Apple's iPhone modem design is three years behind Qualcomm

Posted:
in iPhone

Apple intended for the iPhone 15 to use an 5G modem designed in-house, and it has spent billions working to achieve that. Here's why it still has to buy modems from Qualcomm.

Apple is trying to make its own 5G modem for the iPhone
Apple is trying to make its own 5G modem for the iPhone



Modems are hard. In 2010, Intel spent $1.4 billion to acquire Infineon, whose baseband chips, were used in the cellular features of the iPhone.

In 2019, Intel sold its modem patents to Apple for $1 billion, and got out of that business. Since at least then, Apple has been aiming to make its own modems, and to do so both to save money, and to stop buying from Qualcomm.

For its part, Qualcomm expected Apple to have produced its own modem by 2024. But then in September 2023, Qualcomm announced a deal with Apple that would see it providing modems up to 2026.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the extended delay comes despite Apple spending billions on the project. It is delayed for multiple reasons, ranging from the expected technical challenges, to the presumably unexpected management problems.

"These delays indicate Apple didn't anticipate the complexity of the effort," Serge Willenegger, ex-Qualcomm executive told the publication. "Cellular is a monster."

"Just because Apple builds the best silicon on the planet," said former Apple wireless director Jaydeep Ranade, "it's ridiculous to think that they could also build a modem."

Neither Willenegger nor Ranade have been involved in the project, which Apple has reportedly codenamed Sinope. Former Apple HR executive Chris Deaver told the Wall Street Journal that the project began in 2018.

That's a point when Apple and Qualcomm were taking each other to court over multiple disagreements, though these were settled in 2019.

At that time, Apple executives were divided over whether to partner with Intel, or to design a chip themselves. Reportedly, Ruben Caballero, then a long-standing head of wireless at Apple, wanted to go with Intel.

However, Johny Srouji, senior vice president of hardware technologies, disagreed and wanted Apple to build its own. Caballero left in 2019 and much of his team were placed under Srouji.

Others were split off into the separate hardware engineering group to work on related issues such as antenna design.

According to the Wall Street Journal, this division of engineering work became a problem. Unspecified sources within the project told the publication that one of the senior managers on Srouji's team had no wireless technology background at all.

Other Apple executives lacked experience with wireless, said former project engineers. Consequently they were setting tight and unrealistic deadlines.

Or they did until late 2022 when Apple began testing prototypes. Reportedly, Apple's 5G modem chips were poor enough that they would have made the iPhone's wireless speeds slower than Android.

People said to be familiar with the tests are said to have estimated that Apple is three years behind Qualcomm.

It's possible that the prototypes were an internal-use-only iPhone SE 4, as some models of that were reportedly manufactured for testing purposes. When that was reported, it was expected that a shipping iPhone SE 4 would feature Apple's modem in 2024, but now that appears to be another unrealistic deadline.

Read on AppleInsider

«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 35
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,703member
    To the contrary of what some people claimed, it was never going to be easy. Not in software or in hardware.

    5G is a huge collection of different standards and technologies falling under one general umbrella. 

    A few years ago you could have got away with NSA but now you have to support SA and advances for the immediate future (5.5G) and then be ready for 6G.

    Realistically speaking Apple needed to be at the table where the standards themselves are thrashed out. 

    Without a seat at those tables you will always be playing catch up to a certain degree. 

    They acquired the Intel division plus accumulated patents. You could argue that got them onto the ladder. Climbing it is another story. 

    The odds of Apple producing a superior product to anything Huawei, Samsung, Qualcomm, Broadcom can produce are limited simply because those companies have decades of accumulated knowhow and resources.

    Perhaps 'good enough' is where they are happy to be at the moment in terms of verticality in manufacturing. I think that's a valid aim but it won't free them of patent agreements. 

    Beyond the modem and antenna designs themselves, the whole thing was a result of a massive strategic goof. The spat with Qualcomm. 

    When the Intel plan collapsed it really was a Yikes! moment and although we don't know the details of the deal, it's hard to imagine Qualcomm not having the upper hand in negotiations. 
    dewmebyronlmuthuk_vanalingamAlex1N9secondkox2FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 2 of 35
    Read the story on how huawei got into cellular business. Not from the scratch for sure
    tmayigorskyFileMakerFellerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 35
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,348member
    avon b7 said:
    To the contrary of what some people claimed, it was never going to be easy. Not in software or in hardware.

