Samsung Reportedly Hits Apple with 20% Price Increase for iOS Device Chips

[Eidorian]

Originally Posted by gto55

Maybe apple could consider now TMSC as a serious subistitute for Samsung

Nvidia and Qualcomm Glad with TSMC’s 28nm Chip Supply.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/d...ip_Supply.html

40nm was bad enough and 28nm was worse. They can barely keep nVidia and AMD supplied even if nVidia is going to claim that they no longer have supply issues. It is not the first time nVidia has made such claims either.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/samsung-...ase/17875.html

[golf1410]

Who says Apple is trying to be independent from Samsung. Well, it isn't easy as Samsung is a leader of manufacturer chips and innovate new things. That means Apple can't build a better product without Samsung.

Samsung's new 10nm-process 64GB mobile flash memory chips are smaller, faster, better http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/15/s...-flash-memory/

[wikus]

Apple owes a lot to Samsung for its success anyway. Nobody here or anywhere else seems to remember that Samsung basically gave Apple a monopoly on NAND memory when the iPod was taking off, ultimately securing complete domination of the mp3 player market which opened up the doors for a transition to mobile phone domination.... well, not anymore, Android's got that covered now.

That 20% should be much higher and the extra be paid out to the companys that got SCREWED with NAND purchases back in 2006 (approx) that couldnt get cheap NAND and offer mp3 players at a decent price.

Karma is great. Nice try Apple

[Mr.damien]

Originally Posted by Badbrad17

Riiiiiight. And without Bill Gates investing in Apple they would be out of business. Oh how quickly people forget. Only Apple fans can be so arrogant and elitist to take credit for all the technology of the universe.

Riiiiiight. And it's so funny that you can't understand the difference between Microsoft helping Apple to avoid monopoly and billions of money in lawsuit and Apple helping it's own hardware providers.

But if you can't understand that, I think it's not worth trying to explain you that. You are too limited.

But that's quite funny to see all Apple haters coming here to say that they are ****ed now while Samsung just told the truth and denied it: they are bound with a contract and can't change the price.

And I expect you not understand this part too.

----------

Originally Posted by golf1410

Who says Apple is trying to be independent from Samsung. Well, it isn't easy as Samsung is a leader of manufacturer chips and innovate new things. That means Apple can't build a better product without Samsung.

Samsung's new 10nm-process 64GB mobile flash memory chips are smaller, faster, better http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/15/s...-flash-memory/

Yeah, Samsung is so powerful that all their phones / tablets is just always thicker / less polished than any Apple products. That they need a quad core chip to try to get the same performance of the Apple A6 dual core chip.

[mojothemonkey]

Originally Posted by Mr.damien

Yeah, Apple is so stupid to make stuff by themselves. Their custom proc Apple A6 is so weak and less powerful than the competition just paying "by contract".

Ho wait ...

I dont understand what your comment is supposed to mean.

My original statement, that you quoted, was how unusual and (in my opinion) what a bad business strategy apple seems to be unveiling by changing their current MO, which has been working, to do everything in-house.

You cite the A6 chip, but this was not built in-house. Making a custom order from an established chip fab plant is what they've BEEN DOING ALL ALONG, which yielded this A6, just like the prior chips.

They are making moves to change this process. Your point seems to fall flat.

[Mr.damien]

Originally Posted by mojothemonkey

I dont understand what your comment is supposed to mean.

My original statement, that you quoted, was how unusual and (in my opinion) what a bad business strategy apple seems to be unveiling by changing their current MO, which has been working, to do everything in-house.

You cite the A6 chip, but this was not built in-house. Making a custom order from an established chip fab plant is what they've BEEN DOING ALL ALONG, which yielded this A6, just like the prior chips.

They are making moves to change this process. Your point seems to fall flat.

Because you criticize Apple for doing stuff themselves (leaving google as you said ?), so A6 was a point about how making more stuff yourself is making better products. Because despite they are not producing it, it's all internal design now that Samsung is not able to compete with.

That's my only point.

[mojothemonkey]

Originally Posted by Mr.damien

Because you criticize Apple for doing stuff themselves (leaving google as you said ?), so A6 was a point about how making more stuff yourself is making better products. Because despite they are not producing it, it's all internal design now that Samsung is not able to compete with.

That's my only point.

But the A6 and others in the apple products are NOT internal design. It's like having a custom race car built for your specs. You cant say that you built it yourself, McClaren or Ferrari did. When Ferrari comes to you and says "Hey, we have a V10 or V12 turbo, but the V12 turbo costs more" and you then select the higher $ option, IT DOESNT MAGICALLY MAKE YOU THE DESIGNER.

What apple is doing is saying "Hey, our last car was great when we told Ferrari to put in extra horsepower and that we'd pay the costs because we think its worth it. So NOW we're going to build the racecar from scratch. What does Ferrari know about racecars that we cant figure out by stealing an engineer or 2?"

Thats my point.

The A___ (whichever #) are custom chips, not in-house chips. There is a difference. Any one of these chip fab plants could make a faster speed, more # of cores, more cache chip, but they are making business decisions that those chips would be more expensive than what they anticipate their customers (samsung, htc, sony, etc) would be willing to pay in general for their intended products. Apple just said they'd front the cash to allow them to build a higher spec processor. Apple didnt design it.