or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung to supply quad-core A6 CPU to Apple despite legal battle - report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung to supply quad-core A6 CPU to Apple despite legal battle - report - Page 2

post #41 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Um…?


You really should check the date on that article. It seems kinda old...
post #42 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Tou really should check the date on that article. It seems kinda old...

And does this article rule it out in any way?

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #43 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And does this article rule it out in any way?


Yes. Until now, everything we've known about Apple's decisions to hire out another company to manufacture its A6 chips have been based on rumors and speculation, which IBT was nice about reporting.


But a few months have passed, and we've now received new information. Barring a discovery the Samsung executive was speaking out of turn, things have changed. We've discovered new facts.


I thought this would be obvious to a common sense observer. Perhaps not?
post #44 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Yes. Until now, everything we've known about Apple's decisions to hire out another company to manufacture its A6 chips have been based on rumors and speculation, which IBT was nice about reporting.

But a few months have passed, and we've now received new information. Barring a discovery the Samsung executive was speaking out of turn, things have changed. We've discovered new facts.

I thought this would be obvious to a common sense observer. Perhaps not?

Actually, I don't see any new 'information'. just another rumor. And "Apple is in talks with Samsung" doesn't prove a thing. Even if it's true, so what? Apple would be foolish not to at least talk with Samsung - even if they had already decided to buy elsewhere.

Furthermore, I think it's unlikely that Apple would switch entirely from Samsung to someone else for a critical component. They would probably buy just a portion of A6 chips from a new supplier and the rest from Samsung until the new supplier is fully qualified. So even if we know that some A6 chips will be made by Samsung, that doesn't mean that there won't be new supplier, as well.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #45 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Actually, I don't see any new 'information'. just another rumor. And "Apple is in talks with Samsung" doesn't prove a thing. Even if it's true, so what? Apple would be foolish not to at least talk with Samsung - even if they had already decided to buy elsewhere.

Furthermore, I think it's unlikely that Apple would switch entirely from Samsung to someone else for a critical component. They would probably buy just a portion of A6 chips from a new supplier and the rest from Samsung until the new supplier is fully qualified. So even if we know that some A6 chips will be made by Samsung, that doesn't mean that there won't be new supplier, as well.


Great, except that the IBT article cited was also mostly based on a rumor. While it's true this new article's rumors leave us with very few concrete facts to go off of, it's still reasonable for now just to draw inferences from the new information. A lot of industry insiders have been saying Apple wouldn't move completely away from Samsung for a long time. This sounds like reliable information to me. This isn't some Samsung customer service making statements. This is an actual executive. Judging from the way the article's conclusion has been supported by multiple industry sources over the past several months, there's no need to quibble with semantics.


And your second paragraph isn't really responsive to my comment--I never said Apple would switch entirely from Samsung.


At the end of the day, we're all just going off rumors. I think it's accepted Samsung's not leaving the picture anytime soon. Let's just leave it at that and take it for what it is.
post #46 of 86
Apple knows too well the pain of relying on flaky chip manufacturers (I'm looking at you IBM and Motorola/Freescale). They won't live through that again. So if TSMC can't do the job, I can see how Apple would have to tolerate Samsung a bit longer.

But at this point I wonder why Apple goes with Samsung over Intel. Intel has indicated a potential willingness to fab for Apple (including fabbing ARM rather than x86), but they've said the terms would have to be right. Maybe they couldn't agree on a price. If so, that's a shame -- Apple+Intel would be a killer combination.
post #47 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

While a lot of these posts are worth reading for the giggles, you'll set yourself up for disappoint if you put others here to a high standard.

Ain't that the truth. But I don't think you have paid much attention to MacRulz or any of his other z-sock puppets.

In the end I expect Apple to do everything they can to show Samsung they are expendable should Samsung keep copying. But doing a complete supplier swap without at least a year of proven delivery quality is out of the question. TSMC is auditioning for a VERY LARGE contract. LARGE enough to get Samsung's collective attention, not just the attention of the chip division. Especially since the latest court proceedings are setting up for the potential of a catastrophic March 2012 in the Samsung consumer electronics division.

Samsung has to be doing the risk assessment math on last weeks set of rulings and the prior probabilities given how the rulings were written up. The risk of losing in court and losing a majority of the Apple fab business to TSMC won't be something Samsung will want to ever become a reality. Nothing solid may happen before mid-February, but I expect settlements before the world-wide series of early spring court dates begin to meet.

TSMCs performance will also play into the mix. If TSMC delivers quality and in quantity, showing the ability to absorb a production increase or two and makes Apple very happy to have another qualified supplier, Samsung CE will feel even more internal pressure to settle. If TSMC stubs it's toe, not so much.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #48 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Apple knows too well the pain of relying on flaky chip manufacturers (I'm looking at you IBM and Motorola/Freescale). They won't live through that again. So if TSMC can't do the job, I can see how Apple would have to tolerate Samsung a bit longer.

