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.
More Claims of Samsung Being Cut Out of Apple's A7 Chip Development
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For some reason this site has been insistent on referring to a 20nm TSMC fabbed chip from Apple as the A7. More than likely we'll see a 28nm TSMC chip this Fall that Apple calls A7. A_X are reserved for iPads.
Dear Apple,
Thank you for not feeding the troll.
Sincerely, a stock holder.
Every dollar Apple spends on Samsung is a dollar Samsung can spend against Apple. In war, there is only one good way to give the enemy ammunition.
Note: Every dollar Apple spends with a Samsung competitor makes that competitor stronger and Samsung weaker. Apple needs to invest in companies that compete with Samsung, any way they can.
Thank you for not feeding the troll.
Sincerely, a stock holder.
Every dollar Apple spends on Samsung is a dollar Samsung can spend against Apple. In war, there is only one good way to give the enemy ammunition.
Note: Every dollar Apple spends with a Samsung competitor makes that competitor stronger and Samsung weaker. Apple needs to invest in companies that compete with Samsung, any way they can.
If you consider the garbage Samsung puts out "competition" are you being equally stupid?
...
Diversifying is okay if it's for the right reasons. The ones you mentioned are. The fanboys that scream at the Samsung copy machine are not.
... for toilet paper.
The next chip will be called the i1.
(If not, it should be.)
Samsung doesn't have to get a single replacement client. Furthermore, if Apple is a "super duper large company that causes wafer availability problems" then some of TSMC's customers are going to be displaced. For example if Apple soaks up 75% of TSMC's 20nm process where are all of TSMC's 28nm customers going to move to when it comes time for them to shrink? Many of them will be looking for a a new fab. All Samsung has to do is offer as good or better quality than the other competitors to get most of that business.
Additionally, "smartphones and tablets" are not the only place many millions of ARM SoC can go into.
Apple is extremely unlikely to drop all A6 production all at once. First, there is at least a 60% chance TSMC is going to screw up the 20nm process initially. They have an established track record of rocky transitions. Apple couldn't possibly bet the whole farm on dumping Samsung in one swift move. That would be bozo move. Because if TSMC screws up Apple would basically hand Samsung an even bigger prize. Samsung would have all extra production capacity to fill the product shortage gap with their own more vertical products. This is likely going to be a measured and controlled transition to TSMC.
Samsung wouldn't have to fire folks. That is pretty lame solution. Just lower the wafer costs would bring in more customers. They could take an intermediate haircut on profit margin but it would still be profitable, the skilled workers employed (going to be hard to get them back. These aren't super low skill workers that pluck from country bumpkin rural locations. ).
When not happen about several thousands phones they had produced the Chairman of Samsung had them placed in a field and burned up. It isn't like Samsung wont push through an interim cut in profits to get to where they strategically want to go. To take TSMC customers by large amount all Samsung has to do is produce with better quality at lower cost. It wouldn't be that hard given the kinds of resources Samsung has.
You're reaction depends on the degree of threat you perceive.
Should you get back to basics when another company intends to steal your entire revenue stream and is profiting from components that they build for you in the process?
Google built Android because they realized that Mobile would replace Desktop PC web access. It was a reaction. And necessary. If they just said, "Let's ignore Apple and do business as usual.", Where would they be?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Moving from one Asian "copycat" supplier to another and not expecting TSMC to decide to expand into being more than they are is naive. Short term it will seem like a win for Apple. Longer term, Apple may be creating another competitor by sending Apple dollars to TSMC. Samsung didn't go to all that effort & expense to "copy" Apple because there wasn't a lot of profit in it... even if they would eventually lose Apple as a B2B customer. TSMC is going to see those same dollar signs and be funded with lots of Apple dollars... and want to grow/diversify their business beyond what they are now. Is Apple just creating a new Samsung in terms of directly competitive products? We'll probably argue "no" now... but just wait (all companies want to do new things, diversify from the "as is" and grow their profits).
Secondly, it's sad to know that what has been quality components that make our iDevices, etc go (and go well) are going to be replaced with less known and other company products known to not do things as well. If TSMC can't do their part as good as Samsung, we are currently celebrating what will lead to our future disappointment as consumers. We might as well be saying "rah, rah Apple... way to stick it to Samsung... and us" (potentially).
A lot of our current Apple stuff has Samsung stuff in them. And they work very well. Now Apple's going to substitute those guts from known quality to less known. Hopefully future Apple stuff will still work as well.
Maybe they have better Non-Compete clauses in their contracts this time around.
Not really. One of the primary reasons that Samsung uses the Qualcomm SoC is better radios for the targeted markets just as much as the ARM+GPU capabilities. Until Samsung comes up with better multiband, worldwide LTE coverage the Qualcomm solution has bigger upsides. They may catch up over time, but for right now Qualcomm has a substantial lead on a relatively broad front.
Sure they could use discrete Qualcomm modems like Apple does but Samsung's offerings don't have Apple's pricing margins. Both in the volume that Apple commits to ( because not in the radio business) and value add on overall product.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Maybe they have better Non-Compete clauses in their contracts this time around.
