Hello there, do you want to know if your spouse has been faithful or cheating??? You need not bother anymore as we bring our service to help answer all your questions or worry. We have services like the phone tap, email tap, WhatsApp hack, social media cloning and some other legal means as stated. We also carry out other hack related projects like the credit score upgrade, DMV, school score upgrade, clear criminal records and any other proposed hack projects. You can enquire for this service via WhatsApp/text/call 3238351741.Thanks as we anticipate working with you all.
How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years
311–314 of 314 posts
Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's like saying all of the US's problem is Trump. Reality is often a bit more nuanced than that. Patent licensing fees were a big part of the equation, which led to inability to lower costs to compete.
>Patent licensing fees were a big part of the equation, which led to inability to lower costs to compete. Yes. OP asserted that too. Like OP, you haven't actually given a reason why. Here's some counter-arguments: 1) BB grew exponentially all the while paying Qualcomm licensing fees - why didn't it affect them then? 2) EVERYONE was paying the same licensing fees to Qualcomm. You couldn't build a smartphone connected…
BB phones, As to #1, around BBOS v5 and v6, when they were pretty much top dog, all the cellphone accounts that wants to use a BB pays a service-access fee, or a BlackBerry Tax that goes to the company. Enterprise companies that want their emails and everything else also pays for the BlackBerry Enterprise Server. They were practically the only game in town.
They didn't have problem then, because they were rolling in cash; just like how they didn't have a problem basically buying up Philips st expanding, or keep coming up with phone models even though there's no way that there's enough demand to actually absorb the production.
#2 on top of needing to deal with Qualcomm licensing fees, which often applied (as the article stated) on non-qualcomm phones, they basically freaked out after losing that lawsuit to the patent troll, so they end up overpaying for licenses (not sure who's the licenser in this case) to avoid getting hit with more patent trolls. The contracts for those licenses were quite hard to get out of. By the time they were making the BlackBerry Priv, they don't have the SAF to juice their income. Patent licensing, Qualcomm and others, were disproportionally high, compared to other Android providers. They can't renegotiate some of them due to the contract wording. Being 1% of the market means Qualcomm hardly cared to give support, because Qualcomm is far more likely to help Samsung and other android phone, that pushed out far more numbers than BlackBerry did at the end.
It ends up being that they end up licensing their brand, because had they manufactured their own phone, they'd have to deal with the patent licensing contracts that they can't get out from.
There's probably a reason why OP won't be too forthright in describing why. I'll leave that as an exercise to the reader.
Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Patent licensing fees were a big part of the equation, which led to inability to lower costs to compete. Yes. OP asserted that too. Like OP, you haven't actually given a reason why. Here's some counter-arguments: 1) BB grew exponentially all the while paying Qualcomm licensing fees - why didn't it affect them then? 2) EVERYONE was paying the same licensing fees to Qualcomm. You couldn't build a smartphone connected…
BB phones, As to #1, around BBOS v5 and v6, when they were pretty much top dog, all the cellphone accounts that wants to use a BB pays a service-access fee, or a BlackBerry Tax that goes to the company. Enterprise companies that want their emails and everything else also pays for the BlackBerry Enterprise Server. They were practically the only game in town. They didn't have problem then, because they were rolling in…
To add, the SAF is not just a pure BlackBerry tax. Without getting too deep into it, there's stuff that needs to be set up with the carrier, and that's why BlackBerry push was a true push back in the day, without the phone burning through both battery and data. And when this gear malfunctions, you'd know, because you're not getting push at all.
They sipped battery and data, and once that gear is setup, the SAF was very profitable.
Even to this day, email is not the same level of instant.
Re: How Qualcomm shook down the cell phone industry for almost 20 years
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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 re…
Well no. In this case, it's "premium" LTE market.