You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!




Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Apple iPhone announcement discussion

  1. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    9
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8
    Given: 10
    Daniel, >

    I agree, the squabble is not petty, nor a death match, and QCOM ... will be a MUCH different company as a result (of a loss).>

    An AAPL win that significantly disrupts QCOM’s licensing business model would 1) significantly reduce its licensing revenues (from both AAPL & others), 2) require significant reductions to its 20,000 strong engineering staff, and 3) significantly disrupt their ability to innovate both in the number of vital projects supported and the lengthening in time to complete. >
    Some questions /something to think about->

    1) Do you consider QCOM as more of an innovation company than AAPL, and would **not** diminishing QCOM’s ability to innovate be more of an negative impact on the wireless industry (eco system) than AAPL’s saving a few dollars in royalty on each iPhone sold? >

    2) Which company is more anticompetitive, QCOM or AAPL given that->

    ....+ QCOM’s many-tiered levels of chipsets and reference designs enable global companies (large and small) to produce devices for the masses and even highly sophisticated devices comparable to the iPhone at a fraction of its cost? >

    ...+ AAPL caters to only about 15 percent of the market (top tier), squeezes the profits from its suppliers, and garners 80 -90% of the industries’ (device makers) profits? >

    3) What is your basis for predicting a QCOM loss->

    4) Re: I still plan on buying an iPhone X (10) but I'm not sure I would buy the 8 if I had a 7.>

    So, I’m assuming you have an iPhone 6 and trade up every 2 – 3 years. Is the fact that the new iPhones will **not** have Gigabit LTE and those that buy a 2017 model will be locked-out of those benefits for 2 – 3 years an issue? >

    0 Not allowed!
    Last edited by mullenjl; 4 Weeks Ago at 10:17 AM.
     

  2. #12
    Admin Daniel Nenni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    3,967
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 697
    Given: 1,991
    I really don't think the QCOM APPL dispute is about saving a few dollars, it is much more than that. And remember it is not just APPL, the Chinese Government hit QCOM with an anti trust fine of close to $1B which included lower royalties and other Governments have followed suit.

    QCOM and Apple are very different companies but one point is that systems companies, who were at the mercy of chip companies, are now in the silicon driver's seat and Apple is leading the way. Look at the Apple relationship with TSMC. It really put QCOM in the back seat, so much that they walked to South Korea as a result. Now they are back in Taiwan but again in the rumble seat while Apple is driving and TSMC's margins have never been better, right?

    I actually have an iPhone 6s, I usually buy a new phone every year for myself. My family however does the two year contract deals. We bought the iPhone 6s phones last Christmas for $1 with a two year contract. I had an iPhone 6 before that, my family had 5s.

    I think Apple's plan is to have much more run on the phone than in the cloud so maybe transmission speed will be less of a factor? For my use, which includes AR, transmission speed has not been a problem. Battery life is the big problem and switching between Apple and Android is not an option for my family and probably not for most of Apple's customer base.

    From what I have heard about 5G is that the industry will ensure that there are no monopolies so it will be a different world for QCOM than 3G and 4G, right?

    Just my opinion of course......


    Quote Originally Posted by mullenjl View Post
    Daniel, >

    I agree, the squabble is not petty, nor a death match, and QCOM ... will be a MUCH different company as a result (of a loss).>

    An AAPL win that significantly disrupts QCOMs licensing business model would 1) significantly reduce its licensing revenues (from both AAPL & others), 2) require significant reductions to its 20,000 strong engineering staff, and 3) significantly disrupt their ability to innovate both in the number of vital projects supported and the lengthening in time to complete. >
    Some questions /something to think about->

    1) Do you consider QCOM as more of an innovation company than AAPL, and would **not** diminishing QCOMs ability to innovate be more of an negative impact on the wireless industry (eco system) than AAPLs saving a few dollars in royalty on each iPhone sold? >

    2) Which company is more anticompetitive, QCOM or AAPL given that->

    ....+ QCOMs many-tiered levels of chipsets and reference designs enable global companies (large and small) to produce devices for the masses and even highly sophisticated devices comparable to the iPhone at a fraction of its cost? >

    ...+ AAPL caters to only about 15 percent of the market (top tier), squeezes the profits from its suppliers, and garners 80 -90% of the industries (device makers) profits? >

    3) What is your basis for predicting a QCOM loss->

    4) Re: I still plan on buying an iPhone X (10) but I'm not sure I would buy the 8 if I had a 7. >

    So, Im assuming you have an iPhone 6 and trade up every 2 3 years. Is the fact that the new iPhones will **not** have Gigabit LTE and those that buy a 2017 model will be locked-out of those benefits for 2 3 years an issue? >

    0 Not allowed!
    Now available in print or Kindle: "Mobile Unleashed: The Origin and Evolution of ARM Processors In Our Devices"

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    9
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8
    Given: 10
    Daniel,

    I agree that the AAPL-QCOM dispute is much more than AAPL saving a few dollars on each iPhone sale. And, you’re correct that QCOM agreed pay $1B to settle its alleged anticompetitive case with China’s NDRC in order to continue to do business in China. And, QCOM did lower its royalty rates for domestic Chinese sales..... **and** offered the same terms to AAPL....** which AAPL declined**.... in essence demanding preferential treatment, better rates than QCOM’s 300 plus licensees.... in effect a violation of FRAND’s non-discrimination provision.

    Would you care to comment on my other questions-?

    1) Do you consider QCOM as more of an innovation company than AAPL, and would **not** significantly diminishing QCOM’s ability to innovate have more of an negative impact on the wireless industry (ecosystem)..... than AAPL’s royalty cost savings which most likely would **not** be passed on to its customers (therefore only benefiting AAPL / it’s shareholders) ?

    In other words, do you **not** think that significantly disrupting QCOM’s licensing model that’s been in effect for close to 30 years and at the forefront in “unleashing mobile” would be a significant detriment to future mobile advances in both scope and timing? (potentially resulting in a 10,000 reduction to QCOM current 20,000 engineers) ?

    2) Which company is more anticompetitive, QCOM or AAPLgiven that-

    ....+ QCOM’s many-tiered levels of chipsets and reference designs enable global companies (large and small) to produce devices for the masses and even highly sophisticated devices comparable to the iPhone at a fraction of its cost?

    ...+ AAPL caters to only about 15 percent of the market (top tier), squeezes the profits from its suppliers, and garners 80 -90% of the industries’ (device makers) profits?

    3) What is your basis for predicting a QCOM loss-

    3a) the merits of AAPL’s case, and if so which- royalty rate, royalty base, etc.?

    3b) AAPL’s $260M cash stash to buy the best law firms, and lobbying / influence efforts?.

    0 Not allowed!
    Last edited by Daniel Payne; 4 Weeks Ago at 10:36 AM. Reason: spacing
     

  4. #14
    Admin Daniel Nenni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    3,967
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 697
    Given: 1,991
    Quote Originally Posted by mullenjl View Post
    Daniel, >

    Would you care to comment on my other questions-? >

    I will answer this one and pass on the others due to time constraints.

    3) What is your basis for predicting a QCOM loss->

    >
    .....3a) the merits of AAPLs case, and if so which- royalty rate, royalty base, etc.?>
    >
    .....3b) AAPLs $260M cash stash to buy the best law firms, and lobbying / influence efforts?. >
    >
    It all depends on how you define loss. In my opinion Qualcomm will be a weaker company as a whole and Apple will be stronger so to me that is a loss for QCOM.




    0 Not allowed!
    Now available in print or Kindle: "Mobile Unleashed: The Origin and Evolution of ARM Processors In Our Devices"

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    9
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8
    Given: 10
    Daniel,>
    Thanks for the opportunity to express my opinions on your thread. Time constraints or not, I understand that these are tough questions for AAPL enthusiasts.>

    But, I believe we both.... (and others who take the time to understand the magnitude of the AAPLv QCOM issues)....recognize that the mobile wireless ecosystem and the global public as a whole would be better served with the $2B -$3B in annual revenues at stake remaining with QCOM rather than transferring to AAPL. One would think that QCOM’s retaining rather than losing 10,000 engineers will have a significant impact on the speed and scope of the evolution of mobile wireless and the benefits to mankind that follows. >

    0 Not allowed!
    Last edited by mullenjl; 4 Weeks Ago at 07:30 PM.
     

  6. #16
    Admin Daniel Nenni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    3,967
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 697
    Given: 1,991
    Quote Originally Posted by mullenjl View Post
    Daniel,>
    Thanks for theopportunity to express my opinions on your thread. Time constraints or not, I understand that these are tough questions for AAPL enthusiasts.>
    But, I believe weboth.... (and others who take the time to understand the magnitude of the AAPLv QCOM issues)....recognize that themobile wireless ecosystem and the global public as a whole would be betterserved with the $2B -$3B in annual revenues at stake remaining with QCOM ratherthan transferring to AAPL. One wouldthink that QCOM’s retaining rather than losing 10,000 engineers will have asignificant impact on the speed and scope of the evolution of mobile wirelessand the benefits to mankind that follows. >


    You are very welcome. I'm sure the QCOM enthusiasts appreciate your valiant efforts. Please ping me again when QCOM's legal woes are finished. That should be a much easier discussion for Apple enthusiasts.

    0 Not allowed!
    Last edited by Daniel Nenni; 4 Weeks Ago at 02:33 PM.
    Now available in print or Kindle: "Mobile Unleashed: The Origin and Evolution of ARM Processors In Our Devices"

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    12
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4
    Given: 3
    Quote Originally Posted by Jozo035 View Post
    But rest is just ...meh. Actually my opinion is that all they showed concluded to fact that Android is better today.
    Apple has been behind Android for quite some time, I don't get the obsession with iPhones. No front screen button? Whoopie! I had that with my old Nexus in 2014. Wireless charging? The old-old Palm Pre had that (and much more innovatively with a slanted, magnetic surface!). And handling is still sub-par to Android. Just about the only advantage they have is the more innovative app store. Not much innovation there at Apple these days, but the herd of cult members will follow and shell out a grand, regardless.

    0 Not allowed!
     

  8. #18
    Top Influencer
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    144
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 104
    Given: 12
    At this point I'm mostly still using iPhone because I'm used to iOS. I still find Andriod somewhat glitchy and less responsive despite generally better specs, and I don't really like the user interface. However I think I've finally reached the point where I'm strongly considering getting an Android as my next phone for the following reasons:

    1. USB-C charging
    2. Better integration with google assistant (which I use at home with my Google Home)
    3. Price
    4. Unlimited cloud storage (iCloud)
    5. The Google Pixel is sexy as hell

    0 Not allowed!
     

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •