme (it happened before, especially, the company is not big enough to supply volume device - get volume discount).  If Intel come out with better 5G, that would not only eat QC lunch, but secure its position for create a new platform as "equivalant and better" (equivalent is not good enough).  Best luck for Apple and QC.  May the superior tech and ethic win the game.  
    By the way, does Huawei 5G try to sneak in for QC from back door?  Just curious... You can't be too careful nowadays.  
  • Reply 30 of 44
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,348member
    MacPro said:
    sflocal said:
    modemax said:
    Qualcomm is the best modem technology company in the world. No one should compare Intel and Samsung with them. It costs a lot of money to develop cellular capable products that don't fade. Writing software around the modem for a cellphone is not a science. That's what Apple does and they charge $1000 for it. It is time they pay for the real engineering that Qualcomm is providing. 

    The only thing Apple has got going for them is friends in high places. 


    Before even reading your shill rant, I saw your one-post designation and immediately knew that you were QC’s lap dog.

    Writing software IS a science Einstein, not that you would know anything about that.

    When the judicial hammer drops straight on QC’s head, It’ll be whiners like you that will be wondering where your next shill check will come from.
    It's a shame AI can't check the IP address of these 1 post-anti-Apple comments that are remarkably similar in style to well known ant-Apple posters with higher counts but not as blatant and compare them.  
    We do.
    Great to hear.  There's a poster on the Verge that seems hell-bent on crucifying Apple at every chance called Someguyperson Hard to imagine he doesn't show up on AI to do the same thing.


  • Reply 31 of 44
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,348member
    gatorguy said:
    An aside: I think that some posters are leaning too much on "Troll!" and "Shill!" as a crutch for those times they don't have a counterpoint to share but damn, gotta say something anyway. Really it's a kinda lazy, repetitive way to respond IMHO. Rinse and repeat works for hair and frying pans but gosh...
    Kind of similar to the repeat and rinse anti-Apple posts some folks come up with ad nauseam.
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 32 of 44
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,546member
    modemax said:
    Good engineering companies are assets to our country. Go learn from the Chinese,  Germans, koreans,  Israelis,  and so on. All we can do is in-fighting without regard to international competition.  We do encourage FTC to drag our best tech company to court in humiliation, just because they ask a fair price for their unique product and intellectual rights.

    What is so fair about Apple's $1000 phone price to the consumer?

    If Qualcomm asks for IP compensation, everyone is up in arms, about monopolistic attitude. 

    Don't forget what the government and short sighted people did to General Electric, the original AT&T, Bell Labs, etc. Read the history and ask the people who know. 

    Do you know why we are mostly a service economy, rather than a production one? Think about that before you go to bed tonight. Service is dime a dozen. 

    I know no one from Qualcomm and not in need of a paycheck like the fellow who commented as such. I have done years of transmission engineering and know some facts that would take most years to grasp. Try to understand what I am saying rather than pull my sentences apart and "expose" me to your readers. 

    It is a disgrace for two American companies, with international competition,  to go at each other like we are witnessing.  Show me one country where such a conduct is allowed. This forum must encourage the parties to realize what is at stake, not to get into war of words and claim short lived victory. 

    Wake up.

    Joke: I better call Tim and ask for a raise. I've been busy in the past 24 hours. started as a one timer. Now I am rubbing elbows with full timers. 



    So let me get this straight - QC is a ‘great engineering company’ so therefore they not only have the right to a monopoly, but they deserve protection from other competitors, QC abusing its monopoly is the same as Apple charging $1000 for a phone (even though it has other models and there are other companies selling phones,) and the reason our economy shifted from a manufacturing economy to a service one is because the government had the gall to apply the Sherman act and break up some monopolies. Got it. Your comparisons and conclusions are so whacked that are so far out of touch it’s hard to know where to start and I have a suspicion it’s pointless to try. I will only suggest that maybe you add the study of US history to your engineering background. 
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 33 of 44
    badmonkbadmonk Posts: 819member
    "Definers used the NTK Network to disseminate stories hyper-critical of Apple and its CEO Tim Cook." That helps to explain why, perhaps, I've been seeing a fair number of news stories critical of Apple in the tech press, newspapers, and general blogs over the last year. It may be no more than these outlets just using a press release from Definers without any further thought.
    and why from Tim Cook’s perspective, it has gotten personal.
  • Reply 34 of 44
    GG1GG1 Posts: 265member
    modemax said:
    Evidently I stepped into a discussion of some opinionated article junkies, not real engineers with proper credentials and hands on knowledge.  I reiterate, writing software is not engineering and you can become a "software engineer " by taking a two-week course in some blueberry college. 
    Do you know that CDMA was invented by Qualcomm's real engineers like Andy Jacobs? Do you understand CDMA?
    What exactly has Tim Apple invented ? Apple is not a real technology company,  it is Marketing.  Understand the meaning, not just labels. Samsung and tens of other Marketing companies have better products than Apple. But no group can match Qualcomm's inventions, none! 
    I am not going to tell you about my credentials.  But I understand the difference between real innovation and pushing up stock price, by hook or crook. Not a company basher, only presenting facts.

    Our political system in place has the habit of shooting itself in the foot, time and again. 

