Intel to acquire iPhone chipmaker Infineon's wireless unit for $1.4B

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 49
    Intel must know something. Infeon has a several year contract with APPLE and the conclusion would be that APPLE intends to keep making an IPHONE for ATT perhaps without exclusivity.



    Keep in mind, that INFINEON supplies radio chips to a couple cellphone makers.

    In any case It's believable that INTEL only bought this to make money and stay in the Smartphone game.
  • Reply 22 of 49
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    I never understand the line of reasoning that because one can do a thing, they should. I assume Apple looked into buying Infineon and found that the cost-to-profit ratio wasn’t high enough. Apple could have bought Skype for $2.75 billion, but that doesn’t mean they should. It might be more beneficial to Apple and others to simply buy the components from Infineon as needed while looking at other suppliers for similar components.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    Relative to the value of their holdings and revenue (and the devaluation of the dollar over 14 years), their $400 million of NeXT was probably larger. But the benefit and importance to Apple of the NeXT acquisition was also massively more.



    If we consider inflation maybe, if we consider the valuation absolutely.
  • Reply 23 of 49
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by josephwinters View Post


    This could be interesting. What if they were to take the technology and merge it into their mobile processor so that there's no other option than to use their chip? Are their any other companies out their like infineon?



    IF they do that it would be one hell of a technical achievement. The RF portion of such a device creates a hell of a lot of electrical noise, which a digital processor just can't cope with, so trying to put them together in the same package (let alone the same piece of semiconductor material), is incredibly hard to achieve.



    I don't know for sure about Infineon, but most RF devices are made using Gallium Arsenide as the base material. Processors and the like use silicon. Whilst you can make a processor on GaAs, it's not nearly as cost effective as using silicon, since GaAs is more expensive to buy in the first place, and is much more difficult to manufacture on.
  • Reply 24 of 49
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post




    Intel and Infineon announced Monday that they had agreed to the deal, in which Intel will own the wireless business of Germany's Infineon Technologies in exchange for $1.4 billion in cash. The deal pertains to a range of wireless technologies, including Wi-Fi, 3G, WiMAX and LTE.







    We all know a Verizon iPhone is coming and this acquisition further strengthens that belief in my mind.



    Expect the Verizon iPhone to sell millions of copies. Arguably the second most expensive component that Apple does not already own/manufacture is the communications chip, with the first being the screen. Apple owning the company that is going to develop the communications chip helps keep Apple bucks in their coffers.



    This seems like a no-brainer for Apple, to me.
  • Reply 25 of 49
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nbcbubba View Post


    We all know a Verizon iPhone is coming and this acquisition further strengthens that belief in my mind.



    Expect the Verizon iPhone to sell millions of copies. Arguably the second most expensive component that Apple does not already own/manufacture is the communications chip, with the first being the screen. Apple owning the company that is going to develop the communications chip helps keep Apple bucks in their coffers.



    This seems like a no-brainer for Apple, to me.



    Your point seems to be that Apple is buying Infineon in order to keep control of the development of those components and that this then makes a Verizon iPhone more likely....



    Except Apple isn't buying Infineon. Intel is. Not saying you are wrong, just that your argument doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
  • Reply 26 of 49
    Intel ceased to be an innovative company years ago. They missed the boat bigtime on low-power processors. Now, in an attempt to play catch up, they are buying their way into new markets.
  • Reply 27 of 49
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac_Keeper_Fan_Mod View Post


    1.4 billion

    So why didn´t Apple bought it in the first place? 1.4 Billion is just a fraction of Apple´s capital.



    Are they planning on manufacturing their own baseline controllers?



    because they will never keep all the other customers that use infeneon chips
  • Reply 28 of 49
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by karmadave View Post


    Intel ceased to be an innovative company years ago. They missed the boat bigtime on low-power processors. Now, in an attempt to play catch up, they are buying their way into new markets.





    Intel's CPU's were always worse than Sun's and PowerPC until around 2000. they got 32 and 64 bit capabilities long after the competition did as well as energy efficiency. they were cheap and good enough for the desktop. same as ARM is cheap and good enough for a phone
  • Reply 29 of 49
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    Your point seems to be that Apple is buying Infineon in order to keep control of the development of those components and that this then makes a Verizon iPhone more likely....



    Except Apple isn't buying Infineon. Intel is. Not saying you are wrong, just that your argument doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.



    Ahhh, yes, I did misread that! Thanks.



