Apple's own 5G 'iPhone 13' modem may be used in iPad Pro

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 31
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:

    GG1 said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.
    If Apple went with a complete redesign (nothing to salvage from the Intel 5G design), I would expect 4-5 years, so about 2022 at the absolute earliest. If it's based on the Intel design, then maybe it was far enough along for Apple's taste, so a few years' development got lopped off, and this rumour would make sense.

    But either way, like you said, the new part will be heavily scrutinized vs. QC (just like the M1 is now).
    From what we know, Intel had no real 5G design, just very preliminary work. Without these essential patents Qualcomm has, making a 5G modem would be a very burdensome task. Even Huawei licenses many patents from Qualcomm. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to build a modem either. The only reason Qualcomm licensed them (though with the embargo, who knows what will happen, unless Biden fixes these problems) was because Huawei themselves had some patents Qualcomm needed. But Qualcomm has the large majority.
    And Qualcomm licences many patents from Huawei. 

    They have a cross licencing agreement. They also recently settled a long running patent dispute. Huawei had been holding back on making royalty payments. 

    It is rumoured that even Apple licences a lot of patents from Huawei (almost 800 according to reports from just a few years ago). 

    From a 5G SEP perspective, in mid 2019, Huawei held 1554 patents.

    Apple held 12. 
    Intel held 551.
    Qualcomm held 846.

    There are interdependencies which will always be the case for world standards. 
    What report is that?
  • Reply 22 of 31
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,590member
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:

    GG1 said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.
    If Apple went with a complete redesign (nothing to salvage from the Intel 5G design), I would expect 4-5 years, so about 2022 at the absolute earliest. If it's based on the Intel design, then maybe it was far enough along for Apple's taste, so a few years' development got lopped off, and this rumour would make sense.

    But either way, like you said, the new part will be heavily scrutinized vs. QC (just like the M1 is now).
    From what we know, Intel had no real 5G design, just very preliminary work. Without these essential patents Qualcomm has, making a 5G modem would be a very burdensome task. Even Huawei licenses many patents from Qualcomm. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to build a modem either. The only reason Qualcomm licensed them (though with the embargo, who knows what will happen, unless Biden fixes these problems) was because Huawei themselves had some patents Qualcomm needed. But Qualcomm has the large majority.
    And Qualcomm licences many patents from Huawei. 

    They have a cross licencing agreement. They also recently settled a long running patent dispute. Huawei had been holding back on making royalty payments. 

    It is rumoured that even Apple licences a lot of patents from Huawei (almost 800 according to reports from just a few years ago). 

    From a 5G SEP perspective, in mid 2019, Huawei held 1554 patents.

    Apple held 12. 
    Intel held 551.
    Qualcomm held 846.

    There are interdependencies which will always be the case for world standards. 
    What report is that?
    https://premiercercle.com/news/who-is-leading-the-5g-patent-race#:~:text=Standard essential patents.


    https://www.chinamoneynetwork.com/2016/05/09/apple-is-paying-chinas-huawei-for-patent-licensing


    https://legal-patent.com/patent-law/huawei-and-qualcomm-license-agreement-1-8-billion/


    edited November 2020
  • Reply 23 of 31
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,293member
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:

    GG1 said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.
    If Apple went with a complete redesign (nothing to salvage from the Intel 5G design), I would expect 4-5 years, so about 2022 at the absolute earliest. If it's based on the Intel design, then maybe it was far enough along for Apple's taste, so a few years' development got lopped off, and this rumour would make sense.

    But either way, like you said, the new part will be heavily scrutinized vs. QC (just like the M1 is now).
    From what we know, Intel had no real 5G design, just very preliminary work. Without these essential patents Qualcomm has, making a 5G modem would be a very burdensome task. Even Huawei licenses many patents from Qualcomm. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to build a modem either. The only reason Qualcomm licensed them (though with the embargo, who knows what will happen, unless Biden fixes these problems) was because Huawei themselves had some patents Qualcomm needed. But Qualcomm has the large majority.
    And Qualcomm licences many patents from Huawei. 

    They have a cross licencing agreement. They also recently settled a long running patent dispute. Huawei had been holding back on making royalty payments. 

    It is rumoured that even Apple licences a lot of patents from Huawei (almost 800 according to reports from just a few years ago). 

    From a 5G SEP perspective, in mid 2019, Huawei held 1554 patents.

    Apple held 12. 
    Intel held 551.
    Qualcomm held 846.

