“With Intel’s purchase of the wireless communications unit of Germany-based Infineon Technologies, the world’s largest chipmaker gets inside Apple’s iPhone 4, with a Infineon’s radio chip used by the smartphone juggernaut,” Melly reports. “The deal, at $1.4 billion in cash, is much smaller than its proposed purchase two weeks ago of security software player McAfee for $7.68 billion. It’s a smaller move, but definitely smarter, traders said.”
Melloy reports, “The stock traded down today despite the perception by many that they got a good price. Some analysts worried if a bigger foray into mobile phones would hurt margins. After all, Apple isn’t known to be the friendliest of partners. Just ask AT&T.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple has repeatedly refused to publicly criticize their carrier partner’s rather glaring network issues. That is not unfriendly. If anything, Apple is far too friendly to AT&T. Perhaps Melloy means that the sheer weight of Apple’s insanely popular devices has served to inadvertently shine a glaring spotlight on AT&T’s piece of shit network, making the carrier look lazy, inept, greedy, and cheap?
Apples actions will speak way louder than words when they send iPhone to different carriers.
“Just ask AT&T?”
MDN is right. I cannot remember any time that Apple was anything but a good partner for AT&T. Is he referring to Apple’s ending of the exclusivity contract or that the iPhone has put overwhelming demand on AT&T’s network?
Apple’s, that is.
“the world’s largest chipmaker gets inside Apple’s iPhone 4,”
Intel only wants people to use Intel chips. No more Nvidia chip sets.
I can see Intel changing Infineon’s radio chip to only work with Intel cpus.
Trying to force companies to use Intel cpus the way they are forced to used Intel integrated graphics (that suck compared to Nvidia)
Why didn’t Apple buy them?
Smart move by Intel. If it can’t innovate its way into the mobile device market, it needs to buy its way in. This is too big of a market to miss out on.
Apple has been a great partner to ATT, and vice versa. Yes, the network is the glaring problem for the iPhone, but the move to data-demanding mobile devices happened far, far faster than anyone anticipated once the iPhone came out. Demands on networks, even WiFi, has far exceeded most estimates. ATT needed to move faster to build up its network, but its not as easy as simply slapping up a few more towers. Verizon would not have fared any better, nor Sprint nor T-Mobile (the latter two may have been worse than ATT due to their size and financial troubles).
Not excusing ATT, but the iPhone really boosted ATT’s sales and customer retention rates, as well as stressing their network (the iPhone certainly exposed the holes in ATT’s coverage). Apple has gone WAY out of its way to praise ATT and state that ATT has been a good partner, which it has, because it took a leap of faith to sign on to carry the iPhone without having seen it first, and to initially try a very different compensation model.
So, how long before Apple finds an alternate vendor to Infineon?
paddywack,
Not soon I wouldn’t think. Apple strives to source -the best- it can for it’s products. As long as Infineon continues to be the best available, apple will continue to use them. I think intel’s ownership will be a positive thing, unless they maneuver the product in an attempt to leverage their other products. (ie a “lock in” to the new intel mobile processor family. If they did that (not saying they are going to try) I think then apple would look else ware, as the product offered would no longer represent “the best” available.
I would think apple would have preferred to use an off the shelf (intel) processor in the iPhone, except for the suckitude (yes that is a technical term) of the processors available.
So Intel learned from M$: innovate with money!
I just hope Intel doesn’t try to force customers to use the Atom chips with the Infineon chips like they have done with their integrated graphics “solutions.”
What bizlaw said. Apple may be a difficult partner, but AT&T is better off than before the partnership started. Compare that to MS, which is an easier parter, up to the moment they backstab their partner and drive them out of business.
I keep hearing “AT&T” is Apple’s iPhone Achilles heel, yet as someone who suffered mightily under Verizon’s “nickel and dime even the penny” approach for 4 years, after switching to an iPhone 1.0 on it’s B-Day, all I can say is “GOOD RIDDANCE VERIZON”.
My coverage is better under ATT, my plan is better under ATT, my customer service is better under ATT and there’s no way in hell I’d go back even if iPhone were released for that 1980’s, bass-akward network and company.
Give me 15 minutes extra and I’ll tell you how I really feel
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
give me 15 mins u sir are speak with crooked mouth U GET WATH U PAY FOR att for 3 yrs no phone at work or home go back to ur office at A fuc.kinig TT have a nice day
I has no network issue with At&t. Friends on other networks have problems themselves. This isn’t a carrier issue, it is an industry issue. Other countries (like korea) have a robust telecom network, no contract plans and very affordable rates. Why are we behind?
@thethirdshoe
I dont think you understand why ARM is so dominant in smartphones and other small devices. It owns the intellectual property that is at the centre of an entire product develpment cycle. That sub-culture has adopted ARM (as opposed to MIPS or other competitors) because, going back 10 or more years, it had the right technology, the right support tools and the right licensing and royalties models. Intel cannot simply swap cores and expect the rest of the $zillion economy to say – er, OK Intel, we’ll put everything on hold whilst you play catch up . If Infineon changes core then Apple will simply shop elsewhere. Intel might as well just flush $1.4 billion down the toilet.