But at this point I wonder why Apple goes with Samsung over Intel. Intel has indicated a potential willingness to fab for Apple (including fabbing ARM rather than x86), but they've said the terms would have to be right. Maybe they couldn't agree on a price. If so, that's a shame -- Apple+Intel would be a killer combination.



Yeah. I was really excited to hear Intel was potentially jumping aboard the ARM bandwagon. 3D transistor technology only created new possibilities for low-powered, high-perf chips. ARM or not, guess that contract didn't materialize. But I wouldn't rule out Intel joining the negotiation table. They've always been a king of chip manufacturing.
post #49 of 86
Quote:
The A6 CPU is expected to utilize Samsung's 28-nanometer processing technology.

This is a process developed by TSMC, Samsung, IBM and Global Foundries.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/.../15/2003513278

Will people still complain about the chips not being manufactured in the US?
post #50 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjitMD View Post

Samsung is a very diversified company. They make all kinds of electronic components, like CPUs, Flash, DRAM, LCD displays as well as consumer goods. They could do without the Apple CPU business and barely miss a beat.

On the other hand, if Samsung just terminated their A4, A5 production at the earlier date that their contract allowed, Apple would be a world of hurt. More than half of the profits come from the related products.

Apple should going after Google and Android. Google search is nice, but there are other search engines.

The point of contracts is to eliminate the threat you suggest. Apple prepays for its components, and buys out production years in advance, thus allowing it either reduced prices or increased capacity, or a combination of both.

Samsung legally likely cannot simply "cancel" their contract without a hefty legal penalty. Not that they would; they're making a lot of money from Apple, and corporation don't have "feelings".
post #51 of 86
deleted
post #52 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

post

Not sure what's creepier; the fact that you wasted your time to stalk through months of his posts to pull these quotes out or the fact that

Know what? Never mind.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #53 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neruda View Post

Apple, therefore, can have any other manufacturer make these chips for them, it's their choice.

Correct me if I am wrong.

It looks a lot like Apple had very little choice - otherwise they would not be giving business to Samsung.
post #54 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post

Rumors about iPhone5... hmmm...

I'd find it more likely if the new chip goes into iPad3 first.

What is a phone going to do with a quad core anyways?

as someone said, Apple will never lower PPI, so maybe the quad core + better gfx = 2x rez screen XD (this is a huge joke, but that would be CRAZY, 600 ppi 0.0)

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply

PC means personal computer.  

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

if i say something confusing please tell me!

Reply
post #55 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

It looks a lot like Apple had very little choice - otherwise they would not be giving business to Samsung.

Not necessarily.

It takes time to switch chip suppliers. How do you know that Apple isn't already in the middle of a switch?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #56 of 86
ASSUMING the rumor is true...and I'm going just do so for now.


All this squabbling's kinda pointless. At the end of the day, I see this as a win-win for everyone. Apple doesn't need to waste time and money on building its own factories. It can continue to focus on the areas where it exceeds such as software and design. Samsung gets an infusion of cash through this processor contract that allows it to improve its scale of economies at its foundries and invest in R&D for current and future generation processor technologies. I'm sure some diehard Apple fans are worried and cringing inside at the idea of Apple enriching its competitor, but let's just face the reality. Apple came out with a really good deal, and Samsung, Apple contract or not, still makes its own chips.


It's comparative advantage at its best.
post #57 of 86
Sorry about that cold solder joint on all the processors.
post #58 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

How do you know that Apple isn't already in the middle of a switch?



Well, erm, uh ... the article we just read said so:

Samsung is expected to remain the primary chip supplier for Apple and its anticipated next-generation A6 processor despite a bitter patent dispute between the two companies, according to a new report.

That is kind of the entire point made by the article.

HTH.
post #59 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Mock Turtleneck View Post

despite the numerous back-and-forth patent trolling among both companies

Neither companies are "patent trolling.

There are patent disputes but no patent trolling.
post #60 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

... We've discovered new facts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

At the end of the day, we're all just going off rumors.

Sorry, which is it, facts or rumours? Thanks for lifting the level of discussion here, as well, we all appreciate it.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #61 of 86
Surely Intel or Global Foundries can replace Samsung, Samsung isn't the only company that can fabricate SoCs.

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply
post #62 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post

Sorry, which is it, facts or rumours? Thanks for lifting the level of discussion here, as well, we all appreciate it.


I sincerely apologize, but I used the words "facts" and "details" interchangeably. If that really offended you, feel free to file a lawsuit against me based on causes of action such as emotional distress because of your butthurt syndrome. I'm sure it'll make you feel better.


But really. If you want to "bring the discussion to a new level," try something else besides nit-picking at my choice of words and taking my comments out of context.


