3 ms·
This only works if the "competition" is willing to sell to you (like Apple or Samsung won't) or is roughly on-par with Qualcomm's performance and power consumpt
by xethos 3y ago
This only works if the "competition" is willing to sell to you (like Apple or Samsung won't) or is roughly on-par with Qualcomm's performance and power consumption (which MediaTek absolutely is not). Otherwise your billion dollar company gets laughed out of the room.
- paulmd 3y agoI don't know why there is this concerted effort to stick your head in the sand and pretend that such things cannot be the subject of a contract if the parties involved want them to be. I severely doubt that if you offered qualcomm a trillion dollars they could not support the hardware for another 3 years. In fact it would be much less than a trillion dollars in practice. What you're fundamentally saying is, qualcomm isn't going to do it out of the goodness of their hearts, and google is not willing to write the check to make it happen, and that's still on them.
- baby_souffle 3y ago> What you're fundamentally saying is, qualcomm isn't going to do it out of the goodness of their hearts, and google is not willing to write the check to make it happen, and that's still on them. So QCM should just get to name their price and google should pay it?
- paulmd 3y agoWillful misreading of a comment is extremely impolite on this site. I said that this wasn’t a “not available at any price” situation, it’s a matter of figuring out a cost that works. Google (and other phone vendors) want to pay zero ($0), and the law currently allows them to externalize this cost onto their customers and society at large (e-waste going into landfills, unpatched OSs promoting malware, etc) instead. And they do.