    There are interdependencies which will always be the case for world standards. 
    What report is that?
    https://premiercercle.com/news/who-is-leading-the-5g-patent-race#:~:text=Standard essential patents.


    https://www.chinamoneynetwork.com/2016/05/09/apple-is-paying-chinas-huawei-for-patent-licensing


    https://legal-patent.com/patent-law/huawei-and-qualcomm-license-agreement-1-8-billion/


    You do realize that patent pool is available to all if it is included in the standard? That Apple licenses from various members of the standard is a given.

    That being the case, the fact that Apple isn't a generator of a large number of patents in 5G says nothing about its future capabilities of producing a competitive modem specific to its own product line.

    BTW, your second link from 2015 doesn't really tell a great story about R&D spending. Today, Apple spends about the same as Huawei, but Huawei has its R&D dispersed among range of Industries that it is involved in. Apple, on the other hand, targets its R&D to its current and future line of consumer products, the Apple Car venture being the exception.
  • Reply 24 of 31
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.

    Apple didn't have much choice but to make a deal with the devi:   They bet the farm on Intel and Intel failed them -- and they found they couldn't do it inhouse (at least not in a timely  manner).   And, while that fiasco was playing out, other vendors were racing ahead offering modern phones while Apple was stuck in the mud.   They had to offer a 5G phone or suffer the marketing consequences.

    But I agree with you that only a single year seems very quick.  The numbers just don't add. 

    I can’t blame Intel, as too many people have. Yes, they’re having problems moving to smaller process nodes. But that’s not due to incompetence, it’s due to them trying to have a node that is really what it says it is, rather than the somewhat fake statements from others. The bad publicity from that has carried over everywhere.

    With modems, it’s really difficult to challenge Qualcomm, which has most of the necessary patents, without being allowed to license them. In fact, Intel did an excellent job with what they did have, finding it necessary to reinvent some of those technologies themselves without infringing on Qualcomm’s. Now Apple has most of Intel’s patents, and supposedly is licensing Qualcomm’s as well. Obviously, that makes it far easier for Apple.

    but it takes time from when your engineers first see the patents until they’re able to design a product around them. That can take years. Months? That would be a miracle. Maybe Apple is licensing more from Qualcomm than just patents. That would make the most sense.

    That makes sense.   Especially the part about Apple having access to Qualcomm's patents:   Not only has Qualcomm seemingly reformed from their greedy monopoly days, but any company would be more likely to license a patent to a customer than to a competitor.

    Unfortunately, it also points out one of the many disadvantages of blocking Huawei from western technology:   it eliminates a worthy competitor to Qualcomm and insures their dominance of the market.  But, that may backfire as China and Huawei invest in becoming self sufficient.
    Exactly! I’ve long been against the disallowing the licensing, or selling of technology to adversaries, unless it’s really essential to national security. As you say, these countries simply put the money into developing their own versions as China does, Russia with less success. Then they lose their dependence, if some conflict does begin, they have their own supplies.

    The same applies to (mis)using the power of the U.S. financial system and currency to exert pressure:  long term it will backfire as the victims find and develop alternatives to it.
  • Reply 25 of 31
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,293member
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.

    Apple didn't have much choice but to make a deal with the devi:   They bet the farm on Intel and Intel failed them -- and they found they couldn't do it inhouse (at least not in a timely  manner).   And, while that fiasco was playing out, other vendors were racing ahead offering modern phones while Apple was stuck in the mud.   They had to offer a 5G phone or suffer the marketing consequences.

    But I agree with you that only a single year seems very quick.  The numbers just don't add. 

    I can’t blame Intel, as too many people have. Yes, they’re having problems moving to smaller process nodes. But that’s not due to incompetence, it’s due to them trying to have a node that is really what it says it is, rather than the somewhat fake statements from others. The bad publicity from that has carried over everywhere.

    With modems, it’s really difficult to challenge Qualcomm, which has most of the necessary patents, without being allowed to license them. In fact, Intel did an excellent job with what they did have, finding it necessary to reinvent some of those technologies themselves without infringing on Qualcomm’s. Now Apple has most of Intel’s patents, and supposedly is licensing Qualcomm’s as well. Obviously, that makes it far easier for Apple.

    but it takes time from when your engineers first see the patents until they’re able to design a product around them. That can take years. Months? That would be a miracle. Maybe Apple is licensing more from Qualcomm than just patents. That would make the most sense.

