Are you returning your Samsung chip iPhone for a TSMC?

Status
Not open for further replies.
rockitdog said:
I have a Samsung chip. Won't be returning. I have a good screen, clicky buttons and a firm slient/ vib switch! No way would I return this and gamble getting another device with something wrong. I don't sit on my phone gaming for hours so I'm good with that I have.
Click to expand...
Why do people like clicky buttons?
 
HEK said:
So Apple seeing a large profit, as well as safeguarding risk with only one manufacturer decided to have the chip produced by both. This will of course drive down the price of the A10 chip for the iPhone 7. Having two companies compete for the contract.
Click to expand...

Apple A10 TSMC only?

"Whenever Apple comes out to defend a potential flaw that has a “-gate” suffix — think Antennagate (iPhone 4), Bendgate (iPhone 6) or Batterygate / Chipgate(iPhone 6s) — it probably means that, yes, there’s a problem. Apple’s confirmation of the issue usually sounds reassuring, which suggests the company is working on a fix if it hasn’t already found one, which was certainly true for Antennagate and Bendgate. With Chipgate, Apple might have fixes in the works, including one that it will likely enjoy enacting: Apparently, Samsung might lose the A10 chip business to TSMC, which could be Apple’s way of preventing potential chip-related issues next year."

http://bgr.com/2015/10/16/iphone-6s-iphone-7-chipgate-a10/
 
MaciMac100 said:
Apple A10 TSMC only?

"Whenever Apple comes out to defend a potential flaw that has a “-gate” suffix — think Antennagate (iPhone 4), Bendgate (iPhone 6) or Batterygate / Chipgate(iPhone 6s) — it probably means that, yes, there’s a problem. Apple’s confirmation of the issue usually sounds reassuring, which suggests the company is working on a fix if it hasn’t already found one, which was certainly true for Antennagate and Bendgate. With Chipgate, Apple might have fixes in the works, including one that it will likely enjoy enacting: Apparently, Samsung might lose the A10 chip business to TSMC, which could be Apple’s way of preventing potential chip-related issues next year."

http://bgr.com/2015/10/16/iphone-6s-iphone-7-chipgate-a10/
Click to expand...
If they can meet the demand.
 
MaciMac100 said:
I'm not totally buying that one supplier could not meet demand this time. This A9 is first time Apple SoC is dual-sourced. My guess is Samsung made so cheap offer that Apple couldn't resist.
Click to expand...
see the post below yours. Also if that's the case then Apple would've went with all Samsung.
 
qap said:
Consumer Reports: Battery Tests Find No 'Chipgate' Problems in the iPhone 6S

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/battery-tests-no-chipgate-problems-165402920.html
Click to expand...

Last year, there were numerous accounts of iPhones bending under very normal, non abusive usage. These were people who carried their iPhones in front pockets and treated them delicately--I even had a personal friend experience it. Then as now, Consumer Reports conducted tests which supported the notion that there was actually no bending problem. What happened? Apple strengthened this years model with better aluminum and there is no more issue.

I'm not saying there is actually a big difference in these chips, but I certainly don't trust Consumer Reports.
 
Last edited:
barkomatic said:
Last year, there were numerous accounts of iPhones bending under very normal, non abusive usage. These were people who carried their iPhones in front pockets and treated them delicately--I even had a personal friend experience it. Then as now, Consumer Reports conducted tests which supported the notion that there was actually no bending problem. What happened? Apple strengthened this years model with better aluminum and there is no more issue.

I'm not saying there is actually a big difference in these chips, but I certainly don't trust Consumer Reports.
Click to expand...
Let's recap,
Can't trust Apple
Can't trust other testers, probably bought out by Apple
Can't trust Consumer Reports
But do trust one artificial test, isolating the processor and running one phone.
So you can't actually say there is a big difference in chips, but don't trust anyone that demonstrates it.

Beginning to see a pattern here? Just curious, how old you think the earth is? Do you think the moon landings were real? Do you think you are being spyed on, I mean other than by NSA, Google, and Facebook? I demand Apple prove that unicorns don't exist. If they don't, well then, they must be hiding some, probably in China.

Are their defective phones out of the 20 million made so far? I'm certain of it. Will Apple stand behind their product and replace them? More than likely. After all they have built an infrastructure to do just that. Of all the phone suppliers in the world, Apple has consistently demonstrated they will replace a bad product. Far and away more effectively than the others.
 
Last edited:
HEK said:
Let's see,
Can't trust Apple
Can't trust other testers, probably bought out by Apple
Can't trust Consumer Reports
But do trust one artificial test, isolating the processor and running one phone.
So you can't actually say there is a big difference in chips, but don't trust anyone that demonstrates it.

