Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Future iPhones Could Use Samsung's Industry-First LPDDR5 DRAM

Feenician said:
How far would you take it? You seem to be saying (and I don’t want to put words in your mouth, so tell me if I’m wrong. I acknowledge I may have misinterpreted you) that, for example, Apple should be forced to license their Ax architecture and/or sell their chips to others. Should Tesla be forced to share the code, or at least sell/license the IP for their self driving technologies then? Should Audi, Mercedes and all the rest? Seems to me that pattern ultimately results in a monoculture, if everyone has to share and everyone has to give back. In sounds a lot like the Socialist ideal, verging on Communism (mods, I promise I will not take this any more in a PRSI direction. If that’s already too much, I understand.)



Who can say? They’re obviously very tightly tied together now, even as Apple try to minimize their ongoing reliance on them. Ultimately Apple will likely succeed in that, though they may have to get very spendy helping other suppliers to raise their game. Apple can replace Samsung, eventually, but I’m not so clear that Samsung could ever replace the revenue hole left by Apple with another single customer. I doubt it will do substantial damage to either party.
Click to expand...

Why would they do that?

an Apple led consortium bought out Toshibas memory business. Guess they don’t have to rely on Samsung memory business for much longer.
 
Falhófnir said:
Yet again Samsung pushes the industry forward whilst any meaningful development Apple does is patented and locked down not to be shared with anyone...
Click to expand...

Samsung publishes a crapton of patents every year, more than Apple.

You really think they are sharing anything with anyone?

Shoot, if you want their stuff, you’ll pay for it. Same for Apple or any other company.
 
FFR said:
an Apple led consortium bought out Toshibas memory business. Guess they don’t have to rely on Samsung memory business for much longer.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm having trouble interpreting whether you're agreeing or disagreeing with me. Can you clarify?
 
Feenician said:
But Samsung don't love you. They don't love anyone. Neither do Apple for that matter. They act in their own best interests and sometimes, many times, that coincides with your best interests.

The example of OLED you use, you seem to have misunderstood in my opinion. Samsung didn't invent OLED, so they can't prevent others using it. They absolutely do not share their proprietary SAMOLED technology (which they did indeed move the state of the art massively forward with. No disputing that) with LG or anyone else. LG did their own R&D. They will sell anyone with deep enough pockets panels, but they are not giving away the Crown Jewels for the good of the world, or the industry.
Click to expand...

Umm Samsung is licensing amoled . They never invented it.

Samsung fanboys think Samsung invented everything they are just a component manufacturer easily replaced.
 
FFR said:
Umm Samsung is licensing amoled . They never invented it.

Samsung fanboys think Samsung invented everything they are just a component manufacturer easily replaced.
Click to expand...

I feel like we're getting our wires crossed here :oops: I said they never invented it, though I didn't know they were licensing the base technology.
 
Feenician said:
But Samsung don't love you. They don't love anyone. Neither do Apple for that matter. They act in their own best interests and sometimes, many times, that coincides with your best interests.

The example of OLED you use, you seem to have misunderstood in my opinion. Samsung didn't invent OLED, so they can't prevent others using it. They absolutely do not share their proprietary SAMOLED technology (which they did indeed move the state of the art massively forward with. No disputing that) with LG or anyone else. LG did their own R&D. They will sell anyone with deep enough pockets panels, but they are not giving away the Crown Jewels for the good of the world, or the industry.
Click to expand...
Of course not, but my point is, Apple develops piece of technology. Piece of technology is always for their own use, never to also be sold on for others to use as well. Piece of technology will also be heavily patented, preventing other companies from coming anywhere near the functionality it provides. Let's use FaceID as an example - if Samsung want to improve their generic face recognition technology - which they have had since before the iPhone X was introduced, so I don't buy the 'they're just copying' argument in this instance - and they come across a method which is suitably close to FaceID's implementation it infringes on Apple's patent - they're stuck either not being able to progress or else having to pour resources into finding a workaround that is just different from Apples. If Apple licensed the Face ID tech, perhaps instead Samsung could license that technology. Apple would make money back for it's R&D, Samsung wouldn't have to waste resources duplicating Apple's R&D and finding patent workarounds and everyone is better off.
 
KPandian1 said:
So, what were you saying? "Apple - Bad, Samsung - Good"?
Click to expand...

Huh? No, not at all. I'm not sure why that post is being misinterpreted. I wasn't saying either are good or bad. I'm saying in the first paragraph that both merely act in their own self interest. And I'm saying in the second paragraph, in reply to Falhofnir saying that Samsung selflessly allow others to use OLED, that they couldn't stop others using OLED even if they did want to. They have however done their own work on top of it, and produce the best mobile OLED panels as a result.

I'm genuinely confused that people seem to be reading it differently.


Feenician said:
But Samsung don't love you. They don't love anyone. Neither do Apple for that matter. They act in their own best interests and sometimes, many times, that coincides with your best interests.

The example of OLED you use, you seem to have misunderstood in my opinion. Samsung didn't invent OLED, so they can't prevent others using it. They absolutely do not share their proprietary SAMOLED technology (which they did indeed move the state of the art massively forward with. No disputing that) with LG or anyone else. LG did their own R&D. They will sell anyone with deep enough pockets panels, but they are not giving away the Crown Jewels for the good of the world, or the industry.
Click to expand...
 
KPandian1 said:
No, you did not.
Click to expand...

I feel like I'm having a stroke or something.

Feenician said:
But Samsung don't love you. They don't love anyone. Neither do Apple for that matter. They act in their own best interests and sometimes, many times, that coincides with your best interests.

