AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple could be top mobile processor maker by end of 2012
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple could be top mobile processor maker by end of 2012 - Page 2

post #41 of 68
3/20/12 at 7:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

"Apple engineers elevated the pixels onto a different plane separating them from the signals."

I recall that being a focal point to how this display was engineered... and Apple claims they engineered it. If you wish to call Apple a liar you'll have to back it up with proof.

Go look at the keynote and see if they say ANYTHING about design it.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 68
3/20/12 at 7:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tune View Post

Go look at the keynote and see if they say ANYTHING about design it.

Off the top of my head at 1h:17m:30s Scott Brodrick is talking about how "we" had to elevate the pixels from the signals.

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #43 of 68
3/20/12 at 7:30pm
I don't even remember that but if he did it's just more clever talk from Apple. If they had ANYTHING to do with the design they would have mentioned it AS THEY ALWAYS DO with the processors.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 68
3/20/12 at 7:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tune View Post

I don't even remember that but if he did it's just more clever talk from Apple. If they had ANYTHING to do with the design they would have mentioned it AS THEY ALWAYS DO with the processors.

So let me get this straight...
  • No one has ever used a 3.1 million pixel display in a tablet before.
  • You know of no other product on the market using this same display.
  • Apple said engineered a part of the display during the event.
  • Apple said they engineered a part of the display in text on their website.

...but you claim it's a lie because they didn't lump the display specs in with the processor specs. Fucking genius¡

But wait, haven't you claimed that Apple doesn't engineer their chips because they are manufactured by Samsung. Speaking of bubble you might to pop yours because it seems like you are running low on oxygen.

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #45 of 68
3/20/12 at 7:44pm
Yes that must be it.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 68
3/20/12 at 7:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tune View Post

I don't even remember that but if he did it's just more clever talk from Apple. If they had ANYTHING to do with the design they would have mentioned it AS THEY ALWAYS DO with the processors.

Apple chooses the focus points of their keynote. They don't dwell into every component inside the phone, whether they made it or not.

What exactly is your point that you're trying to make here? So far, you're just making yourself look like an idiot. This article is what it is.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 68
3/20/12 at 7:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

I know some people worry about Samsung dumping Apple as a client, but that would be monumentally stupid, and NO company would ever consider such losses. Apple is a multi-billion dollar client, probably Samsung's largest client/customer. There are many, many other manufacturers that would love to have Apple as a client. Samsung knows that and so does Apple.

I agree. Apple's strength in mobile computing helps explain why Intel was kissing Jobs behind when he wanted to build the first MBA and later when Apple was pushing Thunderbolt. Intel saw which direction the wind was going to blow from and was hoping to be the vendor for Apple's mobile CPUs.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 68
3/20/12 at 8:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I think the objective is for Intel to become the foundry for Apple chips

... goes all the way back to the 6502 days...

I thought the 6502 was a Moto chip?
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 68
3/20/12 at 8:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tune View Post

If Apple had anything to do the design of the display it would have been in the keynote, where they always tout their design of the processors, even the A4. Sorry, that's just clever advertising.

Says who?

They said plenty about the display - and covered all the important things. Do you think that viewers were more interested in the spectacular display or in who designed it?
"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 #50 of 68
3/20/12 at 9:45pm
Duplicate
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #51 of 68
3/20/12 at 10:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

I thought the 6502 was a Moto chip?

Chuck Peddle... MOS Technology... Bought out by Commodore... Jack Tramiel... PET computer...
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #52 of 68
3/20/12 at 11:57pm
There aren't MANY Fabs player on the Market. As the matter of fact, there is only 3 that fits Apple, Global Foundries, Samsung and TSMC, others like UMC and SMIC dont have the advance node tech required. GF is lacking in Capacity as well. TSMC is just plain stupid not to doing any business with Apple.

Samsung has the capacity and Tech. No one likes to due with them because most of them are somehow directly completing with Samsung and they have a better choice such as TSMC.

The most profiting department in Samsung has been its chip making department. So it is VERY unlikely they will ever get rid of Apple as a customer.

