or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung is sole supplier of Apple's iPad Retina displays - report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung is sole supplier of Apple's iPad Retina displays - report - Page 2

post #41 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Yes, but Apple contributes only about 5% to Samsung's overall revenue.

Samsung could get along quite well without apple. But without Samsung, Apple would not be able to make the iPad.

Samsung is a highly diversified global conglomerate, while Apple is more of a one-trick pony in comparison, who puts all of its eggs into the consumer gadget basket.
post #42 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler82 View Post

So why is your rival creating your product?
Isn't this like the mafia sharing family secrets with the police chief?

It's an uncomfortable marriage of talented, demanding screamers.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #43 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Apple would be up the creek without a paddle if it weren't for Samsung.

And Samsung's bottom line wouldn't suffer if Apple did do business with them? Just because there is a rumour that Samsung is Apple's best option that doesn't mean it's their only option. They might have to pay more per display due to more rejects or from hiring out more factories or building their own but we're talking about production here.

Your argument is like saying "Apple would be up the creek without a paddle if it weren't for Foxccon" or "...inexpensive Chinese labour." or any number of things that effect the industry. In the end Apple will get their products made some how and Samsung will get customers. This is commerce not HS.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #44 of 159
They got enough cash to buy ARM holdings and LG display co LTD and not even feel it. Buy all of the part manufacturers and create your own vertical market!
post #45 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

Samsung could get along quite well without apple. But without Samsung, Apple would not be able to make the iPad.

Samsung is a highly diversified global conglomerate, while Apple is more of a one-trick pony in comparison, who puts all of its eggs into the consumer gadget basket.

That's a pretty talented Pony then if their market cap is about $100 bil more than Exxon, the number two company in market cap in the world,
post #46 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

I thought that Royal Dutch Shell was Samsung's biggest customer, followed by the government of the United Arab Emirates?

Where did you get your information? Are you mistaking the subsidiary, Samsung Electronics, for the parent company?

Correct, thank you. So where does that leave the steaming piece of FUD you are trying to leave here?
post #47 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granmastak View Post

They got enough cash to buy ARM holdings and LG display co LTD and not even feel it. Buy all of the part manufacturers and create your own vertical market!

I'd think it's because it's not the best solution. Check out Foxconn's revenue to profit ratio and you see a problem in 2010 they took in $60 billion and netted $2.3 billion... and that's with a 31% increase YoY in profits. Some things are just cheaper and better to hire out.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #48 of 159
duplicate
post #49 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

And Samsung's bottom line wouldn't suffer if Apple did do business with them?

Somewhat. Nothing big, however.

Samsung is highly diversified.

Apple, OTOH, relies heavily on Samsung as a supplier for many important products that currently could not be built without them.
post #50 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler82 View Post

Hi nequidnemis! So glad you found another forum to troll with your pseudo arrogance. How's the view at Gough @ Geary today?

Nope, not I. Sorry you got caught up in with the rest of the pretend worriers in the peanut gallery. Watch out if you find yourself on the same side as ZZZ.
post #51 of 159
Ok. Somebody please explain this to me. The iPhone 4 and 4S have a higher pixel density than the iPad. So why so many problems producing this panel compared to the older higher pixel density one the iPhone has. And yes, I know the panels in the iPad are larger than the one in the iPhone. It just strikes me as odd.
post #52 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Granmastak View Post

That's a pretty talented Pony then if their market cap is about $100 bil more than Exxon, the number two company in market cap in the world,

Yes. An extememly talented pony.

Nevertheless, Apple is not diversified.
post #53 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Correct, thank you. So where does that leave the steaming piece of FUD you are trying to leave here?

It is now in your consciousnesses.

You are welcome.
post #54 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

Somewhat. Nothing big, however.

Samsung is highly diversified.

Apple, OTOH, relies heavily on Samsung as a supplier for many important products that currently could not be built without them.

And then Apple would use its cash to fund someone else to build for them instead. An inconvenience for a while and then Samsung loses a major customer.
post #55 of 159
Apologies to everyone for having engaged the troll and brought the thread to this level. I lost it again. Sorry.

Back to the topic, the displaysearch articles on this indicate that the pixel density is at the limit of possibility for these screens. My question would be, why have they exceeded the barrier with the 3.5" screens. Are they not Super High Aperture? If not, why not? There's a lot not being discussed in the regular blog press, or am I missing it?
post #56 of 159
1. We'll see if Samsung experiences mysterious "production problems" that suppress iPad sales. But no, that would be dirty pool. Samsung wouldn't deliberately hold back iPad screens from Apple. Would they?

