Samsung's Exclusive Contract for iOS Device Chips Expiring in June as A7 for iPhone 6 Heads to TSMC?

[Michael Goff]

This is thermonuclear, Apple/Jobs style.

Knowing Apple's custom ARM CPU design is absolutely something of interest for Samsung.

Surprised Intel isn't mentioned, they could be another option for A7

Btw: buying Apple products is buying American.

That is all.

What ate you going on about?

Samsung has been making SoC for far longer than Apple, and they haven't exactly been copying. Samsung has been leading in the CPU portion of the SoC for a while. And it isn't even like Apple has anything like the octa-core.

 

[nick_elt]

Btw: buying Apple products is buying American.

That is all.

yeh, right.......

 

[irDigital0l]

Wait didn't people want Samsung screens compared to LG screens for the Retina MacBook Pro?

 

[SockRolid]

... Apple will need to use a different solution for its 2013 iOS device models, with options including a die shrink of the current A6 chip from 32-nm to 28-nm, a more substantially revamped A6 chip, or an early A7 chip based on a 28-nm process.

Lowest risk: die shrink of the current A6 chip from 32-nm to 28-nm.

Bigger risk + bigger benefit: an early A7 chip based on a 28-nm process.

Shrinking chips is pretty routine. Safe and sane.
But I think it would be best for TSMC to start working with the A7 ASAP.
Maybe just with 2 cores like the A6 currently has. This would let TSMC get used
to manufacturing the A7, bring up yields, and ship the 28nm version in 2013.

Then they could shrink it for 2014, crank up the clock speed, and add 2 more cores.
Apple needs to ship a quad-core processor next year, especially if iOS 7 / 8 have
some new processor-intensive features (augmented reality or whatever.)

Alternatively, if TSMC isn't ready to build 28nm A7s in massive numbers, TSMC could
build a die-shrunk A6 for the mobile iOS devices while experimenting with A7 production.
Apple could put the early A7 in Apple TV, like they (apparently) did with early production
samples of the A5 in 2012. They could just disable the weaker of the two cores.

 

[samcraig]

Wait didn't people want Samsung screens compared to LG screens for the Retina MacBook Pro?

Yes - a point I've made a couple of times in the thread.

 

[JohnDoe98]

Wait didn't people want Samsung screens compared to LG screens for the Retina MacBook Pro?

Yep, as well as other parts. But here's the thing. Apple could require a higher quality control of the other manufacturers to achieve the same quality produced by Samsung. The issue isn't so much as to who provides the parts but how diligent Apple is in its evaluation of those produced parts. The main problem with the LG screens was the image retention. Fix that and the LG screens would be perfectly fine.

 

[deconstruct60]

It is my contention that if it weren't for Apple revealing it's OS to Bill Gates and Microsoft in the early days so that MS could cut its teeth developing GUI apps (such as Microsoft Word in 1984 BEFORE it was created for Windows which didn't exist until 1989),

You can contend that, but it isn't what happened.

" ... story of Windows dates back to September 1981, when Chase Bishop, a computer scientist, designed the first model of an electronic device and project "Interface Manager" was started. It was announced in November 1983 (after the Apple Lisa, but before the Macintosh) under the name "Windows", but Windows 1.0 was not released until November 1985. ... "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows#Early_versions

Did it look alot like the Xerox PARC GUI ? No. It is a bunch of revisionist history though that only Apple was aware of the kinds of interfaces being developed at PARC and other research labs at the time.

1989 is really Windows 3.0 and yes that is what "took off" in the Marketplace to outpace the Mac as being the more widely used GUI.

1989-1990 was where IBM and Microsoft broke up. OS/2 also started well before 1989

" ... The development of OS/2 began when IBM and Microsoft signed the "Joint Development Agreement" in August 1985.[3][4] It was code-named "CP/DOS" and it took two years for the first product to be delivered. ... "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/2#1985-1988:_Enthusiastic_beginnings

Microsoft gained leverage with Word/Excel on Mac OS in the transition to Windows 3.0 in part because the other Application providers let Microsoft largely have the Mac OS base without as much competition. Most of them were not beating heavily on every horse in the race ( DOS, Windows, OS/2, and Mac OS ). Certainly Microsoft knew somewhat in advance that they were going to pull the rug out from under OS/2.

 

[clibinarius]

It is my contention that if it weren't for Apple revealing it's OS to Bill Gates and Microsoft in the early days so that MS could cut its teeth developing GUI apps (such as Microsoft Word in 1984 BEFORE it was created for Windows which didn't exist until 1989), Windows would not have been born and Microsoft would likely have curled up and died long ago.

