Do you remember the switch to Intel from Motorola for OS X? When it happened, it was revealed that Apple secretly had been building and testing the Intel version simultaneously with public Motorola version. They had their insurance in back pocket.
I'm assuming there are plenty of proto iPhones in the labs of Apple, all running different hardware and versions of iOS - 80 billion in the bank funds that kind of insurance...
Given that they used a custom design they've probably had a lot of failed designs as well. That said do you realize just how expensive it is to develop and manufacture a one off of a single prototype? Regarding Intel Apple also mentioned they were also looking at AMD at the time, but they weren't sure if AMD could keep up with the volume requirements. I mentioned when this first started that there are very few manufacturers worldwide that are capable of filling such an order, and yet everyone was sure Samsung would be gone by the next day .
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Perhaps that there is a limited number of companies that can produce the processors at the demand that Apple needs them. Apple is working on reducing its dependence on Samsung, but it can't be done over night. Apple also has long term contracts in place that Apple probably can't breach.
Even if the long term contracts didn't exist there's a certain process when it comes to vetting potential suppliers/manufacturing partners. Wasn't there something mentioned about Apple investing quite a lot in a new factory for Sharp or some other company? The point I'm trying to make is that unless they are investing in the infrastructure of another company, their choices for these things are severely limited, and as Apple blacklists suppliers like Samsung their pool of potential component suppliers becomes quite small.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjitMD
I have one tinny question: How can Apple depend on Samsung for its most critical component, the A4, 5 CPU? Apple is embroiled in a worldwide legal and marketing fight. Samsung are nothing by thieves of IPRs... they copy everything down to the icons, case and patents. They probably take apart the design and features of the A chips and duplicate the principles.
Apple has no real back up to the A chips. It is the most important component for the entire company. Cook is not dumb. What am I missing?
You truly have no idea how hard it must be for them to switch manufacturers on such a component. Apple has had some real hardware failures in their product line in the past. The G5, several generations of imac screen problems, the 23" ACD, the Nvidia Quadro cards and their drivers, certain generations of macbook (pros) running at scorching temperatures, iphone antenna issue, etc.
The ipad is a huge deal for them. They don't want to add a comparable ipad incident to that list by using an untested manufacturer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Realistic
Well for one thing, even if Apple has decided to dump Samsung, you can't replace a company that makes 7 to 8 billion dollars of equipment for you overnight. Purchasing and manufacturing contracts must be completed, especially any prepaid contracts, then new contracts with new manufacturers, if found, must be negotiated etc. etc.
Exactly aside from current liabilities there's a huge vetting process to it and they need to bring an assembly line up to par for this. Factories tend to make runs on whatever product or component. They try to maintain as little downtime as possible so these things are scheduled out. There aren't just empty factories with fully people waiting to make something for Apple . Also Apple may pay cash but that doesn't allow them to supersede existing contracts. It takes a while to build something with a new supplier or manufacturer up to what they had with Samsung.
I have one tinny question: How can Apple depend on Samsung for its most critical component, the A4, 5 CPU? Apple is embroiled in a worldwide legal and marketing fight. Samsung are nothing by thieves of IPRs... they copy everything down to the icons, case and patents. They probably take apart the design and features of the A chips and duplicate the principles.
Apple has no real back up to the A chips. It is the most important component for the entire company. Cook is not dumb. What am I missing?
On Friday, August 12, 2011, the partnership between TSMC and Apple was announced and TSMC has begun trial production the A6 chip for Apple's next-generation iPads and iPhones.[8][9
On Friday, August 12, 2011, the partnership between TSMC and Apple was announced and TSMC has begun trial production the A6 chip for Apple's next-generation iPads and iPhones.[8][9
From more recent news it seems that Apple is sticking with Samsung for the A6... and I find that odd because there are reports saying that Samsung is behind in their 28nm production and TSMC has already started pumping out 28nm chips.
... but... now TSMC has successfully taped out a 20nm A15 chip scheduled to begin production next September.
From more recent news it seems that Apple is sticking with Samsung for the A6... and I find that odd because there are reports saying that Samsung is behind in their 28nm production and TSMC has already started pumping out 28nm chips.
... but... now TSMC has successfully taped out a 20nm A15 chip scheduled to begin production next September.
The news about the A6 production seems to be all over the map these days. My bet is that Apple is seriously eyeing TSMC as its major supplier in the future.
The question with TSMC is about yields. See post #20 above, and the recent AI article and others from this week noting long-term discussions about A6 and A7 between Cook and Samsung's Lee.
TSMC will likely participate, but it seems increasingly unlikely they'll be able to provide everything Apple needs to sustain its growth, hence Cook's interest in maintain the relationship with Samsung.