Beginning to see a pattern here? Just curious, how old you think the earth is? Do you think the moon landings were real? Do you think you are being spyed on, I mean other than by NSA, Google, and Facebook? I demand Apple prove that unicorns don't exist. If they don't, well then, they must be hiding some, probably in China.

Are their defective phones out of the 20 million made so far? I'm certain of it. Will Apple stand behind their product and replace them? More than likely. After all they have built an infrastructure to do just that. Of all the phone suppliers in the world, Apple has consistently demonstrated they will replace a bad product. Far and away more effectively than the others.
Click to expand...

Hilarious! Thank you! Off to get some photos of Unicorns, now that I know where they are :)
 
Cape Dave said:
Hilarious! Thank you! Off to get some photos of Unicorns, now that I know where they are :)
Click to expand...
Remember trying to photograph a unicorn is like trying to find a specific electron around a given atom. The mear act of looking at it, alters where it is. Quantum physics is weird stuff. Soon as shudder clicks unicorn is instantly in Cupertino.
 
HEK said:
Apple used Samsung chips in most phones till TSMC came up with a 20 nanometer process for the A8 chip in iPhone 6. That chip has 2 Billion, with a "B" transistors on something the size of postage stamp. Looked like Apple could finally use alternative to Samsung that was better.

Apple was going to use the TSMC chip in next iPhone 6s A9 SoC. But then the following happened.

TSMC management pissed off chief designer of chip process/design by giving a titled promotion to someone else and the guy felt he deserved it and left TSMC taking a teaching position at Korean university saying his wife is Korean and wanted to move back. Turns out this university is a front for Samsung and the guy didn't do much teaching. And if I recall correctly, his wife never did move from Taiwan back to Korea. Of course he had all the information on new 14/16 nanometer process.

Somehow (tongue in cheek) Samsung got a hold of the new process and rapidly tooled up this new process. Then offered Apple a cut rate price on their production version of A9 chip. Undercutting TSMC by a huge margin. The design is Apple's, how it is manufactured is is TSMC and Samsung.

So Apple seeing a large profit, as well as safeguarding risk with only one manufacturer decided to have the chip produced by both. This will of course drive down the price of the A10 chip for the iPhone 7. Having two companies compete for the contract.

So as Paul Harvey used to say, "Now you have the rest of the story"
Click to expand...

Your story is based off skewed facts that give the wrong impression.

While most of that is true to a certain extent this all started when Linag Mong-Song (the chief engineer you referred to) left TSMC in 2009.

Any rapid retooling that may have been done has very little to do with this one man.

Here is his whole story.

http://english.cw.com.tw/article.do?action=show&id=14895

And here is an actual article dated in 2011.

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20110707000033&cid=1206

I actually read about him a couple years ago while doing research on Intel and AMD semi conductor manufacturing processes. Pretty interesting stuff IMO.
 
I'm running the Samsung chip and have no regrets about keeping it. My phone performs very well, with more than enough battery to last me a day. I don't dwell on negative specs, especially since it doesn't have any impact on my ability to use my phone as I want.

I don't spend any effort running benchmarks - they're worthless to me... the real test is how well it performs to meet my needs.
 
cynics said:
Your story is based off skewed facts that give the wrong impression.

While most of that is true to a certain extent this all started when Linag Mong-Song (the chief engineer you referred to) left TSMC in 2009.

Any rapid retooling that may have been done has very little to do with this one man.

Here is his whole story.

http://english.cw.com.tw/article.do?action=show&id=14895

And here is an actual article dated in 2011.

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20110707000033&cid=1206

I actually read about him a couple years ago while doing research on Intel and AMD semi conductor manufacturing processes. Pretty interesting stuff IMO.
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting articles. I was going from memory so time line was compressed incorrectly by me, but the fact that he gave proprietory information to Samsung that allowed them to jump ahead of where they would have been is true. What have the courts ruled on this?

There are all sorts of this stuff that happened and is happening. The original menu pull down, Windows graphical interface with mouse and interconnected office was all developed at Xerox PARC and viewed by Jobs on a tour. Find it hilarious and ironic that Xerox executives didn't listen to their own R&D people.
 
MaciMac100 said:
First they talk about CPU, but then they start to test all other chips than CPU. Am I missing something here?
Click to expand...
Yup, you are missing that unless all you ever do with your phone is run the geektest it doesn't matter. The CPU chip is only one component and does not even represent the greatest battery draining components.

I use my whole phone, all the parts inside. So a test that mimics that use means more to me, than isolating one chip. I believe it has been clearly demonstrated that the chip type alone is a poor demonstrator of how any given phone's battery life will behave in real world use.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top