    5G is a huge collection of different standards and technologies falling under one general umbrella. 

    A few years ago you could have got away with NSA but now you have to support SA and advances for the immediate future (5.5G) and then be ready for 6G.

    Realistically speaking Apple needed to be at the table where the standards themselves are thrashed out. 

    Without a seat at those tables you will always be playing catch up to a certain degree. 

    They acquired the Intel division plus accumulated patents. You could argue that got them onto the ladder. Climbing it is another story. 

    The odds of Apple producing a superior product to anything Huawei, Samsung, Qualcomm, Broadcom can produce are limited simply because those companies have decades of accumulated knowhow and resources.

    Perhaps 'good enough' is where they are happy to be at the moment in terms of verticality in manufacturing. I think that's a valid aim but it won't free them of patent agreements. 

    Beyond the modem and antenna designs themselves, the whole thing was a result of a massive strategic goof. The spat with Qualcomm. 

    When the Intel plan collapsed it really was a Yikes! moment and although we don't know the details of the deal, it's hard to imagine Qualcomm not having the upper hand in negotiations. 
    It's funny, but I would use your exact same argument against Huawei/HiSilicon/SMIC, which are firmly anchored in pushing older Western tech to its limits, five years behind and attempting to break out. Who do you think is going to be more successful in their endeavors? Huawei/HiSilicon/SMIC or Apple?

    And while some have lauded Huawei’s HiSilicon chip design business for beating Apple to the punch with the apparent development of its own 5G modem in China’s Mate 60 Pro, lab tests show that Huawei’s chips consume more power than competitors’ and cause the phone “to heat up” which is bad for performance.

    So yeah, modems are hard.

    Apple’s custom modem work continues, and Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman suggests we’ll likely see them gradually roll out before the current Qualcomm deal expires in 2026.


    Qualcomm may have had the "upper hand" in negotiations, and has recently seen a reprieve, but it in fact Apple that was visionary enough to add long term options to the agreement, just in case.  Should Apple deliver their own modem by 2026, or even later, it is due to Apple being able to generate enough revenue and profits to more than afford that considerable R&D effort. 

    You know, the same company that set the bar for smartphones some 16 years ago, which nobody saw coming.

    https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/29/12-years-of-iphone-why-apples-first-smartphone-was-far-from-a-guaranteed-success
    edited September 2023 williamlondondanoxAlex1N9secondkox2MisterKitwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 35
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,703member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    To the contrary of what some people claimed, it was never going to be easy. Not in software or in hardware.

    5G is a huge collection of different standards and technologies falling under one general umbrella. 

    A few years ago you could have got away with NSA but now you have to support SA and advances for the immediate future (5.5G) and then be ready for 6G.

    Realistically speaking Apple needed to be at the table where the standards themselves are thrashed out. 

    Without a seat at those tables you will always be playing catch up to a certain degree. 

    They acquired the Intel division plus accumulated patents. You could argue that got them onto the ladder. Climbing it is another story. 

    The odds of Apple producing a superior product to anything Huawei, Samsung, Qualcomm, Broadcom can produce are limited simply because those companies have decades of accumulated knowhow and resources.

    Perhaps 'good enough' is where they are happy to be at the moment in terms of verticality in manufacturing. I think that's a valid aim but it won't free them of patent agreements. 

    Beyond the modem and antenna designs themselves, the whole thing was a result of a massive strategic goof. The spat with Qualcomm. 

    When the Intel plan collapsed it really was a Yikes! moment and although we don't know the details of the deal, it's hard to imagine Qualcomm not having the upper hand in negotiations. 
    It's funny, but I would use your exact same argument against Huawei/HiSilicon/SMIC, which are firmly anchored in pushing older Western tech to its limits, five years behind and attempting to break out. Who do you think is going to be more successful in their endeavors? Huawei/HiSilicon/SMIC or Apple?

    And while some have lauded Huawei’s HiSilicon chip design business for beating Apple to the punch with the apparent development of its own 5G modem in China’s Mate 60 Pro, lab tests show that Huawei’s chips consume more power than competitors’ and cause the phone “to heat up” which is bad for performance.

    So yeah, modems are hard.

    Apple’s custom modem work continues, and Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman suggests we’ll likely see them gradually roll out before the current Qualcomm deal expires in 2026.