Also Apple surely could have found another chip vendor other than Samsung, but that relationship was working fine until Samsung started stealing Apple's product designs.

Honestly, Samsung's phones are outselling the iPhone and unless the next iPhone comes up really big...I would prefer a Galaxy 3S (4) over an iphone any day of the week. But I don't want to deal with google. Now...if there is as much of a gap between the 3S and iPhone 5S as it looks like there will be...I will finally jump ship.

Saying Samsung is stealing Apple's designs is like saying that a high speed train is a rip off of a horse drawn buggy.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Hopefully quality and performance doesn't suffer if Apple does move to a second tier supplier like it has in the past.

 

[nia820]

This I agree with... Samsung does not want to be friends. They want to compete, so Apple should remove Samsung as a supplier.

I don't know why so may seem to think Samsung designs the A Series chips???? They supply them under contract, but Apple is the designer of the chip. Getting the chip out of Samsung I think is a good thing. Like it or not, Samsung has proven they too (like everyone in high tech) will steal ideas.

if apple could fine a proper alternative then so be it. but apple's other suppliers have put out sub par product. just look at the lg screens. they were utter crap compared to samsungs.

 

[xofruitcake]

Honestly, the only thing Samsung could divine from Apple's manufacturing orders are the make and speed of processors in their next device. There isn't much info they can gleam from that, other than how it compares to their current processor lineup.

Don't forget the cost, schedule and unit volume by quarter. Shipment location also indicate the manufacturing plan. Let's say they produce A7 for Apple and Apple said they need 30m unit in June, given the traditional manfacturing schedule, you can easily induce that Apple is building 30M unit of new Iphone for mid-late Sept launch..And you can easily take that information to your Note 3 team and figure out a window for the launch events..

----------

Lowest risk: die shrink of the current A6 chip from 32-nm to 28-nm.

Bigger risk + bigger benefit: an early A7 chip based on a 28-nm process.

Shrinking chips is pretty routine. Safe and sane.
But I think it would be best for TSMC to start working with the A7 ASAP.
Maybe just with 2 cores like the A6 currently has. This would let TSMC get used
to manufacturing the A7, bring up yields, and ship the 28nm version in 2013.

Then they could shrink it for 2014, crank up the clock speed, and add 2 more cores.
Apple needs to ship a quad-core processor next year, especially if iOS 7 / 8 have
some new processor-intensive features (augmented reality or whatever.)

Alternatively, if TSMC isn't ready to build 28nm A7s in massive numbers, TSMC could
build a die-shrunk A6 for the mobile iOS devices while experimenting with A7 production.
Apple could put the early A7 in Apple TV, like they (apparently) did with early production
samples of the A5 in 2012. They could just disable the weaker of the two cores.

I think the situation is more complicate than just A7. Ipad, Ipad mini, low cost Iphone, Ipod, Iwatch, ITV all need CPU with various technology. It make a lot of sense for Apple to use Snapdragon for the low cost Iphone. Managing that many different Ax processors with different units requirement is hellish transitioning to a new fab. And I serous doubt that TSMC has that many spare capacity. I would think that the older chip (A6 and A5) will continue to come from Samsung until different version of A7 (or A8) is used in all Apple device. It will be at least another two years before Apple can completely get rid of Samsung..

 

[wbeasley]

Now Samsung will have spare capacity

they can get onto making the millions of sWatches they keep hinting about.

Or do they have to wait until "someone else" delivers a product before they release it?

It would be nice for Samsung to actually knock all the nah-Sayers for six by actually releasing a product that couldn't be accused of copying...

 

[Renzatic]

It would be nice for Samsung to actually knock all the nah-Sayers for six by actually releasing a product that couldn't be accused of copying...

You mean like the S3 & 4, the Note line, the...oh hell. Why am I wasting my time?

 

[Dmunjal]

I don't know why so may seem to think Samsung designs the A Series chips???? They supply them under contract, but Apple is the designer of the chip. Getting the chip out of Samsung I think is a good thing. Like it or not, Samsung has proven they too (like everyone in high tech) will steal ideas.

You do know that Samsung designs their own ARM chips (Exynos) that are every bit as fast as the A7 and are up to 8 cores?

Also, most of the real innovation comes from ARM Holdings that supplies the architecture to both.

 

[ftaok]

I disagree. Not to mention - the OP spoke of iOS - not product roadmap.

And again - just because they order chips and screens and nand doesn't mean all three are in one specific product.

I can order Eggs, Milk and Sugar from a supplier - that doesn't mean I'm making a cake. Or cookies. I could be making just about anything.

But it's not just screens, chips, and CPUs. It's all of that plus even more intimate details. There's quantities and delivery dates. There's screen sizes and resolutions. There's also special features that apple may ask for that could provide a glimpse into apple's plans.