2. It's just a matter of time before LG and Sharp can match Samsung's quality, yields, and pricing. But it's quite possible that Sharp is busy working on, say, 60" screens for some future Apple product in the meantime.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #57 of 159
Ruh-roh.

Hope LG and Sharp get their act together.
post #58 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

1. We'll see if Samsung experiences mysterious "production problems" that suppress iPad sales. But no, that would be dirty pool. Samsung wouldn't deliberately hold back iPad screens from Apple. Would they?

2. It's just a matter of time before LG and Sharp can match Samsung's quality, yields, and pricing. But it's quite possible that Sharp is busy working on, say, 60" screens for some future Apple product in the meantime.

1) If they did that it would be a short term strategy that would end up hurting Samsung even if they could get away with it from a legal stand point.

2) I'm sure there are contracts guaranteeing a certain yield or they will incur penalties.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #59 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Apologies to everyone for having engaged the troll and brought the thread to this level. I lost it again. Sorry.

The 'troll' was factually correct. 'This level' appears to be no higher then the usual juvenile Samsung witch burning so prevalent in this forum.
post #60 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I don't recall ever seeing a story about Apple engineering their own displays. I'd personally think it more likely that Apple put out a set of specs they wanted matched and took bids on who could meet the requirements. Just a guess of course in the absence of any evidence that it was Apple who did the design work rather than a display manufacturer. Always a possibility Apple did the screen engineering or some significant part of it.

Your comment is pretty sensible. My guess is Apple doesn't engineer display technology at all but they do have design engineers to tell them what they want or don't want. Apple is a company that prides itself on doing only what they know best. If we had inside information, it probably would show that Apple is a component investor and doesn't design every bit of its IP technology. They do seem to buy it a lot.

On the Samsung vs Apple. These companies are, like one poster above said, big boys. They don't bite off their nose to spite their face.
post #61 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler82 View Post

So why is your rival creating your product?
Isn't this like the mafia sharing family secrets with the police chief?

I don't want you to take this personally but in the world of global business that comment is very ignorant. Like governments, large corporations cooperate with each other even when they don't like each other. Those that don't are isolated in the global space. It's called diplomacy.
post #62 of 159
For what it's worth, this is what Apple says on their iPad features page:

In order to create a display with four times the pixels, we had to design it in a completely new way. You see, every pixel in a display has multiple signals telling it when to light up. But when you have a lot of pixels and a lot of signals on the same plane, signals get crossed and image quality suffers. To make sure everything on the new iPad looks crystal clear, Apple engineers elevated the pixels onto a different plane separating them from the signals. Its technology thats breakthrough. Just like the new iPad itself.

Are captive Samsung or Sharp display engineers considered Apple engineers? Or, is Apple really doing the R&D?
post #63 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

For what it's worth, this is what Apple says on their iPad features page:

In order to create a display with four times the pixels, we had to design it in a completely new way. You see, every pixel in a display has multiple signals telling it when to light up. But when you have a lot of pixels and a lot of signals on the same plane, signals get crossed and image quality suffers. To make sure everything on the new iPad looks crystal clear, Apple engineers elevated the pixels onto a different plane — separating them from the signals. It’s technology that’s breakthrough. Just like the new iPad itself.

Are captive Samsung or Sharp display engineers considered Apple engineers? Or, is Apple really doing the R&D?

Nice find. The first bolded text could refer to a collective we that goes outside of Apple. It could even mean LG engineers with Apple investments for that very product, but with 2nd bolding that clearly is Apple stating they resolved this particular issue. Is there any way to slight this except to say Apple are big fibbers?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #64 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

The 'troll' was factually correct. 'This level' appears to be no higher then the usual juvenile Samsung witch burning so prevalent in this forum.

He's trying to raise fears where there are no reason to be any. Others may genuinely worried because they don't understand business. The "level" I was referring to was my resorting to unsavory metaphors about his FUD . . . excresence? His FUDarrhea?
post #65 of 159
Cooperation between competitors is very normal in this industry. Apple works closely with Google and Microsoft as well on certain things while competing viciously in other areas. It's always been like this.

Yeah, I do understand that this relationship with Samsung is somewhat different considering all the lawsuits being hurled at each other but the truth of the matter is that they also need each other in the grand scheme of things: Apple needs the very best possible components on a very large scale and Samsung needs a customer who can keep their core chip and display factories humming.

It's obvious that Apple would prefer to do business with someone else but if the likes of LG and Sharp (or a bunch of other potential vendors) can't provide the quality and the volume Apple needs, what else can Apple do? And why would Samsung turn down orders of multi-billions from a single customer when no one else can come close to matching Apple's volume?

