4 ms·

Why do you think Dell bothers to put LTE modems in laptops? I asked about evidence regarding the patent and royalty situation that prevents Apple from deliverin

Why do you think Dell bothers to put LTE modems in laptops? I asked about evidence regarding the patent and royalty situation that prevents Apple from delivering a similar product. I am on my fifth MacBook Pro. My first Mac was the 12” PowerBook G4. I bought many more for my employees. I would like to upgrade right now, but it would only be a marginal improvement. If Apple shipped a MacBook Pro today with an LTE modem, I would buy it today, as it would help me with my constant travel. I would like to open the lid on my MacBook Pro and immediately reply to the email I need to reply to instead of starting up the hotspot and waiting on it to download. iPad and iPhone can do this. That the laptop cannot is ridiculous.

fkyoureadthedoc 3y ago
> Why do you think Dell bothers to put LTE modems in laptops? If I had to guess, more enterprise clients that want it. Seriously doubt it's individuals buying up enough to make it worth it. I mean you won't even buy one right.
bradknowles 3y ago
It has nothing to do with patents or royalties. It's all about the total addressable market and whether or not Apple thinks they could make enough profit from adding such a feature. Obviously, Apple has decided not.
- mcculley 3y ago
  It is not obvious to me.
  - bradknowles 3y ago
    If Apple had decided there was enough profit to be made, then you would already have the device in your hands. The fact that you do not have said device is proof that Apple has decided there's not enough profit to be made. The irony is that I agree with you one the point that I'd like to see a MacBook Pro with an integrated SIM or e-SIM card, so that I wouldn't need to tether. Where we disagree is on what process Apple has gone through and what conclusions they have reached on whether they can make enough profit off that function.
    - mcculley 3y ago
      My prediction is that once Apple has their own modem IP working and is not dependent on Qualcomm, the next release of MacBook Pro will have a builtin modem. This why I am asking about the patent/royalty situation and not making assumptions or apologies about Apple's process. Would someone like to bet against this? I would like to invest in a prediction market for this.
      - bradknowles 3y ago
        The company Apple bought had functional modems that they were selling to a lot of customers, before the acquisition. So, Apple could just ship those. But they were always markedly inferior to what Qualcomm had, and those customers were willing to take the lower quality for much lower price. Apple thought that they had designed and built their own CPUs, GPUs, etc... so they could easily take this inferior product and turn it into something that was at least as good as what Qualcomm has. They were wrong. The problems they're trying to solve are partly patent encumbered, but only partly. It turns out that the same ecosystem advantages that Apple enjoys around some of their products are also the same effects that protect Qualcomm from competitors, and even as big as Apple is, they still can't break down those ecosystem barriers. Since Apple is not willing to ship a markedly inferior product, that means they're stuck using Qualcomm modems, until their internal teams can deliver on what they promised. If they can deliver.
        mcculley 3y ago
        We agree that Apple is stuck with Qualcomm. I remain unconvinced that the reason they can put a modem in my watch and not in the top of the line MacBook Pro is for simple market reasons. “Qualcomm licenses all its patents as a group. For a set fee -- based on the selling price of the end device” according to https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-and-qualcomm-settle-heres-what-it-means-for-your-next-iphone/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-and-qualcomm-settle-h...
        bradknowles 3y ago
        This is a company that spends millions and millions of dollars every year, shaving a fraction of a millimeter here and a fraction of an ounce there. The absolute last thing they want to do is add new hardware functionality that won't be used by the bulk of the market. When you squit out 50 models of something per year (like Samsung phones), you can afford for some of them to be more niche products that won't get as wide adoption. When you have only two or three variations on a single product for that year (like Apple), you can't afford that. Instead, you have to make sure that all the features you offer are either used or usable by the majority of the customers, or that adding those features allows you to add enough to the price that the small number of people who would buy that product for those features will give you a sufficiently high return on your investment that you will be able to at least maintain your profit margin. There just aren't enough people in the market like you who are unwilling to tether and that fact alone is enough to push them to hardware being made by a different company. I want the integrated SIM or e-SIM myself, but I'm willing to tether if the integrated option isn't available. So, I'm part of the market that Apple is addressing. In contrast, you're not willing to tether, and so you buy hardware from a different company, and therefore not part of the segment they are addressing. Apple has repeatedly demonstrated that there are segments of the market that they're not willing to chase, and this is one of those situations.

