or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by tooltalk

 @konqerror: eh?  Common Platform is long gone.  TSMC's processing is based on Intel's whereas CP from IBM's, but with IBM gone or now part of GF, Samsung is leading the pack (or GF).   TSMC never had 14nm processing -- they are still trying to get 16+nm up and running later this year -- and Samsung copied TSMCM's 14nm process?  Umm, which planet are you from?
 I recall that rumor too.  It's laughable that Apple was trying to get TSMC to dedicate their foundries for meager $1B -- TSMC's expected to spend $10B in CapEx for their 16nm ramp-up this year, while Samsung is spending $15B.   AMD and Qualcomm are reportedly ditching TSMC for Samsung 14nm processing as well, so Apple's offer wouldn't have made any difference.  No wonder Apple is so profitable (so little CapEx or R&D relatively speaking). 
  Sandisk was collecting about $350+M annually in licensing fees alone from Samsung -- Samsung actually tried to buy Sandisk back in 2008.  Anobit was also founded by some of the key members of Sandisk and Samsung was their largest customer -- and the young start-up had only a few at the time -- before Apple eventually bought it. To say the business doesn't make any profit is a bit silly. Not sure if Samsung continued to invest heavily in their tech after the acquisition,...
  "Samsung didn’t file the petitions to save Apple -- its own fight with Smartflash is scheduled for an August trial in Tyler, Texas, though Samsung may ask that it be put off until the patent office completes the reviews. In the suit, Tyler-based Smartflash claims Samsung’s Media Hub uses the technology without paying royalties." "In all, six Smartflash patents were asserted against both Apple and Samsung. The patent office has already agreed to review five of them. Some...
 Sure, but what is known is that there is no other competitor offering the same kind of product today.  This Bloomberg article notes that TSMC is *still* trying to bring up their next generation processing, 16nm, while Samsung has already gone "mass production" with their 14nm.  The only other custom foundry offering 14nm processing is GlobalFoundry -- Glofo licenses Samsung's tech and they are essentially sharing the orders from Apple.  TSMC was expected to have their...
 I don't see where "Samsung has created a display specifically" to cater Apple in the article.  It's not uncommon to see a team of dedicated sales/pre-sales team for big clients like AT&T, Apple, Verizon, etc, etc.
 @Ecats : Firstly, the AMOLED manufacturing is known to be notoriously difficult and costly that only Samsung has been able to produce them in volume.   Remember when HTC was forced to switch to SONY Super TFT-LCDs from AMOLED because Samsung couldn't produce enough of them for outside customers?  That was back in 2010 and Samsung is still pretty much the only one. Second, the first three-month sales usually accounts for about 35% of Apple's annual iphone sales and,...
 @thewhitebeaner : Samsung is pretty much the only game in mobile OLED display biz and has been pretty much from the getgo.  Their marketshare for AMOLED, for instance, is still around 90% or so and LG and other competitors are still trying to catch up. Samsung is also the largest consumers of mobile OLED displays.  Once again, Apple is crawling back to Samsung for parts.. 
@DavidW : well, going to court to settle a patent dispute is not just limited to SEPs.  And, as for your nonsensical comment about Apple being such a well-behaving litigator,  at least one judge in a Western district case involving Moto and Apple (11-cv-00178-bbc) doesn't think so. Apple quite boldly refused to accept the court's decision unless their decision favors them and Judge Crabbs upon hearing Apple's absurd argument dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice.  The same...
a minor correction :   "Why are you fighting it?" Moore asked Apple. "Why am I wasting my time?"   Moore asked Samsung, not Apple. 
New Posts  All Forums: