• meseek #2982
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    They can’t. Not now anyway as clearly stated in the article they have licensed aptX. Patents and whatnot likely won’t let them push their own for a couple of years. I’m surprised Apple doesn’t develop their own alternative to BT. They always complain it’s the biggest bottleneck in getting high quality anything over the air.

    • Natanael@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Unless the contract they signed says otherwise, there’s nothing stopping you from swapping out bits and pieces even when you have a license for a collection of patents like for bluetooth components. Sony does it!

      • meseek #2982
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It has nothing to do with hardware. It’s a codec. That Qualcomm owns.

        • Natanael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          So what? Qualcomm owns the Qualcomm codec patent. Old news.

          However, Bluetooth explicitly allows you to add support for custom codecs on both ends, so Apple can ignore the existence of the Qualcomm codec and use their own.

          Sony is literally already doing that in both their smartphones and headphones with LDAC

          Apple has AAC

          • meseek #2982
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Not how patents work. Clearly if Apple didn’t need Qualcomm, they couldn’t have signed the deal.

            Old news is news.

            • Natanael@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Are you trolling you absolutely nutjob, OF COURSE if Apple uses a different thing which is not patented because the patent owner DID NOT invent that COMPLETELY DIFFERENT thing then Apple don’t have to pay for patent licensing fees for a thing THEY DON’T USE

              And as I’ve explained so many times that you have to be illiterate to not have understood the point, Qualcomm is not the only company with a lossless algorithm and bluetooth itself doesn’t limit your algorithm choices