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

31–40 of 314 posts

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

#31

Post by henryfjordan »

tzakrajs wrote: post #27
henryfjordan wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think things are as clear cut as you make them out to be. Apple says nobody can run apps on their phone without handing them a 30% cut. No side-loading, no other stores, nothing. There is very obviously a market for apps that Apple controls completely. Just because there are other app stores for other phones does not mean Apple doesn't have control over the entire market for iPhone apps. Markets can be narrow…

Except that isn't what is happening. Side loading is allowed on iOS and is how Netflix is currently monetizing their iOS users.

No, netflix isn't side loading apps. They are asking you sign up for the service on their site, not through the app to avoid having to pay Apple the 30%. A user still must get the app through the app store. There is no way to get an app on the phone that is not signed by apple..

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

#32

Post by conception »

pier25 wrote: post #24
YUMad wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a monopoly in their own product, not in a market.

Doesn't matter, Apple is the only supplier of iOS apps and forbids any competition here.

LG is the only supplier of apps for their TVs and forbids any competition there.

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

#33

Post by binarybits »

CharlesW wrote: post #7
zeveb wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iPhone app-approval market leaps to mind.

That's like saying McDonald's has a monopoly on what food appears on their menu. It's non-sensical as a complaint.

The question is how you want to characterize an iPhone. If the phone is Apple's property that they're letting you use, then Apple's app store restrictions are analogous to McDonalds deciding what going on their menu. If the iPhone is a product that you bought from Apple, then Apple's app store policies are equivalent to GE selling me an oven that will only cook food purchased from GE's grocery store.

Luckily, oven technology doesn't really make that business model feasible so GE doesn't try to do it. But I think there are reasons for antitrust authorities to take a careful look at the behavior of companies that do have this kind of power over their customers.

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

#35

Post by wmf »

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?

CPU design and RF stuff are both very difficult; I wouldn't assume one way or the other. I wonder if knowledge of CPU design is more widely dispersed (e.g. you can hire ex-Intel, ex-AMD, ex-IBM people) than cellular radios where the only (working) ones seem to be made by Qualcomm.

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

#36

Post by Despegar »

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?

They're opening an office in San Diego to do just that.

https://www.macrumors.com/2019/03/06/apple-san-diego-enginee...

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

#37

Post by bsder »

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.

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

#38

Post by derefr »

wmf wrote: post #35
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?

CPU design and RF stuff are both very difficult; I wouldn't assume one way or the other. I wonder if knowledge of CPU design is more widely dispersed (e.g. you can hire ex-Intel, ex-AMD, ex-IBM people) than cellular radios where the only (working) ones seem to be made by Qualcomm.

> cellular radios where the only (working) ones seem to be made by Qualcomm.

Seems strange, given that plenty of manufacturers are making the radios on the other side of the cellular connection. Can't, say, Ericsson take the radios in their cell towers or picocells, redo their tape-outs for phone scale, and end up with a workable mobile radio?

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

#39

Post by bradstewart »

wmf wrote: post #35
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?

CPU design and RF stuff are both very difficult; I wouldn't assume one way or the other. I wonder if knowledge of CPU design is more widely dispersed (e.g. you can hire ex-Intel, ex-AMD, ex-IBM people) than cellular radios where the only (working) ones seem to be made by Qualcomm.

You can license the primary CPU cores from ARM. There is no equivalent in the modem space (that I'm aware of).

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

#40

Post by macspoofing »

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…

Did they really 'strangle the company'?

Blackberry had a meteroic rise and they collapsed because of iPhone and (later) Android.

Post reply on HN