    Qualcomm may have had the "upper hand" in negotiations, and has recently seen a reprieve, but it in fact Apple that was visionary enough to add long term options to the agreement, just in case.  Should Apple deliver their own modem by 2026, or even later, it is due to Apple being able to generate enough revenue and profits to more than afford that considerable R&D effort. 

    You know, the same company that set the bar for smartphones some 16 years ago, which nobody saw coming.

    https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/29/12-years-of-iphone-why-apples-first-smartphone-was-far-from-a-guaranteed-success
    First point: Huawei (and by a wide margin). Designing a modem and manufacturing the design are two different things and five years is a world away in technology. 

    Second point: if 'visionary' were even applicable, they would never have found themselves in this predicament in the first place. It was more a case of not having any more cards to play. To Qualcomm it just means one less competitor (and even that term is a stretch) and much more money.

    Older western tech? 

    I hope you realise that NearLink devices are now shipping. LOL!

    https://techjaja.com/huawei-nearlink-wireless-revolution/
    edited September 2023 9secondkox2
  • Reply 5 of 35
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,703member
    jfabula1 said:
    Read the story on how huawei got into cellular business. Not from the scratch for sure
    Your point makes no sense. Apple bought its way in through a million dollar purchase. 

    The real issue is what I outlined in my post. Apple will never reach the top players until it finds a seat on the standards committees which shape the future. 
    muthuk_vanalingamAlex1N9secondkox2
  • Reply 6 of 35
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,348member
    avon b7 said:
    jfabula1 said:
    Read the story on how huawei got into cellular business. Not from the scratch for sure
    Your point makes no sense. Apple bought its way in through a million dollar purchase. 

    The real issue is what I outlined in my post. Apple will never reach the top players until it finds a seat on the standards committees which shape the future. 
    Apple is already a member of 3GPP.

    https://www.lightreading.com/5g/3gpp-moving-to-prevent-power-grab-by-apple-others


    williamlondonAlex1N9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 35
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,348member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    To the contrary of what some people claimed, it was never going to be easy. Not in software or in hardware.

    5G is a huge collection of different standards and technologies falling under one general umbrella. 

    A few years ago you could have got away with NSA but now you have to support SA and advances for the immediate future (5.5G) and then be ready for 6G.

    Realistically speaking Apple needed to be at the table where the standards themselves are thrashed out. 

    Without a seat at those tables you will always be playing catch up to a certain degree. 

    They acquired the Intel division plus accumulated patents. You could argue that got them onto the ladder. Climbing it is another story. 

    The odds of Apple producing a superior product to anything Huawei, Samsung, Qualcomm, Broadcom can produce are limited simply because those companies have decades of accumulated knowhow and resources.

    Perhaps 'good enough' is where they are happy to be at the moment in terms of verticality in manufacturing. I think that's a valid aim but it won't free them of patent agreements. 

    Beyond the modem and antenna designs themselves, the whole thing was a result of a massive strategic goof. The spat with Qualcomm. 

    When the Intel plan collapsed it really was a Yikes! moment and although we don't know the details of the deal, it's hard to imagine Qualcomm not having the upper hand in negotiations. 
    It's funny, but I would use your exact same argument against Huawei/HiSilicon/SMIC, which are firmly anchored in pushing older Western tech to its limits, five years behind and attempting to break out. Who do you think is going to be more successful in their endeavors? Huawei/HiSilicon/SMIC or Apple?

    And while some have lauded Huawei’s HiSilicon chip design business for beating Apple to the punch with the apparent development of its own 5G modem in China’s Mate 60 Pro, lab tests show that Huawei’s chips consume more power than competitors’ and cause the phone “to heat up” which is bad for performance.

    So yeah, modems are hard.

    Apple’s custom modem work continues, and Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman suggests we’ll likely see them gradually roll out before the current Qualcomm deal expires in 2026.


    Qualcomm may have had the "upper hand" in negotiations, and has recently seen a reprieve, but it in fact Apple that was visionary enough to add long term options to the agreement, just in case.  Should Apple deliver their own modem by 2026, or even later, it is due to Apple being able to generate enough revenue and profits to more than afford that considerable R&D effort. 

    You know, the same company that set the bar for smartphones some 16 years ago, which nobody saw coming.

    https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/29/12-years-of-iphone-why-apples-first-smartphone-was-far-from-a-guaranteed-success
    First point: Huawei (and by a wide margin). Designing a modem and manufacturing the design are two different things and five years is a world away in technology. 

