I feel really sorry for the jurors. Days wasted by many people in the selection process and then the selected ones sitting through the opening arguments only to be told: "Go home, you useless citizens".
Probably preferable to showing up at court for months and getting minimum wage to listen to stuff most of these people have no understanding of anyway.
It was NEVER exclusive to "Android" whatever that means. Deflect and conquer doesn't always work DED.
You have such contempt for truth and reality. But I'm not going to hold your face down and force-feed it to you. You are disingenuous to the point of being vomit inducing.
...and then Apple failed at that task, with none of that decided in this court case even tho that was a supposed goal and focus. Settled before it ever began. It all came down to money. That's actually a real issue with real effects. "Android the big loser because Apple and QC are back in a bromance" is a made-up one.
You do not know whether Apple failed or not. The settlement the two companies reached may have addressed all of those issues, both in terms of the one-time payment (from disputes over past royalties & promises) as well as their future chip deals (potentially no double-dipping, etc). I don't know either. But given the fierceness Apple has always shown in its negotiations (some deals have been revealed after the fact)... if I were forced to place a bet regarding whether Apple took a chunk out of what Qualcomm was hoping for, I would bet "yes".
OK, so you might say that even if my bet were correct, then Apple was only successful with regard to cash but not with regard to "being the hero" for the community against Qualcomm's licensing practices. You don't know that either. There are still several court cases brought by multiple governments against Qualcomm. I also don't know, but my hunch is that by now there is little else Apple could reveal in those cases that they haven't already revealed. So Apple has played its "hero card" about as far as it could go from that standpoint.
The bottom line is that I believe Apple probably came out of this settlement with much nicer terms going forward (and potentially reduced payment for what occurred before) and that Qualcomm's licensing practices with many of their customers are still under the microscope and will possibly have to be revisited going forward.
Maybe you didn't notice the nonstop "Apple won't have 5G until 2020, maybe 2023" clickbait that has been posted everywhere, multiple times per day. Maybe you just desperately spin when you realize there's no other way to be critical apart from just spewing nonsensical words that sound like an opinion.
Bu there's a picture in the article you can look at to see what CNET has been preaching, despite the fact that 5G will not actually be relevant for multiple years.
The point is that Android lost all of its exclusivity in playing this 5G FUD game. There's also a picture fo that you could have looked at if you couldn't read the article.
CNET? That's your authoritative source?
It was never "exclusive to Android" to begin with. The companies using Android as their OS are largely if not 100% Qualcomm licensees as are not-Android companies running other OS's, those in China being one example. Now Apple is back too as a Qualcomm customer after a very short absence. You should be cheering that. "The Big Loser" angle you used instead is clickbait IMHO, and yes it might be only my opinion. But maybe it isn't.
None of the words you laid out here make any sense. (Fix: Well they do but it's inconvenient)
Look at the picture of 5G Android makers Qualcomm was showing in February. Now read the caption. Repeat if necessary.
Hey, point to a picture... Well OK
It was NEVER exclusive to "Android" whatever that means. Deflect and conquer doesn't always work DED.
Why would you ignore the elephant? Apple set out to define what would be acceptable conduct for an SEP licensor going forward and not only applying to Qualcomm. Terms such as double-dipping, "fair" royalties, what the obligations are for a "willing licensee", is withholding royalties permissable when disputing, can royalties already paid be clawed back, is the chipset itself the only agreeable royalty-bearing component and where is the line crossed with "Non-discriminating". Should agreements be defined by what standards agencies establish, and contracts are disputed under contract law, or on general principles of competition and a definition of what F/RAND actually requires.
Everyone (in general) was cheering, finally a hero willing and able to take a tough task on for the good of the industry. ...and then Apple failed at that task, with none of that decided in this court case even tho that was a supposed goal and focus. Settled before it ever began. It all came down to money. That's actually a real issue with real effects. "Android the big loser because Apple and QC are back in a bromance" is a made-up one.
Apple certainly is at no disadvantage this year from lack of 5G, and I'd argue only marginally next year, when they will likely have a slightly more evolved modem from Qualcomm than that for this year.
BTW, Huawei has something like 40 signed contracts for 5G, mostly in the EU, and none at all in China.
Why would the be?
Maybe because some of the 5G standards still haven't been finished. early buildout is going to be expensive, and will still require lots of development. All that aside, 5G has a nice marketing ring to it, so by all means, carry on. /s
With Qualcomm settlement, if Apple sees need, Apple can announce 5G iPhone in September and release few months later or even in Spring 2020. Unfortunately, signing up for 5G adds extra cost but not enough 5G coverage to make use of it.
I don't think you understand product development. There's no way they'd have a 5G iPhone ready in time for September announcement.
cropr said: The 5G networks will be up in running in major cities by the end of 2019
Too bad 5G doesn't really work that well inside buildings. I hear cities have a lot of those.