... and then there are other reports that say that Samsung is far behind on the 28nm front.
The question with TSMC is about yields. See post #20 above, and the recent AI article and others from this week noting long-term discussions about A6 and A7 between Cook and Samsung's Lee.
TSMC will likely participate, but it seems increasingly unlikely they'll be able to provide everything Apple needs to sustain its growth, hence Cook's interest in maintain the relationship with Samsung.
It could be that Apple is hedging it's bets, it would prefer TSMC but TSMC may not be fully ready in time. Apple would logically continue the relationship with TSMC while also getting Samsung up to speed, it could be both supplying parts to Apple as Apple slowly weans itself from Samsung while allowing TSMC time to get their house in order. Once Apple has confidence that TSMC has their quality and yield issues in order then they will start to reduce their orders to Samsung. I don't think with orders this large it is healthy to look at the supplier situation as all Samsung or all TSMC there is room for both, plus this means there should be no supply issues with the A6 or A7 as Apple pushes into China.
I have one tinny question: How can Apple depend on Samsung for its most critical component, the A4, 5 CPU? Apple is embroiled in a worldwide legal and marketing fight. Samsung are nothing by thieves of IPRs... they copy everything down to the icons, case and patents. They probably take apart the design and features of the A chips and duplicate the principles.
Apple has no real back up to the A chips. It is the most important component for the entire company. Cook is not dumb. What am I missing?
Why do you say "Apple has no real back up to the A chips"? I think you are vastly misreading the situation.
You forget that one of Tim Cook's first jobs was running Apple's supply chain. Apple doesn't have just one supplier for anything, not just one plan. I'm sure they have plans B, C, and D figured out for each of their parts suppliers. I have no doubt Apple's got the CEO of every volume chip fab in the world on speed dial. And these companies have Tim Cook on speed dial.
To me, the fact that Apple keeps using Samsung for chips says more about the strength of Samsung's semiconductor business. Apple chose Samsung to fab the A chips, probably because Samsung can do it at the volume Apple needs for a competitive price.
Also, this isn't a divorce. There's a legal and PR battle between the companies, but the drama between the companies is largely fabricated by the media. Consider for a moment that Samsung's slavish copying of Apple isn't going to stop even if Apple withdraws their business. It won't put Samsung Semiconductor out of business. It won't stop cloning of Apple designs or icons or even user-interface elements. I'm sure Apple's ARM-derived designs are heavily protected from copying, so there's no chance Samsung could get away with theft of Apple's chip IP. At the end of the day, why NOT keep Samsung as a chip supplier, if they are good at it?
...Do you remember the switch to Intel from Motorola for OS X?...
To be clear, there was never a period in history when Apple switched directly from "Morotola to Intel". By the time Apple switched over to Intel-manufactured CPUs, Motorola was already years out of the desktop CPU business, with Freescale as the designated successor.
Even if you ignored that point, the fact still remains that Apple had stopped using single-sourced "Morotola/Freescale" parts back when they dumped the old 68K series of processors. PowerPC had always been a joint venture between Apple, IBM, and Motorola/Freescale, with IBM and Motorola/Freescale both participating in the manufacturing chain. For example, Apple sourced its G5 CPUs from IBM, not from Motorola/Freescale.
The transition from PowerPC to x86 actually marked Apple transitioning from two different desktop-class CPU suppliers to only one. (But never forget -- in the desktop domain, Apple almost certainly maintains a stable of engineering prototype Macs running on x86-based AMD processors, just in case anything ever went wrong with their relationship with Intel.)
Comments
You know this for certain because....?
Do you remember the switch to Intel from Motorola for OS X? When it happened, it was revealed that Apple secretly had been building and testing the Intel version simultaneously with public Motorola version. They had their insurance in back pocket.
I'm assuming there are plenty of proto iPhones in the labs of Apple, all running different hardware and versions of iOS - 80 billion in the bank funds that kind of insurance...
Given that they used a custom design they've probably had a lot of failed designs as well. That said do you realize just how expensive it is to develop and manufacture a one off of a single prototype? Regarding Intel Apple also mentioned they were also looking at AMD at the time, but they weren't sure if AMD could keep up with the volume requirements. I mentioned when this first started that there are very few manufacturers worldwide that are capable of filling such an order, and yet everyone was sure Samsung would be gone by the next day
Perhaps that there is a limited number of companies that can produce the processors at the demand that Apple needs them. Apple is working on reducing its dependence on Samsung, but it can't be done over night. Apple also has long term contracts in place that Apple probably can't breach.
