Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 314 posts

Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years

#131

Post by tooltalk »

phonon wrote: post #128
Analemma_ wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they're adding a fixed amount of value regardless of the phone, and so they should get a fixed sum per phone. This business where they get a percentage of the retail price is ridiculous. Consider the 64 GB iPhone XS selling for $1000 vs the 512 GB one for $1349. Is Qualcomm adding any extra value to the second phone as compared to the first one? Obviously not, so why should they capture any of the extra purchase…

At least for the license with Apple, it was capped at the first $400 of the phone. I.e. it was a flat rate for virtually all iPhones.[0] For the industry at large it was $500 (now $400) [1] https://fudzilla.com/news/mobile/47691-apple-qualcomm-licens... [0] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-qualcomm-licensing/qualco... [1]

I believe there was no flat rate. I think during the first FTC trial, it was revealed that Apple paid on average $7.50 per device, or ~$230 (Foxconn's wholesale price for iPhones) x 3.25 = $7.50

Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years

#132

Post by zaroth »

henryfjordan wrote: post #110
closetohome wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your argument is that only Apple can make an app store? I feel like Google might disagree.

Only Apple can make an iPhone app store, which is the market they are alleged to have monopolized

It’s their market! Only Apple can make an Apple App Store for the Apple iPhone.

Every company deserves a “monopoly” on their own product, unless they are a common carrier, a designation which is based on the government enabling them to exist through preferential treatment in the first place.

Apple created the Apple iPhone and they should be allowed to determine its destiny, as long as other companies are also allowed a fair shot to create their own competing devices.

Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years

#133

Post by phonon »

bsder wrote: post #37
pier25 wrote: post #34

So why did Apple decide to make its own SOCs but not its own modem chips? I would expect making CPUs and GPUs to be a lot more difficult than modems, no?

Apple bought SiByte who were a lot of ex-DEC VLSI design engineers. So, "Apple" designing a CPU is technically correct, but its a design team from elsewhere.

I think you mean P.A. Semi.

Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years

#134

Post by zaroth »

tooltalk wrote: post #106
closetohome wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Markets can be narrowly defined in anti-trust law I doubt one has ever been defined as narrowly as a single product. The differences between an iPhone and an Android phone are functionally so minimal as to be irrelevant.

>I doubt one has ever been defined as narrowly as a single product. Actually, QCOM's antitrust case is exactly that: QCOM's dominance in one or two particular markets (or product), in this case, the CDMA and "premium" (aka, LTE) modems.

The market is LTE modems, not Qualcomm LTE modems.

If you define the market to be a single company’s offerings, when there are other companies that make similar products (Android and the Android App Store) then the concept of monopoly has become a tautology.

The problem some people are having goes back to the concept of the walled garden in the first place and general purpose compute devices.

Apple does not have a responsibility to provide general purpose computing smartphones that can run any software you want. If Congress wants to pass a law saying that they do, then fine, but it seems quite to stretch to claim that anti-trust law is designed for that.

Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years

#135

Post by zaroth »

tracker1 wrote: post #88
Veen wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean Apple owns and runs an App Store, then yes, but that’s not a monopoly. It’s just a store that they control. Would you say that their physical stores are a monopoly that they abuse by not selling samsung phones?

If I want to sell an app to users on iOS, and those users want my app, there's no way for them to get it without Apple. That's a vertical market monopoly. And even if it doesn't qualify as a monopoly in your mind, it can still run afoul of anti-trust law.

If you want to sell a product in Apple’s physical store, there’s no way to do it without Apple.

That’s not a monopoly. That’s them exercising control over their own property.

What’s the rationale to treat Apple’s digital store different than Apple’s physical store?

Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years

#136

Post by bitcurious »

Analemma_ wrote: post #104
tooltalk wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did they have anything to do with the CPU, screen, memory or battery? Sure, without QCOM's IP, other non-wireless parts of the phone won't add/contribute as much value or drive market demand for the phone.

But they're adding a fixed amount of value regardless of the phone, and so they should get a fixed sum per phone. This business where they get a percentage of the retail price is ridiculous. Consider the 64 GB iPhone XS selling for $1000 vs the 512 GB one for $1349. Is Qualcomm adding any extra value to the second phone as compared to the first one? Obviously not, so why should they capture any of the extra purchase…

On the other hand, consider a video call on the iPhone XS with v.s. a $50 phone with a low resolution screen. The value of a high bandwidth internet connection is higher when the screen allows you to perceive the difference.

Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years

#139

Post by vkaku »

guardiangod wrote: post #19

As a former worker at Blackberry(RIM) cellular chip division (hello fellow RCT-ees), this article explains so much it physically hurts me. RIM pushed hard to develop its own chip 3G/4G chips because Qualcomm absolutely strangled the company with its licensing cost/terms. They pretty much demanded a separate cellular R&D team (QCT) that duplicates half the effort. All CDMA based phones must contain chips from QCT beca…

I'd say Intel should just spin out it's 5G modem team and let a neutral (!Apple) vendor develop it.

Samsung should start selling 5G modems in NA as well. I know this stuff isn't going to work in the short term, but this is the sort of choices we need.

Post reply on HN