    Second point: if 'visionary' were even applicable, they would never have found themselves in this predicament in the first place. It was more a case of not having any more cards to play. To Qualcomm it just means one less competitor (and even that term is a stretch) and much more money.

    Older western tech? 

    I hope you realise that NearLink devices are now shipping. LOL!

    https://techjaja.com/huawei-nearlink-wireless-revolution/
    NearLink is UWB. 

    Apple was first to introduce UWD in a smartphone, and today, I expect every phone to have UWD of some type, but they don't because it isn't as cheap as BT.

    Apparently, the secret of NearLink is to use a extremely wide spectrum, of the order of at least 400 MHz (a BT channel has 20 MHz, and a WiFi channel 20 (802.11 b) or 40 MHz.

    I wouldn't be surprised of parallel data transfers.

    This would be in line with the idea that Huawei wants a sort of "super device" where single devices can be added seamlessly in a modular fashion and sending data at high speeds.

    Apple's UWB technology is similar, but proprietary and kept like a Draconian treasure. This led societies to instead release an update the Bluetooth LE, especially for wearables, to improve the data rate.

    Of course, Huawei is able to introduce technology at 400 Mhz of bandwidth, in China that may not be allowed in the rest of the world. 

    https://www.androidauthority.com/what-is-uwb-1151744/


    edited September 2023 williamlondonAlex1N9secondkox2watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 35
    “Real engineers do analog”
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 35
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,348member
    “Real engineers do analog”
    I work with RF engineers on a frequent basis, and most designs are hybrid analog/digital, but I agree that RF engineering is one of the most difficult disciplines.
    Alex1Nwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 35
    3 years is a lifetime in this business for good industry leaders to lead even further. Ask Apple.

    Tough task ahead to wean off Qualcomm. 
    edited September 2023 grandact73Alex1NFileMakerFellerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 35
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,875member
    avon b7 said:
    jfabula1 said:
    Read the story on how huawei got into cellular business. Not from the scratch for sure
    Your point makes no sense. Apple bought its way in through a million dollar purchase. 

    The real issue is what I outlined in my post. Apple will never reach the top players until it finds a seat on the standards committees which shape the future. 
    Did that thinking apply to project replace Intel? Apple will never replace them but they did? it took 13 years to replace Intel in Apple products, project modem started five years ago. They still have plenty of time to make it happen and with Apples history in the last 25 years, they will make it happen, and once they do, they can put their foot on the gas pedal which is happening currently with their A, M and R1 series SOC’s every year they get better, however for some of the short term thinkers not fast enough?, but Apple’s iteration keeps moving forward.

    I don’t remember your posts, but did you whine all the way through the Apple, Intel replacement process it can’t be done it will never be done impossible, Apple should just give up?

    Apple might be faced with another replacement project, and that relates to Unity who struck out, after getting a little limelight on the big stage with their game engine, there are those who suggest Apple should just stay home and not do anything despite the fact that Unity appears to have lost their head, when they came up with terms for their developers that were far beyond anything, Apple has ever done, question is, should Apple trust put their future in AAA games into the hands of companies like Unity, or Epic? or roll up their sleeves and get busy internally.
    edited September 2023 narwhalAlex1Nwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 35
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,875member
    anantksundaram said:
    3 years is a lifetime in this business for good industry leaders to lead even further. Ask Apple.

    Tough task ahead to wean off Qualcomm. 
    Like replacing Intel in 13 years? or building a Thorium reactor?
    edited September 2023 watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 35
    Three years behind according to whom?  The WSJ, based on the comments of a former executive at Qualcomm?  What would you expect him to say?  Nobody outside Apple knows about their progress, how close they are, or what technology they’re working on.  Maybe they’ve been working on something beyond 5G.  We won’t know until they release it.  
    bonobobAlex1Nwatto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 35
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,703member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    jfabula1 said:
    Read the story on how huawei got into cellular business. Not from the scratch for sure
    Your point makes no sense. Apple bought its way in through a million dollar purchase. 

    The real issue is what I outlined in my post. Apple will never reach the top players until it finds a seat on the standards committees which shape the future. 
    Apple is already a member of 3GPP.

    https://www.lightreading.com/5g/3gpp-moving-to-prevent-power-grab-by-apple-others


    Being a member and having sway are different things. It's why, when it came to the proposal of polar codes for 5G, Apple was not pulling any weight. That was basically Qualcomm (against) and Huawei (for). That was my point. Polar codes were included in the end and in fact a part of NearLink too.