I guess that's why Apple built a glass building. They didn't think cellular would get through steel and concrete exterior walls like with the intel modem in iPhone 8+ that has bad reception in my office building.
One loser is the government of the judge who spent hundreds of hours at government expense preparing for this trial and then having all that work go to waste. Apple and Qualcomm should be covering those expenses.
Didn't read the article, the headline is such a stretch you already know it who wrote it and that it will be a pages of links to his own older articles.
No one loses. Much less Android users. Everybody wins. Apple included and especially QC.
Intel took a decision and will have to live by it. It could have forged ahead and competed with QC and others with a 5G modem. The problem was if they could deliver a competitive modem or not. If they didn't see themselves as being capable of that, by pulling out early, they win too.
So much bitterness seeping out of every paragragh when iPhone users should just be celebrating this deal. It looks like the author was desperately fearing Android sweeping up on 5G as Apple struggled on with intel vaporware (at worst) or a late, poor performing modem (at best).
Why not just shout a woo hoo! And celebrate?
Agree. DED tends to exaggerate the impact of events.
I've been on the opposite side of lots of analysts and fake-balance "wohoo celebrate everyone" nonsense, and well, my record of accuracy is in print across 15 years of controversial writing: Vista, Zune, Android Market, PFS, Surface RT, Surface, HTC, iPads, HP WebOS, Honeycomb, MacBook Air, Nexus, Samsung, Tegra, Xiaomi, Motogoogarola, MS Nokia, Huawei, Alexa, Apple Watch, Android Wear, so many topics I've addressed and highlighted the future correctly in opposition to waves of people saying the opposite, and literally tons of anonymous cowards throwing out their catty disrespectful contempt. I don't have to feel "desperate fear" about anything.
How much Revenue and Profit are you predicting Apple will post in the Jan-Mar and Apr-June Quarters.
Yes I've seen plenty of times where you criticize writers and analysts after the fact, but don't remember where you go out on a limb before the results. I don't recall you predicting the bad Oct-Dec quarter in December or before.
Maybe you didn't notice the nonstop "Apple won't have 5G until 2020, maybe 2023" clickbait that has been posted everywhere, multiple times per day. Maybe you just desperately spin when you realize there's no other way to be critical apart from just spewing nonsensical words that sound like an opinion.
Bu there's a picture in the article you can look at to see what CNET has been preaching, despite the fact that 5G will not actually be relevant for multiple years.
The point is that Android lost all of its exclusivity in playing this 5G FUD game. There's also a picture fo that you could have looked at if you couldn't read the article.
CNET? That's your authoritative source?
It was never "exclusive to Android" to begin with. The companies using Android as their OS are largely if not 100% Qualcomm licensees as are not-Android companies running other OS's, those in China being one example. Now Apple is back too as a Qualcomm customer after a very short absence. You should be cheering that. "The Big Loser" angle you used instead is clickbait IMHO, and yes it might be only my opinion. But maybe it isn't.
This article is historical revisionism on a level that Soviet editors at Pravda would be impressed by.
As DED Previously said: "Losing the modem business of the world's largest premium phone vendor to Intel was a devastating blow" and "Qualcomm's premium is tethered to Android commodity"
If Apple had been successful in winning the lawsuit and Apple had had stayed with Intel's modems DED and tons of other posters here in the forums would be cheering because it would be a big blow to an important supplier in the Android ecosystem.
Ultimately Apple's caving is a big benefit for users of Apple's future phones. I look forward to being able to buy an Apple XIS in 2020 with a QualComm modem to ditch the substandard Intel modem in my iPhone 8+.
Many misleading points in this article. Android is not the loser. Clearly Intel is the loser as they lost Apple as customer which was a major source of income. For Androids, there is no shortage of 5G modems as QC, Huawei, MT and Samsung have them. And the author did not have guts to compare A12 with SD855 which is almost on par. Even if Apple makes it's own modem in the future, it's a win for QC too as it will get royalty from Apple for its patents.
No one loses. Much less Android users. Everybody wins. Apple included and especially QC.
Intel took a decision and will have to live by it. It could have forged ahead and competed with QC and others with a 5G modem. The problem was if they could deliver a competitive modem or not. If they didn't see themselves as being capable of that, by pulling out early, they win too.
So much bitterness seeping out of every paragragh when iPhone users should just be celebrating this deal. It looks like the author was desperately fearing Android sweeping up on 5G as Apple struggled on with intel vaporware (at worst) or a late, poor performing modem (at best).
Why not just shout a woo hoo! And celebrate?
Agree. DED tends to exaggerate the impact of events.
...