    That makes sense.   Especially the part about Apple having access to Qualcomm's patents:   Not only has Qualcomm seemingly reformed from their greedy monopoly days, but any company would be more likely to license a patent to a customer than to a competitor.

    Unfortunately, it also points out one of the many disadvantages of blocking Huawei from western technology:   it eliminates a worthy competitor to Qualcomm and insures their dominance of the market.  But, that may backfire as China and Huawei invest in becoming self sufficient.
    Exactly! I’ve long been against the disallowing the licensing, or selling of technology to adversaries, unless it’s really essential to national security. As you say, these countries simply put the money into developing their own versions as China does, Russia with less success. Then they lose their dependence, if some conflict does begin, they have their own supplies.
    Technologies that are used for chipmaking have seen expanded export restrictions to China, given that these technologies are necessary for China's buildout of its military.

    Sure, China is doing everything that they can to decrease dependencies, but at the same time, the West needs to reduce our reliance on China for manufacturing. Hence, why even slightly less authoritarian countries, like Viet Nam, are seeing growth in assembly/manufacturing.

    Smartphone communication technologies are not equivalent to the dual use technologies such as telecom, that are also seeing component restrictions to China, and an effort to reduce Huawei's and ZTE's footprint in the West. Much of this is due to China's mercantilism, in which Huawei and ZTE use Chinese Government backing to undercut pricing, with competitors at a significant disadvantage. More to the point, Western countries have banned, or are considering bans, on Chinese sourced Telecom equipment entirely due to the National Security risk associated with an equipment sourced from companies with close ties to an authoritarian power.
  • Reply 26 of 31
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,590member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:

    GG1 said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.
    If Apple went with a complete redesign (nothing to salvage from the Intel 5G design), I would expect 4-5 years, so about 2022 at the absolute earliest. If it's based on the Intel design, then maybe it was far enough along for Apple's taste, so a few years' development got lopped off, and this rumour would make sense.

    But either way, like you said, the new part will be heavily scrutinized vs. QC (just like the M1 is now).
    From what we know, Intel had no real 5G design, just very preliminary work. Without these essential patents Qualcomm has, making a 5G modem would be a very burdensome task. Even Huawei licenses many patents from Qualcomm. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to build a modem either. The only reason Qualcomm licensed them (though with the embargo, who knows what will happen, unless Biden fixes these problems) was because Huawei themselves had some patents Qualcomm needed. But Qualcomm has the large majority.
    And Qualcomm licences many patents from Huawei. 

    They have a cross licencing agreement. They also recently settled a long running patent dispute. Huawei had been holding back on making royalty payments. 

    It is rumoured that even Apple licences a lot of patents from Huawei (almost 800 according to reports from just a few years ago). 

    From a 5G SEP perspective, in mid 2019, Huawei held 1554 patents.

    Apple held 12. 
    Intel held 551.
    Qualcomm held 846.

    There are interdependencies which will always be the case for world standards. 
    What report is that?
    https://premiercercle.com/news/who-is-leading-the-5g-patent-race#:~:text=Standard essential patents.


    https://www.chinamoneynetwork.com/2016/05/09/apple-is-paying-chinas-huawei-for-patent-licensing


    https://legal-patent.com/patent-law/huawei-and-qualcomm-license-agreement-1-8-billion/


    You do realize that patent pool is available to all if it is included in the standard? That Apple licenses from various members of the standard is a given.

    That being the case, the fact that Apple isn't a generator of a large number of patents in 5G says nothing about its future capabilities of producing a competitive modem specific to its own product line.

    BTW, your second link from 2015 doesn't really tell a great story about R&D spending. Today, Apple spends about the same as Huawei, but Huawei has its R&D dispersed among range of Industries that it is involved in. Apple, on the other hand, targets its R&D to its current and future line of consumer products, the Apple Car venture being the exception.
    What you are saying has nothing to do with what I wrote or why I wrote it. 


  • Reply 27 of 31
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,293member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:

    GG1 said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.
    If Apple went with a complete redesign (nothing to salvage from the Intel 5G design), I would expect 4-5 years, so about 2022 at the absolute earliest. If it's based on the Intel design, then maybe it was far enough along for Apple's taste, so a few years' development got lopped off, and this rumour would make sense.

