If you want to read more about this issue, here's some reading that was the basis for what I discussed in this video. Thank you to the journalists below who reported on this issue! As always, read the source, don't take the word of a dude on YT for anything. www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-15/apple-maps-app-is-experiencing-downtime-for-search-navigation www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-qualcomm-itc/apple-qualcomm-battle-over-possible-ban-on-some-u-s-iphone-imports-idUSKBN1JB337 www.reuters.com/article/uk-qualcomm-licensing/qualcomms-patent-deals-aim-to-ease-apple-regulator-tensions-exec-says-idUSKBN1I22IP www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-10-04/apple-and-qualcomm-s-billion-dollar-war-over-an-18-part www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/technology/apple-qualcomm-lawsuits.html www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/business/international/qualcomm-fine-china-antitrust-investigation.html www.apple.com/shop/buy-iphone/iphone-8#00,20,30 indianexpress.com/article/world/south-korea-court-says-samsungs-jay-y-lee-gave-bribe-to-win-presidents-support-sent-to-5-years-jail-4812755/ amzn.to/2JHPZXU ✓ Cryptocurrency tip links: › Bitcoin: 1EaEv8DBeFfg6fE6BimEmvEFbYLkhpcvhj › Bitcoin Cash: qzwtptwa8h0wjjawr5fsm0ku8kf40amgqgm6lx4jxh › Dash: XwQpZuvMvU44JT7C7Uh6xHvkSadzJw9fMN › Dogecoin: DKetsoCvwa2hF29ssgUA4Wz4hxT4kj3KLU › Ethereum: 0x6f6870feb48f08388ee345cf0261e2f03d2fa310 › Ethereum classic: 0x671bfd61ba87edf6365c97cea33d66ba73645510 › Litecoin: LWnbTTAjojZQt68ihFJFgQq3cYHUsTcyd7 › Verge: DFumZ5sMhi3JktLQpsTVtV9xUt3zKDrcZV › Zcash: t1Ko3FkphQYoQroQc8k2DVk4WKMAbmNR8PH › Zcoin: a8QdvArHmdRYe1MjiqtP6jDNe6Z4JgnRKZ
Louis Rossmann Business focus on making more money. Of course they'd try to reduce payment to another company no matter what they sell, how many they sell, and for how much they sell. They are not NPGO, Mr.Louis.
I think when it comes down to it, the percentage model Qualcomm is employing makes more sense than a fixed rate model will be. 1. As you say, Apple has insane profit margins. Why shouldn't Qualcomm share in those higher margins if they enable the device to be a device? 2. More importantly and reasonably, if the licensing fee is fixed at $10 per device and you have a $100 device, that's a significant portion of the cost that's being consumed by the licensing fee. So a company that'd already probably be losing money on a cheap device would be far less motivated to make cheaper devices. The percentage model makes more sense to me, IF the same model is applied to everyone.
Akshay Anand Why does a company which makes money out of selling overpriced devices deserves sympathy? It deserves only criticism and praises where it's due. Nothing more. Did I just explained your reply? Lmao
Qualcomm always has the option of _denying_ licenses, technologies, and parts to companies. Maybe the Officially Wordy Standards And Regulations require Qualcomm objectively complies to "reasonable" and "fair" industry considerations ... but the bottom line is that anyone who refuses to pay royalties/permissions on patented technologies is *illegally pirating* the technology. Good luck with that.
Yeah, I think it's more than ok for qualcomm to take a (fair) percentage (it isn't as high as 10% apple want for MFI) of retail price because for every dollar apple raises their price, they make that more profits from the phone, even including qualcomms percentage. (why shouldn't qualcomm profit more from a more expensive phone when it's thier tech that make the phone an actual phone?) And since Apple are BY FAR the company that makes most profit per phone already, it's the company I feel the least bad for with their disgusting behaviour. I don't understand why people still buy them, I really don't.
Samsung literally had a 132 page internal document that showed them comparing the iOS interface to the original s1 and comparing which samsung used to copy certain elements that was done better on iOS. Also samsung is the one who keeps renewing the suit, even though at one time it was like a 300 million fine and now its 500 million, pretty sad for samsung there but as of now samsung is still renewing the case
Kevin Neu, Only 132 pages? Between the functions that Apple has copied and the technology the bought...I mean innovated, I would say Apple could easily top a million pages worth of 'study' they grabbed from outside sources.
Every company "innovates" (meaning not blatantly copying) Apple had some features that came before android first but there's the main reason why Google isn't sued by Apple in that realm which is because Google put their own spin on it with, a different interface plus better features and implementations then apple. Samsung tried to be something they arent during that time, while Google did it their own way.
Louis, can you please start selling Rossmann Screwdrivers (patent pending) soon? They're currently nowhere to be found, but my 2014 MacBook needs urgent repair, so I cant delay, must buy today.
Are they the one's that have lines like "Screw you!" and "Think different." written on them ontop of a logo that resembles an apple, which was stabbed with a screwdriver? And that aforementioned apple has droplets of juice dripping down the sides from where the entry and exit cavities of the screwdriver running through it are positioned, which begin to form a small pool of juice beneath the penetrated apple as they reach the bottom? Yeah, I don't think I've ever seen one of those. As far as I know, they only exist in legend.
@@thomaster8870 look wot u dun now , "legendary" screwdrivers cost more you know , now i cannot afford one , oh well , back to prying the machine open with a unlegendary flat blade :-)
That video made my day. Not much annoys me more than those who want it both ways. I hope Qualcomm succeed in screwing Apple at least as much as Apple have screwed everyone else.
The Germans have a word for a "face in need of a fist" which I think could apply to Apple "Backpfeifengesicht". A great German word is Shardenfraude which has been been imported into English meaning taking pleasure in someone else's misfortune.
well: we are sure that apple would forward the price benefit to its costumers, employees and the country that shared their legal point of view - well: Except that they will just increase their own internal intellectual property fee to move the profit off shore.
So Qualcomm gets a percentage of the overall price of your device, versus, Apple who gets a percentage of the overall price of your app (for "hosting" your app). Apple is also "legally" allowed to discount your app at will (so you make potentially way less money. Less food for your kids), yet they are able to control the end price of their own products so retailers etc cannot realistically discount their product when they sell it. Apple wants their cake, a piece of your cake, and also sells their old cake at full price.
I understand Apple's argument about the retail price. But ya, not paying at all is just stupid and it truly is silly. They really think their shit doesn't stink.
I don't like the licencing model, but that is hardly new. The different prices/licenses for the same software based only on the hardware is commun place in software. Microsoft, VMWare, Oracle, ... all charge licenses based on a per/core basis. The CPU has nothing to do with it, the same software is installed, but they want a bigger piece of the pie.
Yeah, I think it's more than ok for qualcomm to take a (fair) percentage (it isn't as high as 10% apple want for MFI) of retail price because for every dollar apple raises their price, they make that more profits from the phone, even including qualcomms percentage. (why shouldn't qualcomm profit more from a more expensive phone when it's thier tech that make the phone an actual phone?) And since Apple are BY FAR the company that makes most profit per phone already, it's the company I feel the least bad for with their disgusting behaviour. I don't understand why people still buy them, I really don't.
not gonna bother trying to repair a 9 year old machine with the power of what now fits into a basic NUC. I'm gonna rip the hard drive out and save some components, then throw it in the garbage where it belongs.
Not related to the video. I was able to fix a MacBook Pro 2008 and 2010 with your capacitors at you store. I am looking forward to ordering parts from you in the future.
and Apple will reduce your app from say $10 to $0.99 on sale, still take their 30% profit for "hosting your app", but will gladly still sell 5 year old computers at full retail to the unsuspecting public. Apple is a recipe company, not a true innovator (perhaps their silicon chip business), but everything else is purchased through other companies massive R&D (and risk) budgets, or companies, and their tech, that they bought cheap (or relatively comparatively) to pursue their own goals. Riveted, glued, and poorly ventilated components/products are NOT engineering marvels Apple.
If Apple wins, Qualcomm will try to maintain profitability by punishing their largest licensing customer, MediaTek, which is a company that makes low-cost communication processors that are used in all the phones for poor people. Like sub $100 phones that most of the world uses - India, south America, Russia, China, Africa, those little places. In turn, to maintain RAND condition that allows Qualcomm to serve as part of the standards body, Qualcomm will have to raise prices on their own chips. So you tell me if Apple winning is good or bad news for all of us?
Defending intel or any other company is also stupid in this war. Intel has been sued and lost for paying shops to not sell AMD laptops back in early Intel Core 2 Duo years.
Intel is one cunt of a company. There's no doubt about that. What they're doing to "combat" AMD's Zen CPU line is insulting to everybody, even themselves lol.
You can't blame apple for that, consumers are the ones who determine what the value of tech is worth and if the majority of people say "yes, it's ok to charge $1000 for a smartphone" then $1000 is what it's gonna be priced at for the foreseeable future.
apple did start this shit of because with apple u payed for exclusivity, if apple put the apple logo on a brick and named it IBrick then people would buy it, the tech inside of an apple iphone i pre iphone 7 was antiquated in terms of android (Tech and OS)yet they always sold them devices way above the cost of parts, the reason u pay so much to apple is to have that logo its the same with EVERYTHING in the world a £10 pair of trainers (no name brand) vs a £100 named brand pair. who gives a flying fuck if they cost £10 they do the same job and are not attached to a brand like nike or addidas. Fucktards that buy for this reason need shooting.