    That said, I was unaware that 3GPP had made changes to the voting system which will even that side out a bit now. The changes are recent and haven't taken effect yet.

    Perhaps acquiring intel's 5G modem division is what saw them double their votes. 
    Alex1N9secondkox2FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 15 of 35
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,703member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    To the contrary of what some people claimed, it was never going to be easy. Not in software or in hardware.

    5G is a huge collection of different standards and technologies falling under one general umbrella. 

    A few years ago you could have got away with NSA but now you have to support SA and advances for the immediate future (5.5G) and then be ready for 6G.

    Realistically speaking Apple needed to be at the table where the standards themselves are thrashed out. 

    Without a seat at those tables you will always be playing catch up to a certain degree. 

    They acquired the Intel division plus accumulated patents. You could argue that got them onto the ladder. Climbing it is another story. 

    The odds of Apple producing a superior product to anything Huawei, Samsung, Qualcomm, Broadcom can produce are limited simply because those companies have decades of accumulated knowhow and resources.

    Perhaps 'good enough' is where they are happy to be at the moment in terms of verticality in manufacturing. I think that's a valid aim but it won't free them of patent agreements. 

    Beyond the modem and antenna designs themselves, the whole thing was a result of a massive strategic goof. The spat with Qualcomm. 

    When the Intel plan collapsed it really was a Yikes! moment and although we don't know the details of the deal, it's hard to imagine Qualcomm not having the upper hand in negotiations. 
    It's funny, but I would use your exact same argument against Huawei/HiSilicon/SMIC, which are firmly anchored in pushing older Western tech to its limits, five years behind and attempting to break out. Who do you think is going to be more successful in their endeavors? Huawei/HiSilicon/SMIC or Apple?

    And while some have lauded Huawei’s HiSilicon chip design business for beating Apple to the punch with the apparent development of its own 5G modem in China’s Mate 60 Pro, lab tests show that Huawei’s chips consume more power than competitors’ and cause the phone “to heat up” which is bad for performance.

    So yeah, modems are hard.

    Apple’s custom modem work continues, and Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman suggests we’ll likely see them gradually roll out before the current Qualcomm deal expires in 2026.


    Qualcomm may have had the "upper hand" in negotiations, and has recently seen a reprieve, but it in fact Apple that was visionary enough to add long term options to the agreement, just in case.  Should Apple deliver their own modem by 2026, or even later, it is due to Apple being able to generate enough revenue and profits to more than afford that considerable R&D effort. 

    You know, the same company that set the bar for smartphones some 16 years ago, which nobody saw coming.

    https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/29/12-years-of-iphone-why-apples-first-smartphone-was-far-from-a-guaranteed-success
    First point: Huawei (and by a wide margin). Designing a modem and manufacturing the design are two different things and five years is a world away in technology. 

    Second point: if 'visionary' were even applicable, they would never have found themselves in this predicament in the first place. It was more a case of not having any more cards to play. To Qualcomm it just means one less competitor (and even that term is a stretch) and much more money.

    Older western tech? 

    I hope you realise that NearLink devices are now shipping. LOL!

    https://techjaja.com/huawei-nearlink-wireless-revolution/
    NearLink is UWB. 

    Apple was first to introduce UWD in a smartphone, and today, I expect every phone to have UWD of some type, but they don't because it isn't as cheap as BT.

    Apparently, the secret of NearLink is to use a extremely wide spectrum, of the order of at least 400 MHz (a BT channel has 20 MHz, and a WiFi channel 20 (802.11 b) or 40 MHz.

    I wouldn't be surprised of parallel data transfers.

    This would be in line with the idea that Huawei wants a sort of "super device" where single devices can be added seamlessly in a modular fashion and sending data at high speeds.

    Apple's UWB technology is similar, but proprietary and kept like a Draconian treasure. This led societies to instead release an update the Bluetooth LE, especially for wearables, to improve the data rate.

    Of course, Huawei is able to introduce technology at 400 Mhz of bandwidth, in China that may not be allowed in the rest of the world. 

    https://www.androidauthority.com/what-is-uwb-1151744/


    That has nothing to do with the point! 

