Qualcomm wants to see the Intel chips inside the 2018 iPhones

Qualcomm wants to see the Intel chips inside the 2018 iPhones
You have probably heard about the Apple-Intel-Qualcomm court intrigue that's been going on for a while now. In case you haven't, here's a rough round-up: Last year Apple sued Qualcomm, saying it wants too much money to license its products to Apple. Qualcomm decided to retaliate by suing Apple for patent infringement, going as far as seeking a ban on sales of iPhones in the States. Then Apple decided to strike back by choosing Intel for some of its parts instead of Qualcomm. Qualcomm suspects Intel is now also infringing on its patents and wants to see technical information about Intel's chips to make sure there's no infringement, which of course is what Intel claims. Now back to current events.

Qualcomm wanting to see "...source code, High Level Architecture Specifications, and schematics..." of a competitor's products might sound absurd, but apparently, during meetings and in written communication between both companies, Intel agreed to provide the requested documentation. Qualcomm was happy with that, so it waited for Intel to make good on their promise.

That was two months ago, and it seems that Intel has no intention of sharing schematics and technical specifications with Qualcomm, unless forced to by the court. Qualcomm is trying to do just that and last week filed a motion in the district court of Northern California to compel compliance from Intel. To show some good will, Qualcomm decided to "only" request information about the chips that will be in Apple's 2018 phones, not for all models since 2016 as it was initially discussed. Now it's up to the district court to make a decision on the motion.

While this simplification makes the situation sound like two kids arguing, we should remember that there are billions of dollars at stake for each company involved. Something tells us that we'll see a few more episodes of this saga before the final decision is made.

via: Cnet



1. AfterShock

Posts: 4147; Member since: Nov 02, 2012

Things are going to cost even more then they need to if Intel grabs a serious foothold in mobile market. We all know this devil's traits all too well. Personally I hope to see Intel get caught infringing QC parents.

3. chris2k5

Posts: 291; Member since: Nov 17, 2012

Thats messed up thinking. If QC has a monopoly and pushes Intel out of the market then QC will charge phone makers whatever they want. What do you think phone manufacturers like Apple and Samsung will do? They WILL push that cost off to customers which means phone prices will keep increasing. Think $1500-2000 phones.

4. monkeyb

Posts: 414; Member since: Jan 17, 2018

Nicely put. I have no idea how someone can comment that monopoly from Qualcomm is better than Intel staying in the industry.

7. strategic_developer

Posts: 1627; Member since: Jul 17, 2018

QC does not have a monopoly. Apple has other options for modems. QC does however have the bet options for modems that offer better support for CDMA networks in US and Asian countries. QC has a right to charge whatever they want for them basically being the best option. If the price is too high, don't agree to it. Apple agreed to pay and that is why they should be paying. Agreeing to a deal and then using a court to intervene is shady.

9. monkeyb

Posts: 414; Member since: Jan 17, 2018

Umm. Yes, QC had a monopoly on CDMA till now and will continue till Intel releases their chip next month in a smartphone. Please read what a FRAND patent is before commenting that QC can charge whatever they want. Why did Apple or Samsung agree to QC all these years you ask. Well it is because they had MONOPOlY in CDMA.

10. strategic_developer

Posts: 1627; Member since: Jul 17, 2018

Samsung's own modem, which they make for the Exynos, does work on CDMA networks. It simply doesn't offer 100% compatibility to some bands or doesn't support all features a carrier may offer. As I mentioned, the Galaxy S6 was release with all Exynos chipsets worldwide and they did not use QC modems and they worked just fine with Sprint and Verizon; as example. QC insures 100% CDMA compatibility. No one can offer such without using QC tech, so its just best to buy it by using their modem. Other chip makers simply need to innovate and find a way to match the tech and it can be done. After all, Compaq found a way to get around IBMBIOS and make PC compatibles without infringing on IBM's patents and ended IBM's PC monopoly which was actually a true monopoly. Intel's modems do work on CDMA. That is why QC wants to see them to see if it is infringing, because if it is, Intel will be sued and Apple won't have a leg to stand on if QC gets a ban on infringing products. Monopoly - the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service. QC is not the only option for CDMA modems. They are simply the biggest and best. As long as there is another option, no matter how small; they don't have a true monopoly. They simply have a majority. Apple has a monopoly on IOS just as Microsoft has a monopoly on Windows.

11. monkeyb

Posts: 414; Member since: Jan 17, 2018

2 things: - You have conviniently ignored what FRAND patents mean. Well it means QC cannot over charge to any company no matter what they say. - Samsung is a much better company than QC. Their Exynos chips most of the time outperform QC. As you have stated yourself, to get 100% CDMA support, exynos needs to borrow IP from QC. This is what I meant by monopoly. They were the only company that had 100% support of CDMA networks in US. And no one is denying that Apple and Microsoft does not have monopoly. But this topic is onky about Intel breaking that 100% support monopoly by QC. All companies including Android phone manufacturers will have multiple options now. This is a good thing for the consumers.

8. strategic_developer

Posts: 1627; Member since: Jul 17, 2018

Intel is not gonna ever even match QC. Because most Android OEM's use QC chipsets, not just the modems. Intel isn't gonna be a first option do to compatibility issues. Intel will not be able to provide a modem to OEM's that match QC without infringing on QC patents. QC has this by the balls because they've had this tech for years. Intel makes great x86 chips. They suck at anything else.

12. monkeyb

Posts: 414; Member since: Jan 17, 2018

“Not gonna ever” is a very strong set of words. You need to understand that intel has almost caught upto QC. They are just 1 year trailing behind at this point. XMM 7560 is as good as QC’s latest and greatest that is available out in the market. And please dont compare the Xmm 7560 to something that QC will release in 6 months.

2. ShadowHammer

Posts: 212; Member since: Mar 13, 2015

It's funny, when I read the article title, it sounded to me like the author was saying QC wanted Intel to put their chips in iPhones instead of their own. Some of these design and intellectual property patents seem very vague to me, but in this particular case, I don't know enough about the patents to have a strong opinion one way or the other.

5. monkeyb

Posts: 414; Member since: Jan 17, 2018

Im not a super technical person but I do not think anyone will give their latest chip, XMM 7560, source code to their biggest competitor. It is very easy for QC to say we only want the 2018 iphone chip source code but one has to remember that what QC is requestting is Intels latest and best.

6. strategic_developer

Posts: 1627; Member since: Jul 17, 2018

The problem is, if Apple felt QC prices were to high, they shouldn't have agreed to a contract to pay. When you rent an apartment, if the rent is too high to begin with, you don't sign a lease and then sue the landlord to get the cost of your rent dropped. QCmakes the best options for modems. It si funny how Apple thinks QC is charging to much, when Apple themselves charge too much for all their products. Apple just wants to increase profits which is already through the roof. You agreed to pay. Pay what you agreed and negotiate a better deal on the next contract. if QC doesn't want to offer a better deal, don't sign and seek another option. But you agreed to pay based on signing a contract. No Judge should ever overturn or get involved.

13. fastfreddy123

Posts: 67; Member since: Mar 25, 2017

say what you want but if u agree to pay then dont its on you. qualcomms going to win its simple.

14. worldpeace

Posts: 3135; Member since: Apr 15, 2016

Want to see.... And then laugh at it.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.