True, but at the same time, these days it's equally sort of "cool" to hate on apple as people are slowly becoming more aware of how bad of a company they really are and how their "premium" products aren't quite as premium as they lead you to believe, well that plus not being able to get your device repaired at all or scandals such as admitting to bend gate and the slower performance thing a while back, has probably left a bad taste in enough people's mouth to where they're more hesitant to defend apple, so there's still a cult there but the sane people are coming to a realization.
villavan kothai exactly. Why phone maker crazyly create beast phone with mountain selling price while the battery technology still the same. Battery took huge space in phone and absolutely will decrease performance after 2 years, top. Cost a lot to change the battery or the sparepart availability is none. I'm start to think to buy super cheap elegant smartphone that I can toss out after 1 year and get new one.
Battery technology is a entirely different thing to attempt to tackle. It's about energy density, weight, recharge speed, and power it can deliver. Battery that work based on the chemistry like we use now are not likely going to become much greater then using lithium simply because there is no where to go on the periodic table of elements from lithium. Maybe somehow we develop some artificial complex molecule that is not a anode cathode based chemical battery but works like a super capacitor but seems like the batteries could be potentially electrically lethal then from mishandling and it discharging through someone somehow. Now hydrocarbon liquid fuels are like 100x more energy dense then the chemical based energy of lithium but I don't see us filling up our smart phones at the local gas station anytime soon.
Because it will make people think you have a bigger dick. Sorta like having a stud car. And after two years, you get to buy a another new and improved model for $2000.00. Who could ask for anything more?
Great vid! It was nice hearing your opinion. I loved it. Watching you work in many of your video's prevents me from buying Apple products. Sorry Louis, I will not be using your services...lol
I love these videos... for me it’s like watching Bob Ross because I have zero knowledge as of what you are talking about and as you talk you kinda allow me to be able to understand what is going on and it is so pleasing to hear the enthusiasm and kinda funny voice of yours.
Just see it this way. Qualcom is not charging more for a modem built into a more expensive. Rather they grant a discount if the modem is used in a cheaper phone. It's something like with student edition software licenses.
One argument in favor of Qualcomm is that their model evenly distribute the impact of the fee... If they do what Apple want, cheap phone will be unfairly taxed and become much more expensive...
Not only that... It's an IP so no marginal cost... It makes no sense for Qualcomm to have a fee that could make a potential phone unprofitable... A lower bound to the fee shouldn't exist. There's no such problem with an upper bound.. and actually recently they agreed to do just that...
I couldn't have said it better! I was waiting for a video like this for the past year... Finally someone talking about this ridiculous Apple vs Qualcomm battle.
Louis,you have a great way with words. As a reseller of vintage audio,most mfg do not care what is done with older product. But some do .these mfg would get a great lesson from you. Thank you for caring about open market.
Your analysis is right on! "You live by the douchy business model, you die by the douchy business model!" Well put! If only the analysts would bring these issues up.
Unfortunately Apple can argue that its own behavior is irrelevant to the case at hand, and it's right. You can argue one case under one theory and win, then argue the complete opposite theory, with the same judge, on the same day, against the same opponent, and be just as victorious under the rules of evidence. The law is an ass, it has no memory.
Mike Mixer How about using the Unclean hands legal argument? That is "Apple comes before this court as plaintiff while committing related crimes, please throw out the entire case".
I love your take on things, you are spot on every time. Even though my current laptop is a MacBook Pro, I'm firmly against Apple's business practices. The iPhone memory cost drives me bonkers, and even though I'm an android user, I cannot get my wife to give up her iPhone. Anyhow, thanks for taking the time to make your videos, I appreciate it.
Been an iPhone user for a long while. My 6s is dying and going by the looks of things I can no longer afford buying new iPhones from what looks like nothing other than an artificial inflation of prices. I’m not complaining because at the end of the day I can only afford what I can afford. Though I will miss iMessage, I am excited see what Android has to offer nowadays.
DonicsM back in days when there was no WhatsApp or Facebook messenger for most ppl. And we had 100sms per month and over that was cheapest 6.9 eurocents per sms. Now we have unlimited everything including data for 20euros. Only thing if you can send video and data in good quality in iMessage (WhatsApp and messenger sucks in quality). Don't worry you get used to other apps fast! I did too, I had iPhone 5 when 6(+) came out and I was like price is too high. They upped the price 100€ after every iPhone for 4-4s-5-6.
Tsiikki Was it easyto convince your friends to migrate to Whatsapp? My friends are a bunch of dry vagina douches but I think they’ll do it for me. Lol. Just fucking sad how much Apple have inflated their prices over the years. I’m pretty conviced the only reason the iPhone 8 exists is to jack up the X to high heaven.
I think in general patent laws and other government red tape have been and are strangling innovation. I'm fine with companies being given some protection as an incentive to be innovators and lead the market in creating new things, but it's a bit on the ridiculous side. The length of patents is too long, the company doesn't have to demonstrate any intent to actually produce a product from the patent. A patent should require an actual functional product, not just a general idea or concept. I'm sure most people remember RIM being sued over the blackberry because some company held a nonsense patent for something as vague as "mobile device that sends and receives emails" with no working prototype or any R&D done to develop one. There are entire companies whose sole mission in life is to file and purchase vague patents, and then sue companies they think might be infringing patents they own. Companies that actually have invested in developing the technology. They frequently win these cases too. Then of course you have regulations and organizations in charge of controlling industries like the fcc, fda, and many others, where they can create such an atrocious amount of red tape around creating anything new that only a huge company can reasonably run the gauntlet. This is why there are no mom and pop drug companies, it costs many many billions of dollars to get one drug to market. This usually means that if a few brilliant grad students decide to get together after they graduate and make a drug company using whatever funds they can get, loans, cash, trust funds, inheritance, whatever, they will never be able to see their inventions through to the market and reap the benefits. Best case scenario, they invent the cure for cancer, they do some early phases of testing in animals and possibly some early early testing in humans, but before the later phases of testing and licensing begin, they can no longer afford the process and usually sell the patent for a meager amount to a bigger pharmaceutical company that will either shelf it because it would mean less profit than the drugs they're already selling, or they will bring it to market and make hundreds of billions of dollars off of it over time. Plus any of these organizations can potentially be manipulated to prevent competition. Pay the right person and the start-up with a better product than you can't get their product licensed to sell, and after enough frustration end up just selling the company to a huge conglomerate that will either just take that better product and make it theirs or scrap it. That whole fuss that went on over the price of epipen injectors and inhalers was 100% red tape and regulation created. The actual drug in an epipen is dirt cheap epinephrine. The cost is the auto-injector mechanism, which at the time of the debaucle, epipen was the only approved auto-injector for emergency epinephrine injection licensed for sale in the usa. Meanwhile in europe there were at least 2 competitors, and epipens were cheaper there as well. The FDA created that situation, and while i would love to imagine it was incompetence keeping competitors from getting approved to sell a product obviously deemed safe for use in other 1st world countries, very likely somebody's pockets were being lined to drag their feet or flat out reject them on that project. The inhalers were slightly different, the drug companies were told they needed to change the inhalers to a more environmentally friendly propellant in the little bottle. The actual medicine didn't change. This required the drug companies to go through the entire R&D and licensing procedure all over again, so the price of an inhaler went from like $5 to like $65. People blamed the drug companies(who i'm sure found a way to benefit from this nonsense as well, i'm not saying they're wholly innocent by default) but it was really tree hugging hippies that made it so poor people struggle to afford inhalers. People have the tendency to think of regulation as all that is keeping the consumer safe from big bad corporations but it seems like more often the regulation is anti-consumer itself. I mean really, we have the courts for a reason. If a company sells you a bad product that causes harm, you and everyone else harmed can sue, either class action or individually, and the company will end up likely having to pay out. That in and of itself is a regulating affect on any industry. If a company dumps chemicals in a river that ruins the river for a time, every city downstream from there, and every individual with a connection to the river, can sue, and the settlements should cover cleanup and stand as a deterrent to anyone else for doing it. Why do we need an epa? Because people don't want to take any personal responsibility for anything as far as staying informed and taking action, so they'd rather big daddy government step in and moderate everything like an overly involved playground monitor that is constantly shouting "no shoving!" while you play tag.
If a fracking company poisons a river in a small poor town in the rust belt even if the whole town got together they'd likely not be able to afford the level of court case would proceed. The fracking company would also probably fly in a endless amount of "experts" to advise how its not an issue or not their fault. The court system is fairly dirty and pretty corrupt at its core in the US and a deep level of investigation and "expert analysis" is required to prove in the preponderance of evidence that its the fracking company that is at fault (considering that they will definitely have there own "experts") these "experts" know the game and know their value in such court cases. Hence their time and statements to a court become pretty expensive for the average person.