    You were going off about using 'older western tech' so I gave you the perfect example of the exact opposite. Of course, in a thread on 5G and Huawei being one of the major 5G players, trying to make the point you made was already flat on its face before you hit the 'post' button. 

    And when you say 'western' I suppose you are trying to squeeze TSMC in which is completely laughable.

    On the subject of UWB, that is nothing new. It's been around for decades and Huawei has been using it for years now in industrial settings, so saying NearLink is UWB is saying nothing. 

    Like saying Apple was first to put UWB in a phone. 

    NearLink is a wireless implementation with over 300 companies on board. What counts here is what it does and how it does it. For example, it uses polar codes. As for cost, I'm not following you. How could Huawei put it in its newest earbuds if cost was an issue? Btw, those earbuds are taking advantage of NearLink to enable Huawei's latest HD audio codec. 

    Cost used to be a factor but if a pair of earbuds have it.... 
    edited September 2023 Alex1N9secondkox2FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 16 of 35
    Makes perfect sense that it’s taking a while to launch an industry leading cellular modem considering the following:

    1.Apple has never made a cellular modem before. 
    2. Apple has to design around a ginaormous number of patents owned by Qualcomm to try to find an untapped way to do the same thing - and critically that means Apple doesn’t get to take an R&D shortcut by reverse engineering Qualcomms units. 
    3. Apple doesn’t mess around by offering crap. When they go after something, it’s with the goal of being the best. A tall order here considering Qualcomm has been hitting big for a while now. 
    4. Apple may have forfeit the 5g game and are aiming at the next generation beyond 5g. 

    So Apple isn’t late. It doesn’t matter when Qualcomm says they thought apple would be ready by. They don’t care if they’re trivializing apples Herculean effort in the space. Apple will only be late if and when they announce a launch date and fail to meet that date. 
    tmayAlex1Nwatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 35
    Betting against Apple never works out in the end. 
    StrangeDaysAlex1NMisterKitFileMakerFellerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 35
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,703member
    danox said:
    avon b7 said:
    jfabula1 said:
    Read the story on how huawei got into cellular business. Not from the scratch for sure
    Your point makes no sense. Apple bought its way in through a million dollar purchase. 

    The real issue is what I outlined in my post. Apple will never reach the top players until it finds a seat on the standards committees which shape the future. 
    Did that thinking apply to project replace Intel? Apple will never replace them but they did? it took 13 years to replace Intel in Apple products, project modem started five years ago. They still have plenty of time to make it happen and with Apples history in the last 25 years, they will make it happen, and once they do, they can put their foot on the gas pedal which is happening currently with their A, M and R1 series SOC’s every year they get better, however for some of the short term thinkers not fast enough?, but Apple’s iteration keeps moving forward.

    I don’t remember your posts, but did you whine all the way through the Apple, Intel replacement process it can’t be done it will never be done impossible, Apple should just give up?

    Apple might be faced with another replacement project, and that relates to Unity who struck out, after getting a little limelight on the big stage with their game engine, there are those who suggest Apple should just stay home and not do anything despite the fact that Unity appears to have lost their head, when they came up with terms for their developers that were far beyond anything, Apple has ever done, question is, should Apple trust put their future in AAA games into the hands of companies like Unity, or Epic? or roll up their sleeves and get busy internally.
    You are distorting reality here. If PowerPC had delivered, Intel wouldn't have got a look in. If Intel had delivered, Apple Silicon might never have existed on Macs. 

    It all boils down to need. Apple needed Intel at the time. Bootcamp was a boon back then.

    One thing to remember is that even when OSX was released on PowerPC, it wasn't long before Intel compiles started being built in secret (Marklar).

    Everything is context and perspective dependant. That applies here too. If Intel had delivered a decent 5G modem we wouldn't be having this conversation. 

    It still remains a strategic goof though and of epic proportions. 
    FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 19 of 35
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,200member
    Apple engineers seem to have muffed the development of an M2 "Extreme", too.
  • Reply 20 of 35
    avon b7 said:
    danox said:
    avon b7 said:
    jfabula1 said:
    Read the story on how huawei got into cellular business. Not from the scratch for sure
    Your point makes no sense. Apple bought its way in through a million dollar purchase. 

