Image source: @VisualChina
Text | Ray Technology leitech
Who can fix iPhone signal problems?
Not Qualcomm, not Intel, it's Broadcom.
What is curious is whether Broadcom can save Apple from fire and water and help it find its way on the road of self-developed baseband?
Broadcom, Apple's "savior"?
Broadcom, born in 1961, was formerly SPG, the semiconductor products division spun off from Hewlett-Packard. In the following decades, Broadcom acquired a number of well-known companies in the field of communications, covering wireless/wired communications, multimedia chips and storage.
In 2016, Broadcom, which is in a period of transition, sold its IoT business unit, which includes the IoT product line and related intellectual property for Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and Zigbee technologies. In 2017, Broadcom initiated the acquisition of Qualcomm Semiconductor, but was rejected by the other party on the grounds that the price was not suitable.
Broadcom and Apple have a long history of cooperation, from the iPhone 3G period, Broadcom has provided it with wireless solutions including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and FM RF chips. Since then, the two sides have maintained a good cooperative relationship.
In addition to the iPhone, Broadcom also provides network card components and wireless network technology for MacBooks, such as the famous "AirDrop", which is partly credited by Broadcom.
But in fact, as one of the world's top ten chip design companies, Broadcom focuses more on the development of digital and mixed-signal CMOS devices and RF components, and its business covers set-top boxes, broadband access, telecommunications equipment, smart phones and base stations.
In the 5G era, the thin-film acoustic wave resonator chip designed by Broadcom has become the optimal solution in mobile communications. Thin-film acoustic wave resonators (FBARs) are part of an RF system that helps mobile devices connect to mobile networks, while baseband chips are responsible for signal processing and protocol processing.
When it comes to Apple's slow progress on the "self-developed baseband", in fact, the biggest problem is the constraint of patents. At present, Qualcomm, as one of the semiconductor companies with the most 5G patents in the world, is also Apple's largest supplier, and the cooperation between the two parties is limited to the purchase of hardware. This means that if Apple succeeds in "self-developed baseband", Qualcomm will reduce hardware orders from Apple, and profits will also decline.
Broadcom, which has also made achievements in the field of 5G, is exactly the "partner" that Apple needs, and with its patent and technical advantages, it may be able to make a breakthrough in the "self-developed baseband".
"Self-developed baseband", why is it so difficult?
Apple is determined to "self-developed baseband", which is actually not unrelated to Qualcomm.
In the iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS periods, Apple chose to find the old communications company Infineon to provide baseband, but with the advent of the 4G era, Infineon's relatively backward technology and narrow coverage of the frequency band were eliminated by Apple.
It is Qualcomm who takes over the related business.
Since the iPhone 4, Qualcomm has taken on most of the iPhone's baseband, and to the iPhone 5S, we can no longer find baseband chips provided by other brands on the iPhone. Logically speaking, Qualcomm is developing rapidly in the field of communications, and the technology is also quite advanced, and Apple cooperates with Qualcomm to basically no longer need to worry about the baseband problem.
The problem is that Apple needs to pay Qualcomm an exclusive fee of $1 billion a year, in addition, each iPhone sold also has to pay Qualcomm an additional fee of 5% of the selling price, which is called a "patent licensing fee". In order to ensure that each iPhone is properly profitable, Apple can only think of other ways to "dilute the high patent fees".
So Apple found Intel, which had just acquired Infineon.
In fact, everyone knows more about the latter things, the iPhone using Intel baseband has been criticized by consumers, and Apple has no choice but to repair the old with Qualcomm. But the problem is not solved, and Apple still has to pay high patent licensing fees.
Realistically speaking, Qualcomm, which holds a large number of patents, will not support Apple's "self-developed baseband", after all, from the perspective of the agreement, the "patent licensing fee" sold by the iPhone is the bulk of Apple's expenditure, if Apple does not use Qualcomm's baseband chip, it obviously does not have to pay this fee.
In addition to the patent being "stuck in the neck", in fact, Apple's "self-developed baseband" also has many technical problems that need to be solved. Wang Xiaolong, research director of Xinmou Consulting, once said that designing baseband chips is not as simple as imagined, high speed, large throughput, and smooth upward and downstream, these are all 5G baseband must be considered. In addition, although 5G has been very popular, the baseband can not only support the 5G protocol, but also 2G, 3G, 4G networks, which involve more patent and technical issues.
For Apple, the "self-developed baseband" project must be meaningful, such as cheaper cost, better performance, if any of these requirements cannot be met, then its birth is just a waste of money.
At present, Apple holds hands with Broadcom, at least some patent preferential treatment, as well as technical support for 5G RF chip design, but it seems to be more difficult to bypass 5G patent bosses such as Qualcomm and Samsung.
Qualcomm President Cristiano Amon revealed during MWC 2023 that Apple's first "self-developed baseband" may begin production in 2024 and be officially commercialized in 2025. But Qualcomm still provides Apple with at least 20% of its baseband chips in 2025.
In this way, Apple may have found the right direction of "self-developed baseband".
How far is Apple from "full self-research"?
The same situation also appears in some of Apple's "semi-self-developed" products, such as camera sensors customized with Sony and supermagnetic glass-ceramic developed in cooperation with Corning.
Of course, in addition to the "lack of performance", for Apple, the core key is price.
Since entering the "Liu Haiping" era, Apple's pricing on the iPhone has stabilized, just like the iPhone 11 to the iPhone 14, and their basic starting prices have not changed much. But the purchase price of design, manufacturing and parts is constantly rising, such as the XDR display panel that debuted on the iPhone 12, which is much more expensive than the previous generation.
If core components such as chips, basebands, and sensors can all be independently developed, the manufacturing price will be reduced accordingly. In addition, the design ability is in your own hands, and you can also avoid being "stuck in the neck" of some partners, which is also a risk that needs attention to Apple, which is a huge market demand.
But for now, Apple wants to achieve the core component "full self-development", at least after 2025.
Write at the end
But the "self-developed baseband" is still different, after all, Infineon has exposed many defects before it was acquired by Intel, and there has never been any progress under the guidance of Intel's professional team, and even harmed a generation of "magic machine" iPhone 11. To put it simply, Apple itself acquires a "not very good" team, and it is a bit difficult to expect them to quickly build a decent product.
However, the play is not finished, and no one knows how it will end. Maybe after Apple cooperates with Broadcom, can it really make a decent "self-developed baseband"?