And as for the historical revisionism of Avon and Gatergate on Android:
Sascha Seagan of PCMag : "Qualcomm Deal Means Apple’s 5G iPhone Is Back on for 2020"
"Even knowing that Apple has a good path to 5G takes a lot of air out of the Android world’s competitive sails. Samsung, Qualcomm, and various Android vendors have all been promoting 5G as an “only on Android!” technology—you see the banner ads pop up whenever you run the Speedtest app. It’s in Apple’s interest to cut that line of thinking short."
That doesn't change anything. There is no historical revisionism.
Up until the Apple/QC agreement, those statements were absolutely correct and it would have been foolish to not to take advantage of them.
No doubt over the coming months we will see some indicators to just how much of a squeeze Apple felt it was in (or not).
A first reading does look like Apple had its hand forced by the situation.
If general consensus supports that idea a few months from now, it will be chalked up to a huge strategic miscalculation.
I believe Tim Cook went on record not long ago as stating there had been no meaningful contact with QC their legal battle.
If the idea is that if intel had delivered a decent product on time, then Apple would have fought its case in court, it would look as if Apple considered 5G as simply too important an issue to be late with.
After a lacklustre iPhone refresh last year, the pressure is on to produce a stellar upgrade this year. Having no folding phone or 5G option set them at a marketing disadvantage with regards to Android's heavy hitters, which have been eating into Apple's premium sales. With those manufacturers already ahead in other key phone areas, it could have been an uphill struggle. So, with the new access to QC hardware, Android handset makers will simply drop the 'only on Android' line but continue pushing 5G in marketing and if the next iPhone lacks 5G, you can bet that marketing will be back for the Christmas push.
where is the "exclusivity" come from? if you are standard, you can NOT to do exclusive deal. Besides, there are many companies that focus on IoT utilize 5G - high price industry application with plug in (no need to worry about connectivity and battery power limitation) to earn (1) recover of R&D cost while waiting for network bring up speed and (2) gain implementation experience of reduce latency and application, most important (3) how to reduce power consumption of 5G and improve antenna amp efficiency for future mobile. I'll keep my eyes on Ericsson, IBM, both have experience in long range communication (remote). don't get me wrong, I am glad Apple/QC settlement, I am sad Intel lost (although I think it is very good business move for share holder like me). There are different roadmap toward 5G full implementation. QC is not the only road IMHO. (Apple got good deal and drop from roughly 13 dollar per handset to 9 -according to CNBC I think, but please keep one eye open to sleep with your enemy - If I were Apple designer, will make two sets of PCB top foot print garber file, just in case... Can't be too careful in this dog eats dog world.
Here's the logic for arguing Android is the big loser here -- this settlement is basically an advertisement for the 2020 5G iPhone. Buyers who might have bought an Android phone this year just to get 5G are going to wait now, knowing an iPhone is coming.
cropr said: The 5G networks will be up in running in major cities by the end of 2019
Too bad 5G doesn't really work that well inside buildings. I hear cities have a lot of those.
I guess that's why Apple built a glass building. They didn't think cellular would get through steel and concrete exterior walls like with the intel modem in iPhone 8+ that has bad reception in my office building.
I don't think 5G mmwave goes through walls of glass either. It's not light, it's high frequency energy.
Many misleading points in this article. Android is not the loser. Clearly Intel is the loser as they lost Apple as customer which was a major source of income. For Androids, there is no shortage of 5G modems as QC, Huawei, MT and Samsung have them. And the author did not have guts to compare A12 with SD855 which is almost on par. Even if Apple makes it's own modem in the future, it's a win for QC too as it will get royalty from Apple for its patents.
Not only is Qualcomm materially behind Apple in many areas, it can now no longer keep lying about features that aren't even real.
And the corollary is, if Qualcomm and all of its Android partners were going along so well, why didn't Qualcomm just flip Apple off and leave it in "no 5G land"? It's because 5G is wildly overhyped, especially in how useful it might be in 2019-2020, and Qualcomm desperately needs a high quality, high volume buyer.
I've been on the opposite side of lots of analysts and fake-balance "wohoo celebrate everyone" nonsense, and well, my record of accuracy is in print across 15 years of controversial writing: Vista, Zune, Android Market, PFS, Surface RT, Surface, HTC, iPads, HP WebOS, Honeycomb, MacBook Air, Nexus, Samsung, Tegra, Xiaomi, Motogoogarola, MS Nokia, Huawei, Alexa, Apple Watch, Android Wear, so many topics I've addressed and highlighted the future correctly in opposition to waves of people saying the opposite, and literally tons of anonymous cowards throwing out their catty disrespectful contempt. I don't have to feel "desperate fear" about anything.
How much Revenue and Profit are you predicting Apple will post in the Jan-Mar and Apr-June Quarters.
Yes I've seen plenty of times where you criticize writers and analysts after the fact, but don't remember where you go out on a limb before the results. I don't recall you predicting the bad Oct-Dec quarter in December or before.
