“Apple and Qualcomm have been in a heated dispute for the last two years, and now Apple is taking another small jab at the company by opening up jobs that seem to be designed to grab employees from the chipmaking gian,” Jacob Kastrenakes reports for The Verge.
“Bloomberg spotted that Apple has opened 10 job listings this month for chipmaking positions in San Diego. That’s where Qualcomm is based, and according to the report, Apple has never searched for chip engineers there before,” Kastrenakes reports. “It’s notable that Apple is targeting Qualcomm at the very same time that it’s trying to move away from something Qualcomm does best: modems.”
“Apple completely dropped Qualcomm for its latest iPhones, choosing instead to get modems from Intel,” Kastrenakes reports. “That said, Bloomberg reports seeing job listings focused on a variety of technologies, including LTE and 5G, but also Bluetooth and AI, so this could be more than just a way to boost Apple’s cellular performance.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: We’d answer our headline, but we can’t stop laughing, plus we’re too dizzy from watching Apple’s A12, A12X, and, for that matter, 2017’s A11/X run rings around Qualcomm’s latest Slothdraggin dreck.
SEE ALSO:
iPad Pro video editing performance takes less than one-third of the time vs. MacBook Pro – November 7, 2018
What Apple’s iPad Pro enables matters more than what it replaces – November 7, 2018
New iPad Pro benchmarks blow away Windows PCs – November 5, 2018
Laptop Mag reviews Apple’s new 12.9-inch iPad Pro: ‘The most powerful mobile device ever made’ – November 5, 2018
The Verge reviews the new iPad Pro: Apple’s approach to iOS is holding back powerful hardware in serious ways – November 5, 2018
John Gruber reviews Apple’s new iPad Pro: ‘A better value than any MacBook Apple has ever made’ – November 5, 2018
Apple iPad Pro’s A12X chip has no real rivals; it delivers performance unseen on Android tablets – November 1, 2018
5G? Tell that to all the birds who have died passing through the 5G microwaves. We are next.
Funny, all those birds that have died passing through a wireless standard that hasn’t been implemented, may never be implemented, and is only in the draft stage.
There must be millions of birds dead already from just reading the Draft standard.
Here’s a link to a discussion in July of this year:
http://www.microwavejournal.com/blogs/23-5g-and-beyond-national-instruments/post/30732-is-5g-really-done
5G is exponentially stronger than its predecessors, and its long term effects on mammals has not been studied so humans would be the test animals.
M-M-muh Makk Daywee Neeuz
Your headlines are juvenile and insulting.
The actual Verge headline is “Apple targets Qualcomm employees with new job listings”
Also, many people would prefer not to work for limp dick Cook.
Butthurt Qualcomm boy who got rejected by Apple above.
Aww, poor widdle Qualcomm employee and/or someone who settled for a crappy Android handset with a Qualcomm processor.
MDN’s headline is a funny joke. Almost as funny as these benchmarks:
Geekbench single-core:
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 w/Apple A12X Bionic – 5,020
Apple iPhone XS w/Apple A12 Bionic – 4,823
Apple iPhone X w/Apple A11 Bionic – 4,256
Huawei Mate 20 Pro w/Kirin 980 – 3,291
Snapdragon 8150 – 3,181
Google Pixel 3 XL w/Snapdragon 845 – 2,363
Geekbench multi-core:
Apple iPad Pro 12.9 w/Apple A12X Bionic – 18,217
Apple iPhone XS w/Apple A12 Bionic – 11,472
Apple iPhone X w/Apple A11 Bionic – 10,215
Snapdragon 8150 – 10,084
Huawei Mate 20 Pro w/Kirin 980 – 9,712
Google Pixel 3 XL w/Snapdragon 845 – 8,088
Why do I get the feeling that Geekbench will win App of the year on iOS?
Most frequently used too.
“Why an iPhone?”
“Because it runs Geekbench the best”
iPhones normally run rings around Android phones in real world tests too. You’ve got a hard argument to make if you want to say Apple’s mobile chips aren’t more powerful than the rest of the industry.
You have a hard argument defending the cross platform capabilities of Geekbench. Run a cpu on the same OS, JVM, and the same hardware, then talk. Oh wait… you can’t….
Real world tests are the best indicator. It’s a fair fight that way. Isn’t that what you wanted? iPhone normally crushes the competitors in real world use. I’m sure there are exceptions but those would be, you know, exceptions.
The iPhone doesnt anything off an Sd card at all. Same for unallowed programs.
Never mind being tied to one company for everything. Will guarantee you I will NEVER run symbolic math, finite element analysis, QM, or simulations on my phone. Not just me either.
That’s for the desktop, where it belongs, if not on modern supercomputers. This does inspire an interesting question… how fast do many thousand cpu clusters run Geekbench?
Move the goalposts much? I said “You’ve got a hard argument to make if you want to say Apple’s mobile chips aren’t more powerful than the rest of the industry.”
I’m right.
Does Apple’s mobile chip in an iPhone outperform a supercomputer cluster? No. Nobody said that. Nobody would ever say that.
Next you’ll say “rest of the industry” means the entire tech industry. Anyone with any sense at all knows we’re all talking about mobile performance.
Apple is far ahead of the rest of the mobile industry when it comes to chips. That’s a fact. You like facts right?
I said defending cross platform benchmarks… so much for real world.
Then we agree that Apple’s mobile chips are leading the industry and are much more powerful than competitors.
It’s not possible to agree or disagree, there are no “oranges to oranges” tests.
You could legitimately argue about performance of what’s available to complete a task to the same level of difficulty based on what’s available. That, you can do, but it’s not a true measure of raw cpu performance, which even if better (maybe) we don’t quantitatively know how much better.
The only way to do that, really, is to have identical machines, under the same OS, the same libraries, same compilers, etc… which is impossible.
Then you have the matter of ARM doing better on RISC type tasks versus Intel doing better on CISC type tasks. Bottom line, for a phone or tablet it’s more about mobility over compute. Most of the time, you’re only as fast as your internet connection on these devices.
I have to give you a slow clap for that epic apologist dodge. Apple’s mobile chips can’t be said to be more powerful than other mobile chips because there’s no way to compare. Wow.
First of all, Apple has the hubris, using Geekbench, to claim it beats PC Chips.
Then, you’re right, there’s no way to know whether and how much it beats other chips. Not without a reference system that’s basically impossible. There is fast enough though.
If Geekbench became less a neutral arbiter of performance, I’m sure the companies that were negatively affected would point that out.
What wins converts is real facts and evidence rather than unsubstantiated snark. For a self-labeled cynic, you’re not doing a very good job. Why not give yourself a valid name, AppleNaysayer? Better yet, why hide behind a fake name? Why not use a real name?
I’m suspicious of Geekbench because it seems it’s disproportionally favoring lesser Intel processor models. I don’t care as much about mobile performance, where the benefit is mobility.
PS- I use the screen name to be honest and transparent of my AppleNaysayer outlook. Is Apple honest they are bullshiting?
The name has a history and a reputation, however you choose to take it. Is KenC your real name btw…?
Yes, I’ve always used my real name and my real picture.
@Kenc
You’re allright…!