fkyoureadthedoc 3y ago

> Why do you think Dell bothers to put LTE modems in laptops? If I had to guess, more enterprise clients that want it. Seriously doubt it's individuals buying up enough to make it worth it. I mean you won't even buy one right.

bradknowles 3y ago

It has nothing to do with patents or royalties. It's all about the total addressable market and whether or not Apple thinks they could make enough profit from adding such a feature. Obviously, Apple has decided not.

mcculley 3y ago
It is not obvious to me.
- bradknowles 3y ago
  If Apple had decided there was enough profit to be made, then you would already have the device in your hands. The fact that you do not have said device is proof that Apple has decided there's not enough profit to be made. The irony is that I agree with you one the point that I'd like to see a MacBook Pro with an integrated SIM or e-SIM card, so that I wouldn't need to tether. Where we disagree is on what process Apple has gone through and what conclusions they have reached on whether they can make enough profit off that function.
  - mcculley 3y ago
    My prediction is that once Apple has their own modem IP working and is not dependent on Qualcomm, the next release of MacBook Pro will have a builtin modem. This why I am asking about the patent/royalty situation and not making assumptions or apologies about Apple's process. Would someone like to bet against this? I would like to invest in a prediction market for this.
    - bradknowles 3y ago
      The company Apple bought had functional modems that they were selling to a lot of customers, before the acquisition. So, Apple could just ship those. But they were always markedly inferior to what Qualcomm had, and those customers were willing to take the lower quality for much lower price. Apple thought that they had designed and built their own CPUs, GPUs, etc... so they could easily take this inferior product and turn it into something that was at least as good as what Qualcomm has. They were wrong. The problems they're trying to solve are partly patent encumbered, but only partly. It turns out that the same ecosystem advantages that Apple enjoys around some of their products are also the same effects that protect Qualcomm from competitors, and even as big as Apple is, they still can't break down those ecosystem barriers. Since Apple is not willing to ship a markedly inferior product, that means they're stuck using Qualcomm modems, until their internal teams can deliver on what they promised. If they can deliver.
      - mcculley 3y ago
        We agree that Apple is stuck with Qualcomm. I remain unconvinced that the reason they can put a modem in my watch and not in the top of the line MacBook Pro is for simple market reasons. “Qualcomm licenses all its patents as a group. For a set fee -- based on the selling price of the end device” according to https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-and-qualcomm-settle-heres-what-it-means-for-your-next-iphone/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-and-qualcomm-settle-h...
        bradknowles 3y ago
        This is a company that spends millions and millions of dollars every year, shaving a fraction of a millimeter here and a fraction of an ounce there. The absolute last thing they want to do is add new hardware functionality that won't be used by the bulk of the market. When you squit out 50 models of something per year (like Samsung phones), you can afford for some of them to be more niche products that won't get as wide adoption. When you have only two or three variations on a single product for that year (like Apple), you can't afford that. Instead, you have to make sure that all the features you offer are either used or usable by the majority of the customers, or that adding those features allows you to add enough to the price that the small number of people who would buy that product for those features will give you a sufficiently high return on your investment that you will be able to at least maintain your profit margin. There just aren't enough people in the market like you who are unwilling to tether and that fact alone is enough to push them to hardware being made by a different company. I want the integrated SIM or e-SIM myself, but I'm willing to tether if the integrated option isn't available. So, I'm part of the market that Apple is addressing. In contrast, you're not willing to tether, and so you buy hardware from a different company, and therefore not part of the segment they are addressing. Apple has repeatedly demonstrated that there are segments of the market that they're not willing to chase, and this is one of those situations.