[danjoc]

>You're not addressing the poster's point.

I already addressed it. The poster is repeating the point. That doesn't make it more valid.

>Apple A series tech is destroying the Qualcomm's snapdragons just fine without any need for legalities.

You might want to review world wide market share numbers before you try to defend that statement.

>Are you suggesting that Qualcomm is using its licensing fees to support an unprofitable Snapdragons?

I'm suggesting Apple is using litigation expense as an avenue to destroy the business of their competitor, again. Apple has much deeper pockets than Qualcomm. It's very simple math.