It is indeed a very interesting relationship. Samsung simply kicks ass in the chip and display sectors and these are Samsung's most profitable businesses. Samsung has crushed the Japanese competitors and the gap between Samsung and other vendors in these sectors is growing. Apple is simply going to go with what makes the most business sense and that means going with Samsung no matter how Apple feels about Samsung's smartphone and tablet business.

It can't be a comfortable feeling for either side. I'm sure Apple would prefer to spread the business around and will do so as time goes by but there is only so much capacity out there for these kinds of advanced technologies and Apple needs to fill it to prevent other competitors from using that capacity. Samsung's chip and display divisions certainly don't want to lose Apple either and the best way for them to keep Apple's business is provide the best quality at the best price with the best delivery times, which is what it seems to be doing.

The scale in which these companies operate across the globe is hard to fathom for most people. It's hard to imagine millions of phones being produced per day but that's what's going on in Asia. Our economies are so intertwined with an extremely complex web of business relationships that there really is no going back. Apple and Samsung both simply accept that not only will they co-exist and compete but cooperate as partners for a long time to come.
post #66 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter236 View Post

Apple just does not have the technology of many of the parts that go into its products, e.g displays, flash, batteries etc. Apple products just put together a bunch of parts from other manufacturers.

Apple knows what they want because they do a lot of research, just for your information they do research on battery because most of their products are now idevices. Hence the importance of battery life.
Do you think the come by chance of the retina display without doing some research on it.
If you thInk they mix and match then they are the luckiest company in the world with so many successful products.
Face it makIng money is the hardest thing to do and it doesn't come by chance except those who strike the lottery.
post #67 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter236 View Post

Apple just does not have the technology of many of the parts that go into its products, e.g displays, flash, batteries etc. Apple products just put together a bunch of parts from other manufacturers.

Do you know of a phone or tablet maker that has the technologies of everything that goes into one?
post #68 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by mausz View Post

Because Samsung is a very large company, and the consumer electronic branch is not the same as the display production branch.

No, Apple is suing Samsung Electronics, not Samsung Electronics's Mobile division or display vision.
post #69 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

No, Apple is suing Samsung Electronics, not Samsung Electronics's Mobile division or display vision.

That's true but Samsung's chip and display divisions don't really care about what's going on elsewhere; they're just occupied with keeping their factories humming and profitable. I'm sure the people there give Apple the red carpet treatment.
post #70 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Awkward...

no.

Samsung and Apple have mutually benefited from several of their business agreements. in the end, the consumer also benefits.
post #71 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

At 11.6" it's slightly below but all intents and purposes it's the same PPI. That would also have the appearance of having denser pixels because a laptop is likely to held farther away then a tablet.

That said, That article shows that their "demoed" 2560x1600 10.1" display was defective with many lines in the prototype. If you can't get a single model to an event to show off I have to think you are not close to being production ready.

That link also shows that the same resolution with PenTile is gearing up to be production ready but RB-GB isn't the same as RBG-RBG due to the 1/3 less sub-pixels.

Sorry to burst your bubble but making and developing electronic screens isnt Apple's strong points. It's pretty obvious they are using off the shelf parts from other suppliers.

All Apple does is perhaps place an order for certain customer specifications to each manufacturers; in turn the manufacturers meet those needs and start supplying Apple with it. Apple, then, christens the new component with its "magical" marketing scheme and throw a bone or two to the Apple community (Engadget, Gizmodo, AI etc) for preferential treatment in return for a solid review.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

No, Apple is suing Samsung Electronics, not Samsung Electronics's Mobile division or display vision.

They all fall under the Electronics umbrella. What affects the component division also affects the mobile division.




Apple fans in here hate to admit how much Apple is reliant on Samsung. It's showing.
Hope you all enjoy your Samsung screens.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #72 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexkhan2000 View Post

Do you know of a phone or tablet maker that has the technologies of everything that goes into one?

Well yea Samsung, Samsung has many phones and tablets that just use Samsung parts. Look at the tear down for Samsung's Galaxy 7.7 or the European version of the Note every part including the fricken screws were made in house.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #73 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Apple fans in here hate to admit how much Apple is reliant on Samsung. It's showing.
Hope you all enjoy your Samsung screens.

Why, Samsung makes world class products and display manufacturing being their best. Just because Apple and Samsung are suing each over stupid paten violations doesn't mean they can't be business partners. What's the saying "it's just business".
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #74 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJJameson View Post

And then Apple would use its cash to fund someone else to build for them instead. An inconvenience for a while and then Samsung loses a major customer.