    But either way, like you said, the new part will be heavily scrutinized vs. QC (just like the M1 is now).
    From what we know, Intel had no real 5G design, just very preliminary work. Without these essential patents Qualcomm has, making a 5G modem would be a very burdensome task. Even Huawei licenses many patents from Qualcomm. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to build a modem either. The only reason Qualcomm licensed them (though with the embargo, who knows what will happen, unless Biden fixes these problems) was because Huawei themselves had some patents Qualcomm needed. But Qualcomm has the large majority.
    And Qualcomm licences many patents from Huawei. 

    They have a cross licencing agreement. They also recently settled a long running patent dispute. Huawei had been holding back on making royalty payments. 

    It is rumoured that even Apple licences a lot of patents from Huawei (almost 800 according to reports from just a few years ago). 

    From a 5G SEP perspective, in mid 2019, Huawei held 1554 patents.

    Apple held 12. 
    Intel held 551.
    Qualcomm held 846.

    There are interdependencies which will always be the case for world standards. 
    What report is that?
    https://premiercercle.com/news/who-is-leading-the-5g-patent-race#:~:text=Standard essential patents.


    https://www.chinamoneynetwork.com/2016/05/09/apple-is-paying-chinas-huawei-for-patent-licensing


    https://legal-patent.com/patent-law/huawei-and-qualcomm-license-agreement-1-8-billion/


    You do realize that patent pool is available to all if it is included in the standard? That Apple licenses from various members of the standard is a given.

    That being the case, the fact that Apple isn't a generator of a large number of patents in 5G says nothing about its future capabilities of producing a competitive modem specific to its own product line.

    BTW, your second link from 2015 doesn't really tell a great story about R&D spending. Today, Apple spends about the same as Huawei, but Huawei has its R&D dispersed among range of Industries that it is involved in. Apple, on the other hand, targets its R&D to its current and future line of consumer products, the Apple Car venture being the exception.
    What you are saying has nothing to do with what I wrote or why I wrote it. 


    So?

    I just elaborated on what you stated.
  • Reply 28 of 31
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,590member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    melgross said:

    GG1 said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.
    If Apple went with a complete redesign (nothing to salvage from the Intel 5G design), I would expect 4-5 years, so about 2022 at the absolute earliest. If it's based on the Intel design, then maybe it was far enough along for Apple's taste, so a few years' development got lopped off, and this rumour would make sense.

    But either way, like you said, the new part will be heavily scrutinized vs. QC (just like the M1 is now).
    From what we know, Intel had no real 5G design, just very preliminary work. Without these essential patents Qualcomm has, making a 5G modem would be a very burdensome task. Even Huawei licenses many patents from Qualcomm. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to build a modem either. The only reason Qualcomm licensed them (though with the embargo, who knows what will happen, unless Biden fixes these problems) was because Huawei themselves had some patents Qualcomm needed. But Qualcomm has the large majority.
    And Qualcomm licences many patents from Huawei. 

    They have a cross licencing agreement. They also recently settled a long running patent dispute. Huawei had been holding back on making royalty payments. 

    It is rumoured that even Apple licences a lot of patents from Huawei (almost 800 according to reports from just a few years ago). 

    From a 5G SEP perspective, in mid 2019, Huawei held 1554 patents.

    Apple held 12. 
    Intel held 551.
    Qualcomm held 846.

    There are interdependencies which will always be the case for world standards. 
    What report is that?
    https://premiercercle.com/news/who-is-leading-the-5g-patent-race#:~:text=Standard essential patents.


    https://www.chinamoneynetwork.com/2016/05/09/apple-is-paying-chinas-huawei-for-patent-licensing


    https://legal-patent.com/patent-law/huawei-and-qualcomm-license-agreement-1-8-billion/


    You do realize that patent pool is available to all if it is included in the standard? That Apple licenses from various members of the standard is a given.

    That being the case, the fact that Apple isn't a generator of a large number of patents in 5G says nothing about its future capabilities of producing a competitive modem specific to its own product line.

    BTW, your second link from 2015 doesn't really tell a great story about R&D spending. Today, Apple spends about the same as Huawei, but Huawei has its R&D dispersed among range of Industries that it is involved in. Apple, on the other hand, targets its R&D to its current and future line of consumer products, the Apple Car venture being the exception.
    What you are saying has nothing to do with what I wrote or why I wrote it. 


    So?

    I just elaborated on what you stated.
    If you were 'just elaborating' your very first line wouldn't have been questioning what I wrote. 

    Yes, of course I 'realise' . That was part of what I was saying.