The example of OLED you use, you seem to have misunderstood in my opinion. Samsung didn't invent OLED, so they can't prevent others using it. They absolutely do not share their proprietary SAMOLED technology (which they did indeed move the state of the art massively forward with. No disputing that) with LG or anyone else. LG did their own R&D. They will sell anyone with deep enough pockets panels, but they are not giving away the Crown Jewels for the good of the world, or the industry.
Click to expand...
[doublepost=1531847571][/doublepost]
FFR said:
My bad I got mixed up between you and the other poster.

Yes it’s a company called universal display.

https://www.oled-info.com/investment/samsung_licenses_oled_patents_from_universal_display
Click to expand...

Starting to think I was taking crazy pills here! :eek:
 
  • Like
Reactions: FFR
Feenician said:
Huh? No, not at all. They have however done their own work on top of it, and produce the best mobile OLED panels as a result.

I'm genuinely confused that people seem to be reading it differently.
Click to expand...

I did make a mistake - the signature at the top confused me; both starting with F, you F(ee) and the Samsung fan F(al)! Sorry about that - you'd replied by the time I realized and edited.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Feenician
MacRumors said:

Samsung says the prototype chip boasts a data rate of up to 6.4 Gbps, [...]
Click to expand...

Note: That is 6.4 Gbps per pin. So if you have a 64-bit bus, it's 6.4 Gbps × 64 = 409.6 Gbps or 51.2 GBps. Again, that's more than 50 Gigabytes per second.
 
KPandian1 said:
I did make a mistake - the signature at the top confused me; both starting with F, you F(ee) and the Samsung fan F(al)! Sorry about that - you'd replied by the time I realized and edited.
Click to expand...

Nope - not a stroke! At least not by me, hopefully!:)
 
Feenician said:
So would you judge, say, Tesla by the same standard? They buy tires from Pirelli, having Pirelli doing their R&D for them as you frame Apple and Samsung in this context. At the same time they research and develop their own technologies, but don't share or even sell to them others. Do you view Tesla as retarding progress?

(btw car analogies are always terrible but it's the first company I came up with)
Click to expand...

Actually Tesla open sourced all their research on electric vehicles so that other companies can build electric cars faster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Feenician
KPandian1 said:
I did make a mistake - the signature at the top confused me; both starting with F, you F(ee) and the Samsung fan F(al)! Sorry about that - you'd replied by the time I realized and edited.
Click to expand...

No worries. It happens. Between you can @FFR mistaking me for the other poster though, it was about the most confusing interaction I've had here. I'm like, "B..b..but that's what I said :("
[doublepost=1531848026][/doublepost]
neutralguy said:
Actually Tesla open sourced all their research on electric vehicles so that other companies can build electric cars faster.
Click to expand...

I knew a car analogy would let me down. Darn car analogies.
 
It's ok guys. Even though I got here first and hold the patent on the basic shape of my name, I am licensing it for a small fee. It's for the good of humanity as a whole. @Falhófnir - please send me a check for $5 monthly :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Falhófnir
ignatius345 said:
News flash: these companies only exist to make money. All this talk about "doing things for people" aside, Apple and Samsung are responsible only to their shareholders, to the laws of the jurisdictions in which they operate, and to anyone they enter into legal contracts with. That's it. There's no "greater good" here. Apple hoards their cash overseas because it is financially beneficial for them to do so.

I happen to (mostly) like Apple products and services, but I'm not under any illusions here: they serve me well because they make a lot of money by doing so. That same logic drives all of the decisions a company like this makes, up and down the scale.
Click to expand...
Eh, I guess it's just a difference in perspective. I was always taught growing up that we have much more than most, and therefore it's good to be generous and altruism is a virtue. I also spent a fair amount of time in Scandinavia where common good is a big thing. YMMV but that's how I see it, all companies are self-interested first and foremost, but Apple in particular seem more willing to take without giving back, as I've discussed in my back-and-forward with Feenician
 
NightFox said:
The consumer is better served by the success of an industry rather than the success of a specific company. No one's disputing Apple's success story, but I'm still surprised how people seem to value Apple's interests above their own personal interests as consumers.
Click to expand...
I think it's because some people have been around Apple a long time and remember when they almost went under. They almost lost Apple forever and want what is best for Apple first because they worry about that happening again—especially since they see them making some changes that are similar to ones they made in the 90s. It's more like these people see Apple's best interest as their best interest because if something bad were to happen to Apple then they would be stuck with Android and Windows and that's a world for some of us too dark to comprehend, lol. But I get what you're saying. There are a lot of people who are more invested in Apple than themselves for some strange reason—especially the younger ones among us who have no real reason to be—and it's kinda creepy sometimes. I'm kinda in the middle having been a kid when Apple's troubles were going on but having those lessons taught to me and shaped my formative teenage and college years learning about technology so I feel like I can understand both sides. Some people just get really invested in companies like they're a sports team that they're rooting for. Apple also tends to align itself with certain philosophies—both political and cultural on issues such as marriage rights, equality, environmental issues, and privacy. So perhaps that's why some people get more wrapped up in Apple. They see their identity in Apple's corporate culture and align themselves with that more than they should. And Apple is very much cognizant that such things exist and is likely a part of their marketing strategy. I tend to believe it's a mix of both. I don't think Apple would have leaned so hard into certain initiatives if they didn't think it would benefit them financially in the long-run. But I also think they have a better moral compass than most companies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mizhou and NightFox
Feenician said:
It's ok guys. Even though I got here first and hold the patent on the basic shape of my name, I am licensing it for a small fee. It's for the good of humanity as a whole. @Falhófnir - please send me a check for $5 monthly :p
Click to expand...
Crikey that's a good deal I bet you could hold out for at least $6.50 ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back