maestro64

First, I wish people who have no idea what they are talking about or do not have first hand knowledge about what is going should stop commenting and trying to make statements of fact which are not accurate.

Next, the fact people do not understand the difference between developing and applying technology or using already available solutions then applying it in new innovated ways and think this is the same as just replicating exactly what someone else had already done, has never worked in product development. Yes, Apple is not always first but just because you are first does not mean what you did is innovative and people find it has value.

What people do not understand about Huawei, they have been at this for a very long time, yes they employee lots of people, but those people are not innovating. They are purely copying/reverse engineering. They are worse than Samsung. No one talked about this 20 yrs ago when Huawei almost put Cisco out of business outside the US. Huawei was able to copy Cisco hardware to the point the Huawei hardware could run Cisco software. Huawei completely reversed engineered Cisco switches. I worked in the Telecom hardware industry during this time, and every network hardware company was very concerned about Huawei. During the Dot Com bust in the early 2000's where lots of design engineer were out of jobs. Huawei attempted to hire these folks to learn what they knew. I personally new one of these people who went to China and consulted with Huawei, he said they ran a 24/7 design center which focus on reverse engineering every networking product they could get their hands on, they want him to explain how and why things were designed in a specific way on products he was familiar with. Anyone who think it is any different today is kidding themselves.

I worked for a different telecom company in the mid 2000's and the company found one of their proprietary communication DSP chips were being knocked off. We design the chip in house and it was fab in the US so it was not like it was transfer to China which happen most of the time. There was Asian competitor making claims their product could do what our product did. We investigated the product and had their communication DSP chip torn apart and we found it was our chip, We knew this since the designer had buried the company logo in the middle of the chip artwork. We traces the thief back to a process engineer who was responsible to how the chip was made. He was a Chinese national, he stole the chip artwork to make the IC. He did not have the original design files so could not remove the logo, but had the artwork and process recipe which allowed any fab in the world with the right technology to make the part. In this case they did not have to reverse engineer the chips, they just stool the design. My company share this information with Chinese authorities and the company that did this disappears. China does not like when one of their companies get caught red handed doing these kinds of things.   

The other thing people do not understand China generally sees no issue with what they are doing. They believe no one owns anything and everything can be used for the common good. 

boltsfan17 said:

I just read the lawsuit. Under facts it says "The fire was caused by a defect in the subject tablet, specifically affecting the subject tablet's battery pack."

How do they know that? There is no supplied report by the fire department or any other documents that show the iPad caused the fire. 

They making this assumption and will under discovery require Apple to produce any data they have about Ipad battery failure and any actions they may or may not have taken. I highly doubt they done any independent failure analysis of the ipad. if they did they would have reference it in the case filing.

gatorguy said:

wood1208 said:

One loss at a time finally will turn Qualcomm into total looser. Qualcomm lost Apple business and now Samsung, Intel and MediaTek will provide 5G modem to any phone manufacturer want, in process removing Qualcomm from the equation. Good strategy Qualcomm.

They can't "remove Qualcomm from the equation" tho they can replace Qualcomm hardware. The QC IP, some of it standards-essential and some of it not pledged, will still require licensing. Qualcomm will feel the punch to the gut, but licensing accounts for most of their profits anyway. They won't go broke, just battered.

Actually they can, but it also means dumping Verizon customer, the only reason Apple and QCOM got into bed together is because Verizon many years ago decided to go non-standard with their cell phone and made a deal with QCOM to be the sole solution for the CDMA which made anyone who wanted to play in Verizon's sand box go to QCOM for the chip solution. This why QCAM has abusive licensing terms its call the only game in town. QCOM now plays in 5G since some of the 5G technology is based on CDMA. This is the technology which QCOM Is being forced to license to companies like Intel. These fee are going to be much lower then their CDMA fees they collect and make up most of their profits.

I have personally argued if Verizon want this tech then Apple and others companies  should make VZ customer pay all the extra cost for dealing with QCOM. Apple phones should $50 more for Verizon enable phones. The problem is Apple has always had a one price for all model so they did not want to penalize VZ customers. Also, VZ will not allow their suppliers to charge them more for the CDMA tech they help create. 

QCOM could be come irrelevant as 5G comes along, and apple and other hire away the talent who created the 5G tech and as CDMA dies its slow death QCOM will be reduce to IP licensing house, It may take 5 yrs to happen but this is where it is heading thus the reason they are fighting so hard.

ericthehalfbee said:

What did they steal? The only thing I could think of would be something related to their A Series processors, as most other components in iPhones are purchased from suppliers and not designed specifically by Apple.

And given how far behind their processors are, I don't think they did a very good job of stealing anything.

This is what most people do not realize about technology, it not always the actual IP or the physical design of something which is more important, many times it is the actual manufacturing technology and processes (know how) which is the more important element of making something work. It called indirect transfer "stolen" of the know how that is  really the issue here. Apple develops and design most of the manufacturing tech for their products and you can be pretty sure most of what Apple developed for its supplier, has gone out the back door and made its way to competitor operations. 

This is why China has demand if you are going to manufacture in china it is done with a Chinese own business or it has to be a JV with 51% ownership by a Chinese entity. It is very difficult to sell non-Chinese product in China and not have it made there and the fact Apple has had good success, means they knowingly allowed this information to be transferred and have not say anything about it. They made a deal with China for market access in exchange for the know-how transfer. There is no evidence to back this up, but all the indicators point in this direction.

I see things coming out of China today which they could not do 10 yrs ago, there is no way these companies advance this fast without steal the know how. I have work with Chinese company for over 20 yrs and the hardest thing to do with them is to follow a process or do things a particular way, they had the good enough attitude, no reason to improve or make something better. Most time they are like this because they did not have skill and know how to do it any other way. Today this is not the case they turn out as good or not better than most US counter parts. 

I will tell you this, if you plan to drive any long distance like 3 to 5 hours you better put the watch in theater mode, the simple act of having your hands on the steering wheel and turning the wheel cause the display to light up constantly and this will kill your battery in no time. 

I have make this complaint to apple for the last 3 years and they have yet to fix this, since they have so much move data they should be able to tell the difference between driving and just walking or raising our hand to see the watch, which does not work well, many times I raise my hand and it does not turn on. But it turns on all every time I turn the steering wheel with my left hand.