DS Forums

 
 

Qualcomm given record £631m fine


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-02-2015, 14:06
alanwarwic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132

http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...-monopoly-case

Interesting, considering I had long observed that they were stifling competition and, by affect, thus holding back much ARM development.


edit - "Qualcomm’s acts to eliminate or restrict market competition, hinder and inhibit technological innovation and development and harm the interests of consumers violate China’s anti-monopoly law.”
alanwarwic is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 10-02-2015, 14:16
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 25,199
"[Qualcomm] would not contest the matter." You do not want to mess with the Chinese comrades
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 15:36
alanwarwic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20150210VL202.html

"Qualcomm will offer licenses to its current 3G and 4G essential Chinese patents separately from licenses to its other patents "

In the west, I suspect it is that bundling that made it far too costly to buy anything but Qualcomm chipsets.
alanwarwic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 15:40
enapace
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,249
In fairness Qualcomm do make some of the best processors. But honestly doubt this will effect them at all.
enapace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 16:23
Aye Up
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,884
In fairness Qualcomm do make some of the best processors. But honestly doubt this will effect them at all.
I would agree were it not for the fact they are late to the party for 64Bit CPUs. Samsung, Mediatek and Huawei have had theirs in development way before QC announced their plans (I think just after Apple announced theirs). Admittedly they do dominate the market in the west, however I suspect they are going to have a challenge to that position as and when Samsung releases their next flagship.

Qualcomm has already revised down figures in light of Samsung's abandonment, their share price has also taken a knock as well. Qualcomm used to be the default option, however Samsung et al are finding they can better design chips which are both energy efficient and powerful. I am not saying Qualcomm's reign as to dog are over, not by a long stretch. I think the market is finally becoming more competitive force all SoC makers to innovate and deliver quickly, unless I am mistaken Samsung has moved its flagship SoC to a 16Nm process where as Qualcomm is still stuck on a larger one.
Aye Up is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 16:29
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,876
They're one of the few American chip manufacturers; I just wish they manufactured them in the US.
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 17:20
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 25,199
I feel like an old man, protesting a number of cores and bits, but if they decide to double a number of both every year then that's what we get. But that doesn't mean any unavoidable improvement. A lot of Windows applications are 32bit and apart from the address space limit most of them aren't going to come even near to, they do just fine in their 32 bit world. As I see it, it all comes down to games that can really profit from all this. Let's hope it will take longer than a few minutes before these pocket rockets running at full steam suck all energy out of the battery
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 18:29
The Lord Lucan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,966
Competition usually breeds innovation. I can only see this as a good thing.
The Lord Lucan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 19:00
Roush
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 2,937
Considering the fine was for their behaviour around 3G / 4G patent licensing, and nothing to do with their SoC / CPU activities I doubt this will have much impact on anything at a consumer level.
Roush is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 19:10
Aye Up
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,884
Considering the fine was for their behaviour around 3G / 4G patent licensing, and nothing to do with their SoC / CPU activities I doubt this will have much impact on anything at a consumer level.
Whilst that maybe so, the fine and subsquent ruling have larger implications for Qualcomm in the far east. Qualcomm does seem to struggle gaining a foothold there compared to Mediatek/Samsung/Huawei. At any rate, as Lucan has said this will force all chip makers to innovate more, I think QC have been caught off guard recently in respect to the 810 SoC, more device makers are turning to their own designs or that of neighbouring countries.

I have always wondered why Samsung has chosen to go with QC in the past when their own designs have been more than a match?
Aye Up is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2015, 11:34
alanwarwic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
Samsung has a big customer for their chipsets, but again, they likely have to pay Qualcomm a disproportionate amount for patents.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02...ntitrust_regs/' South Korea's Fair Trade Commission – the country's top antitrust regulator – has launched a probe into whether Qualcomm is abusing its dominant market position there, Reuters reports'
Now with it being South Korea, I guess you really have to lead the horsey politicians to water.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02...ntitrust_regs/
Maybe, with so much history with regards to the Intel monopoly, in recessionary times countries just cannot afford to let it be again.

Near everywhere it seems, it is far cheaper to buy Qualcomms product than to make your own or buy a competitors, all because of patent fee surcharges.
alanwarwic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2015, 14:28
Ben_Fisher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 577
Whilst that maybe so, the fine and subsquent ruling have larger implications for Qualcomm in the far east. Qualcomm does seem to struggle gaining a foothold there compared to Mediatek/Samsung/Huawei. At any rate, as Lucan has said this will force all chip makers to innovate more, I think QC have been caught off guard recently in respect to the 810 SoC, more device makers are turning to their own designs or that of neighbouring countries.

I have always wondered why Samsung has chosen to go with QC in the past when their own designs have been more than a match?
Qualcomms RF is second to none. Exynos just cannot match that LTE performance.

head over to anandtech and read the latest snapdragon 810 preview.
Ben_Fisher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2015, 14:36
alanwarwic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
I believe think Samsung signed a deal with Intel for LTE.

Out of one patent holders mouth into another ?
alanwarwic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2015, 14:51
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 25,199
Doesn't Microsoft/Nokia have 2G/3G/4G patents, too? Or is this in connection with ARM? Apparently Samsung and Microsoft like each other very much again, that could change something for them, too.
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2015, 08:38
alanwarwic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
"The EC would also like input on Qualcomm's practice of passing rights to patents it has licensed from other companies on to its partner phone makers..........The other probe was launched by a complaint from Nvidia's Icera wireless modem chip division – which, ironically perhaps, Nvidia said this week that it plans to wind down."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05...etition_going/

It is certainly a murky world.
alanwarwic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2015, 11:08
alanwarwic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
http://www.techeye.net/business/qual...-to-heisenberg
'The outfit was under pressure from its activist shareholders Jana to sell off its chipmaking side and concentrate on a more lucrative patent trolling business.'

Bizarre. How does turning into a patent troll help their EU cause?
Or is any fine just chickenfeed?
I'm left wondering if shareholders see this a way of sidestepping the EU complaint, butI see it likely legitimising it more.
alanwarwic is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:34.