    Saying Huawei couldn't make a 5G modem without Qualcomm misses the whole point. That's why I mentioned the SEP patent situation and omitted all the other Huawei 5G patents. It's why I mentioned interdependencies. 

    The comment on Huawei reportedly licencing so many patents to Apple had nothing to do with money or R&D. It was about the end result: the patents. 
  • Reply 29 of 31
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    tmay said:
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.

    Apple didn't have much choice but to make a deal with the devi:   They bet the farm on Intel and Intel failed them -- and they found they couldn't do it inhouse (at least not in a timely  manner).   And, while that fiasco was playing out, other vendors were racing ahead offering modern phones while Apple was stuck in the mud.   They had to offer a 5G phone or suffer the marketing consequences.

    But I agree with you that only a single year seems very quick.  The numbers just don't add. 

    I can’t blame Intel, as too many people have. Yes, they’re having problems moving to smaller process nodes. But that’s not due to incompetence, it’s due to them trying to have a node that is really what it says it is, rather than the somewhat fake statements from others. The bad publicity from that has carried over everywhere.

    With modems, it’s really difficult to challenge Qualcomm, which has most of the necessary patents, without being allowed to license them. In fact, Intel did an excellent job with what they did have, finding it necessary to reinvent some of those technologies themselves without infringing on Qualcomm’s. Now Apple has most of Intel’s patents, and supposedly is licensing Qualcomm’s as well. Obviously, that makes it far easier for Apple.

    but it takes time from when your engineers first see the patents until they’re able to design a product around them. That can take years. Months? That would be a miracle. Maybe Apple is licensing more from Qualcomm than just patents. That would make the most sense.

    That makes sense.   Especially the part about Apple having access to Qualcomm's patents:   Not only has Qualcomm seemingly reformed from their greedy monopoly days, but any company would be more likely to license a patent to a customer than to a competitor.

    Unfortunately, it also points out one of the many disadvantages of blocking Huawei from western technology:   it eliminates a worthy competitor to Qualcomm and insures their dominance of the market.  But, that may backfire as China and Huawei invest in becoming self sufficient.
    Exactly! I’ve long been against the disallowing the licensing, or selling of technology to adversaries, unless it’s really essential to national security. As you say, these countries simply put the money into developing their own versions as China does, Russia with less success. Then they lose their dependence, if some conflict does begin, they have their own supplies.
    Technologies that are used for chipmaking have seen expanded export restrictions to China, given that these technologies are necessary for China's buildout of its military.

    .....

    YEH!   And the BIGGEST threat was TikTok!    ROFL....

    Nah!  Trump survives by smearing others so they look even worse than he does -- and to distract from his own corruption (it's a pretty standard trick used by most despots).    But, he can't say that -- so he justifies his attacks based on national security -- like how he justified his silly wall.    But, there are those who fell for it.
    It will be good to get back to a fact based world view.
  • Reply 30 of 31
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,293member
    tmay said:
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.

    Apple didn't have much choice but to make a deal with the devi:   They bet the farm on Intel and Intel failed them -- and they found they couldn't do it inhouse (at least not in a timely  manner).   And, while that fiasco was playing out, other vendors were racing ahead offering modern phones while Apple was stuck in the mud.   They had to offer a 5G phone or suffer the marketing consequences.

    But I agree with you that only a single year seems very quick.  The numbers just don't add. 

    I can’t blame Intel, as too many people have. Yes, they’re having problems moving to smaller process nodes. But that’s not due to incompetence, it’s due to them trying to have a node that is really what it says it is, rather than the somewhat fake statements from others. The bad publicity from that has carried over everywhere.

    With modems, it’s really difficult to challenge Qualcomm, which has most of the necessary patents, without being allowed to license them. In fact, Intel did an excellent job with what they did have, finding it necessary to reinvent some of those technologies themselves without infringing on Qualcomm’s. Now Apple has most of Intel’s patents, and supposedly is licensing Qualcomm’s as well. Obviously, that makes it far easier for Apple.

    but it takes time from when your engineers first see the patents until they’re able to design a product around them. That can take years. Months? That would be a miracle. Maybe Apple is licensing more from Qualcomm than just patents. That would make the most sense.

    That makes sense.   Especially the part about Apple having access to Qualcomm's patents:   Not only has Qualcomm seemingly reformed from their greedy monopoly days, but any company would be more likely to license a patent to a customer than to a competitor.

