Editorial: Apple's Ax SoC move from Samsung to TSMC can't happen fast enough

1356

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 111

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by LXK400 View Post



    Copyediting. Can we have some please?


     


    LXK400: Help, help, I'm being repressed!


    AI: Bloody peasant.

  • Reply 42 of 111
    macinthe408macinthe408 Posts: 1,050member
    Yes, this should have happened within 3 weeks of tensions starting between Apple and Samsung. Because setting up a foundry and pumping out chips using new designs from a new customer shouldn't take longer than, let's say, 4 weeks.

    Apple/TSCM could've adopted the Google playbook, releasing a "beta" version of the first batch of chips, then working out the kinks as they went along. Customers would've had dud iPhones/iPods/iPads, but Apple could've come out and said, "Well, it is beta, so bear with us."

    Yes, because business dealings between huge, multi-national corporations should be conducted like high school friendships: one mishap and they're cutoff! CEO implies your company is lazy? You're outta here, Samsung! I know it was yesterday, but stop the foundrys now!

    Is AI hiring armchair analysts? If so, sign me up. I'm good at that.
  • Reply 43 of 111
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,480member
    kdarling wrote: »
    I assume that these articles are paid for by the word.  


    For example, there's the bizarre sidetrack about iOS being "maligned", which somehow ignores the years of positive free press that Apple has enjoyed.  In any case, it has nothing to do with the topic.
     
    Most of the article attempted to tie together software patent fights with the availability of fab facilities, yet again there's no such relationship.   Companies engage in licensing disputes all the time, while continuing to work together, just as Apple and Samsung and Microsoft and others have done for years.

    The primary reason why Apple "needs" to find another fab, appears to be<span style="line-height:1.231;"> Apple's desire for revenge against Samsung, which at this point is basically like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.</span>
    Samsung must own some peoples souls. Depending on your biggest rival to supply your tech when they have shown they will copy you and use your IP against you is crazy. As a partner they know too much about Apple's business so they have to go.
  • Reply 44 of 111

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


    The primary reason why Apple "needs" to find another fab, appears to be Apple's desire for revenge against Samsung, which at this point is basically like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.



     


    Your comments continue to amaze with how stupid they really are.


     


    Let's forget about the Samsung employee leaking data about Apple screen purchases to a hedge fund to give them advance information on how many iPads Apple was planning on making. Or that Samsung has talked about a "firewall" between Samsung Semi and Samsung Mobile to ease Apple's concerns about information transfer going on. Or that Samsung put a person in charge that had worked with Apple and had a good relationship with Apple, again to ease concerns. Or the fact that Apple is now designing completely custom processors (while Samsung just clones ARM designs) and since Samsung fabs these chips they get an inside look at what Apple has done to make their SoC's.


     


    No, you're right. Apple doesn't have a single good reason to dump Samsung as a supplier for SoC's. /S/S/S/S/S/S/S for the people who don't seem to get it.

  • Reply 45 of 111
    vvswarupvvswarup Posts: 336member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


    I assume that these articles are paid for by the word.  


     


     


    For example, there's the bizarre sidetrack about iOS being "maligned", which somehow ignores the years of positive free press that Apple has enjoyed.  In any case, it has nothing to do with the topic.


     


    Most of the article attempted to tie together software patent fights with the availability of fab facilities, yet again there's no such relationship.   Companies engage in licensing disputes all the time, while continuing to work together, just as Apple and Samsung and Microsoft and others have done for years.


     


    The primary reason why Apple "needs" to find another fab, appears to be Apple's desire for revenge against Samsung, which at this point is basically like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.



     


    If the division that makes Apple's chips and the division making Samsung phones are completely separate, to the point that someone from the phones division can't even get into the chip company's offices without an escort, and essentially being treated like an outsider, then there is nothing for Apple to worry about.


     


    But if that's not the case, then why shouldn't Apple even try to investigate some other options? Why should Apple line a competitor's pockets with cash? I agree that Apple can't run half-cocked and just make an emotional decision to cut out Samsung in one day. But it doesn't look like that's what they're doing. Apple is working with Samsung for now but making preparations with other suppliers to eventually move away from Samsung. What's wrong with that? 