Even if the long term contracts didn't exist there's a certain process when it comes to vetting potential suppliers/manufacturing partners. Wasn't there something mentioned about Apple investing quite a lot in a new factory for Sharp or some other company? The point I'm trying to make is that unless they are investing in the infrastructure of another company, their choices for these things are severely limited, and as Apple blacklists suppliers like Samsung their pool of potential component suppliers becomes quite small.
I have one tinny question: How can Apple depend on Samsung for its most critical component, the A4, 5 CPU? Apple is embroiled in a worldwide legal and marketing fight. Samsung are nothing by thieves of IPRs... they copy everything down to the icons, case and patents. They probably take apart the design and features of the A chips and duplicate the principles.
Apple has no real back up to the A chips. It is the most important component for the entire company. Cook is not dumb. What am I missing?
You truly have no idea how hard it must be for them to switch manufacturers on such a component. Apple has had some real hardware failures in their product line in the past. The G5, several generations of imac screen problems, the 23" ACD, the Nvidia Quadro cards and their drivers, certain generations of macbook (pros) running at scorching temperatures, iphone antenna issue, etc.
The ipad is a huge deal for them. They don't want to add a comparable ipad incident to that list by using an untested manufacturer.
Well for one thing, even if Apple has decided to dump Samsung, you can't replace a company that makes 7 to 8 billion dollars of equipment for you overnight. Purchasing and manufacturing contracts must be completed, especially any prepaid contracts, then new contracts with new manufacturers, if found, must be negotiated etc. etc.
Exactly aside from current liabilities there's a huge vetting process to it and they need to bring an assembly line up to par for this. Factories tend to make runs on whatever product or component. They try to maintain as little downtime as possible so these things are scheduled out. There aren't just empty factories with fully people waiting to make something for Apple
It's been said before, but Apple is in good hands.
It's not surprising to me that Apple has been so successful lately. They're truly hitting on all cylinders, from beginning to end:
-Jony Ive arguably leads the most brilliant design team in consumer electronics
-Apple uses its cash to secure cheap, dependable supply chains
-Corporate secrecy feeds curiosity, surprise, etc. about Apple's releases
-As the article mentioned, their system of inventory is very lean
-Apple's keynotes are the gold standard. They're clear, well-rehearsed, and fun. Steve will be missed of course
-Their success in retail is the stuff of legends. Record-setting profit margins per square foot.
-Customer satisfaction and support have been topping competitors for over 6 years. ~90%+satisfaction
On top of all that, they're pioneering new fields or invigorating old ones, never content. Repeat cycle.
But Apple don't have Adobe flash in their products. Nobody wants a tablet or phone without it.
Just look at the last reports. Apple missed all goals. They only grew 54% and the shares went down 7%
We are DOOMED.
I have one tinny question: How can Apple depend on Samsung for its most critical component, the A4, 5 CPU? Apple is embroiled in a worldwide legal and marketing fight. Samsung are nothing by thieves of IPRs... they copy everything down to the icons, case and patents. They probably take apart the design and features of the A chips and duplicate the principles.
Apple has no real back up to the A chips. It is the most important component for the entire company. Cook is not dumb. What am I missing?
On Friday, August 12, 2011, the partnership between TSMC and Apple was announced and TSMC has begun trial production the A6 chip for Apple's next-generation iPads and iPhones.[8][9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSMC
Enjoy, your fears should be gone now...
On Friday, August 12, 2011, the partnership between TSMC and Apple was announced and TSMC has begun trial production the A6 chip for Apple's next-generation iPads and iPhones.[8][9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSMC
Enjoy, your fears should be gone now...
From more recent news it seems that Apple is sticking with Samsung for the A6... and I find that odd because there are reports saying that Samsung is behind in their 28nm production and TSMC has already started pumping out 28nm chips.
... but... now TSMC has successfully taped out a 20nm A15 chip scheduled to begin production next September.
Hmmmmmm...
From more recent news it seems that Apple is sticking with Samsung for the A6... and I find that odd because there are reports saying that Samsung is behind in their 28nm production and TSMC has already started pumping out 28nm chips.
... but... now TSMC has successfully taped out a 20nm A15 chip scheduled to begin production next September.
Hmmmmmm...
Relationship looks fine to me...
http://www.phonearena.com/news/TSMC-...-chips_id22755
But what do I know...
Relationship looks fine to me...
http://www.phonearena.com/news/TSMC-...-chips_id22755
But what do I know...
The news about the A6 production seems to be all over the map these days. My bet is that Apple is seriously eyeing TSMC as its major supplier in the future.
The question with TSMC is about yields. See post #20 above, and the recent AI article and others from this week noting long-term discussions about A6 and A7 between Cook and Samsung's Lee.
