Yea. For sure. Apple should be encouraged to spend their 200b in cash on an alternative instead of lawyers.
This is the problem with mandatory standards and patents that cover those standards.
Standards require all participants to license at a FRAND rate. If apple developed 5G IP they would have effectively received a rebate based on the relative impact of their contribution.
Qualcomm actually has great execution. You realize 5G is going to put a 1 gigabit network in the palm of your hand? I can’t even get that out of cable.
Clearly you didn’t read the article. There’s an entire section about Qualcomm not issuing FRAND licenses.
In the ideal world the phone would be like a PC, and you could buy an iPod touch from apple and swap in the qualcomm 5g modem or the intel one.
Apple pays qcom $14 bucks for the modem. In the PC world I think qualcomm would be able to price theirs closer to 50 compared to intels.
Qcom charges Apple $14 bucks for the modem. That doesn't sound crippling or unfair or unreasonable. I think if consumers had the option to buy an ipod touch for 500, then add the modem like you do with a PC no one would be buying a fully integrated device from Apple for 1000.
I worked at Qualcomm, so take this with a grain of salt. But I find it laughable that Apple is complaining when they can sell the exact same thing at 2x the price by just adding a $14 dollar qualcomm modem.