@@kms50549 In your hypothetical scenario apparently the concept of working pro bono doesn't exist and there are no volunteer organizations or individuals, not even ones in it for the tax write off. Expert witness can come from a lot of sources. There are tons of environmentalist professors that would gladly volunteer to take samples, use University equipment to test it, and provide expert witness testimony. Is there a chance that they wouldnt win? Sure, of course. However 10s of thousands of successful lawsuits against big organizations by small groups and individuals say it is definitely possible. Just 3 individuals a while back won over 100 million in settlements from Johnson and Johnson claiming baby powder gave them ovarian cancer. The preponderance of evidence in those cases were incredibly weak and they won anyway. Yes courts can be corrupted but so can any government entity including the EPA. Ultimately the EPA or other alphabet soup agencies have no teeth without their parent branch of government and the other 2. In general if something doesn't work, fix it. If the judiciary is corrupt, fix it. The EPA would have a hard time operating without a functional judiciary anyway.
Under current conditions, I simply don't like Apple's business practices. I've watch your videos for a while. I have never seen such a company like Apple. I simply will NOT use them. I agree with your right to repair. I appreciate your videos. I agree with your videos. I simply will not purchase Apple.
Having a percentage makes sense though. For the budget manefacturer making $200 phones, that say 10% fee is smaller and lets them do that. But if you charge 10% of an apple phone's price to that budget manefacturer suddenly their phone costs way more. Qualcomm recognise they're only a part of the phone so they only want a part of the money but they also don't want to get screwed by picking a number like $20 and then in 50 years when a milk shake is $400, basically being screwed by getting $20 for each $50,000 apple phone. I'd say percentage is fairest for all involved.
Intellectual property....pffft, If you sell me a device I own said device period and can do anything I want to it. Does that mean I am gonna take programming off the device and try to reverse engineer it and compete with the device manufacturer, no. That is what patents and copyrights are for. But any patent or copyright does not mean I can't take a device apart and or send receive any part of it through mail or shipping PERIOD. So do I think Apple needs knocked down a peg, most certainly.
if u reverse engineering it u steal my intellectual property because i sell device to use. And if I tell u pay me 50percent Msrp, u can agree or gtfo. But If u use my technology i sue u because u steal my IP
You see this is not a debate or otherwise. Fact 1: If you sell me something I own it period, you exchanged an object for payment, the deal is done you own what I give you and I own what you gave me. It does not matter if its an intellectual or physical item. Just because some companies have tried to pull this crap in a grey area in law does mean what they say is fact. And the big eye opener for them is going to be handed to them on a silver platter soon. If enough people just stand up and say enough is enough it will never have to go to law.
If I purchase the use of that IP by buying a product which contains it, then I have the right to continue using that IP by buying replacement parts. From anyone I choose.
Louis.. being real is the best thing you carry with you on a daily basis.. The shit you talk about interests me because i can relate with the realism you preach.. Apple never wanted to be a company that connects with other companies, they always wanted to stand alone, so my advice is to allow them to stand alone, completely alone until they realise what they have done
Just want to point out Apples storage options since the 6S are expensive partly because they're greedy but also because they're onboard single chip NVME based solutions that are many times faster than SD card based options.
This is a good point and I'm glad you covered it since I missed it. However, at the same time, Apple's storage options have been over market pricing since the dawn of the original iPhone.
Danny War Robots UFS was definitely not as fast back then. I can't be bothered to check how fast it is nowadays because I don't care enough about this argument but back when the 6S came out it benchmarked twice as fast in read speeds and more than five times faster in write. I'm not saying they don't price gouge but they're less evil in recent years at least regarding storage, theirs was market leading in performance //at that time// and I'm sure it wasn't cheap to implement so higher prices make sense.
Ok its faster but still u cannot just popup another storage, apps on internal storage but exceed files on external. Make photo ok, one four twelve but why u must store on internal storage, spotify etc sdxc have enough speed to listen from. make 4k video in 100fps
I'd argue that the price structure for this ultra-critical property is _very_ fair - and its _contributing_ to innovation in the mobile / smartphone space - not the other way around. Its about as "fair" a price (structure) as it gets - considering they're not really paying for a physical chip here. This allows newcomers in the space, startups and smaller companies making / selling less ridiculously expensive devices, to pay a percentage licence fee for current-gen tech. That way, their devices can actually be functionally relevant/up to date on the telecom-side and thus have at least _a change_ to compete in the market, especially when it comes to the lower end. Had Qualcomm opted for a per-unit _defined_ price instead, those newcomers and low-end models would be crushed under the weight of that _defined_ price, as it (defined unit price) of course would (have to) evolve and adapt/adjust to stay reasonable and profitable in a market dominated by high-end, expensive devices (in the _western markets,_ average pricetag on sold smartphones pr Q3-4 2018, is near the 600 USD mark). As a hypothetical (very simplified) example: 5% on a $1000 phone is $50. Its a significant amount, but it still leaves $950 on Apple's table, of which *_$578.75_* (Iphone X) is Apple's _gross_ sales profit. If you made that a defined price, no one would be able to survive in making and selling a low-end $100-150 model. Apple is in this position as a *_direct, hard-linked consequence_* of their own choice to massively overprice their devices. They have every opportunity to reduce the $ amount paid to Qualcomm, by reducing their profit margin. This is jus one of those ways that grossly overcharging for something, tends to eventually bite you in the ass. Especially when that something, is something you didn't make.
Why should i pay more taxes, just because i earn more money? Well ... thats how percentage fees work! And Apple accepted those fees in the first place!
Autistic Giraffe - lol, you mean the same Intel that stuck with 4 core chips for how long? Qualcomm is a cancer on the mobile industry and with as much as I hate Apple i hope they win and take those retards down a few pegs. Fuck their garbage chips. It's pretty obvious how much they're hated when Google, Samsung, and Apple are all suing them.
It'd be interesting to see how they structured the licensing contract. It does seem BS because Intel would have to pay QC for their patents then charge Apple for using the same patents implemented in a chipset unless it's a separate patent that Apple has to use that isn't a part of the chipset.
Maybe its a software patent rather than hardware? But I agree, its rather confusing as you would expect the chip manufacturer to pay for the patent rather than the device manufacturer.
Qualcomm's licensing model allows them to get paid for their foundational research (and a lot of committee lobbying, mostly that probably) while charging pennies for devices that mere mortals across the world use. The $100 phones. This is RAND compliant since the likes of MediaTek can undercut Qualcomm's offerings while still making use of their patents. And that's something Apple doesn't want you to have, Apple wants to carry a lower burden at the cost of everyone else.
Motolav The Intel chips probably come with an "License for non-Intel patents not included" sticker. Simple as that. The patents are on specific ways to deal with radio waves, so not really software patents. Someone can theoretically build a cellphone with generic chips, just like Qualcomm did when inventing the stuff. The license fee would be the same.
the only problem with monopoly is that it corners the market, apple should either make there own modem chips and spend decades on RnD and alot of cash or outright BUY QUALCOM, but if apple did this they might kill all competition like android smart devices.
Spriggen 1337 they are absolutely not interested in buying Qualcomm, their SoC's are way ahead of Qualcomm's, and I don't see apple interested in network communication or semiconductor development (outside their apple A processors)
As I understand it Qualcomm own patents for 3G/4G technology, so it wouldn't matter if Apple made their own chip, for it to be 3G/4G compatible they would still need to pay Qualcomm.
if thats the case then how can they have a monopoly on something they own, if qualcomm has patented 3g and 4g then they can charge what they want regardless
MegaChickenPunch if he hates apple so much and down want to lose money because of repairing apple defect product he would not make anti apple video at all u dmbass...he doesnt support apple ways of getting money because apple is greedy as fuck..if u support a company like that is shows how your mindset is.
Niya Blake Are you sure Intel actually pays for the use in those chips? Industry practice may be that Intel gets to sell those chips cheaper by not including the patent license.
Yes Intel license qualcom IP . They only way intel gets out of not paying is if they do cross license patents . Right now intel does not have any thing that qualcom wants.
Niya Blake I'm not saying Intel isn't licensing _some_ Qualcomm IP. I'm suggesting that the specific Intel chips bought by Apple might not include a prepaid license for at least some of the Qualcomm patents Apple uses in iPhones with Intel modern chips. Otherwise that would be a completely different and much more reasonable argument that Apple has seemingly not used.
To be fair SD cards are becoming a rarity on Android phones as well and the handling of external memory on many devices is more clunky than it needs to be.
Martin King I hope Qualcomm brings the hammer down on them too cause I feel Google is purposely left the SDcard slot in, but smade using the SDcard Slot difficult to use so people would be frustrated & upgrade. 1. Every OS after Kitkat (OS4) has SDCard problem & Marshmellow's Adoptive Storage is gone (ENCRYPTS YOUR SDCARD & sucks if your phone breaks) >>> We have larger phones with 2 Sim Card Slots & CLOUD STORAGE (Google 1 App), but NO DUAL SDCARD SLOTS (1st for OS & 2nd for USER) 2. 4 newer OS faster than IceCreamSandwich to Kitkat and all have SDCard problems
Abdur Rafi Trash talking Apple for the good of the people is tiring, don’t you know?! Anytime I need a good laugh I come read this comment section. Sad part is, those who wish for Apples demise seem to forget the impact it would have on the economy of a number of countries. Eh, negative comments/videos helps feed the likes/views whores. 😂😂
Nobody sane wishes Apple's demise. People just want Apple to use business practices which actually do not screw the customer over and over. Is that too much to ask?
yosuhara Nah, not at all. My problem is those who haven’t ever owned a single Apple product (also not having tried any with an open mind) spewing contemptuous sophomoric hate. At least use the products, and don’t just because someone works on them, jump on the bandwagon of every sign of impropriety whether the situation was self inflicted because of ones smugness or an actual issue with Apple. Honestly, Apple definitely has issues, but I don’t think they are any worse than any other company. I have heard countless horror stories regarding other companies (regarding their computers in particular), but they never seem to gain traction in the same way they do when it’s Apple. IDK iOS 12 & Mojave seem as though they are going to be a “going back to their roots” type situation, so all we can do is hope.
Your thoughts on Apple, also over a couple of other videos you made, really changed my mind. I never was a fanboy and never will, but it is a really interesting topic. Thx
First off, why don't you compare what say Motorola pays Qualcomm for a $200 phone using the same chipset as the one in the iPhone? It after all serves the same function in both devices. No other FRAND licensor does what Qualcomm does. Image what would've happened to the internet if ethernet transceiver users had to pay a percentage of the computers they went in to - computer makers refused to pay a buck-and-a half or so for IEEE-1394 ports because it was too expensive. No one licensing FRAND technology embedded in a standard should be allowed to tithe the entire device - and I'm still pissed that Qualcomm was allowed to participate in 5G after their antics. BTW, it's not just Apple who'd like to see the backside of Qualcomm - just about every phone maker out there feels that Qualcomm is practicing legalized extortion on the entire industry. And while you're looking in that, look up "patent exhaustion" while you're at it - Qualcomm's practice of charging everyone up the ladder is contrary to US law. Qualcomm charges Intel a license fee for the IP going into their modems, then it charges Apple a license fee for the chipset, then it tries to charge Apple a license fee for the total cost of the phone. And it does so for every other manufacturer in an overt attempt to kill competition (though if you use Qualcomm modems you just have the last two to contend with). With every other IP holder, the manufacturer of the component pays a license fee to use the IP and there is no other license collected. You may not like Apple, and you can buy their devices or not, but in this case I really think you've picked to wrong club to wield.
Apple takes a 30% cut off a $100 app or a $0.99 app. Same shit, different pile. Designing chips/fabrication is a much more involved (and risky) business, than hosting a few apps
You're wrong louis ! Apple doesn't have a monopoly on mobile phones, if you don't justify spending money over a 256gb phone then buy another phone with an sd card. nobody is forcing you to pay anything to apple in order for you to own a smartphone. While apple is forced to pay qualcomm as it's having monopoly on mobile modems. While qualcomm has the right to protect it's patents and charge for them that doesn't give them the power to charge 256gb iPhone more than 32gb ones. The consumer has a choice when it comes to choosing a smartphone, Apple doesn't when it comes to qualcomm.
People have a choice but dumb people still buy iphones.. Smarter consumer should educate them..if your kids are an asshole bcause they friended an asshole you as an adult that understand that attitude is negative should EDUCATE your child not just leave them be with their wrong choices that they make.now do u understand??
Qualcomm and Apple settled last week and very damning information was revealed of how Apple had been plotting for years to hurt Qualcomm. I'd very interested for your coverage and analysis on that topic. Thank you.
That sounds perfectly reasonable. I feel so bad for Jessa loosing all those screens. That is a very shi**y thing Apple is doing that's completely wrong.
![FNAF vs TF2 - Episode 2 [SFM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z5b3V2-VLb0/mqdefault.jpg)
If you want to read more about this issue, here's some reading that was the basis for what I discussed in this video. Thank you to the journalists below who reported on this issue! As always, read the source, don't take the word of a dude on YT for anything.
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-15/apple-maps-app-is-experiencing-downtime-for-search-navigation
www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-qualcomm-itc/apple-qualcomm-battle-over-possible-ban-on-some-u-s-iphone-imports-idUSKBN1JB337
www.reuters.com/article/uk-qualcomm-licensing/qualcomms-patent-deals-aim-to-ease-apple-regulator-tensions-exec-says-idUSKBN1I22IP
www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-10-04/apple-and-qualcomm-s-billion-dollar-war-over-an-18-part
www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/technology/apple-qualcomm-lawsuits.html
www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/business/international/qualcomm-fine-china-antitrust-investigation.html
www.apple.com/shop/buy-iphone/iphone-8#00,20,30
indianexpress.com/article/world/south-korea-court-says-samsungs-jay-y-lee-gave-bribe-to-win-presidents-support-sent-to-5-years-jail-4812755/
amzn.to/2JHPZXU
✓ Cryptocurrency tip links:
› Bitcoin: 1EaEv8DBeFfg6fE6BimEmvEFbYLkhpcvhj
› Bitcoin Cash: qzwtptwa8h0wjjawr5fsm0ku8kf40amgqgm6lx4jxh
› Dash: XwQpZuvMvU44JT7C7Uh6xHvkSadzJw9fMN
› Dogecoin: DKetsoCvwa2hF29ssgUA4Wz4hxT4kj3KLU
› Ethereum: 0x6f6870feb48f08388ee345cf0261e2f03d2fa310
› Ethereum classic: 0x671bfd61ba87edf6365c97cea33d66ba73645510
› Litecoin: LWnbTTAjojZQt68ihFJFgQq3cYHUsTcyd7
› Verge: DFumZ5sMhi3JktLQpsTVtV9xUt3zKDrcZV
› Zcash: t1Ko3FkphQYoQroQc8k2DVk4WKMAbmNR8PH
› Zcoin: a8QdvArHmdRYe1MjiqtP6jDNe6Z4JgnRKZ
Louis Rossmann Business focus on making more money. Of course they'd try to reduce payment to another company no matter what they sell, how many they sell, and for how much they sell. They are not NPGO, Mr.Louis.
Jeeva Bharathi but this does mean that Apple deserve no sympathy for any practices that bother Apple themselves.
Louis Rossmann Wow! Did Apple become fragile snowflake with case for importing iPhone in SK? lmao
I think when it comes down to it, the percentage model Qualcomm is employing makes more sense than a fixed rate model will be. 1. As you say, Apple has insane profit margins. Why shouldn't Qualcomm share in those higher margins if they enable the device to be a device? 2. More importantly and reasonably, if the licensing fee is fixed at $10 per device and you have a $100 device, that's a significant portion of the cost that's being consumed by the licensing fee. So a company that'd already probably be losing money on a cheap device would be far less motivated to make cheaper devices. The percentage model makes more sense to me, IF the same model is applied to everyone.
Akshay Anand Why does a company which makes money out of selling overpriced devices deserves sympathy? It deserves only criticism and praises where it's due. Nothing more.
Did I just explained your reply? Lmao
I hope Qualcomm wins so apple can get what it feels like to be their consumer
More like "what it feels like to be their slave" !
Qualcomm will win, it's only a matter of time.
Qualcomm always has the option of _denying_ licenses, technologies, and parts to companies. Maybe the Officially Wordy Standards And Regulations require Qualcomm objectively complies to "reasonable" and "fair" industry considerations ... but the bottom line is that anyone who refuses to pay royalties/permissions on patented technologies is *illegally pirating* the technology. Good luck with that.
Apple is Qualcomm's little bi*ch
Yeah, I think it's more than ok for qualcomm to take a (fair) percentage (it isn't as high as 10% apple want for MFI) of retail price because for every dollar apple raises their price, they make that more profits from the phone, even including qualcomms percentage. (why shouldn't qualcomm profit more from a more expensive phone when it's thier tech that make the phone an actual phone?) And since Apple are BY FAR the company that makes most profit per phone already, it's the company I feel the least bad for with their disgusting behaviour. I don't understand why people still buy them, I really don't.
Apple: Think Double standard
Apple. DoubleThink Different!
Apple has no standard but greed, greedy companies don't like other greedy companies taking their money
Apple - Think like Samsung.
Orwell called it "doublethink" and wikipedias description of fits perfectly
Weren't they going after Samsung for the entire device on their case against them?
Apple, the "We hold a patent on rounded rectangles" company, want to question someone else's patent ethics. That is a f'ing hoot.
Well, that's the problem with the world, the Idiocracy and greed is beyond comprehension
chrisose you right, that Samsung Apple lawsuit was pretty sad
Samsung literally had a 132 page internal document that showed them comparing the iOS interface to the original s1 and comparing which samsung used to copy certain elements that was done better on iOS. Also samsung is the one who keeps renewing the suit, even though at one time it was like a 300 million fine and now its 500 million, pretty sad for samsung there but as of now samsung is still renewing the case
Kevin Neu,
Only 132 pages? Between the functions that Apple has copied and the technology the bought...I mean innovated, I would say Apple could easily top a million pages worth of 'study' they grabbed from outside sources.