These rumors have proven to be mostly reliable. Apple most likely was planning to dump Samsung for TSMC, but a change of circumstances required a change in decisions. But now that you mention it, though these are rumors, I really don't think there's any harm in taking these details as at least pretty credible as long as the sources are pretty reliable. The previous article in which it was stated Apple was moving solely to TSMC for A6 fabbing isn't necessarily inconsistent with this new piece of information, regardless whether it's factual or purely speculative.


FWIW, this piece of news just shows me cooler heads prevailed at both Samsung and Apple. We'll still see a lot of rhetoric and posturing taking place in the news--that's nothing new. It's simply business as usual.
post #63 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

These rumors have proven to be mostly reliable.

ROTFLMAO.

So how's that iPhone 5 with 4.5" screen and NFC working for you?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #64 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

ROTFLMAO.

So how's that iPhone 5 with 4.5" screen and NFC working for you?

I wasn't referring to every single rumor posted on the internet, hence the article adjective "These." You would've been more convincing if you'd rewritten my entire comment to support your own imagination. FYI, I was referring to industry news surround chip-fabbing. Apparently the virtues of common sense and reading comprehension are lost on the ignorant.



Nice try, but you really should try coming up with an intelligible rebuttal to my previous points instead of conceding to them and twisting my words around childishly.
post #65 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Not sure what's creepier; the fact that you wasted your time to stalk through months of his posts to pull these quotes out or the fact that

Know what? Never mind.

Exactly. Creepy. Must... win... argument... on web forum

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #66 of 86
Apple dont have a choice, GF's 28nm is not even ready yet, and TSMC is just not getting its act together.

As much as i hate Samsung, they do make brilliant tech.
post #67 of 86
Quote:

What was that supposed to be? Some sort of narcissistic I'm gonna get him? Finally?

Ummm, nope. Didn't work out the way you thought.

And homey, you don't seem to know how to read to apply context very well. The literal "in your own words" only works when the words quoted are factually incorrect. Seeing as how that isn't true and you couldn't even figure out that first part for yourself it doesn't leave a very good impression of your posting ability. Kinda pathetic and consistently self delusional.

You utterly missed your own attempted point so badly that you merely proved I don't fall for random BS on the boards and that I call it out (especially from the -z crew). And that's news to anyone in these parts?

Wow. Are you impressed with yourself? Here, have a </cookie>, only Fails that spectacular deserve one!

And oh, I suggest you look sock-puppet up on the internet. I don't think it means what you think it does!
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #68 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

I wasn't referring to every single rumor posted on the internet, hence the article adjective "These."

I see. So your argument is that only those rumors which turn out to be true are to be believed?

Sounds like a tautology to me.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #69 of 86
deleted
post #70 of 86
deleted
post #71 of 86
deleted
post #72 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

I wasn't referring to every single rumor posted on the internet, hence the article adjective "These." You would've been more convincing if you'd rewritten my entire comment to support your own imagination. FYI, I was referring to industry news surround chip-fabbing. Apparently the virtues of common sense and reading comprehension are lost on the ignorant.



Nice try, but you really should try coming up with an intelligible rebuttal to my previous points instead of conceding to them and twisting my words around childishly.



Its a matter of reading comprehension. When you say "These rumors have proven to be mostly reliable.", some people see "Every one of these rumors have proven to be 100% reliable."

It may be pathological, it may be psychological, it might be intentional.
post #73 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

Surely Intel or Global Foundries can replace Samsung, Samsung isn't the only company that can fabricate SoCs.

Apparently those choices were not available to Apple. The way things are going lately, my guess is that Apple offered them some kind of a "deal", which they considered, and then tried to keep a straight face as they said "No Thanks".

Apple then went, hat in hand, back to Samsung, and begged them.
post #74 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I see. So your argument is that only those rumors which turn out to be true are to be believed?

Sounds like a tautology to me.

It is neither his argument nor , if it were his argument, would it be a a tautology.

HTH.
post #75 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Apple then went, hat in hand, back to Samsung, and begged them.



Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #76 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

It is neither his argument nor , if it were his argument, would it be a a tautology.

HTH.

Actually, it is his argument. He first said that the rumors were true. I pointed out that the majority of rumors here turned out to be nonsense. He said, effectively, "I was only talking about the rumors which turned out to be true".

And, yes, that is a tautology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_(logic)

Now, I realize that there are a lot of big words there that will be difficult for you, but a tautology is, in sort, something that turns out to be inherently true because the proposition is phrased in such a way that it MUST be true. Which is what he did.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #77 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

"I hadn't previously noticed you at all

Here, have a kiss <3. There feel better now? Now that you notice me?

At least I'm not the crazy stalker that waded through 7 years of posts over some wild personal hissy fit. An oh yeah, you've noticed me before, I'm just not going off the deep end spending hours of my day combing our old posts.

The -z sock-puppet comment must have hit awful close to home to get you that riled up and defensive. No apologies there.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #78 of 86
deleted
post #79 of 86
deleted
post #80 of 86
If Samsung gets really pissy, they COULD just drop support
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung to supply quad-core A6 CPU to Apple despite legal battle - report