    Unfortunately, it also points out one of the many disadvantages of blocking Huawei from western technology:   it eliminates a worthy competitor to Qualcomm and insures their dominance of the market.  But, that may backfire as China and Huawei invest in becoming self sufficient.
    Exactly! I’ve long been against the disallowing the licensing, or selling of technology to adversaries, unless it’s really essential to national security. As you say, these countries simply put the money into developing their own versions as China does, Russia with less success. Then they lose their dependence, if some conflict does begin, they have their own supplies.
    Technologies that are used for chipmaking have seen expanded export restrictions to China, given that these technologies are necessary for China's buildout of its military.

    .....

    YEH!   And the BIGGEST threat was TikTok!    ROFL....

    Nah!  Trump survives by smearing others so they look even worse than he does -- and to distract from his own corruption (it's a pretty standard trick used by most despots).    But, he can't say that -- so he justifies his attacks based on national security -- like how he justified his silly wall.    But, there are those who fell for it.
    It will be good to get back to a fact based world view.
    You seem to be unable to read for comprehension. I've seen it over and over again with you.

    Maybe its a medical issue.
    MplsP
  • Reply 31 of 31
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    melgross said:
    I don’t know about this. It seems awfully quick. If it would be ready for next year, why would Apple have made a five year deal with Qualcomm? Yes, items that are still made a few years after they come out would still use the same modems, but the whole thing seems odd. If Apple just began licensing Qualcomm patents months ago, how could they come up with a brand new 5G modem so quickly? I’m a bit skeptical. If this is correct, I sure hope it’s as good as Qualcomm’s, or Apple will get some pretty bad publicity.

    Apple didn't have much choice but to make a deal with the devi:   They bet the farm on Intel and Intel failed them -- and they found they couldn't do it inhouse (at least not in a timely  manner).   And, while that fiasco was playing out, other vendors were racing ahead offering modern phones while Apple was stuck in the mud.   They had to offer a 5G phone or suffer the marketing consequences.

    But I agree with you that only a single year seems very quick.  The numbers just don't add. 

    I can’t blame Intel, as too many people have. Yes, they’re having problems moving to smaller process nodes. But that’s not due to incompetence, it’s due to them trying to have a node that is really what it says it is, rather than the somewhat fake statements from others. The bad publicity from that has carried over everywhere.

    With modems, it’s really difficult to challenge Qualcomm, which has most of the necessary patents, without being allowed to license them. In fact, Intel did an excellent job with what they did have, finding it necessary to reinvent some of those technologies themselves without infringing on Qualcomm’s. Now Apple has most of Intel’s patents, and supposedly is licensing Qualcomm’s as well. Obviously, that makes it far easier for Apple.

    but it takes time from when your engineers first see the patents until they’re able to design a product around them. That can take years. Months? That would be a miracle. Maybe Apple is licensing more from Qualcomm than just patents. That would make the most sense.

    That makes sense.   Especially the part about Apple having access to Qualcomm's patents:   Not only has Qualcomm seemingly reformed from their greedy monopoly days, but any company would be more likely to license a patent to a customer than to a competitor.

    Unfortunately, it also points out one of the many disadvantages of blocking Huawei from western technology:   it eliminates a worthy competitor to Qualcomm and insures their dominance of the market.  But, that may backfire as China and Huawei invest in becoming self sufficient.
    Exactly! I’ve long been against the disallowing the licensing, or selling of technology to adversaries, unless it’s really essential to national security. As you say, these countries simply put the money into developing their own versions as China does, Russia with less success. Then they lose their dependence, if some conflict does begin, they have their own supplies.
    Technologies that are used for chipmaking have seen expanded export restrictions to China, given that these technologies are necessary for China's buildout of its military.

    .....

    YEH!   And the BIGGEST threat was TikTok!    ROFL....

    Nah!  Trump survives by smearing others so they look even worse than he does -- and to distract from his own corruption (it's a pretty standard trick used by most despots).    But, he can't say that -- so he justifies his attacks based on national security -- like how he justified his silly wall.    But, there are those who fell for it.
    It will be good to get back to a fact based world view.
    You seem to be unable to read for comprehension. I've seen it over and over again with you.

    Maybe its a medical issue.

    Nah!  I just prefer reality to propaganda.   But that's just me.

    But by the way, since you are so upset about China not being a democracy, how do you feel about your boy Trump trying to overturn our democracy with his little coup?   Do you think he'll be able to get his shills on the Supreme Court to override the will of the people ? 
    edited November 2020
Sign In or Register to comment.