    Qualcomm must be protected at all cost and rewarded accordingly,  to continue producing real technology. 

    Also, stop calling me Einstein and try to understand facts. Resorting to mockery will not advance you career.

    Regards.
    Actually, I admire Andrew Viterbi more. He's the "real engineer" of Qualcomm's CDMA. But you should've known that.

    I agree that QC's engineers develop the best modems, I just dislike their business practices. (So does Apple.)

    Also, Intel bought Infineon (a modem chip company/division from Siemens). Intel didn't just recently start developing modem chips from scratch. According to Wikipedia, Infineon formed in 1999, so definitely not as old as QC, but not what I consider as a recent company.
    edited April 16 MplsP
  • Reply 35 of 44
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,176member
    flydog said:

    The news reports like to point out that Apple has no public 5G modem plan in place, but fails to mention several other phone manufacturers who don’t have a 5G phone and only have a commitment to making one. 
    What happens after the trial?
    Lets assume that Apple wins big time.
    Can QC refuse to license their 5G patents to anyone who supplies Apple with 5G capable chips?
    Can QC refuse to license their 5G patents to Apple for their supposed 5G Modem?

    Apple needs at the very least some licenses from QC unless a 3rd party would step in an license everything from QC and take the inevitable Patent lawsuit storm... Somehow I doubt it. QC's practices stink big time but they hold all the patents.
    Even if Apple lose I think that QC will want blood and lots of it from Apple for the hit on their reputation.
    Patent holders cannot refuse to license IP covered by a standard essential patent, and the license must be on fair and non-discriminatory terms. 
    What law requires that?
  • Reply 36 of 44
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,244member
    modemax said:
    Evidently I stepped into a discussion of some opinionated article junkies, not real engineers with proper credentials and hands on knowledge.  I reiterate, writing software is not engineering and you can become a "software engineer " by taking a two-week course in some blueberry college. 
    Do you know that CDMA was invented by Qualcomm's real engineers like Andy Jacobs? Do you understand CDMA?
    What exactly has Tim Apple invented ? Apple is not a real technology company,  it is Marketing.  Understand the meaning, not just labels. Samsung and tens of other Marketing companies have better products than Apple. But no group can match Qualcomm's inventions, none! 
    I am not going to tell you about my credentials.  But I understand the difference between real innovation and pushing up stock price, by hook or crook. Not a company basher, only presenting facts.

    Our political system in place has the habit of shooting itself in the foot, time and again. 

    Qualcomm must be protected at all cost and rewarded accordingly,  to continue producing real technology. 

    Also, stop calling me Einstein and try to understand facts. Resorting to mockery will not advance you career.

    Regards.
    Oh look, a troll-boy. 

    You’re completely ignorant of enterprise software engineering. Software engineering is a thing. Software engineers write code that runs the world’s banking, travel, and medical systems. That there are also hobbyist coders is like saying that because there are hobbyist carpenters there are no master carpenters building our buildings. Get real.

    Apple is a CEO, not an inventor. Like most CEOs. 

    Apple isnt a technology company? “But but but it’s just marketing!” OK now I know you’re just a troll. The tech coming out of Apple is both internal and public facing. Guess you forgot about the first 64-bit mobile SoC....sorry your sponsor didn’t have one first.

    Your posts are low-value. I don’t imagine we’ll see you a month from now. 
    edited April 16
  • Reply 37 of 44
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,244member

    MacPro said:
    gatorguy said:
    An aside: I think that some posters are leaning too much on "Troll!" and "Shill!" as a crutch for those times they don't have a counterpoint to share but damn, gotta say something anyway. Really it's a kinda lazy, repetitive way to respond IMHO. Rinse and repeat works for hair and frying pans but gosh...
    Kind of similar to the repeat and rinse anti-Apple posts some folks come up with ad nauseam.
    Yup. Notice that he doesn’t use his “Actually Google did it first with this link that does something different but similar...” templates anymore. 
  • Reply 38 of 44
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,894member

    MacPro said:
    gatorguy said:
    An aside: I think that some posters are leaning too much on "Troll!" and "Shill!" as a crutch for those times they don't have a counterpoint to share but damn, gotta say something anyway. Really it's a kinda lazy, repetitive way to respond IMHO. Rinse and repeat works for hair and frying pans but gosh...
    Kind of similar to the repeat and rinse anti-Apple posts some folks come up with ad nauseam.
    Yup. Notice that he doesn’t use his “Actually Google did it first with this link that does something different but similar...” templates anymore. 
    Heck we both agree he couldn't have been referring to me anyway as he talkin' anti-Apple posts. :)

    ...Not that I ever recall the numerous "Google did it first" links anyway that you seem to. Accuracy is less important than trolling to some posters, not saying that applies to you of course.
    edited April 16
  • Reply 39 of 44
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 726member
    CNBC is reporting that Apple and Qualcomm have settled their royalty dispute.
    gatorguy
  • Reply 40 of 44
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,894member
    carnegie said:
    CNBC is reporting that Apple and Qualcomm have settled their royalty dispute.
    Thanks Carnegie. If accurate perhaps Apple and Qualcomm have been in some sort of negotiations for a period of time despite the denials.

    Checking further CNBC does appear to be accurate too with more than one source now reporting a settlement. 
Sign In or Register to comment.