I guess Apple understands the problem as well and want to have a go with Intel as a Fab player. Hence the rumors of Apple talking to Intel about making their SoC there. But Intel just doesn't want to do anything without their x86.

So unless TSMC gets their act together, the current scenario wont likely change in the foreseeable future.

P.S - Building Fabs is just not cost effective. So scrap the idea.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 68
3/21/12 at 12:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

There aren't MANY Fabs player on the Market. As the matter of fact, there is only 3 that fits Apple, Global Foundries, Samsung and TSMC, others like UMC and SMIC dont have the advance node tech required. GF is lacking in Capacity as well. TSMC is just plain stupid not to doing any business with Apple.

Could Apple invest in UMC or SMIC the way they have other companies to get them to advance rapidly or do they not have the aptitude even if they were well funded?

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #54 of 68
3/21/12 at 12:26am
Hey, check it out: Samsung makes parts to order for their boss, Apple. Ha ha, Apple! You, um, only get all the glory and money, whereas Samsung gets, you know, paid for their services. Which totally puts the lie to Apple's claims of being innovative!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #55 of 68
3/21/12 at 2:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

In a way, Apple is tying up Sammy's production -- and keeping them off the street!

Very funny, but not even remotely close to reality. Look up Exynos.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 68
3/21/12 at 4:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by prw View Post

More accurate to say world's largest mobile chip user. The largest maker will be Samsung. They make chips used in a lot of other cellphones, too.

Chip designer appears to be what they meant (but I'm glad someone else read this article incisively). Going to the original document, they seem to be pretty clumsy with their language, first seeming to mean "shipper of chips" but then later meaning "designer of chips." I suspect what happened was that the author of the original report meant "designer", and then the InfoWorld reporter got sloppy, and then AI compounded that sloppiness with some of its own.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 68
3/21/12 at 5:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Hey, check it out: Samsung makes parts to order for their boss, Apple. Ha ha, Apple! You, um, only get all the glory and money, whereas Samsung gets, you know, paid for their services. Which totally puts the lie to Apple's claims of being innovative!

Troll much? A designer can innovate. And a manufacturer can innovate. You seem to think only one of those is true. The A5X chip is an Apple design. If you would be so kind as to quote (and link) a couple of Apple claims about being innovative that you think are lies, and explain why they're lies.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 68
3/21/12 at 5:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Chuck Peddle... MOS Technology... Bought out by Commodore... Jack Tramiel... PET computer...

Motorola was involved in the development, though:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6502
"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 #59 of 68
3/21/12 at 6:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Could Apple invest in UMC or SMIC the way they have other companies to get them to advance rapidly or do they not have the aptitude even if they were well funded?

If Apple doesn't do something they are going to run into the same problems they ran into with Motorola and Intel (and Nvidia for that matter).

Sooner or later Samsung will not be able to provide Apple with what they need. Then where do they turn.

Yes, it will cost Apple money but I think that sooner or later they will have no other choice but to invest in their own fab)

(not part of your argument Solipsism but... ) [not cost effective? What's more cost effective... running without proper processors?]
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
post #60 of 68
3/21/12 at 7:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

No, the article is correct. Apple designed chips are currently manufactured by Samsung, but that could change... They are in fact Apple's chips. You're taking the word 'make' too literally, when it's obvious that's not what the author meant.


Using your vague definition of "make", then ARM is the "largest maker" of chips, not Apple.

"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 #61 of 68
3/21/12 at 7:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

No, I don't think that way. Apple aint the company it was 10 years ago, or 5 years ago or even 2 years ago. Apple's growth is exploding and I believe that Apple's needs are beginning to outstrip other company's abilities to supply them with the consistent yields that Apple requires.

I believe that Apple has to acquire some manufacturing ability in order to move to the next phase of its business life.