For instance, if Samsung got an order for a super small CPU/GPU, plus an order for a high resolution 2.5" square screen, wouldn't that pint to an upcoming smartwatch? And knowing Apple's cost for these two components could give Samsung insight into what apple would price this smartwatch at. Samsung would also be privy to Apple's expected quantities and release date. All of these things can be gleaned from knowing these intimate details.

It's too much to expect Samsung to keep firewalls up between their component and mobile divisions, so Apple is making plans to separate themselves from a super who also happens to be a competitor. It's a business decision and ultimately the wisdom behind the move will play out over the next couple of years.

Oh, and obviously, the OP meant iOS device roadmap, not the actual roadmap for the iOS software. Samsung has nothing to do with the software and supplying components to Apple wouldn't give them any edge on the OS front b

----------

You do know that Samsung designs their own ARM chips (Exynos) that are every bit as fast as the A7 and are up to 8 cores?

Also, most of the real innovation comes from ARM Holdings that supplies the architecture to both.

oh, you mean the octa-core chip that they can't supply enough of to put into all S4's? They have to go with Qcom's 4-core chip for some pretty big markets, USA included.

Disclaimer - I do realize that the decision to go with the Snapdragon has much to do with the markets that have high penetration of LTE coverage. But still, it looks bad when many of the big markets get the "crappy" chip on the next big thing.

 

[Renzatic]

For instance, if Samsung got an order for a super small CPU/GPU, plus an order for a high resolution 2.5" square screen, wouldn't that pint to an upcoming smartwatch? And knowing Apple's cost for these two components could give Samsung insight into what apple would price this smartwatch at. Samsung would also be privy to Apple's expected quantities and release date. All of these things can be gleaned from knowing these intimate details.

I'd think that being a both a competitor in the same market and a manufacturer themselves, Samsung would be well aware of the cost and availability of all these components. The only hint they'd get from a list of parts would be that they'd know Apple was building a smartwatch a few months ahead of everyone else.

 

[ftaok]

I'd think that being a both a competitor in the same market and a manufacturer themselves, Samsung would be well aware of the cost and availability of all these components. The only hint they'd get from a list of parts would be that they'd know Apple was building a smartwatch a few months ahead of everyone else.

and if the smartwatch is the next big thing, wouldn't a three month head start be something worth protecting?

Now, I'm no futurist and I have no real idea as to what the next big thing is, but if Apple does indeed have something big and new planned, it's in their best interest to keep any and all information out of their competitor's hands. Unless Samsung is the only supplier of a critical part, get it from someone that poses no competitive threat. Would McDonalds ever source a key ingredient to their newest culinary product from a processing faculty owned by Burger King? Of course not, and neither should Apple.

 

[Renzatic]

and if the smartwatch is the next big thing, wouldn't a three month head start be something worth protecting?

It'd be worth something, I'm sure. Though I'm not exactly sure what. Plus a slight peek ahead is only worth so much for a product untested by the market.

Now, I'm no futurist and I have no real idea as to what the next big thing is, but if Apple does indeed have something big and new planned, it's in their best interest to keep any and all information out of their competitor's hands. Unless Samsung is the only supplier of a critical part, get it from someone that poses no competitive threat. Would McDonalds ever source a key ingredient to their newest culinary product from a processing faculty owned by Burger King? Of course not, and neither should Apple.

You're right to a point. If I were Apple, I wouldn't want my direct competitor knowing what I was building, even if there wasn't much they could do with the information. They'll never throw something completely unprecedented their way, because...

A. Samsung is about in the same boat as Apple as far as processors go. Both are working on their own designs from the same source material.

and...

B. If they're able to fulfill a brand new Apple designed processor order, then it means they've probably been able to make similar processors themselves.

So really, there's not much Samsung can gain from knowing what Apple is making. If Apple were to release something absolutely mindblowingly different, what could Samsung do in this three months? They'd have to whip up their own prototype to compete against and already designed and nearly ready to release product within that amount of time. If they show off something halfassed and barely working, it'll only make Apple's product look that much better in comparison.

 

[ftaok]

So really, there's not much Samsung can gain from knowing what Apple is making. If Apple were to release something absolutely mindblowingly different, what could Samsung do in this three months? They'd have to whip up their own prototype to compete against and already designed and nearly ready to release product within that amount of time. If they show off something halfassed and barely working, it'll only make Apple's product look that much better in comparison.

How about this for a hypothetical. Remember back when apple introduced the ipad2. It was so much thinner than the original iPad. Prior to the ipad2 being presented, Samsung had their Tab10 being shown at some trade shows. After the ipad2 was shown, Samsung pulled their Tab10 back for a redesign to make it thinner.