TSMC will likely participate, but it seems increasingly unlikely they'll be able to provide everything Apple needs to sustain its growth, hence Cook's interest in maintain the relationship with Samsung.
... and then there are other reports that say that Samsung is far behind on the 28nm front.
Hard to say...
The question with TSMC is about yields. See post #20 above, and the recent AI article and others from this week noting long-term discussions about A6 and A7 between Cook and Samsung's Lee.
TSMC will likely participate, but it seems increasingly unlikely they'll be able to provide everything Apple needs to sustain its growth, hence Cook's interest in maintain the relationship with Samsung.
It could be that Apple is hedging it's bets, it would prefer TSMC but TSMC may not be fully ready in time. Apple would logically continue the relationship with TSMC while also getting Samsung up to speed, it could be both supplying parts to Apple as Apple slowly weans itself from Samsung while allowing TSMC time to get their house in order. Once Apple has confidence that TSMC has their quality and yield issues in order then they will start to reduce their orders to Samsung. I don't think with orders this large it is healthy to look at the supplier situation as all Samsung or all TSMC there is room for both, plus this means there should be no supply issues with the A6 or A7 as Apple pushes into China.
It's been said before, but Apple is in good hands.
It's not surprising to me that Apple has been so successful lately. They're truly hitting on all cylinders, from beginning to end:
-Jony Ive arguably leads the most brilliant design team in consumer electronics
-Apple uses its cash to secure cheap, dependable supply chains
-Corporate secrecy feeds curiosity, surprise, etc. about Apple's releases
-As the article mentioned, their system of inventory is very lean
-Apple's keynotes are the gold standard. They're clear, well-rehearsed, and fun. Steve will be missed of course
-Their success in retail is the stuff of legends. Record-setting profit margins per square foot.
-Customer satisfaction and support have been topping competitors for over 6 years. ~90%+satisfaction
On top of all that, they're pioneering new fields or invigorating old ones, never content. Repeat cycle.
+1
Perfection in a post. Thanks.....
Ditto
I have a feeling I'm going to be on an emotional rollercoaster while reading this book.
I'm hoping for some closure. I need closure.
I have one tinny question: How can Apple depend on Samsung for its most critical component, the A4, 5 CPU? Apple is embroiled in a worldwide legal and marketing fight. Samsung are nothing by thieves of IPRs... they copy everything down to the icons, case and patents. They probably take apart the design and features of the A chips and duplicate the principles.
Apple has no real back up to the A chips. It is the most important component for the entire company. Cook is not dumb. What am I missing?
Why do you say "Apple has no real back up to the A chips"? I think you are vastly misreading the situation.
You forget that one of Tim Cook's first jobs was running Apple's supply chain. Apple doesn't have just one supplier for anything, not just one plan. I'm sure they have plans B, C, and D figured out for each of their parts suppliers. I have no doubt Apple's got the CEO of every volume chip fab in the world on speed dial. And these companies have Tim Cook on speed dial.
To me, the fact that Apple keeps using Samsung for chips says more about the strength of Samsung's semiconductor business. Apple chose Samsung to fab the A chips, probably because Samsung can do it at the volume Apple needs for a competitive price.
Also, this isn't a divorce. There's a legal and PR battle between the companies, but the drama between the companies is largely fabricated by the media. Consider for a moment that Samsung's slavish copying of Apple isn't going to stop even if Apple withdraws their business. It won't put Samsung Semiconductor out of business. It won't stop cloning of Apple designs or icons or even user-interface elements. I'm sure Apple's ARM-derived designs are heavily protected from copying, so there's no chance Samsung could get away with theft of Apple's chip IP. At the end of the day, why NOT keep Samsung as a chip supplier, if they are good at it?
...Do you remember the switch to Intel from Motorola for OS X?...
To be clear, there was never a period in history when Apple switched directly from "Morotola to Intel". By the time Apple switched over to Intel-manufactured CPUs, Motorola was already years out of the desktop CPU business, with Freescale as the designated successor.
Even if you ignored that point, the fact still remains that Apple had stopped using single-sourced "Morotola/Freescale" parts back when they dumped the old 68K series of processors. PowerPC had always been a joint venture between Apple, IBM, and Motorola/Freescale, with IBM and Motorola/Freescale both participating in the manufacturing chain. For example, Apple sourced its G5 CPUs from IBM, not from Motorola/Freescale.
The transition from PowerPC to x86 actually marked Apple transitioning from two different desktop-class CPU suppliers to only one. (But never forget -- in the desktop domain, Apple almost certainly maintains a stable of engineering prototype Macs running on x86-based AMD processors, just in case anything ever went wrong with their relationship with Intel.)