Every company "innovates" (meaning not blatantly copying) Apple had some features that came before android first but there's the main reason why Google isn't sued by Apple in that realm which is because Google put their own spin on it with, a different interface plus better features and implementations then apple. Samsung tried to be something they arent during that time, while Google did it their own way.
Someone is "over charging" Apple? Where is the crowdfunding page for the statue that company deserves? Surely there is one.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I've looked
It doesn't exist
@@kenbee1957 sad day
I believe there is one outside of the building, its a giant statue of a bronze figure jumping off the roof into a safety net.
You can buy stock.
We should all go to an apple store, take a phone and say "I'm gonna take this phone, but I am no paying for it, because I think it costs too much"
Yes
Then u will get arrested for stealing. 😂
Cuzeg Spiked I have the 5T and it's so much better than iPhones. And I even have root and am on a custom rom to get even more out of the device.
What about the vivo nex? It's software is similar to apples ios but is android. also NO NOTCH
Exactly right
It is NOT a lack of self-awareness, Louis. It is a complete lack of any ethical concerns on the part of Apple or any profit driven company.
Isn't it just generally understood that corporations are sociopathic?
Damn Louis you have a fantastic PhD in sarcasm, lol.
Keep bashing crapple; they earned it.
Louis, can you please start selling Rossmann Screwdrivers (patent pending) soon? They're currently nowhere to be found, but my 2014 MacBook needs urgent repair, so I cant delay, must buy today.
Are those Rossmann Screwdrivers those Septa-lobe drivers that I've heard so much (nothing) about?
Are they the one's that have lines like "Screw you!" and "Think different." written on them ontop of a logo that resembles an apple, which was stabbed with a screwdriver?
And that aforementioned apple has droplets of juice dripping down the sides from where the entry and exit cavities of the screwdriver running through it are positioned, which begin to form a small pool of juice beneath the penetrated apple as they reach the bottom?
Yeah, I don't think I've ever seen one of those. As far as I know, they only exist in legend.
@@thomaster8870
look wot u dun now , "legendary" screwdrivers cost more you know , now i cannot afford one , oh well , back to prying the machine open with a unlegendary flat blade :-)
@@thomaster8870 Great idea for an independant Apple repair shop.
That video made my day. Not much annoys me more than those who want it both ways. I hope Qualcomm succeed in screwing Apple at least as much as Apple have screwed everyone else.
The Germans have a word for a "face in need of a fist" which I think could apply to Apple "Backpfeifengesicht". A great German word is Shardenfraude which has been been imported into English meaning taking pleasure in someone else's misfortune.
coweatsman as a German Schadenfreude*
Schaden damage Freude joy
coweatsman That's brilliant, we need an English equivalent!
+Vee Eight Nothing better than a good rant.
+whuzzzup "Backpfeifengesicht" is a valid german word.
I imagine Tim Cook covering the ears of one of their customers while shouting: "You're charging us too much for this!"
lol
Tim Cook :Ohhhh my tralala.....umph....my ding ding dong
Tim Cook took a company with some great products and a great brand and turned it into a company with only a great brand.
well: we are sure that apple would forward the price benefit to its costumers, employees and the country that shared their legal point of view - well: Except that they will just increase their own internal intellectual property fee to move the profit off shore.
Lmaooooo
So Qualcomm gets a percentage of the overall price of your device, versus, Apple who gets a percentage of the overall price of your app (for "hosting" your app). Apple is also "legally" allowed to discount your app at will (so you make potentially way less money. Less food for your kids), yet they are able to control the end price of their own products so retailers etc cannot realistically discount their product when they sell it. Apple wants their cake, a piece of your cake, and also sells their old cake at full price.
I like cake.
@@NeuronalAxon
Apple wants a bunch of it too
They have a point but are the wrong entity to complain about it
Exactly
I understand Apple's argument about the retail price. But ya, not paying at all is just stupid and it truly is silly. They really think their shit doesn't stink.
I don't like the licencing model, but that is hardly new. The different prices/licenses for the same software based only on the hardware is commun place in software. Microsoft, VMWare, Oracle, ... all charge licenses based on a per/core basis. The CPU has nothing to do with it, the same software is installed, but they want a bigger piece of the pie.
Then they try to blackmail Qualcom with a Korean law suit. They're like the old gangster movies.
Yeah, I think it's more than ok for qualcomm to take a (fair) percentage (it isn't as high as 10% apple want for MFI) of retail price because for every dollar apple raises their price, they make that more profits from the phone, even including qualcomms percentage. (why shouldn't qualcomm profit more from a more expensive phone when it's thier tech that make the phone an actual phone?) And since Apple are BY FAR the company that makes most profit per phone already, it's the company I feel the least bad for with their disgusting behaviour. I don't understand why people still buy them, I really don't.
when i buy a Rossmann screwdriver (patent pending), can I repair my iMac 2009 whose graphics chip just burned out 2 days ago?
trisymphony I have the same iMac, you'll have to buy another card. And replace it. There's no use in repairing this grafics card.
Pigoath any graphics card you will buy on eBay will be just a oven reheated card. waste of money
Buy a better device...no apple
not gonna bother trying to repair a 9 year old machine with the power of what now fits into a basic NUC. I'm gonna rip the hard drive out and save some components, then throw it in the garbage where it belongs.
it's a 9 years old pc. throw it in the bin!
Not related to the video. I was able to fix a MacBook Pro 2008 and 2010 with your capacitors at you store. I am looking forward to ordering parts from you in the future.
I'm glad to hear it!
Louis Rossmann can u do a video on a cheap 5$ soldering iron .. cuz i work with that at home chinees shit but its kinda good for me
..
demonetized in 3 2 1.... but you do have a valid point..
But apple wants that 50% profit margin on every device... That's all they care about.
their profit margin is more like 500%
Not every video needs to make money.
He was demonetized, yeah, as in every video in his channel. But he doesn't care lol
Hyperspeed1313 i think youtube still roles ads but he doesn't get paid for any of it
it was a joke... youtube tend to demonetised anything that has negative commentary on a business or service.
and Apple will reduce your app from say $10 to $0.99 on sale, still take their 30% profit for "hosting your app", but will gladly still sell 5 year old computers at full retail to the unsuspecting public. Apple is a recipe company, not a true innovator (perhaps their silicon chip business), but everything else is purchased through other companies massive R&D (and risk) budgets, or companies, and their tech, that they bought cheap (or relatively comparatively) to pursue their own goals. Riveted, glued, and poorly ventilated components/products are NOT engineering marvels Apple.
Is it bad that I kinda want Qualcomm to win and block all iPhones
not bad until Apple gets a reasonable CEO which focuses Apple back on tech than profit
Nope
Well who recalls that time when Apple (through Steve Yobs) threatened to completely destroy Android? Cry babies. Hope they get stung hard.
If Apple wins, Qualcomm will try to maintain profitability by punishing their largest licensing customer, MediaTek, which is a company that makes low-cost communication processors that are used in all the phones for poor people. Like sub $100 phones that most of the world uses - India, south America, Russia, China, Africa, those little places. In turn, to maintain RAND condition that allows Qualcomm to serve as part of the standards body, Qualcomm will have to raise prices on their own chips. So you tell me if Apple winning is good or bad news for all of us?
no its good
If it was a flat fee than cheaper phones ($50-$60) won't work so the percentage is better
Defending intel or any other company is also stupid in this war. Intel has been sued and lost for paying shops to not sell AMD laptops back in early Intel Core 2 Duo years.
Intel is one cunt of a company. There's no doubt about that. What they're doing to "combat" AMD's Zen CPU line is insulting to everybody, even themselves lol.
TIL everyone screws everyone over.
Except this has nothing to do with Intel as its up to Apple to pay the license fee not Intel.
actually it was right before c2d, before any core cpu actually, it was during pisstium 4
Qualcomm are just as much as trash as Intel.
Great to see this channel growing. More people need to watch you and learn to repair their products and learn more about this industry.
man i love this, its apples fault the tech industry is overpriced to begin with.
Spriggen 1337 the irony
You can't blame apple for that, consumers are the ones who determine what the value of tech is worth and if the majority of people say "yes, it's ok to charge $1000 for a smartphone" then $1000 is what it's gonna be priced at for the foreseeable future.
Yeah, and rampant marketing and cult behaviour is what makes consumers think it's worth the price, apple fosters that shit like its ambrosia.
apple did start this shit of because with apple u payed for exclusivity, if apple put the apple logo on a brick and named it IBrick then people would buy it, the tech inside of an apple iphone i pre iphone 7 was antiquated in terms of android (Tech and OS)yet they always sold them devices way above the cost of parts, the reason u pay so much to apple is to have that logo its the same with EVERYTHING in the world a £10 pair of trainers (no name brand) vs a £100 named brand pair. who gives a flying fuck if they cost £10 they do the same job and are not attached to a brand like nike or addidas. Fucktards that buy for this reason need shooting.