Like that would stop companies in that part of the world. Signatures on pieces of paper are just ink scribbles. Where the dollars are, so follows the opportunists. It's like patents preventing knockoffs over there (you can already buy iPhone 6 in some of those countries, of course it runs on Android or something else but it can come in an Apple box and look pretty much like it could be the real thing. And only $200 instead of $600+! $150 if you bargain. $100 if you try harder. $20 if you start to walk away without buying).
To move forward, you must not think of business partnerships as "stealing." It's possible for two companies to work together and both can profit. This point seems to be lost on most people.
What happens when these other chip manufacturers decide to make their own "competing" product? An endless game of switching manufacturers?
Companies like Apple & Google are at their best, not when they react to the market, but rather see an opportunity to do things better.
They will probably dominate. Most likely in two years Android phone manufacturers will switch to Intel Atom chips which will have a solid lead over ARM chips by then.
No, the numbers do not support your claim.
This is not the “I hate XYZ, because i've no other problems!”-thread.
This is not the “I do not buy product X, because i do not like CEO Y!”-thread.
----------
On the contrary! Samsung sells a lot of components to HTC, Nokia, Sony and many other big companies.
Not childish, but common sense. Would you want to stay with a supplier that has just been ordered to pay you half a billion dollars for copying your products? Who you can be sure is going to look for loopholes in your contracts to shaft you?
There's a massive risk that the next chip will run into unfortunate production problems if Apple stays with Samsung. Production problems that only happen with chips for iOS devices, not for others.
To move forward, you must not think of business partnerships as "stealing." It's possible for two companies to work together and both can profit. This point seems to be lost on most people.
What happens when these other chip manufacturers decide to make their own "competing" product? An endless game of switching manufacturers?
Companies like Apple & Google are at their best, not when they react to the market, but rather see an opportunity to do things better.
All those Patent suits have shown that the playing field is no longer friendly. The competitors seem like they are out for
blood.Maybe with TSMC they have better Non-Compete clauses in their contracts.
----------
Like that would stop companies in that part of the world. Signatures on pieces of paper are just ink scribbles. Where the dollars are, so follows the opportunists. It's like patents preventing knockoffs over there (you can already buy iPhone 6 in some of those countries, of course it runs on Android or something else but it can come in an Apple box and look pretty much like it could be the real thing. And only $200 instead of $600+! $150 if you bargain. $100 if you try harder. $20 if you start to walk away without buying).
A Higher Court can at least rule and decide on a Settlement.
----------
Like that would stop companies in that part of the world. Signatures on pieces of paper are just ink scribbles. Where the dollars are, so follows the opportunists. It's like patents preventing knockoffs over there (you can already buy iPhone 6 in some of those countries, of course it runs on Android or something else but it can come in an Apple box and look pretty much like it could be the real thing. And only $200 instead of $600+! $150 if you bargain. $100 if you try harder. $20 if you start to walk away without buying).
A Higher Court can at least rule and decide on a Settlement.
You can also write the damages into the agreement.
You are an idiot.
Do you think competing companies can't work together?
Do you think Sony should stop putting Windows 8 on their Sony laptops just because they compete with Microsoft in the gaming market?
Did you know Microsoft made games for the Nintendo DS even though Nintendo competes with them?
Do you think Subaru and Toyota should not of worked together to build the FR-S and BRZ when they did just because they are competing car companies?
Competing companies can still work together. Do you think Apple should work with a worse company just to get back at Samsung? That would only make the Apple chips suffer. Its a business... they aren't going to just get in bed with a crappy company to get back at Samsung.
You would only watch that stock you own drop.
Patent suits up, innovation down. Coincidence?All those Patent suits have shown that the playing field is no longer friendly. The competitors seem like they are out for
Maybe with TSMC they have better Non-Compete clauses in their contracts.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
An Asian High Court? Is that like the high courts that sided with the locals over the iPad name or the high courts that sided with the locals over clone of Apple stores selling clone of Apple products? Is that the $1 billion Samsung settlement that hasn't resulted in $1 changing hands? Etc.
I can't believe there is so much faith in written agreements made with some of those countries. For example, North Korea has signed many documents related to NOT developing their nuclear capabilities. That deal was made with higher powers than even Apple... but broken just the same.
Whatever diverifying means
I said diversify the suppliers. Adding TMC as a supplier qualifies. Apple still uses Samsung for memory chips.
This kind of diversity doesn't help though. I doubt diversity even factored into the equation. The whole point of diversity is so that even if one supplier is crippled for one reason or another (natural or otherwise), you're not dead in the water. TSMC and Samsung do enough diversifying on their own to make Apple diversifying chip manufacturers rather pointless, but that's generally the point. This is just substitution. TSMC has a few benefits over Samsung, one of which is not having one of your major competitors manufacturing highly-customized device components.
People
There's always an amount of "Co-opitition" (credit: Bill Gates) in the industry. Companies work together and compete. However Samsung made fun of Apple fans in commercials and crossed the line with copying. They simply cannot be trusted with Apple SoC designs. I would have lost all respect for Apple if they let a chintzy company like Samsung walk all over them.
Bring on TSMC.
There's always an amount of "Co-opitition" (credit: Bill Gates) in the industry. Companies work together and compete. However Samsung made fun of Apple fans in commercials and crossed the line with copying. They simply cannot be trusted with Apple SoC designs. I would have lost all respect for Apple if they let a chintzy company like Samsung walk all over them.
Bring on TSMC.