Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:43 AM   #126
RedCroissant
macrumors 68000
 
RedCroissant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Arizona
What about Texas Instruments?

Wasn't there something in the news recently about Apple using a TI chip in one of its products? Why not use a U.S.-based chip manufacturer that already has a presence in the same state as Apple's secondary hub?

Plus, according to CNET,
Texas Instruments OMAP 4470
"This one currently powers the Archos 101XS and soon the Kindle Fire HD 8.9 and Nook HD line. It sports a PowerVR SGX544 GPU and delivers smooth frame rates, even taxing 3D Android games. Its performance currently outdoes the Tegra 3 in polygon-pushing power."
__________________
Welcome to the Grid, Program.

27" iMac, 3.2GHz i5, 16GB RAM, 3TB HDD; 32GB iPad 1 WiFi+3G; 30GB iPod Video 5G
RedCroissant is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:43 AM   #127
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbookReader View Post
Forbes has been on an anti-Apple kick lately. I'd take what they write with a grain of salt.
KPOM is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:45 AM   #128
SiPat
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Price increases are common in most manufacturing industries and are written into supply contracts. Samsung can't just raise prices on a whim -- the contract must have come up for renewal and therefore new prices negotiated.

This report suggests that Samsung is practically blackmailing Apple in to paying a higher price -- Apple isn't that stupid, especially given the escalation of hostilities between the two companies.
SiPat is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:45 AM   #129
pat park
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellhammer View Post
That's the lesson Apple needs to learn. Samsung produces everything from LCDs to NAND and SoCs which makes them independent, whereas Apple doesn't own a single factory. Without Samsung, Apple couldn't make a single iPhone or iPad but Samsung would do just fine without Apple, so who is feeding who?
Samsung will have a huge void in their manufacturing if Apple is no longer a customer. They will feel some belt tightening as well.

Apple may hit some road bumps, but they will be fine.
__________________
pat park is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:45 AM   #130
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KanosWRX View Post
LOL, Apple is getting a taste of their own Medicine, biting the hand that feeds you.

Apple - Lets sue Samsung for 1 Billion dollars! Oh wait they make all our chips for the devices we just sued them over.

Samsung - were out 1 Billion Dollars, lets make Apple pay more since they just took 1 Billion from us.

Stupid Apple. They should have worked out an agreement with them, maybe they would have be able to reduce chip prices by 20%.
Apple didn't sue for 1B. That was the judgment. A judgement, by the way that is in appeals. So Samsung isn't out a dime in regards to the judgement.

I don't think the price increase has anything to do with the court case but because they hadn't raised prices in 5 years and/or because Apple has less purchasing power at Samsung now that they're going to other vendors for other parts.

But - I am sure that Samsung is enjoying the fact that Apple now has to pay for all of Samsung's legal fees in the UK...
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:45 AM   #131
noiseordinance
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxtech View Post
You must be using it wrong.
You must settle for mediocrity.
noiseordinance is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:46 AM   #132
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by pat park View Post
Samsung will have a huge void in their manufacturing if Apple is no longer a customer. They will feel some belt tightening as well.

Apple may hit some road bumps, but they will be fine.
Both companies will be fine.
samcraig is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:47 AM   #133
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
No, it isn't, it is something like a 10% of the chip division
That's pretty significant. Plus at one time Apple was Samsung's biggest customer for displays.

Obviously there is a lot more money to be made selling the finished product than the parts. That's why Samsung got serious about its Android lineup.
KPOM is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:49 AM   #134
everything-i
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: London, UK
The lesson here is to never have to rely on a single supplier for anything. Apple have left themselves vulnerable in having a single supplier for some of their components and that Supplier is now turning the screw. Apple have transitioned their LCD panel to other suppliers so they no longer have a single supplier problem there but I would say they are still a year away from dropping Samsung as a foundry for their processors. This is the reason they developed their own maps so they did not have to rely on Google, a competitor, for that functionality. That was handled badly but they have now removed that point of leverage Google had over them. In an extreme case Samsung could just stop making the processors and that would sink Apple. Now that isn't going to happen because the contractual fallout for Samsung would be huge but it just goes to show how vulnerable Apple has left itself by relying on a single supplier who is also a competitor for supply of a key component.
everything-i is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:51 AM   #135
WardC
macrumors 68020
 
WardC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Send a message via AIM to WardC
Maybe this will halfway reduce Apple's staggering mark-up prices on their iOS devices and make their already exorbitant prices somewhat more justifiable.

Apple is charging $400 for a device that costs them $150 to make. That is $250 in Apple's pocket for a device that only costs them $150 to make. That is high mark-up if you ask me!

It's even more staggering for their Macs. Their Retina MacBook Pro 15" machines cost them less than $1200 to make, and they are selling them for $2500+
__________________
iMac 27" 3.4GHz i7 SSD 16GB RAM
MacBook Pro 15-inch 2.6GHz i7 256GB SSD/ 16GB RAM

Thinking about Apple...
WardC is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:51 AM   #136
Vitrum
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
That's pretty significant. Plus at one time Apple was Samsung's biggest customer for displays.

Obviously there is a lot more money to be made selling the finished product than the parts. That's why Samsung got serious about its Android lineup.
Nope, samsung will love if someome buys the mobile devision and just sell the parts
Vitrum is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:52 AM   #137
ArtOfWarfare
macrumors 603
 
ArtOfWarfare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Send a message via Skype™ to ArtOfWarfare
It's like Samsung is sitting there wondering "How can we piss our partner off more? How can we make them want to jump ship to a rival even quicker?"

It seems someone at Samsung is clueless how to operate in a global economy.
ArtOfWarfare is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:53 AM   #138
Vitrum
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by everything-i View Post
The lesson here is to never have to rely on a single supplier for anything. Apple have left themselves vulnerable in having a single supplier for some of their components and that Supplier is now turning the screw. Apple have transitioned their LCD panel to other suppliers so they no longer have a single supplier problem there but I would say they are still a year away from dropping Samsung as a foundry for their processors. This is the reason they developed their own maps so they did not have to rely on Google, a competitor, for that functionality. That was handled badly but they have now removed that point of leverage Google had over them. In an extreme case Samsung could just stop making the processors and that would sink Apple. Now that isn't going to happen because the contractual fallout for Samsung would be huge but it just goes to show how vulnerable Apple has left itself by relying on a single supplier who is also a competitor for supply of a key component.

Samsung is however playing a dangerous game here as other clients may take notice of this and get nervous about relying on Samsung for supply. This could cause Samsung future headaches damaging their brand in the component supply market.
Theres nothing weird or "dangerous" about it, its perfectly normal for price to increase; contract.
Vitrum is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:53 AM   #139
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
It's like Samsung is sitting there wondering "How can we piss our partner off more? How can we make them want to jump ship to a rival even quicker?"

It seems someone at Samsung is clueless how to operate in a global economy.
Sorry - so you're saying that negotiating a better rate for their chips is bad business? Ok.
samcraig is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:53 AM   #140
SeniorGato1
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aluminum213 View Post
this, Samsung just got back its billion dollar loss
1 billion / 3.50 = 285 million iphones to break even. That's not going to happen, but Samsung's on the right track!
__________________
-Current Phone: Verizon iPhone 5S 32
-Previous phones: iPhone 2G, 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S, HTC Thunderbolt, Samsung Galaxy Nexus, iPhone 5, S3, S4
-iPad 3 64GB Verizon & iPod Touch 5th Gen
SeniorGato1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:53 AM   #141
roadbloc
macrumors 604
 
roadbloc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: UK
Send a message via Skype™ to roadbloc
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlesdayton View Post
This is a bad move for Samsung.
Probably not. I doubt Samsung even care whether Apple use their services or not. A bonus if they do, but they have plenty of other people needing chips. Including themselves for their own Smartphone line which is giving Apple's iPhone a run for its money.