Losing billions of dollars by having a flagship product off the market for an extended period of time. Yes, that is an "inconvenience" as the word is used in Applespeak.

But in standard written English, it would be called a fucking disaster.
post #75 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Well yea Samsung, Samsung has many phones and tablets that just use Samsung parts. Look at the tear down for Samsung's Galaxy 7.7 or the European version of the Note every part including the fricken screws were made in house.

That is axiomatically false. I did a search for "iFixit Teardown Samsung" and choose the very first item, a 7" Galaxy Tab. They don't appear to have the specific Galaxy 7.7 you mention, but that's beside the point.

Let's examine the lineup:
  • SanDisk SDIN4C2-16G (MLC NAND Flash 16 GB)
  • Maxim 8998 (Power Management IC)
  • Infineon PM9801 (X-GOLD 616 HSDPA/HSUPA/EDGE Modem Solution)
  • Wolfson Microelectronics WM8994 (Audio Codec)
  • Infineon PMB5703 (RF Transceiver)
  • Broadcom BCM4329 (Bluetooth/FM/WLAN receiver)
  • STMicroelectronics L3G4200D (Gyroscope)
  • ATMEL MXT224 (touchscreen controller)
  • Broadcom BCM4751 (GPS receiver)
  • Corning Gorilla Glass

And that's just the ones that were named. The interconnect, casing, screws, etc. aren't named. That also doesn't include all the licensing for many of the technologies used in these devices. Bottom line: None of these products are built in a bubble.

PS: How the hell can you look at a screw in a handheld device and know it was manufactured by Samsung? The threads are slightly off?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #76 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

The 'troll' was factually correct. 'This level' appears to be no higher then the usual juvenile Samsung witch burning so prevalent in this forum.

The funniest thing of all is that even if we ignore his mistake about mixing up Samsung and Samsung Electronics, Apple is nowhere near the biggest customer.

The information I've seen is that Sony buys 50% more from SE than Apple.

But why let facts get in the way of a good fanboi shibboleth?
post #77 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

For what it's worth, this is what Apple says on their iPad features page:

In order to create a display with four times the pixels, we had to design it in a completely new way. You see, every pixel in a display has multiple signals telling it when to light up. But when you have a lot of pixels and a lot of signals on the same plane, signals get crossed and image quality suffers. To make sure everything on the new iPad looks crystal clear, Apple engineers elevated the pixels onto a different plane separating them from the signals. Its technology thats breakthrough. Just like the new iPad itself.

Are captive Samsung or Sharp display engineers considered Apple engineers? Or, is Apple really doing the R&D?

We have no way to know if Apple does the R&D.

We are certain, however, that Apple does the PR.
post #78 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

He's trying to raise fears where there are no reason to be any. Others may genuinely worried because they don't understand business. The "level" I was referring to was my resorting to unsavory metaphors about his FUD . . . excresence? His FUDarrhea?

I accept complete responsibility for your emotional state.
post #79 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


Apple fans in here hate to admit how much Apple is reliant on Samsung. It's showing.
Hope you all enjoy your Samsung screens.

What really cracks me up is when people proclaim that they will never buy a Samsung product to show how "loyal" they are to Apple, while they unknowingly enrich Samsung with every Apple purchase.

Too funny!
post #80 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Well yea Samsung, Samsung has many phones and tablets that just use Samsung parts. Look at the tear down for Samsung's Galaxy 7.7 or the European version of the Note every part including the fricken screws were made in house.

But Samsung relies on Android for the functionality of it. And they'll do a lot of Windows as well in the future. They have Bada but does anyone really believe they'll ditch Android for it? Samsung also has no real ecosystem of their own to speak of. They're totally dependent on Google on the software side of things and they're not very happy about that.

Apple doesn't and shouldn't be involved with the manufacturing of screws or camera lenses or mechanical buttons, etc. Apple still designs and specifies them and where they're made. What Apple does is much more cost-effective and efficient than trying to manufacture everything in house.

Vertical integration in electronics manufacturing is way more trouble than it's worth and offers very little flexibility. But Apple's vertical integration in terms of design, engineering, procurement, assembly, software (especially the OS), content (iTunes), and services (iCloud) all the way through retail is something no one else can match and why Apple has a net margin of 28%. Samsung's net margins isn't even near the ballpark.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Samsung is sole supplier of Apple's iPad Retina displays - report
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung is sole supplier of Apple's iPad Retina displays - report