"Qualcomm has since countersued, claiming Apple's legal barrage is a gambit to secure lower licensing fees."
Qualcomm is correct. Apple is definitely trying to secure lower licensing fees. Because Qualcomm has been using its monopoly power to both skirt FRAND pricing and to double dip on licensing. By their accusation directed toward Apple they invite Apple to show these facts to the world, and to the courts.
I don't know what would drive a company to post this kind of self-congratulations and Android worship on the eve of a major product launch from Apple. /s
No, but seriously, if you have to make a list of non-Apple phones with "firsts" because nobody remembers, well, what does that tell you?
Newsflash - it's just been revealed that Apple did NOT invent the telephone !! Neither did they invent or discover the LCD, OLED, LioN battery, glass, aluminium, touch display, wrist watch, leather, JPEG encoding, digital camera, SIM, cellular phone technology, or IP37 rated devices. They were not first to market with any of it! I just don't know why people buy their blatantly derivative stuff!
The iPod wasn't the first portable media player, but it will be the last one.
How often do we hear these tired tropes. At least they can take some cold comfort in their lonely little world while Apple goes nukular on them in the coming battle.
FFIW, I started out my career in the mid 70's in a professional laboratory hand processing E3 and C22 film in a manual sink line, I mention this because colour fidelity was the key to getting along in this industry. Some of the most finicky photographers would bring their 120 rolls to get them processed rather than take them to large facilities. The reversal on E3 was done by hand meaning that one had to physically wave a bright incandescent light over the rolls after they went through the hardener. I had to unroll and hand reverse them for this otherwise there would be an almost imperceptible red colour shift, maybe about 2 or 3 CC. Later on in my career when early digital printing onto film may have taken 4 hours to run off an 11x14 tranny, if there was the tiniest colour shift between the test and the final, all hell would break loose.
It was even worse with hand C type printing where a balance had to be made between skin tones neutrals and overall looks. This is all moot now with the miracles of end to end digital. But what I'm getting at is that I feel I am qualified to pass judgement on the Samsung OLED displays when I inspect them in a shop, which I do from time to time. I had a look at the new Galaxy S8 a few days ago against a iPhone 7 and speaking purely from an objective viewpoint the colour reproduction was abysmal. If I worked to that crappy standard I'd have been out of a job before I even started. The flesh tones are ridiculous, the contrast, the garishness everything is just wrong. I was quite surprised as I did expect something better. With top quality photos maybe it is fine, but when it comes down to images that are not perfect then it cannot find a balance that works. I really don't understand all the praise that is heaped on them. Also the Galaxy S8 with it's curved screen is atrocious, really ugly in comparison to not just iPhone but some other Android devices. But there you go.
I heard Leo Laporte do an ad for Qualcomm on TWiT. I did a double-take. I'm not sure how they can remain impartial when they need to discuss the ongoing case with Apple. They're a new sponsor - so they took a conscious decision to accept their money while knowing they'd probably need to discuss them again very soon. Not to mention Qualcomm itself stinks.
Although, I'm not sure why I was surprised since Leo sided with Qualcomm when he talked about the recent Apple dispute.
There are dozens of Android smartphone manufacturers and each one of them can work on some new technology to put into their smartphones especially if they're making many various models. However, it can be quite expensive and rather risky to put lots of new technology into just one smartphone. Android can easily have a lot of firsts if you've got lots of companies making Android smartphones. Hey, that's good for Android. Apple does what it can and if it has to gradually put in new technology every year into an iPhone, then that's the way it has to be. I still believe the iPhone is advancing fast enough for most users or they wouldn't be paying a premium price for the product. I think Qualcomm should be happy for what it has and not worry about what Apple is doing. There is more than enough room on this planet for both companies to be successful and make money.
I bet QUALCOMM is feeling frustrated right about now, because they have all this Tech and no real software to support it 😂
But everyone says Android OS is so far ahead of iOS, so there shouldn't be any excuse for Qualcomm not getting enough software support. Heck, Google is even working for free developing and supporting Android OS for everyone.
I don't know what would drive a company to post this kind of self-congratulations and Android worship on the eve of a major product launch from Apple. /s
No, but seriously, if you have to make a list of non-Apple phones with "firsts" because nobody remembers, well, what does that tell you?
"If a tree falls in the forest, and theres nobody around to hear it, did it make a noise?"
The Android models were first to have advanced features were in the greater than $400 category. Apple dominates this category with 80+% worldwide share. Raise the category's price threshold to $500 and the iPhone commands 90+% worldwide share.
Qualcomm can claim "firsts" all they want but Android consumers didn't buy their handset because of what it can do, they bought because of Android's low price.
I bet QUALCOMM is feeling frustrated right about now, because they have all this Tech and no real software to support it ߘ⦬t;/div>
For every GSM iPhone sold, Apple pays a royalty license to Qualcomm. Are they frustrated? More like Tim Cook is frustrated Apple has to pay the high license fees.
Funny out they leave out 64-bit, where Apple was FIRST by a long shot. Their list is a joke. Some clueless person didn't fact checked very well. So much in a rush to get this list released yesterday, a day before Apple's Press Conference. I don't know if it's just sad of them to release such garbage or to laugh at them for this junk.
Comments
Is it good to be first or better?
Qualcomm is correct. Apple is definitely trying to secure lower licensing fees. Because Qualcomm has been using its monopoly power to both skirt FRAND pricing and to double dip on licensing. By their accusation directed toward Apple they invite Apple to show these facts to the world, and to the courts.
No, but seriously, if you have to make a list of non-Apple phones with "firsts" because nobody remembers, well, what does that tell you?
Although, I'm not sure why I was surprised since Leo sided with Qualcomm when he talked about the recent Apple dispute.
The Android models were first to have advanced features were in the greater than $400 category. Apple dominates this category with 80+% worldwide share. Raise the category's price threshold to $500 and the iPhone commands 90+% worldwide share.
Qualcomm can claim "firsts" all they want but Android consumers didn't buy their handset because of what it can do, they bought because of Android's low price.
Read more Qualcomm whining at qualcomm.hissyfit.com
also they forgot world's first self exploding phone. 😂