Absolutely not. The minute you put your own factories into the mix, you hobble your ability to quickly adapt to and exploit ever-changing technologies. Look ... Tim Cook is a manufacturing and logistics wizard. Check out his bio. That's his career background and education. Yet 10 years ago, who do you think led Apple's transition OUT OF manufacturing? That's right. Tim Cook. He is as much responsible for Apple's awesome growth and nimble technology footing as any person in the organization. Read Isaacson's book.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #62 of 68
3/21/12 at 7:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post

Absolutely not. The minute you put your own factories into the mix, you hobble your ability to quickly adapt to and exploit ever-changing technologies. Look ... Tim Cook is a manufacturing and logistics wizard. Check out his bio. That's his career background and education. Yet 10 years ago, who do you think led Apple's transition OUT OF manufacturing? That's right. Tim Cook. He is as much responsible for Apple's awesome growth and nimble technology footing as any person in the organization. Read Isaacson's book.

I still believe that Tim Cook has his limitations. What was a benefit for Apple ten years ago doesn't mean that it will be a benefit going forward. As I said, this could be Apple's Achille's heel. One CEO can give tremendous growth to a company but the quality that made that CEO tremendous can quickly become the quality that makes a company stagnate.

Companies like Samsung can put 28nm tech in a couple of its phones. They can get the yield needed for 5 or 6 million phones a quarter. Who is Apple going to be able to push hard enough, get to invest fast enough, to be able to ramp up their fab plants to get consistent yield for 30-40 million phones in a quarter.

Eventually Apple could be left noticeably behind in the tech race due to its size.

How do you fix that other than having your own fab plant.
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
post #63 of 68
3/21/12 at 9:13am
Correction.... SAMSUNG will be the world's largest chip maker.

They are also the main producer of the world's BEST MOBILE SCREEN... also on your iPad.

If GM sells 18 million cars with Toyota engines, and it becomes the world's best selling car, GM isn't the largest engine maker in the world. They are the largest CAR maker/seller in the world. Toyota would in fact be the largest engine maker in the world.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 68
3/21/12 at 9:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post

Absolutely not. The minute you put your own factories into the mix, you hobble your ability to quickly adapt to and exploit ever-changing technologies. Look ... Tim Cook is a manufacturing and logistics wizard. Check out his bio. That's his career background and education. Yet 10 years ago, who do you think led Apple's transition OUT OF manufacturing? That's right. Tim Cook. He is as much responsible for Apple's awesome growth and nimble technology footing as any person in the organization. Read Isaacson's book.

I guess Samsung, then, is the exception to your rule.

They own all the facilities to produce their products yet is flexible to adapt to the ever changing technologies.

You CAN have your cake and eat it too.

"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 #65 of 68
3/21/12 at 10:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

Troll much? A designer can innovate. And a manufacturer can innovate. You seem to think only one of those is true. The A5X chip is an Apple design. If you would be so kind as to quote (and link) a couple of Apple claims about being innovative that you think are lies, and explain why they're lies.

(Slams head against table)
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #66 of 68
3/21/12 at 10:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

I guess Samsung, then, is the exception to your rule.

They own all the facilities to produce their products yet is flexible to adapt to the ever changing technologies.

You CAN have your cake and eat it too.

Hmmm... I was going to use that as my closing argument but you beat me to it.

I can't believe I'm agreeing with you... lol!
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
post #67 of 68
3/21/12 at 11:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Off the top of my head at 1h:17m:30s Scott Brodrick is talking about how "we" had to elevate the pixels from the signals.

Link from this article: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._the_leds.html

SHA is a method of increasing aperture ratio by applying approximately a 3 µm thick photo-definable acrylic resin layer to planarize the device and increase the vertical gap between the ITO pixel electrodes and signal lines. ...... SHA technology was pioneered by Sharp and JSR many years ago.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 68
3/21/12 at 7:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I think the objective is for Intel to become the foundry for Apple chips

... goes all the way back to the 6502 days...

Unfortunately, a lot Intel chips are being made in Chinese factories under [loose ??] Intel control. So from a security POV, Intel can't guarantee there are no back doors in their chips. Apple does have some chips made in America by Samsung or some other Asian factory. I'm sure I read that somewhere. Unless Apple's chips are made in America by Americans, Apple can't guarantee the security of their chips, and if they are made here, there's still no guarantees. But it would be less likely.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple could be top mobile processor maker by end of 2012