avon b7

9secondkox2 said:

avon b7 said:

williamlondon said:

"64-bit is a marketing gimmick"

- Official Qualcomm Statement 2013

"Apple's 64-bit A7 Chip 'Set off Panic in the Industry'", "the A7 'sent ripples of disbelief' throughout their [Qualcomm] offices"

- Qualcomm Employees

Not sure losing such a big revenue stream warrants a "that's what it is" blasé response from the CEO. Downplay it all you want, but it's actually quite a big thing.

It's lost revenue. That's a fact. 

However, it's lost revenue that they never expected to have in the first place. 

Literally money for nothing. 

It was only Intel failing to deliver that got them this current contract. Just a bonus. It also saw the end of a multi-billion dollar legal fight as Apple had no option but to abandon that. 

They have always known it was temporary. The contract itself was temporary. Right from the start. 

What isn't temporary are the patent royalties that Apple will continue to pay them. 

Apple wouldn't have gone into the modem business if Qualcomm wasn't so shady. That's what triggered this. Qualcomm has 5G on lockdown as far as getting the best out of it. anyone else has to work around their patents. But 6G is a whole new ballgame. And it's time fore 6G.

Believe me, Qualcomm, Huawei and Samsung aren't resting on their laurels with regards to 6G.

Apple will want to contribute (just as it should IMO) and I can tell you for a fact that Huawei and Apple are working together (with others) in the EU on network sensing technologies. 

But before that, 5.5G support is needed. 

williamlondon said:

"64-bit is a marketing gimmick"

- Official Qualcomm Statement 2013

"Apple's 64-bit A7 Chip 'Set off Panic in the Industry'", "the A7 'sent ripples of disbelief' throughout their [Qualcomm] offices"

- Qualcomm Employees

Not sure losing such a big revenue stream warrants a "that's what it is" blasé response from the CEO. Downplay it all you want, but it's actually quite a big thing.

It's lost revenue. That's a fact. 

However, it's lost revenue that they never expected to have in the first place. 

Literally money for nothing. 

It was only Intel failing to deliver that got them this current contract. Just a bonus. It also saw the end of a multi-billion dollar legal fight as Apple had no option but to abandon that. 

They have always known it was temporary. The contract itself was temporary. Right from the start. 

What isn't temporary are the patent royalties that Apple will continue to pay them. 

Colibrinyc said:

John Gruber makes a good example on Daring Fireball. AirDrop is not an industry standard but a piece of Apple IP that they use to differentiate their offering from other industry players. Why should they be forced to share that tech with other manufacturers or software developers? Why should they be forced to open low level processes to third parties?

The vast majority of consumers - Europeans included - just want a well made and secure smartphone. We buy iPhones because of their quality construction and privacy/security differentiators and with knowledge of its "walled garden."  Apple has <25% market share in Europe, so it's nowhere near the dominant (or monopolist) OS or hardware manufacturer. I don't see a lot of European consumers screaming for change, and there are plenty of Android-based options here, more so than in the US. What exactly is the EU trying to protect its citizens from here? How are European consumers being actively harmed by Apple?

It would seem that the EU would be better off creating the economic and regulatory conditions that would encourage and allow European companies to develop their own OSes, hardware, etc. While that will take time, simply targeting Apple isn't going to accomplish that. Apple has enough problems dealing with Trump in its primary market, so it will probably just result in the loss of features and functionality for European consumers.

Then why has the iPhone never (AFAIK) supported the Bluetooth file transfer profile?

Something that has been around for years. 

The reason is clear. That is an interoperable direct file transfer method but is not in the interest of Apple's lock in mentality.

rob53 said:

Apple owns its products not the EU. The EU has no right to dictate to Apple how its products operate. As I’ve said before, the EU has every right to build their own platforms but it’s obvious they don’t have the ability or talent to design and manufacture anything people, including those in EU countries, want. It’s time to boycott everything made in the EU but I’m not so sure there’s actually anything they make I really want. 

The EU has every right to level playing fields and counter consumer harm and the stifling of innovation.

That has long been the case. 

In the 'digital' world, the same ideas are applicable but new laws were needed specifically for the kind of cases explained here. 

Do you remember the world pre-pdf?

Interoperability is key to the points mentioned above and for progress. 

Mechanisms will have to be created and perfected but technology has the tendency to outpace legislation so these situations will persist until things get settled. 

This isn't an Apple thing. 

It's a EU thing! ICT carriers were forced to open up their technologies years ago and share their resources to a degree. 

This isn't like the US where for as long as I can remember (and for all I know, may still be the case) your place of residence was a limiting factor to which carriers you could choose from.

I can opt for a virtual carrier which will use the infrastructure of one of the bigger players. That allows for competition to exist. 

Left to its own devices, Apple does not allow for competition to exist. We know this and this is precisely why it is being forced to open up in certain areas (and not only the EU). 

Of course, Apple is free to pull out of the EU. So is Google and Meta et al. Will they? Nope because, as you seem unwilling to contemplate, any pull-out would be met with very swift movements to fill any gaps. 

You personally, may well be able to get by without EU products, but what would Apple's current supply chain do without ASML? 

humbug1873 said:

blastdoor said:

When I first read that Apple executives wouldn’t be talking to John Gruber this year (https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/05/29/the-talk-show-live-tickets-2025) I interpreted it as a snub. But now I wonder if the Apple executives are just going into hiding. 

Anything else would have been completely surprising. Gruber has been an Apple positive news fanboy for years, now that even he starts to realize/report harsh critic on Apple, he lost the Apple Execs support. They'll only show up, if they don't risk being critized in public. In that Tim and Donald are quite similar.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of Gruber but I commend him on calling this out fairly, if firmly. 

Apple was (and still is) behind on new AI directions and back end hardware. 

On top of that, no one pushes back during interviews with hard hitting follow up questions when the executive really needs to be nailed to the wall during the questioning. 

It's had to reshuffle the executive management line. There have obviously been differences on opinion within Apple and I wouldn't be surprised if Gruber's whole write up was the fruit of contact within the dissenting side at Apple. Those who can't officially speak out.