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 Reportedly Buys Into a Chip Fab, Looking to Produce Its Own Chips
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Absolutely.
I hear they're also looking into buying a mine in South America to ensure a steady supply of copper.
Apple isn't buying a Fab. They are buying into a fab run by a well known company to help fund the fab equipment and process, while getting guaranteed capacity and optimal silicon. The company in question is looking for long-term partners that will be a reliable customer in years to come, whilst not being a direct competitor as has been the case with samsung.
Is it? I see Apple having huge problems with capacity and maintaining the technological edge.
This is a big problem, it is easy to buy the machines, not so easy to get the talent to run them.
Actually I don't see a big issue here, Samsung is less than perfect but they do have some of the best foundries going. The big problem is that Apple is effectively feeding Samsung cash which is never a good thing.
Actually if you look at Apples patent history they have had engineers patenting design efforts around microprocessors for years. The recent purchases of the differing design companies are a direct result of growth in that effort not something new per say.
Actually not true. It is a very complicated subject with no clear answers. If Apple did go this route it would signal a reversal of a general trend in the industry over the last few decades. The expense of a fab is generally not covered well by one company thus the need to have additional customers. Then you have the very real issue of finding and retaining the right talent to keep a plant running.
Actually not true. It is a very complicated subject with no clear answers. If Apple did go this route it would signal a reversal of a general trend in the industry over the last few decades. The expense of a fab is generally not covered well by one company thus the need to have additional customers. Then you have the very real issue of finding and retaining the right talent to keep a plant running.
Who knows, maybe Apple has something unreleased up their sleeve that can't handled with an off the shelf chip from whomever.
Mostly though, I think this is more about securing materials for future demand more than Apple making a big push into the chip business.
Mostly though, I think this is more about securing materials for future demand more than Apple making a big push into the chip business.
Pay walls aren't a problem if attached to credible news reporting. However it is silly to expect anybody to pay for a rumor site.
Now, start the moaning about how wrong that is and that folks need to earn their bread and me being such a "freeloader"
Glassed Silver:mac
The freeloader mentality can be a problem. I say can because you have things like Linux that allows "freeloaders" to contribute back to the "system". On the other hand freeloaders can drain a service to the point that profitability becomes a problem.
Actually "a" above is obviously true. Apple has no particle experience in running a fab. Designing a microprocessor has nothing to do with running a fab.
Maybe but all one had to do was watch the patent stream from Apple to realize that the A6 was a long time coming.
Having their own fab doesn't guarantee this either.
This is very true, but it isn't really the fabs fault. Once you customize a line for a specific customer it can be difficult to realize that capital for other customers. If you can't keep product flowing through that line then your profitability suffers badly, thus the recent quotes from TSMC.
Often designs are built to serve marketing needs not engineering needs.
Frankly if that is the direction they go in for iWatch it will be a terrible product in the marketplace. IWatch should effectively replace your iPhone to generate solid sale momentum.
3D chip technology is indeed an interesting direction to go in. However a process shrink or two could allow for a huge amount of onboard RAM, as caches or buffers, to address the performance problems you mentioned.
The problem that you are missing here is the huge expense involved in going in this direction in your own facility. If Apple did have its own 3D process let's hope that it is a low cost solution.
That is how this valley has worked from when Varian Associates was buying up vacuum tube companies in just after WWII before transistors came on market. You either innovate by buying it or hiring the right people. As Bill Joy said, "The best people in this business will not work for you. You have to work with them."
But fixed costs are higher when you make your own components, meaning you are less flexible.
There are regular stories about Apple changing their order volumes. That would be a problem if those seasonal changes had to be supplied from their own factories that only make Apple products.
Which is something people really don't understand when they advocate Apple building their own fabs.
However to be the devils advocate here let's say Apple has enough volume to keep a fab going for a good part of the year and let's say they put Apple specific technology into those fabs would it really be a waste then?
Maybe that is good for Qualcomm but what about Texas Instruments? While I tend to agree it is a bad idea for Apple to run a generic fab, it isn't by default a bad idea for every company. Even for Apple the idea may have some positives if the manufacturing was less than generic. It depends upon Apples ability to add value to the process that others can't.
Which agian people don't grasp. Most foundries these days partner up to develop the latest process nodes so in effect share those technologies. If Apple joins such a consortium then there technology isn't any better than anybody else's in then porgram.
That isn't really a big deal though.
At best I don't think a lot of people think about or really understand the business of semiconductor manufacturing when they proclaim that Apple has to build their own foundry. Unless you do the IP yourself you need to buy from somebody and that somebody has to be willing to support your unique process.
It can only make sense in two ways. One is if your volume is so high you have problems with getting foundries to commit to your needs. This sounds like it may be a problem with TSMC. The second is if you can add significant value to the generic process.
That is an interesting twist on the AMD story. What killed their bottom line was the lack of sales.
This is one thing that needs to be realized, a brand new fab with all the latest gadgets is useless without people to run the plants. Further your run of the mill factory worker just isn't smart enough to drop into a state of the art fab.
Being a skeptic is pretty smart at this point. However the report could be wrong in its details, I could see Apple buying into an exist manufacture to be less dependent on contracted production. The problem here though is that Apples history is to take production internal.
Did you notice the majority of this MacRumors article is just conjecture based on the tags attached to the source, and a rehash of previous stories about chip suppliers?
Maybe not quote it, but this is ridiculous:
With the majority of the report behind a paywall, details remain scarce.
If a paywall is what's stopping you, then either dont post anything until you have othe free sources or man up and buy the report.
Exactly my thoughts.
it just feels so childish.
Hope this means we get slightly cheaper prices due to direct manufacturing. But no high hopes here
Why should you (or me) feel so entitled? Companies almost always take any difference in cost and pocket it as profit for the higher-ups and to make the presence and perceived value on Wall Street higher. Why else did Apple switch from Motorola to Intel in the first place? Cheaper.
Companies exist to profit. Not help you. You (or me) as 'customer', this is not personal.
----------
And that means possible jobs back home.
Let's see it happen first.
More, companies should not have been moving offshore, especially while taking even a penny in corporate welfare or getting any bennies through tax loopholes... they only want a 'free market' when it suits them. Make them live the 'free market' the way they sell it to us and they wouldn't last two minutes.
There are two issues here:
1. If they made their own components they would not need to place advance orders, they could use a just-in-time manufacturing system were production closely follows sales.
2. They don't necessarily have to manufacture all of their own components, but they could develop more of their components and put them out to contract manufacturing. That would make them less reliant on outside suppliers like Samsung, Sharp, etc. They have the funds to buy up current companies and develop their own batteries, SSD, displays, memory, etc.
He rebranded all of those things? Does that mean he's driving a "Battlefield Fan" car?
Seriously, this is a riduclous cxomparison.
When will Apple buy a vacuum tube plant, for their new high-end iPods with that "warm, natural sound that can't be replicated with transistors?"
Ha! Geez lots of reactions to my comment and this is the only one that hit the nail on the head. Fanboy force is strong within this community.
Now if I was a really bad troll I'd report you for calling me a troll and you'd earn yourself a warning...