True, but at the same time, these days it's equally sort of "cool" to hate on apple as people are slowly becoming more aware of how bad of a company they really are and how their "premium" products aren't quite as premium as they lead you to believe, well that plus not being able to get your device repaired at all or scandals such as admitting to bend gate and the slower performance thing a while back, has probably left a bad taste in enough people's mouth to where they're more hesitant to defend apple, so there's still a cult there but the sane people are coming to a realization.
Apple used to be tech oriented. Now it's business oriented.
Dana Yi It has always been about the business
eivis13 .. errr liver cancer?
They have always been very homosexual.
Its the beginning of the end of Apple.
@Martin Jones I think eivis13 meant the first time.
Why should I pay 1000$ for a phone which gonna die/ obsolete after 2 years 😏
I could never quite figure that one out. I can get a better, more easily upgradeable Android phone for cheaper
villavan kothai exactly. Why phone maker crazyly create beast phone with mountain selling price while the battery technology still the same. Battery took huge space in phone and absolutely will decrease performance after 2 years, top. Cost a lot to change the battery or the sparepart availability is none. I'm start to think to buy super cheap elegant smartphone that I can toss out after 1 year and get new one.
Battery technology is a entirely different thing to attempt to tackle. It's about energy density, weight, recharge speed, and power it can deliver. Battery that work based on the chemistry like we use now are not likely going to become much greater then using lithium simply because there is no where to go on the periodic table of elements from lithium. Maybe somehow we develop some artificial complex molecule that is not a anode cathode based chemical battery but works like a super capacitor but seems like the batteries could be potentially electrically lethal then from mishandling and it discharging through someone somehow.
Now hydrocarbon liquid fuels are like 100x more energy dense then the chemical based energy of lithium but I don't see us filling up our smart phones at the local gas station anytime soon.
villavan kothai well then don't buy any flagship phone. An iPhone 6 still works just fine. Believe me because I'm using a 6.
Because it will make people think you have a bigger dick. Sorta like having a stud car. And after two years, you get to buy a another new and improved model for $2000.00. Who could ask for anything more?
Great vid! It was nice hearing your opinion. I loved it. Watching you work in many of your video's prevents me from buying Apple products. Sorry Louis, I will not be using your services...lol
I love these videos... for me it’s like watching Bob Ross because I have zero knowledge as of what you are talking about and as you talk you kinda allow me to be able to understand what is going on and it is so pleasing to hear the enthusiasm and kinda funny voice of yours.
LIKE!! Before the video even started, now that it's over, I wish there was a LOVED button.
Your points are spot on!
Wish there was a grading scale of Love, like, bad and atrocious. I'd definitely click "love" if there were 4 choices.
Just see it this way. Qualcom is not charging more for a modem built into a more expensive. Rather they grant a discount if the modem is used in a cheaper phone. It's something like with student edition software licenses.
One argument in favor of Qualcomm is that their model evenly distribute the impact of the fee... If they do what Apple want, cheap phone will be unfairly taxed and become much more expensive...
Not only that... It's an IP so no marginal cost... It makes no sense for Qualcomm to have a fee that could make a potential phone unprofitable... A lower bound to the fee shouldn't exist.
There's no such problem with an upper bound.. and actually recently they agreed to do just that...
I couldn't have said it better!
I was waiting for a video like this for the past year... Finally someone talking about this ridiculous Apple vs Qualcomm battle.
Apple complains of being overcharged?
Ha!
Touche`.
Louis,you have a great way with words. As a reseller of vintage audio,most mfg do not care what is done with older product. But some do .these mfg would get a great lesson from you. Thank you for caring about open market.
I love a good old Louis rant with ninja sarcasm topping in the morning
Thank you so much for listing your sources!!
Your analysis is right on! "You live by the douchy business model, you die by the douchy business model!" Well put! If only the analysts would bring these issues up.
Unfortunately Apple can argue that its own behavior is irrelevant to the case at hand, and it's right. You can argue one case under one theory and win, then argue the complete opposite theory, with the same judge, on the same day, against the same opponent, and be just as victorious under the rules of evidence. The law is an ass, it has no memory.
Mike Mixer How about using the Unclean hands legal argument? That is "Apple comes before this court as plaintiff while committing related crimes, please throw out the entire case".
80% of people believe in the legal system. 20% have had first hand experience with it. (Sorry for the bad translation of a german saying.)
it has no memory cuz the law didnt wnna pay for apples overpriced storage
John Francis Doe
Right there. Perfect.
American law is just dumb.
I saw you on LTT. Now I am a subscriber. I'm a lawyer in Europe and I think you really nailed the issues.
Bro, love your videos, please rest a bit , you look like you are wearing the Zorro / Robin mask .
He is a hero, it's showing through.
I change oil for a living and I find your videos absolutely fascinating. Keep up the good work and the good fight! Love the new setup.
14:44
Wow Louis your Stuart (Madtv) impression was spot on👏🏻👏🏽👏🏿👏🏻
I love your take on things, you are spot on every time. Even though my current laptop is a MacBook Pro, I'm firmly against Apple's business practices. The iPhone memory cost drives me bonkers, and even though I'm an android user, I cannot get my wife to give up her iPhone. Anyhow, thanks for taking the time to make your videos, I appreciate it.
Been an iPhone user for a long while. My 6s is dying and going by the looks of things I can no longer afford buying new iPhones from what looks like nothing other than an artificial inflation of prices. I’m not complaining because at the end of the day I can only afford what I can afford. Though I will miss iMessage, I am excited see what Android has to offer nowadays.
DonicsM what's so great or superior about iMessage? Maybe when it came out, but nowdays WhatsApp or any other app works fine.
Tsiikki truthfully? nothing. Just fimilliarity.
1 point for Bender, 1 for honesty. Nice to see non brain washed apple users.
DonicsM back in days when there was no WhatsApp or Facebook messenger for most ppl. And we had 100sms per month and over that was cheapest 6.9 eurocents per sms. Now we have unlimited everything including data for 20euros. Only thing if you can send video and data in good quality in iMessage (WhatsApp and messenger sucks in quality).
Don't worry you get used to other apps fast! I did too, I had iPhone 5 when 6(+) came out and I was like price is too high. They upped the price 100€ after every iPhone for 4-4s-5-6.
Tsiikki Was it easyto convince your friends to migrate to Whatsapp? My friends are a bunch of dry vagina douches but I think they’ll do it for me. Lol. Just fucking sad how much Apple have inflated their prices over the years. I’m pretty conviced the only reason the iPhone 8 exists is to jack up the X to high heaven.
You are one my favourite person on RUclips handsdown.
I think in general patent laws and other government red tape have been and are strangling innovation. I'm fine with companies being given some protection as an incentive to be innovators and lead the market in creating new things, but it's a bit on the ridiculous side. The length of patents is too long, the company doesn't have to demonstrate any intent to actually produce a product from the patent. A patent should require an actual functional product, not just a general idea or concept. I'm sure most people remember RIM being sued over the blackberry because some company held a nonsense patent for something as vague as "mobile device that sends and receives emails" with no working prototype or any R&D done to develop one. There are entire companies whose sole mission in life is to file and purchase vague patents, and then sue companies they think might be infringing patents they own. Companies that actually have invested in developing the technology. They frequently win these cases too.
Then of course you have regulations and organizations in charge of controlling industries like the fcc, fda, and many others, where they can create such an atrocious amount of red tape around creating anything new that only a huge company can reasonably run the gauntlet. This is why there are no mom and pop drug companies, it costs many many billions of dollars to get one drug to market. This usually means that if a few brilliant grad students decide to get together after they graduate and make a drug company using whatever funds they can get, loans, cash, trust funds, inheritance, whatever, they will never be able to see their inventions through to the market and reap the benefits. Best case scenario, they invent the cure for cancer, they do some early phases of testing in animals and possibly some early early testing in humans, but before the later phases of testing and licensing begin, they can no longer afford the process and usually sell the patent for a meager amount to a bigger pharmaceutical company that will either shelf it because it would mean less profit than the drugs they're already selling, or they will bring it to market and make hundreds of billions of dollars off of it over time.
Plus any of these organizations can potentially be manipulated to prevent competition. Pay the right person and the start-up with a better product than you can't get their product licensed to sell, and after enough frustration end up just selling the company to a huge conglomerate that will either just take that better product and make it theirs or scrap it. That whole fuss that went on over the price of epipen injectors and inhalers was 100% red tape and regulation created. The actual drug in an epipen is dirt cheap epinephrine. The cost is the auto-injector mechanism, which at the time of the debaucle, epipen was the only approved auto-injector for emergency epinephrine injection licensed for sale in the usa. Meanwhile in europe there were at least 2 competitors, and epipens were cheaper there as well. The FDA created that situation, and while i would love to imagine it was incompetence keeping competitors from getting approved to sell a product obviously deemed safe for use in other 1st world countries, very likely somebody's pockets were being lined to drag their feet or flat out reject them on that project.
The inhalers were slightly different, the drug companies were told they needed to change the inhalers to a more environmentally friendly propellant in the little bottle. The actual medicine didn't change. This required the drug companies to go through the entire R&D and licensing procedure all over again, so the price of an inhaler went from like $5 to like $65. People blamed the drug companies(who i'm sure found a way to benefit from this nonsense as well, i'm not saying they're wholly innocent by default) but it was really tree hugging hippies that made it so poor people struggle to afford inhalers.
People have the tendency to think of regulation as all that is keeping the consumer safe from big bad corporations but it seems like more often the regulation is anti-consumer itself. I mean really, we have the courts for a reason. If a company sells you a bad product that causes harm, you and everyone else harmed can sue, either class action or individually, and the company will end up likely having to pay out. That in and of itself is a regulating affect on any industry. If a company dumps chemicals in a river that ruins the river for a time, every city downstream from there, and every individual with a connection to the river, can sue, and the settlements should cover cleanup and stand as a deterrent to anyone else for doing it. Why do we need an epa? Because people don't want to take any personal responsibility for anything as far as staying informed and taking action, so they'd rather big daddy government step in and moderate everything like an overly involved playground monitor that is constantly shouting "no shoving!" while you play tag.
If a fracking company poisons a river in a small poor town in the rust belt even if the whole town got together they'd likely not be able to afford the level of court case would proceed. The fracking company would also probably fly in a endless amount of "experts" to advise how its not an issue or not their fault. The court system is fairly dirty and pretty corrupt at its core in the US and a deep level of investigation and "expert analysis" is required to prove in the preponderance of evidence that its the fracking company that is at fault (considering that they will definitely have there own "experts") these "experts" know the game and know their value in such court cases. Hence their time and statements to a court become pretty expensive for the average person.
@@kms50549 In your hypothetical scenario apparently the concept of working pro bono doesn't exist and there are no volunteer organizations or individuals, not even ones in it for the tax write off. Expert witness can come from a lot of sources. There are tons of environmentalist professors that would gladly volunteer to take samples, use University equipment to test it, and provide expert witness testimony. Is there a chance that they wouldnt win? Sure, of course. However 10s of thousands of successful lawsuits against big organizations by small groups and individuals say it is definitely possible. Just 3 individuals a while back won over 100 million in settlements from Johnson and Johnson claiming baby powder gave them ovarian cancer. The preponderance of evidence in those cases were incredibly weak and they won anyway.
Yes courts can be corrupted but so can any government entity including the EPA. Ultimately the EPA or other alphabet soup agencies have no teeth without their parent branch of government and the other 2.
In general if something doesn't work, fix it. If the judiciary is corrupt, fix it. The EPA would have a hard time operating without a functional judiciary anyway.
Very nice and clear resume. Reason for why I continue to watch this channel! 😊
Louis, the rules are for us.....not them
obviously, and thats what Louis fights against, because if u dont fight for your rights, you will lose them.
What kind of mic are you using Louis?
That was your best rant ever!
Under current conditions, I simply don't like Apple's business practices. I've watch your videos for a while. I have never seen such a company like Apple. I simply will NOT use them. I agree with your right to repair. I appreciate your videos. I agree with your videos. I simply will not purchase Apple.
"You're conducting business wrong."-Apple 2018
How true, how true...Thank you Louis for pointing these hidden things that the company does. I hope they get back on the right track for their sake.
That's why I have always refused to buy apple products and after the S3 stopped buying Samsung.
Xiaomi all the way now.
Having a percentage makes sense though. For the budget manefacturer making $200 phones, that say 10% fee is smaller and lets them do that. But if you charge 10% of an apple phone's price to that budget manefacturer suddenly their phone costs way more. Qualcomm recognise they're only a part of the phone so they only want a part of the money but they also don't want to get screwed by picking a number like $20 and then in 50 years when a milk shake is $400, basically being screwed by getting $20 for each $50,000 apple phone.
I'd say percentage is fairest for all involved.
Don't all ARM devices pay licensing fee's to ARM? Including Qualcom and Intel
:) the awesome youtube personality that is Rossman! I love the sincerity of this channel :D
Intellectual property....pffft, If you sell me a device I own said device period and can do anything I want to it. Does that mean I am gonna take programming off the device and try to reverse engineer it and compete with the device manufacturer, no. That is what patents and copyrights are for. But any patent or copyright does not mean I can't take a device apart and or send receive any part of it through mail or shipping PERIOD. So do I think Apple needs knocked down a peg, most certainly.
if u reverse engineering it u steal my intellectual property because i sell device to use. And if I tell u pay me 50percent Msrp, u can agree or gtfo. But If u use my technology i sue u because u steal my IP
You see this is not a debate or otherwise. Fact 1: If you sell me something I own it period, you exchanged an object for payment, the deal is done you own what I give you and I own what you gave me. It does not matter if its an intellectual or physical item. Just because some companies have tried to pull this crap in a grey area in law does mean what they say is fact. And the big eye opener for them is going to be handed to them on a silver platter soon. If enough people just stand up and say enough is enough it will never have to go to law.
Low IQ post. You can talk when you create something worth stealing.
If I purchase the use of that IP by buying a product which contains it, then I have the right to continue using that IP by buying replacement parts. From anyone I choose.
@@ErikID142 Low IQ comment. You can talk when you own a repair business.
Louis.. being real is the best thing you carry with you on a daily basis.. The shit you talk about interests me because i can relate with the realism you preach.. Apple never wanted to be a company that connects with other companies, they always wanted to stand alone, so my advice is to allow them to stand alone, completely alone until they realise what they have done
Just want to point out Apples storage options since the 6S are expensive partly because they're greedy but also because they're onboard single chip NVME based solutions that are many times faster than SD card based options.
This is a good point and I'm glad you covered it since I missed it. However, at the same time, Apple's storage options have been over market pricing since the dawn of the original iPhone.
yeah but you don't want the OS on the SD card they can still have internal memory like any other phone.
Danny War Robots UFS was definitely not as fast back then. I can't be bothered to check how fast it is nowadays because I don't care enough about this argument but back when the 6S came out it benchmarked twice as fast in read speeds and more than five times faster in write. I'm not saying they don't price gouge but they're less evil in recent years at least regarding storage, theirs was market leading in performance //at that time// and I'm sure it wasn't cheap to implement so higher prices make sense.
Ok its faster but still u cannot just popup another storage, apps on internal storage but exceed files on external. Make photo ok, one four twelve but why u must store on internal storage, spotify etc sdxc have enough speed to listen from. make 4k video in 100fps
I'd argue that the price structure for this ultra-critical property is _very_ fair - and its _contributing_ to innovation in the mobile / smartphone space - not the other way around. Its about as "fair" a price (structure) as it gets - considering they're not really paying for a physical chip here. This allows newcomers in the space, startups and smaller companies making / selling less ridiculously expensive devices, to pay a percentage licence fee for current-gen tech. That way, their devices can actually be functionally relevant/up to date on the telecom-side and thus have at least _a change_ to compete in the market, especially when it comes to the lower end.
Had Qualcomm opted for a per-unit _defined_ price instead, those newcomers and low-end models would be crushed under the weight of that _defined_ price, as it (defined unit price) of course would (have to) evolve and adapt/adjust to stay reasonable and profitable in a market dominated by high-end, expensive devices (in the _western markets,_ average pricetag on sold smartphones pr Q3-4 2018, is near the 600 USD mark).
As a hypothetical (very simplified) example: 5% on a $1000 phone is $50. Its a significant amount, but it still leaves $950 on Apple's table, of which *_$578.75_* (Iphone X) is Apple's _gross_ sales profit. If you made that a defined price, no one would be able to survive in making and selling a low-end $100-150 model.
Apple is in this position as a *_direct, hard-linked consequence_* of their own choice to massively overprice their devices. They have every opportunity to reduce the $ amount paid to Qualcomm, by reducing their profit margin. This is jus one of those ways that grossly overcharging for something, tends to eventually bite you in the ass. Especially when that something, is something you didn't make.
So I also have to thank Tim Cook for contributing to ousting president Park? What a world we live in.
By the way, I love these types of videos keep up the good work!
Apple: from "be different" to "do exactly what we say"
Very good points, please do more videos like this please, I love your logic.
Why should i pay more taxes, just because i earn more money? Well ... thats how percentage fees work! And Apple accepted those fees in the first place!
I absolutely love his commentary style.
Qualcomm is a company I hate just as much as Apple, so I'm not sure who I want to root for in this situation.
Invidious Ignoramus Just root both.
Also many others that copy apple
can i just hope they take each other out?
Invidious Ignoramus Well.. hope is the last to die, hold into it. I hope that this really happens to them too.
If that is the situation sit back and enjoy.
Autistic Giraffe - lol, you mean the same Intel that stuck with 4 core chips for how long? Qualcomm is a cancer on the mobile industry and with as much as I hate Apple i hope they win and take those retards down a few pegs. Fuck their garbage chips. It's pretty obvious how much they're hated when Google, Samsung, and Apple are all suing them.
I read the title as, "Apple's beef w/ Guacamole & why I find it hilarious."
Two cronies trying to outcrony each other. If Apple had it their way, then they would be a public utility, and all competition would be outlawed.