Now imagine if Samsung manufacturered tge aluminum backs for apple. They would have gotten advanced knowledge of what apple was up to in regards to the thinness of the ipad2. As it were, Samsung had wasted a lot of time with their first rendition of the Tab10, and had to quickly cobble together a thinner Tab10 in the span of a few months. They got it out the door, slightly thinner than the ipad2 to boot.

Don't discount what Samsung can do with advanced knowledge of what Apple is doing. They've proven that they can make quick changes on the fly after seeing what's been released. Imagine what the original Tab10 could have been if they had known what the ipad2 was going to be like 3 months before the intro.

 

[Renzatic]

How about this for a hypothetical. Remember back when apple introduced the ipad2. It was so much thinner than the original iPad. Prior to the ipad2 being presented, Samsung had their Tab10 being shown at some trade shows. After the ipad2 was shown, Samsung pulled their Tab10 back for a redesign to make it thinner.

Now imagine if Samsung manufacturered tge aluminum backs for apple. They would have gotten advanced knowledge of what apple was up to in regards to the thinness of the ipad2. As it were, Samsung had wasted a lot of time with their first rendition of the Tab10, and had to quickly cobble together a thinner Tab10 in the span of a few months. They got it out the door, slightly thinner than the ipad2 to boot.

Don't discount what Samsung can do with advanced knowledge of what Apple is doing. They've proven that they can make quick changes on the fly after seeing what's been released. Imagine what the original Tab10 could have been if they had known what the ipad2 was going to be like 3 months before the intro.

Yup, I remember that. But didn't all that happen after Apple started showing off the completed iPad 2 at the keynote, and not beforehand, while the parts were still running down the manufacturing lines?

Here, it's less Samsung using their insider position to get a jump on Apple, and more they got embarrassed by the competition and went back to the drawing boards to save some face.

This didn't do a thing to hurt Apple. If anything, it made them look better because of the way Samsung reacted to it.

 

[ftaok]

Yup, I remember that. But didn't all that happen after Apple started showing off the completed iPad 2 at the keynote, and not beforehand, while the parts were still running down the manufacturing lines?

Here, it's less Samsung using their insider position to get a jump on Apple, and more they got embarrassed by the competition and went back to the drawing boards to save some face.

This didn't do a thing to hurt Apple. If anything, it made them look better because of the way Samsung reacted to it.

Exactly my point. Samsung was able to drop back and punt. Three months later, they had a new Tab10 that was thinner than the ipad2. This is exactly why apple has to keep information out of Samsung's hands. Had they had knowledge about the ipad2 beforehand, the Tab10 would have been dramatically better than what they ultimately released and might have dented iPad sales.

 

[Renzatic]

Exactly my point. Samsung was able to drop back and punt. Three months later, they had a new Tab10 that was thinner than the ipad2. This is exactly why apple has to keep information out of Samsung's hands. Had they had knowledge about the ipad2 beforehand, the Tab10 would have been dramatically better than what they ultimately released and might have dented iPad sales.

Yeah, but you're missing one important point (I think, this happened awhile ago and I've slept since then).

Samsung didn't redesign the Tab10 before the announcement. Only after everyone saw Steve Jobs brag about it during the keynote speech. They didn't use their insider position to get a heads up on what Apple was doing. They only learned how thin the 2 was the same moment the general public did.

Plus, I don't believe Samsung manufactures any of the chassis for the iDevices. They're a fab plant for Apple, responsible for screens, processors, and ram.

 

[Oletros]

Exactly my point. Samsung was able to drop back and punt. Three months later, they had a new Tab10 that was thinner than the ipad2. This is exactly why apple has to keep information out of Samsung's hands. Had they had knowledge about the ipad2 beforehand, the Tab10 would have been dramatically better than what they ultimately released and might have dented iPad sales.

Apart that the redesign was made AFTER the iPad 2 was presented, I still don't understand how a SoC manufacturing can give Samsung an insider knowledge about the case or the battery size

 

[Popeye206]

You do know that Samsung designs their own ARM chips (Exynos) that are every bit as fast as the A7 and are up to 8 cores?

Also, most of the real innovation comes from ARM Holdings that supplies the architecture to both.

Interesting.... yet they use a Snapdragon chip in their own flagship phone? Either way.... proves that Apple does not NEED samsung as some seem to think.

BTW... I do think it's too bad that Samsung and Apple have come to this crossroad - I think Samsung is a good manufacture, but I can see why Apple would want to distance themselves from this old partner.

 

[fourthtunz]

I think both companies are great but this does seem a case of biting the hand that feeds you, or at least maybe nibbling!