Comments
Probably preferable to showing up at court for months and getting minimum wage to listen to stuff most of these people have no understanding of anyway.
You have such contempt for truth and reality. But I'm not going to hold your face down and force-feed it to you. You are disingenuous to the point of being vomit inducing.
You do not know whether Apple failed or not. The settlement the two companies reached may have addressed all of those issues, both in terms of the one-time payment (from disputes over past royalties & promises) as well as their future chip deals (potentially no double-dipping, etc). I don't know either. But given the fierceness Apple has always shown in its negotiations (some deals have been revealed after the fact)... if I were forced to place a bet regarding whether Apple took a chunk out of what Qualcomm was hoping for, I would bet "yes".
OK, so you might say that even if my bet were correct, then Apple was only successful with regard to cash but not with regard to "being the hero" for the community against Qualcomm's licensing practices. You don't know that either. There are still several court cases brought by multiple governments against Qualcomm. I also don't know, but my hunch is that by now there is little else Apple could reveal in those cases that they haven't already revealed. So Apple has played its "hero card" about as far as it could go from that standpoint.
The bottom line is that I believe Apple probably came out of this settlement with much nicer terms going forward (and potentially reduced payment for what occurred before) and that Qualcomm's licensing practices with many of their customers are still under the microscope and will possibly have to be revisited going forward.
Some subject material that suggests, wait until 2020, or better 2021;
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/12/dont-buy-a-5g-smartphone-at-least-not-for-a-while/
https://daringfireball.net/2019/04/why_apple_settled_with_qualcomm
Apple certainly is at no disadvantage this year from lack of 5G, and I'd argue only marginally next year, when they will likely have a slightly more evolved modem from Qualcomm than that for this year.
BTW, Huawei has something like 40 signed contracts for 5G, mostly in the EU, and none at all in China.
Why would the be?
Maybe because some of the 5G standards still haven't been finished. early buildout is going to be expensive, and will still require lots of development. All that aside, 5G has a nice marketing ring to it, so by all means, carry on. /s
The lady does protest too much.
Yes I've seen plenty of times where you criticize writers and analysts after the fact, but don't remember where you go out on a limb before the results. I don't recall you predicting the bad Oct-Dec quarter in December or before.
BIG THANKS FOR THIS ARTICLE LAST YEAR:
https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/11/30/testcard-turns-your-iphone-into-a-private-clinical-grade-urinalysis-kit
Please do updates when they actually ship. Their website indicates next month in England. This really can benefit people,.
As DED Previously said:
"Losing the modem business of the world's largest premium phone vendor to Intel was a devastating blow"
and
"Qualcomm's premium is tethered to Android commodity"
If Apple had been successful in winning the lawsuit and Apple had had stayed with Intel's modems DED and tons of other posters here in the forums would be cheering because it would be a big blow to an important supplier in the Android ecosystem.
Ultimately Apple's caving is a big benefit for users of Apple's future phones. I look forward to being able to buy an Apple XIS in 2020 with a QualComm modem to ditch the substandard Intel modem in my iPhone 8+.
Up until the Apple/QC agreement, those statements were absolutely correct and it would have been foolish to not to take advantage of them.
No doubt over the coming months we will see some indicators to just how much of a squeeze Apple felt it was in (or not).
A first reading does look like Apple had its hand forced by the situation.
If general consensus supports that idea a few months from now, it will be chalked up to a huge strategic miscalculation.
I believe Tim Cook went on record not long ago as stating there had been no meaningful contact with QC their legal battle.
If the idea is that if intel had delivered a decent product on time, then Apple would have fought its case in court, it would look as if Apple considered 5G as simply too important an issue to be late with.
After a lacklustre iPhone refresh last year, the pressure is on to produce a stellar upgrade this year. Having no folding phone or 5G option set them at a marketing disadvantage with regards to Android's heavy hitters, which have been eating into Apple's premium sales. With those manufacturers already ahead in other key phone areas, it could have been an uphill struggle. So, with the new access to QC hardware, Android handset makers will simply drop the 'only on Android' line but continue pushing 5G in marketing and if the next iPhone lacks 5G, you can bet that marketing will be back for the Christmas push.
Qualcomm's Snapdragon 855 is over a year behind Apple's A12 Bionic, lacks a premium Android audience
https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/12/06/qualcomms-snapdragon-855-is-over-a-year-behind-apples-a12-bionic-lacks-a-premium-android-audience
Not only is Qualcomm materially behind Apple in many areas, it can now no longer keep lying about features that aren't even real.
And the corollary is, if Qualcomm and all of its Android partners were going along so well, why didn't Qualcomm just flip Apple off and leave it in "no 5G land"? It's because 5G is wildly overhyped, especially in how useful it might be in 2019-2020, and Qualcomm desperately needs a high quality, high volume buyer.
Well then you should pay closer attention