    The real issue is what I outlined in my post. Apple will never reach the top players until it finds a seat on the standards committees which shape the future. 
    Did that thinking apply to project replace Intel? Apple will never replace them but they did? it took 13 years to replace Intel in Apple products, project modem started five years ago. They still have plenty of time to make it happen and with Apples history in the last 25 years, they will make it happen, and once they do, they can put their foot on the gas pedal which is happening currently with their A, M and R1 series SOC’s every year they get better, however for some of the short term thinkers not fast enough?, but Apple’s iteration keeps moving forward.

    I don’t remember your posts, but did you whine all the way through the Apple, Intel replacement process it can’t be done it will never be done impossible, Apple should just give up?

    Apple might be faced with another replacement project, and that relates to Unity who struck out, after getting a little limelight on the big stage with their game engine, there are those who suggest Apple should just stay home and not do anything despite the fact that Unity appears to have lost their head, when they came up with terms for their developers that were far beyond anything, Apple has ever done, question is, should Apple trust put their future in AAA games into the hands of companies like Unity, or Epic? or roll up their sleeves and get busy internally.
    You are distorting reality here. If PowerPC had delivered, Intel wouldn't have got a look in. If Intel had delivered, Apple Silicon might never have existed on Macs. 

    It all boils down to need. Apple needed Intel at the time. Bootcamp was a boon back then.

    One thing to remember is that even when OSX was released on PowerPC, it wasn't long before Intel compiles started being built in secret (Marklar).

    Everything is context and perspective dependant. That applies here too. If Intel had delivered a decent 5G modem we wouldn't be having this conversation. 

    It still remains a strategic goof though and of epic proportions. 
    Again you’re talking about partners. Not apple itself. PowerPC was an I’ve/Motorola partnership. Intel was another third party partnership. IBM didn’t care enough about apple to step on the throttle. Intel didn’t care enough about apple to change the status quo. Qualcomm cares so little for everyone, they abuse their monopoly. 

    The impossible things apple does:

    1. comes back from the dead
    2. Turns the music industry right side up with not only an answer to rampant piracy, but a pioneering revolution of the business. 
    3. Obliterates Sony in the portable music player space with iPod. 
    4. Obliterates everyone with a space age futuristic iphone that changes the way smartphones are designed, I/o is done, and what expectations of a mobile internet are. 
    5. Takes over the tablet industry entirely. 
    6. Launches an Apple Watch to dominate that industry. 
    7.  Supersedes the CPU industry with its Appple Silicon. 

    Not to mention that Apple invented:

    a. THE MOUSE
    b. FireWire
    c. Thunderbolt -in collaboration with Intel. 
    d. The QuickTime standard. 
    e. The ProRes video codec. 
    And more. Apple has been a responsible party in shaping our digital world either itself or in collaboration with others. So there is more than plenty ofreason to believe that Apple not only will Apple succeed at adding a modem category to its lineup, but that it will be ready for the future. 


    Still to come:
    1. Apple car…
    2. vision pro…
    3. Cellular modem. Likely 5.5 or 6g (skate to where the puck is going to be. Not where it has been…)…

    not everything apple does succeeds. Obviously, the Apple TV is still “a hobby.” And Apple TV plus could use an injection of enthusiasm. iCloud plus could hold more value, the g4 cube tanked (but the studio seems to be doing just fine…) 

    it’s a new Apple. Though it’s still finding it’s way again in terms of moving design forward, it’s definitely an engineering powerhouse at the top of the heap with the work ethic, the financial solvency, the drive, and talent to succeed. 

    A high performance cellular modem isn’t insurmountable even for a smaller company. The only real challenge is designing the system in such a way as to not intrude on all the patents Qualcomm has. That’s a major undertaking. Though daunting, it’s possible. It just takes time to get it right. Apple has to pioneer methods here. Rome wasn’t built in a day but it faded away due to arrogance. Meanwhile Apple’s modem won’t be a quick matter, but it will be great when complete. And apple is wise to remain cagey as they are acutely aware how easy it is to see a successful company die surrounded by cutthroat competitors. I’d say Apple is doing fine in the modem arena. They just aren’t there yet. Of course they aren’t. Two to Three more years of Qualcomm modems may actually mean apple is closer than that in launching their own modems as well. 

    ALSO
    Let’s not forget that once apple launches its own modem, they still need to be able to fulfill orders for older handsets still on sale that require…qualcomm modems. With that in mind, this seems like the logical way to go. Apple could quite possibly be closer to launch than “another two to three years contract with qualcomm” would suggest. 
    edited September 2023 Alex1Nwatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.