3 ms·

> Apple stopped paying Qualcomm the LTE blood money. "blood money"? Why so many tears for the most valuable business on Earth? When they picked Qualcomm for

> Apple stopped paying Qualcomm the LTE blood money. "blood money"? Why so many tears for the most valuable business on Earth? When they picked Qualcomm for their 4G modem, the terms were clear. And then they decided to renegotiate the terms afterwards by telling their manufacturer to withhold the payments to Qualcomm. > _Qualcomm still sued and made money_. They negotiated a settlement, Qualcomm got less than they were owed and Apple paid less than the royalties due. Why did Apple settle? Because they had to make design decisions about their new phone - like which modem vendor to use. If you decide not to pay your supplier you could imagine they'd want to work that out before agreeing to give you samples of their new design. If Apple felt that they'd win the case on the merits and that the Qualcomm modem design didn't perform well, they would have just picked a competitor like Samsung. But they didn't do that. They even dual-sourced modems for iphone 7 in order to preserve their negotiating position. But that didn't work because the iphones with Intel modem performed worse than iphones with Qualcomm modems. > If Apple can't secure a win against Qualcomm, how the hell can Google? Google "did" secure a win, didn't they? They took their ball and went home. They decided to take the Samsung Exynos SoC and modem for their flagship phone. > They're back to buying Qualcomm modems again. ... because they're better than the competition - including their acquisition? Is it your contention that Qualcomm somehow forced Apple to pick them over their own?

DiabloD3 3y ago
> "blood money"? Software patents are math patents, and math patents are not legal under US law, yet the USPTO continues to issue them. Many standards organizations require you to open the patents to anyone implementing the specifications managed by that organization if you wish to be part of the committee and introduce your technology to it, and the relevant policy here is a joint ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC governing agreement to do so. 3GPP was developed as a way to sidestep such mandatory agreements, while still being an ITU-managed spec. The company that is gaining the most advantage from this loophole is Qualcomm. > Google "did" secure a win, didn't they? They took their ball and went home. They decided to take the Samsung Exynos SoC and modem for their flagship phone. Yes and no. Google and Samsung are jointly putting pressure on Qualcomm that Apple couldn't. Both of them have patents that are part of the LTE patent pool as well, and key ones that would cripple Qualcomm if either of them pulled out. Apple, through their Intel LTE acquisition, did not have as much leverage, even though Intel was the only other company was ready to compete in the 5G space and had patents relevant to 5G. I believe Qualcomm, if they wished to push the issue, could also force both companies to settle. They may do so in the future. > ... because they're better than the competition - including their acquisition? Is it your contention that Qualcomm somehow forced Apple to pick them over their own? I do not believe so. Most of what was wrong with the first post-acquisition gen modems was Intel mismanagement of the product line (the same way they do to every other product of theirs). LTE benchmarks of the iPhone generation that contained both modems (and it was a random chance on which was in your phone) were mixed. Sometimes the Qualcomm modem was better, sometimes it was Intel. It would be a shame if Apple abandoned the product entirely, and I don't think they did. I think this is part of the settlement. So, yes, to answer your question, I believe the settlement requires purchase of Qualcomm modems for x generations. The details of the settlement are not entirely public, other than there is a 2 year supply agreement. You don't drop $1B on an acquisition just to get their patent portfolio and then settle and give up forever. You double down and continue working on polishing up that acquisition while the conditions of the settlement expire. I think in 2-3 generations we will see the return of the Intel modem; if we don't, I think Apple should go find themselves a new CEO.

DiabloD3 3y ago

> "blood money"? Software patents are math patents, and math patents are not legal under US law, yet the USPTO continues to issue them. Many standards organizations require you to open the patents to anyone implementing the specifications managed by that organization if you wish to be part of the committee and introduce your technology to it, and the relevant policy here is a joint ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC governing agreement to do so. 3GPP was developed as a way to sidestep such mandatory agreements, while still being an ITU-managed spec. The company that is gaining the most advantage from this loophole is Qualcomm. > Google "did" secure a win, didn't they? They took their ball and went home. They decided to take the Samsung Exynos SoC and modem for their flagship phone. Yes and no. Google and Samsung are jointly putting pressure on Qualcomm that Apple couldn't. Both of them have patents that are part of the LTE patent pool as well, and key ones that would cripple Qualcomm if either of them pulled out. Apple, through their Intel LTE acquisition, did not have as much leverage, even though Intel was the only other company was ready to compete in the 5G space and had patents relevant to 5G. I believe Qualcomm, if they wished to push the issue, could also force both companies to settle. They may do so in the future. > ... because they're better than the competition - including their acquisition? Is it your contention that Qualcomm somehow forced Apple to pick them over their own? I do not believe so. Most of what was wrong with the first post-acquisition gen modems was Intel mismanagement of the product line (the same way they do to every other product of theirs). LTE benchmarks of the iPhone generation that contained both modems (and it was a random chance on which was in your phone) were mixed. Sometimes the Qualcomm modem was better, sometimes it was Intel. It would be a shame if Apple abandoned the product entirely, and I don't think they did. I think this is part of the settlement. So, yes, to answer your question, I believe the settlement requires purchase of Qualcomm modems for x generations. The details of the settlement are not entirely public, other than there is a 2 year supply agreement. You don't drop $1B on an acquisition just to get their patent portfolio and then settle and give up forever. You double down and continue working on polishing up that acquisition while the conditions of the settlement expire. I think in 2-3 generations we will see the return of the Intel modem; if we don't, I think Apple should go find themselves a new CEO.