    Reading comprehension: -1
  • Reply 30 of 49
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post


    Are there any reports that Apple uses truly customized radio processors for Macs, iPhones, and iPads? My assumption has been those are essentially off-the-shelf parts they've buying from Infineon. If true, this deals matters little if anything to Apple.





    i've read that due to contractual obligations the firmware is custom coded for each customer. which makes sense when looking at the growing problems that the iphone has had



    with intel buying infeneon expect to see the firmware being commoditized as well





    i think the biggest change will be that come 2012 or 2013 we'll see LTE chips sold in packages on the Atom CPU die. if you want separate silicon expect to pay a premium price.



    it's the way Intel and MS operate. have the end product be a commodity and take the biggest chunk of the value out of it.
  • Reply 31 of 49
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    Intel like Microsoft has failed miserably at getting a strong foot hold into the mobile communications as well as the media markets.



    This purchase and I assume there maybe more in the future is Intel attempt to get into these markets. Many companies are purposely staying away form Intel and Microsoft since they is no bargaining power with them.



    Remember Apple going to Intel was not about putting intel inside but more about apple getting away from the PPC. Apple does not care about Intel and if it made sense they would not do business with them.



    If Intel makes an issue of this with Apple, there are choices Apple can make, grant it Infineon is independent of the communication chip makers, but there are other choice and Apple has track record of dumping one company over another.



    Intel also made announcement to buy TI cable modem business and Mcafee which that want to include security features in to their processors, specifically mobile processors.



    Rest assure Intel will get board and dump or shut down these business like they have done ever time in the past when they realize it is not selling more processors.
  • Reply 32 of 49
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sheff View Post


    I wonder if Intel will try to use this as leverage to keep Macs running Intel. After Apple used ATI cards in most (all?) of the new macs there has been talk of moving over to AMD, which I mostly support (nothing against intel I just think AMD would have more time to customize their chips for apple then Intel which already has big customers.) Or perhaps intel is trying to keep apple as a customer even if they do leave for AMD.



    Of course this could also mean that Intel wants to integrate wireless right into their Atom platform to make it more attractive for cell phone makers. I guess we'll have to wait and see.



    AMD chips aren't anywhere near as good as Intel's CPU offerings. And AMD can't produce the volumes required anyway.
  • Reply 33 of 49
    x86 was and is one of the worst architectures in the market. I am glad that Intel has problems in the mobile market. I really hope x86 dies... (never happens since windows source code is based on x86)



    There are other companies that provide wireless solutions like Intersil, TI or STMicroelectronics and Analog Devices. None of them offer a complete product set like Infineon though!



    I do not think, personal opinion, that Apple really want to invest in this part of the market. The return is very low, you are better off buying it off the shelf!
  • Reply 34 of 49
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    Intel's CPU's were always worse than Sun's and PowerPC until around 2000. they got 32 and 64 bit capabilities long after the competition did as well as energy efficiency. they were cheap and good enough for the desktop. same as ARM is cheap and the most power efficient for a phone



    There, fixed it for you. Most of Intel's power savings will have some basis/foothold in ARM's designs, seeing as that was the direction ARM took when Intel went for raw power (consumption).
  • Reply 35 of 49
    sambansamban Posts: 171member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post


    IF they do that it would be one hell of a technical achievement. The RF portion of such a device creates a hell of a lot of electrical noise, which a digital processor just can't cope with, so trying to put them together in the same package (let alone the same piece of semiconductor material), is incredibly hard to achieve.



    I don't know for sure about Infineon, but most RF devices are made using Gallium Arsenide as the base material. Processors and the like use silicon. Whilst you can make a processor on GaAs, it's not nearly as cost effective as using silicon, since GaAs is more expensive to buy in the first place, and is much more difficult to manufacture on.



    Nailed it..... The first thing intel could have done was to integrate it's junk Wifi with Processor, which until now they haven't. There are far more complex problem like antennae placement, routing, noise etc.., which it needs to solve before it can do something like this.
  • Reply 36 of 49
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    So are they going to rename the racetrack on Sears Point Road to Intel Raceway?
  • Reply 37 of 49
    Weird Al was right: it's all about the Pentiums.
  • Reply 38 of 49
    ibillibill Posts: 400member
    My concern is that Intel will try to bundle the wireless tech with their Atom processors, and the possible consequences to Apple. I can only believe (hope) that Apple has suitable alternatives if this becomes a problem.
  • Reply 39 of 49
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iBill View Post


    My concern is that Intel will try to bundle the wireless tech with their Atom processors, and the possible consequences to Apple. I can only believe (hope) that Apple has suitable alternatives if this becomes a problem.



    See my comments above - I don't think that is technically possible (at least, not without being fantastically expensive).
  • Reply 40 of 49
    ibillibill Posts: 400member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post


    See my comments above - I don't think that is technically possible (at least, not without being fantastically expensive).



    Agree, they can't be physically bundled, but what about from a licensing standpoint?
Sign In or Register to comment.