The title of this article is apparently incorrect.
Where does Qualcomm say they are 'always' first?
That point aside, the page limits itself to Qualcomm technologies only. It makes no claims to other firsts which are also Android first.
As for how 'first' the items on the list are, you could debate them one by one with Qualcomm but the point is purely marketing and as such, not really worth the effort unless you feel some of what they say might actually rub off on someone.
I think from a marketing perspective it's pretty poor although Android in general could do sustained damage to the Apple halo effect with an intelligent branding campaign.
Google doesn't seem up to the task of coordinating an Android campaign at this point in time.
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.
They pay twice, at a non FRAUND rate and that's why Qualcomm is getting their ass kicked up and down the street by Apple.
Two decades ago, Apple was famous for wildly innovating ... and Microsoft was famous for copying the ideas that worked and incorporating them into Windows. Everyone joked that Apple was Microsoft's R&D department. Apple filed numerous look-and-feel lawsuits and lost, and was widely criticized for trying to legally defend ideas that were so brilliantly obvious that it's a wonder no one had made them work previously.
I am not at all bothered that Apple has learned its lesson and is now copying ideas from Android.
Your comment is weird as ass, Apple's implementation is almost always different than the Android one. If a Porsche has wheel, is it copying another car with wheel?
Patents are on the implementation, not the idea. People buy ideas, not products. And no, Thinking about something and crapping out a lame implementation is not R&D for Apple.
Comments
Where does Qualcomm say they are 'always' first?
That point aside, the page limits itself to Qualcomm technologies only. It makes no claims to other firsts which are also Android first.
As for how 'first' the items on the list are, you could debate them one by one with Qualcomm but the point is purely marketing and as such, not really worth the effort unless you feel some of what they say might actually rub off on someone.
I think from a marketing perspective it's pretty poor although Android in general could do sustained damage to the Apple halo effect with an intelligent branding campaign.
Google doesn't seem up to the task of coordinating an Android campaign at this point in time.
Patents are on the implementation, not the idea. People buy ideas, not products. And no, Thinking about something and crapping out a lame implementation is not R&D for Apple.