this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2023
46 points (74.0% liked)

Technology

59211 readers
2737 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Apple used billions of dollars and thousands of engineers on a ‘spectacular failure,’ WSJ reports::Apple’s “spectacular failure” to build a modem chip for its new iPhones was the topic of a Wall Street Journal expose Wednesday.

all 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jet@hackertalks.com 89 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Spectacular failure is not generous. I would say Apple is doing the right thing. They want to develop their own vertical stack for their hardware. Even if the current endeavor is unsuccessful, they're building the skill set to do it in the future. Let's not forget Apple has a massive global phone footprint, so they're a massive consumer of these cellular modems.

Even if they don't have the chip ready to go at this moment, it gives them negotiating leverage with the modem manufacturer, namely Qualcomm. Having a thousand engineers, billions of dollars invested, and prototypes going on... That's negotiation leverage. Many business deals are done by capabilities, so if you're developing a capability you might get a better deal, so you don't accelerate that capability is growth.

Not to mention if Apple builds their own modem silicon, they would be in a position to sell it to other people.

I think this is just a reasonable business development, the article is breathless and over the top, I would expect nothing less from any extremely large organization, to at least try to bring feature parity in their own pipeline even if it's more expensive, it's a good option to have on the back burner.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 31 points 1 year ago (2 children)

When companies try to innovate under capitalism, suddenly that's a bad thing to the WSJ. I thought it was supposed to be about innovation and risk taking? Especially if the company is Apple and they have more money than they know what to do with.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Let's be generous and say they're not trying to induce clickbait.

Maybe from an investor's perspective, a long-term investment with a return horizon beyond 5 years, falls outside of most investors timelines. From that perspective you could say this makes Apple a not great investment.

But if your time horizon is 10-20 years. Apple creating leverage and independence is a great thing.

The personally I think they're just going for clickbait at this point

[–] spitfire@infosec.pub 9 points 1 year ago

It's absolutely clickbaot IMO. The phrasing alone gives it away. Regardless, there was massive garbage rumors and hate when it was leaked that Apple was making their own chip for macOS. The M-series chips have been phenomenal, which might be their own enemy in this case by setting the expectations too high. You're definitely right about the long term implications though, if I was an investor, I would take this as a net positive to hold.

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Look, you clicked on it didn't you. You were interested in the topic, WSJ is in the business to make money based on people's interest.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nah, the WSJ is Rupert Murdoch's blog, they're not there to make money.

And it's lemmy, of course I didn't RTFA.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ever since antenna gate, the reality distortion field around Apple has gone both ways it seems. Nothing around the company seems to be reported reasonably and it’s pretty boring and exhausting.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 15 points 1 year ago

Seems pretty common nowadays, with internet articles going for maximum clickbait, I would have hoped the Wall Street journal would be above that, that apparently not.

[–] Savaran@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Pretty sure a company with nearly a $3 TRILLON dollar market cap can afford to spend a few billion just trying things for kicks if they want. It doesn’t make it a failure, it makes it R&D.

[–] bbbbb@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I wonder what the takeaway was? They successfully designed processors with the m1 & bionic chips, so super curious what blocked them here. Are modems harder to design than processors? Maybe it’s the RF part?

If someone patents the wheel, it's very hard to make a car.

[–] rutenl@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

I heard somewhere they ran into tons of patent issues

[–] FediLeGrand@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Highly recommend reading daringfireball.net’s takedown of this nonsense

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 7 points 1 year ago
[–] dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago

Qualcomm be like: