Because that's why every company and every person (including you) are in it for the money.
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.
Apple and Intel Have Reportedly Discussed Deal for Production of Future iPhone and iPad Chips
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because that's why every company and every person (including you) are in it for the money.
This was a deal that was only waiting on Intel.
They have started to realize how the post-PC era is really going to look for them.
Being a contract manufacturer is not the dream solution for Intel, but given their expertise and fab capacity, no one else can do what Apple needs.
Crazy, but Apple could be their number one priority customer before too long.
Sadly its only a very, very, very small dent. Samsung makes billions from everything else.
I'm fairly certain this is Apple's fault and not Intel's. Sandy Bridge E has been around for some time. Ivy Beidge E is around the corner.
Well played, Intel!!
Hmmm...bone Samsung, get access to ARM tech, strengthen strategic relationship with Apple, make more money - All at the same time! At the same damn time!!!
Hmmm...bone Samsung, get access to ARM tech, strengthen strategic relationship with Apple, make more money - All at the same time! At the same damn time!!!
Steve Jobs:
“If you don’t cannibalize yourself, someone else will”
iPhone did it to iPod, iPad did it to macs, and iPad mini is doing it to iPad. Apple, unlike many other companies, is not afraid of cannibalizing itself. But I really don't see OSX on a tablet in the near future. Using it with touch would not IMO, be a great experience.
I think Apple had wanted to work with Intel in the past for ARM chips. Intel always said no to others using it's foundries for non-Intel designs... at that time wanting companies switch to Atom. I guess they are changing their thinking.
If true, it's good for Apple since it's less risk to work with companies like TSMC and Intel than direct competitors.
If true, it's good for Apple since it's less risk to work with companies like TSMC and Intel than direct competitors.
Almost half is smartphones.
http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Screen-Shot-2012-12-03-at-12-3-10.11.21-AM.png
Intel always has a need to put those older 32/45nm fabs to use. Not everything they make is in brand new 22nm.
I don't really follow your logic. No one puts a proverbial gun to these supplier's heads. If they can't work a deal they have no obligation to enter into an agreement. But companies like Apple and Walmart do have greater "purchasing power" because of who they are, their size, their deep pockets. Usually companies do want to supply them, and will sell at lower margins because the volume is greater, and the odds of getting paid favorable. And for start ups the visibility being in Walmart is PR you just can't buy. Once you are in Walmart nationwide other retail wants your product too.
Specifically to Intel, they are a big company. I'm sure they can handle Apple.
You do realize most U.S. gov'ts from munis to the feds do many of their contracts based on lowest bid by GSA or similar qualified contractor. Not sure how that is any different than how private companies do business.
I think your issue is not with Apple or Walmart, but capitalism, and that's a different topic.
I agree but I think the ideal way to use it would be similar to an imac - the ipad is your screen/cpu and you use peripherals (mouse/keyboard) which many are doing with an ipad already. Then when you are on the go, the OS switches to iOS - so you basically get both experiences. Who knows what the best way to do it is, but I can see tablets going down that road.
Why would it? It's still the same Apple-designed ARM core, it would be no different if Intel or Samsung was the fabricator.
ARM is RISC-based so it will not boot an x86 version of OSX.
I suppose we will all have laptop/tablet hybrids in a few years. I like your concept.
No, If you want to give an arch that title, it is most certainly not x86. The macpro is a terrible example considering that there are much much newer and faster chips available, it is apple that is dragging it's feet on the macpro, not intel. Also, it is of note that it's getting harder and harder to eek out more performance from silicone. Each time the process gets smaller it's harder to make the next jump. Arm has been making amazing strides in the last 6 years, but x86 has also made huge strides in that time.
It's not a "non-story" for two reasons
1) It's Intel
2) It's Apple and Intel
The concept is sound business, the entities involved however ...
It gets harder and harder for intel to eek out more performance because its still never learned to work outside of x86. There are 4 and 5ghz cpu's out right now and have been for years yet Intel keeps on selling you on gimmicks like colossal die shrinks that yield nothing but a smaller die. You've been buying the same 2.5-3.3ghz dual and quad core cpus for the last 7 years.
This is true...
----------
At a cost
let me put it to you this way...
Chips from samsung= PC prices vs Chips from Intel= Mac prices
And where you think Apple is going to offset the cost for this more advance and more expensive chips??
TSMC can't be too happy to hear about this. I think they were hoping to pickup the foundry work from Samsung. Or maybe Apple is talking to Intel as a way to bargain with TSMC on their margins.
You're exactly right, but it's not something you (or I) should be concerned about unless we're one of the suppliers. It's Apple's job as a corporation to legally use their position in the market to maximize shareholder return. The suppliers should be keen enough in business to make logical and sound business decisions as to whether working with Apple makes sense to them.
Oh man this is exciting. Lose the Samsung dependency!
EDIT: Does this mean OSX bootable iPads perhaps?!
You wont lose the Samsung dependancy since they have now got 3% of sharp 'Say hello to your smasung screens'