|Ben, re: Inventors Beware / AAPL v QCOM-|
Comment posted to the Hill.com opinion piece>>>>
“...The irony is that if Cook's Apple is successful in its lawsuit(s) and Qualcomm's patents are weakened with compensation for them reduced, it is likely that the dollars lost would likely come directly from the research dollars being spent to figure out the 5G puzzle — an answer that Apple and others are waiting on so they can launch their next generation of mobile devices...”
I agree that an Apple win would be disastrous to the mobile wireless ecosystem and the 6 billion global wireless subscribers. But that appears **not** to be a consideration of AAPL as it’s always late to adopt state-of-the art wireless technologies as evidenced by its throttling of the Qualcomm modems in the iPhone 7 so as not to outperform their inferior Intel counterparts. Apple accuses Qualcomm of being anticompetitive but a closer look reveals just the opposite.
1) Which company is more anticompetitive, QCOM or AAPL given that-
....+ QCOM’s many-tiered levels of chipsets and reference designs enable global
companies (large and mall) to produce devices for the masses and even highly
sophisticated devices comparable to the iPhone at a fraction of its cost?
...+ AAPL which caters to only about 15 percent of the market (top tier),
squeezes the profits from its suppliers, and garners 80 -90% of the industries’
(device makers) profits?
2) Would the mobile wireless ecosystem and the global public as a whole be
better served with the $2B -$3B in annual revenues at stake remaining with QCOM
rather than being transferred mainly to AAPL?
One would think that QCOM’s retaining rather than losing 10,000 engineers will
have a significant impact on the speed and scope of the evolution of mobile
wireless and the benefits to mankind that follows.
Whereas, $2B- $3B annually would represent a pittance to AAPL’s $200+B top line, do little to further the mobile wireless experience of 85% global smartphone users, and if fact would most likely cause many device makers dependent upon QCOM’s chips to suffer along with their customers.