Fantastic to listern to Intellegent debate, thank you, so I will subscribe and await the next instalment
It'd be interesting to see how they structured the licensing contract. It does seem BS because Intel would have to pay QC for their patents then charge Apple for using the same patents implemented in a chipset unless it's a separate patent that Apple has to use that isn't a part of the chipset.
Maybe its a software patent rather than hardware? But I agree, its rather confusing as you would expect the chip manufacturer to pay for the patent rather than the device manufacturer.
Agree, Qualcomm is another evil company than is another huge IP bully, no less than Apple.
Qualcomm's licensing model allows them to get paid for their foundational research (and a lot of committee lobbying, mostly that probably) while charging pennies for devices that mere mortals across the world use. The $100 phones. This is RAND compliant since the likes of MediaTek can undercut Qualcomm's offerings while still making use of their patents. And that's something Apple doesn't want you to have, Apple wants to carry a lower burden at the cost of everyone else.
Motolav The Intel chips probably come with an "License for non-Intel patents not included" sticker. Simple as that. The patents are on specific ways to deal with radio waves, so not really software patents. Someone can theoretically build a cellphone with generic chips, just like Qualcomm did when inventing the stuff. The license fee would be the same.
Perfect conclusion, absolutely agree with your opinion on it Louis.
Too bad apple pay the fees like everybody else
Louis, my man, keep on keepin' on! I share in your savoring of the irony here. Let them fall upon each other like wolves.
here's your misunderstanding, they don't really care about logic and stuff, lawsuit is another way to gain massive profit and thats about it
I really enjoy these informative talks
the only problem with monopoly is that it corners the market, apple should either make there own modem chips and spend decades on RnD and alot of cash or outright BUY QUALCOM, but if apple did this they might kill all competition like android smart devices.
Spriggen 1337 they are absolutely not interested in buying Qualcomm, their SoC's are way ahead of Qualcomm's, and I don't see apple interested in network communication or semiconductor development (outside their apple A processors)
As I understand it Qualcomm own patents for 3G/4G technology, so it wouldn't matter if Apple made their own chip, for it to be 3G/4G compatible they would still need to pay Qualcomm.
if thats the case then how can they have a monopoly on something they own, if qualcomm has patented 3g and 4g then they can charge what they want regardless
RnD = Research and development
Apple seems quite dependent on Qualcomm wireless modem technology, but the US government probably would not approve the buyout.
With that voice-over @12:47
You'll be perfect for the role of Joker.
i wonder, how frequent Rossmann give his middle finger when he walk pass through apple store cross the street..
Probably not much, seeing Boss-man makes a living fixing A LOT of defective apple products.
Their shitty tech makes him earn a lot
Anger and hatred on shitty thousand dollar products that got abysmal repairability is well placed.
MegaChickenPunch if he hates apple so much and down want to lose money because of repairing apple defect product he would not make anti apple video at all u dmbass...he doesnt support apple ways of getting money because apple is greedy as fuck..if u support a company like that is shows how your mindset is.
My new Hero! You should have got that spot on 9th! Keep up the good work.
How Apple influenced (unknowingly) the downfall of the Korean Government.
Louis is setting a new standard for framing videos. I thought it awkward at first, but then deemed it as artistic.
I guess the next step for Apple is to buy Qualcomm.
I don't think Qualcomm would accept *any* deal from Apple...
Great point of view brother. Totally agree.
Omg, I was listening at 1.5x and 14:43-14:50 happened XD.
Wtf man😂😂 louis chipmunk
I haven't seen any apple branded stove,fridge, microwave, washers, dryers, im wondering if so called apple innovation will ever have this going.
One thing that is left out. Intel paying Qualcom to use their IP. So Qualcom is double dipping
Niya Blake Are you sure Intel actually pays for the use in those chips? Industry practice may be that Intel gets to sell those chips cheaper by not including the patent license.
Yes Intel license qualcom IP . They only way intel gets out of not paying is if they do cross license patents . Right now intel does not have any thing that qualcom wants.
Niya Blake I'm not saying Intel isn't licensing _some_ Qualcomm IP. I'm suggesting that the specific Intel chips bought by Apple might not include a prepaid license for at least some of the Qualcomm patents Apple uses in iPhones with Intel modern chips. Otherwise that would be a completely different and much more reasonable argument that Apple has seemingly not used.
To be fair SD cards are becoming a rarity on Android phones as well and the handling of external memory on many devices is more clunky than it needs to be.
Martin King I hope Qualcomm brings the hammer down on them too cause I feel Google is purposely left the SDcard slot in, but smade using the SDcard Slot difficult to use so people would be frustrated & upgrade.
1. Every OS after Kitkat (OS4) has SDCard problem & Marshmellow's Adoptive Storage is gone (ENCRYPTS YOUR SDCARD & sucks if your phone breaks) >>> We have larger phones with 2 Sim Card Slots & CLOUD STORAGE (Google 1 App), but NO DUAL SDCARD SLOTS (1st for OS & 2nd for USER)
2. 4 newer OS faster than IceCreamSandwich to Kitkat and all have SDCard problems
Louis you look tired as hell, get some sleep bby
You look tired af
Abdur Rafi Trash talking Apple for the good of the people is tiring, don’t you know?! Anytime I need a good laugh I come read this comment section. Sad part is, those who wish for Apples demise seem to forget the impact it would have on the economy of a number of countries. Eh, negative comments/videos helps feed the likes/views whores. 😂😂
Nobody sane wishes Apple's demise. People just want Apple to use business practices which actually do not screw the customer over and over. Is that too much to ask?
yosuhara Nah, not at all. My problem is those who haven’t ever owned a single Apple product (also not having tried any with an open mind) spewing contemptuous sophomoric hate. At least use the products, and don’t just because someone works on them, jump on the bandwagon of every sign of impropriety whether the situation was self inflicted because of ones smugness or an actual issue with Apple. Honestly, Apple definitely has issues, but I don’t think they are any worse than any other company. I have heard countless horror stories regarding other companies (regarding their computers in particular), but they never seem to gain traction in the same way they do when it’s Apple. IDK iOS 12 & Mojave seem as though they are going to be a “going back to their roots” type situation, so all we can do is hope.
Your thoughts on Apple, also over a couple of other videos you made, really changed my mind. I never was a fanboy and never will, but it is a really interesting topic. Thx
First off, why don't you compare what say Motorola pays Qualcomm for a $200 phone using the same chipset as the one in the iPhone? It after all serves the same function in both devices.
No other FRAND licensor does what Qualcomm does.
Image what would've happened to the internet if ethernet transceiver users had to pay a percentage of the computers they went in to - computer makers refused to pay a buck-and-a half or so for IEEE-1394 ports because it was too expensive.
No one licensing FRAND technology embedded in a standard should be allowed to tithe the entire device - and I'm still pissed that Qualcomm was allowed to participate in 5G after their antics.
BTW, it's not just Apple who'd like to see the backside of Qualcomm - just about every phone maker out there feels that Qualcomm is practicing legalized extortion on the entire industry. And while you're looking in that, look up "patent exhaustion" while you're at it - Qualcomm's practice of charging everyone up the ladder is contrary to US law.
Qualcomm charges Intel a license fee for the IP going into their modems, then it charges Apple a license fee for the chipset, then it tries to charge Apple a license fee for the total cost of the phone. And it does so for every other manufacturer in an overt attempt to kill competition (though if you use Qualcomm modems you just have the last two to contend with). With every other IP holder, the manufacturer of the component pays a license fee to use the IP and there is no other license collected.
You may not like Apple, and you can buy their devices or not, but in this case I really think you've picked to wrong club to wield.
Apple takes a 30% cut off a $100 app or a $0.99 app. Same shit, different pile. Designing chips/fabrication is a much more involved (and risky) business, than hosting a few apps
Go Qualcomm! Even though you've literally patented a standard technology, I live for moments like this!
You're wrong louis ! Apple doesn't have a monopoly on mobile phones, if you don't justify spending money over a 256gb phone then buy another phone with an sd card. nobody is forcing you to pay anything to apple in order for you to own a smartphone. While apple is forced to pay qualcomm as it's having monopoly on mobile modems. While qualcomm has the right to protect it's patents and charge for them that doesn't give them the power to charge 256gb iPhone more than 32gb ones. The consumer has a choice when it comes to choosing a smartphone, Apple doesn't when it comes to qualcomm.
People have a choice but dumb people still buy iphones.. Smarter consumer should educate them..if your kids are an asshole bcause they friended an asshole you as an adult that understand that attitude is negative should EDUCATE your child not just leave them be with their wrong choices that they make.now do u understand??
I love when you angrily do funny voices
Keep dropping that info bro. Swampy!!
Very well said Louis!
Qualcomm and Apple settled last week and very damning information was revealed of how Apple had been plotting for years to hurt Qualcomm. I'd very interested for your coverage and analysis on that topic. Thank you.
Like this format!
That sounds perfectly reasonable. I feel so bad for Jessa loosing all those screens. That is a very shi**y thing Apple is doing that's completely wrong.