They'll earn money with or without Apple.
__________________
roadbloc is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:53 AM   #142
noiseordinance
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
It's like Samsung is sitting there wondering "How can we piss our partner off more? How can we make them want to jump ship to a rival even quicker?"

It seems someone at Samsung is clueless how to operate in a global economy.
Gosh, can't the same be said about Apple? "How can we crap all over our vendors? Oh, let's chase them around for making something with the same shape as the iPad!"
noiseordinance is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:54 AM   #143
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeniorGato1 View Post
1 billion / 3.50 = 285 million iphones to break even. That's not going to happen, but Samsung's on the right track!
There's nothing to make back. Samsung hasn't had to pay Apple a dime as of current.
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:56 AM   #144
itr81
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
I wonder if the iPhone 5s will be the first iPhone without using Samsungs foundry? My guess is if not it will probably start to happen next yr. This maybe why Samsung is asking for more because they know they will lose Apple next yr sometime probably? But according Android Authority Samsung has a contract until 2014 with Apple...so who knows.
itr81 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:58 AM   #145
Windlasher
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Kick em to the curb....

in 60 - 90 days, Apple will announce that it is building a chip manufacturing plant in Nebraska or somewhere like that or has re-tooled a plant or gotten intel, or AMD to make the chips for them.

I'd bet money the AMD president has a call into Apple at this very moment.
__________________
....
It is only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize that problems can be solved without violence.
....
Windlasher is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:58 AM   #146
Vitrum
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by itr81 View Post
I wonder if the iPhone 5s will be the first iPhone without using Samsungs foundry? My guess is if not it will probably start to happen next yr. This maybe why Samsung is asking for more because they know they will lose Apple next yr sometime probably? But according Android Authority Samsung has a contract until 2014 with Apple...so who knows.
I guess aslong A4 and A5 devices are offered.
Vitrum is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:58 AM   #147
itr81
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
There's nothing to make back. Samsung hasn't had to pay Apple a dime as of current.
I bet they are both paying thru the noses for lawyer fees. I bet some of the lawyers are making millions a yr just for representing Samsung or Apple in these cases.
itr81 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:59 AM   #148
mightyneek
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: California
Bad form...
mightyneek is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 09:59 AM   #149
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by itr81 View Post
I bet they are both paying thru the noses for lawyer fees. I bet some of the lawyers are making millions a yr just for representing Samsung or Apple in these cases.
Well in the case of the UK ruling - Apple is footing Samsung's bill. I guess trying to be snarky wasn't a "win" for Apple.
samcraig is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 10:00 AM   #150
Popeye206
macrumors 68030
 
Popeye206's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NE PA USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by WardC View Post
Maybe this will halfway reduce Apple's staggering mark-up prices on their iOS devices and make their already exorbitant prices somewhat more justifiable.

Apple is charging $400 for a device that costs them $150 to make. That is $250 in Apple's pocket for a device that only costs them $150 to make. That is high mark-up if you ask me!

It's even more staggering for their Macs. Their Retina MacBook Pro 15" machines cost them less than $1200 to make, and they are selling them for $2500+
Yaaaawwwwwwnnnnn....

I'm soooooo tired of these sorts of comments... if you don't like the product or thinks it's overpriced, don't buy it.

Personally, given the longevity I get out of my overpriced Apple products, they are well worth the money. You get what you pay for.
Popeye206 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple Reportedly Negotiating with Carriers for $100 Price Increase on iPhone 6 MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 569 Apr 17, 2014 08:57 PM
Apple Reportedly Signs Deal with Samsung for 14-nm A9 Chips Starting in 2015 MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 126 Jul 16, 2013 05:36 PM
Samsung's Exclusive Contract for iOS Device Chips Expiring in June as A7 for iPhone 6 Heads to TSMC? MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 157 May 2, 2013 02:09 PM
Samsung Denies Claims of Price Hikes for iOS Device Chip Production MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 110 Nov 18, 2012 01:28 PM
Samsung raises price of chips sold to Apple by 20% kdarling Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 2 Nov 12, 2012 10:52 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:56 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC