Samsung has not lost anything. Right at this moment Apple CPUs are manufactured by Samsung in Texas. And the way Samsung is gaining market share in smart phones (which is now 50% higher than that of Apple) they will need this Texas FAB for their own chips. Apple's share in smart phones in 2012 was reported at 20%. They are not really that big of a player.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
'Project Azalea' - A TSMC Chip Factory Dedicated to Building Processors for iDevices?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Samsung has not lost anything. Right at this moment Apple CPUs are manufactured by Samsung in Texas. And the way Samsung is gaining market share in smart phones (which is now 50% higher than that of Apple) they will need this Texas FAB for their own chips. Apple's share in smart phones in 2012 was reported at 20%. They are not really that big of a player.
Sure, that's why Apple is rumored to back this FAB, so that the company will be a bigger player in volume, not just revenue, where curiously, Apple seems to have 80% of the profits in mobile devices.
Kudos to Samsung for $8-12 B in marketing and promotional expense to get that market share.
Now, let's see them defend it.
Replacement of Samsung would be wise.
There is no good reason to do buiness with a company that steals from you.
I have to believe that would be the intention. It is really a question of ethics. As to one plant doing it all, who knows. The reality is it is bad business to have too much reliance on a single plant. So I'd rather see Apple split production across plants and vendors.
As for Samsung people seem to have this perception that they have some magical capability to produce chips. This really isn't the case and frankly Samsung has suffered from the same issue the rest of the industry has.
There is no good reason to do buiness with a company that steals from you.
I have to believe that would be the intention. It is really a question of ethics. As to one plant doing it all, who knows. The reality is it is bad business to have too much reliance on a single plant. So I'd rather see Apple split production across plants and vendors.
As for Samsung people seem to have this perception that they have some magical capability to produce chips. This really isn't the case and frankly Samsung has suffered from the same issue the rest of the industry has.
That is just totally ignorant. Business supports the growth in the human population on this planet. As for being clean or not so clean semiconductor manufacturing isn't that bad when it comes right down to it.
Are we suffering from some sort of complex wrapped around excessive self importance? You seemingly desire to make electronics in affordable to many of your countrymen.
Actually it isn't better. Many of those industries you mentioned would still be in the dark ages if it wasn't for electronics. The medical industry for one wouldn't exist in its current form without electronics. Beyond that there is nothing to say that Apple would ever be successful in energy, transportation or any other industry. Apple is successful because the talent they have is focused on a common goal or interest.
Frankly after reading your series of posts I'm left with the impression you are of weak mind and easily manipulated. Think about that a bit. You pass more pollution every time you sit on the can then most semiconductor plants that are well operated.
We are talking about TSMC here. They have no problem building capacity to replace Samsung twice. Their problem would be that this is a huge investment, and they would want guarantees from Apple to make sure the investment pays. On the other hand, Apple has the cash to make those guarantees.
----------
That is always claimed, but I wouldn't think so. So Apple builds a new, faster ARM processor - well, who would have thought that? Of course they do. Samsung knows Apple will do that, whether Apple places an order with Samsung or keeps the thing top secret, because it is just common sense they will. Apple is looking for better batteries - well, who would have thought that?
Most things are just ordinary improvements that you would expect Apple to make anyway. Designs are legally protected, some technology is protected by patents, and both don't take long to copy - it's just risky because you can and will get sued for it. If Samsung wanted to make a phone that looks exactly like iPhone 5, buying a dozen on the first day it's released would give them enough time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDnsSoEGBzs
iPhones with quantum chips?! Now that would be front page news! I think we might have to wait a few more years for that.
If Apple uses chips based on TSMC's 20-nanometer process, it would have two benefits for practically all consumers:
1) Power consumption would be reduced, thus resulting in longer battery life.
2) Clock-for-clock speed increase over the current A6X chips, thus resulting in Safari being snappier.
1) Power consumption would be reduced, thus resulting in longer battery life.
2) Clock-for-clock speed increase over the current A6X chips, thus resulting in Safari being snappier.
Bingo. I've never seen so many S3 and Note commercials on TV. Go to the mall ans all the posters and ads on the mall directories are of the Galaxy S3 or Note.
First you need to actually get your facts straight before people can attempt to "defend" anything. It's $8-12 MILLION, not BILLION. Nice attempt at being falsely hyperbolic.
...and the tax concessions were already given, not that IBM did what they promised.
If Apple uses chips based on TSMC's 20-nanometer process, it would have two benefits for practically all consumers:
1) Power consumption would be reduced, thus resulting in longer battery life.
2) Clock-for-clock speed increase over the current A6X chips, thus resulting in Safari being snappier.
Can someone give me a link or background to this safari being snappier joke? I have seen this several times but missed where it came from. Thanks
It not curiously, it's on purpose. Let the mega-corps fight over low profit margins on Android.
The idea that being sued prevents somebody from copying/doing something is a pipe dream.
It takes years for a suit to be finished and usually people settle as the costs become outrageous and the copier wins. Samsung is actually the perfect example of copying and then paying for the lawsuits as cost of doing business.
Must be enough profit in copying to pay for this.
Last I heard, quantum chips still needed huge refrigeration units to operate. Someday though.
The chart goes up to 12,000 million.
That's 12 billion.
Yes... Samsung spends nearly 12 billion on marketing.
Can someone give me a link or background to this safari being snappier joke? I have seen this several times but missed where it came from. Thanks
I don't know when it started being associated with Safari, but back in the very early days of Mac OS X, every time a point release would come out (eg 10.0.3) people would install it and say it feels "snappier" -even though there really weren't any performance improvements being implemented by Apple at that point. In a lot of cases the Macs got slightly faster at launching apps because of the optimization routines that are run when software is installed, or they just got a temporary speed boost from actually being rebooted due to the install (since for the first time the majority of Mac users could go "forever" without rebooting compared to classic Mac OS).
And oral gratification from a partner is illegal in several US states. What's your point?