  • Reply 46 of 111
    Your comments continue to amaze with how stupid they really are.

    Hey, this is KDarling. I stopped being amazed by his comments quite sometime ago. He's the resident troll. And he's not even as entertaining as DaHarder.
  • Reply 47 of 111
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Your comments continue to amaze with how stupid they really are.

    Let's forget about the Samsung employee leaking data about Apple screen purchases to a hedge fund to give them advance information on how many iPads Apple was planning on making. Or that Samsung has talked about a "firewall" between Samsung Semi and Samsung Mobile to ease Apple's concerns about information transfer going on. Or that Samsung put a person in charge that had worked with Apple and had a good relationship with Apple, again to ease concerns. Or the fact that Apple is now designing completely custom processors (while Samsung just clones ARM designs) and since Samsung fabs these chips they get an inside look at what Apple has done to make their SoC's.

    No, you're right. Apple doesn't have a single good reason to dump Samsung as a supplier for SoC's. /S/S/S/S/S/S/S for the people who don't seem to get it.

    I wouldn't call him stupid by any measure. He's wrong, but he seems to do so in a deliberate, trollish way.

    He can clearly write and research well — the Teckstuds and DaHarders of this forum.., not so much — he just chooses to take an anti-Apple stance on everything without any desire to be fair and balanced. He's to tech what FOX is to news.
  • Reply 48 of 111


    This is such a breath-of-fresh-air article. Thank you for covering all the lazy pundits and anti-Apple know-nothings who malign this wonderful company - a company that I have depended on for over 20 years as a commercial artist and a professional composer. I only wish Apple was as proactive as you in defending their efforts and reputation. Perhaps then their stock wouldn't reflect the views of clueless analysts and armchair "journalists". 

  • Reply 49 of 111
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


    I assume that these articles are paid for by the word.  


     


     


    For example, there's the bizarre sidetrack about iOS being "maligned", which somehow ignores the years of positive free press that Apple has enjoyed.  In any case, it has nothing to do with the topic.


     


    Most of the article attempted to tie together software patent fights with the availability of fab facilities, yet again there's no such relationship.   Companies engage in licensing disputes all the time, while continuing to work together, just as Apple and Samsung and Microsoft and others have done for years.


     


    The primary reason why Apple "needs" to find another fab, appears to be Apple's desire for revenge against Samsung, which at this point is basically like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.



     


    Funny, being "paid by the word" is the thing that comes to mind every single time I read one of your posts. It's the only reason I can think of that you would spend to much time and thousands of posts on a website dedicated a company and products that you so vehemently despise. 


     


    Oh, and thanks for the enlightenment about Apple's motives. Because, clearly, Apple, one of the largest and most successful companies on the planet, would decisions like this, that have tens of billions of dollars at stake, on such a childish notion as "revenge".  It's no surprise that in your twisted perception, in which you ignore all the countless facts that do not support your agenda, that can be the only explanation. 


     


    It's also telling that you pretend as if it's in Apple's best interest to continue investing billions of dollars into it's biggest competitor  , and that Apple should continue doing just that, infinitely, without assessing alternatives. You're purposely naive if you pretend that one division of Samsung (semiconductors) would never use info and their relationship with Apple to cater advantage to another (mobile). Just because you're so incredibly limited that "revenge" is the only possible explanation that can come to your mind, it does not mean that a multi-billion dollar company you just happen to hate shares your childish notions. 

  • Reply 50 of 111
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post


    This is such a breath-of-fresh-air article. Thank you for covering all the lazy pundits and anti-Apple know-nothings who malign this wonderful company - a company that I have depended on for over 20 years as a commercial artist and a professional composer. I only wish Apple was as proactive as you in defending their efforts and reputation. Perhaps then their stock wouldn't reflect the views of clueless analysts and armchair "journalists". 



     


    I agree. It blows my mind that people would rather read bullshit analyst and rumor articles 100% of the time, and would prefer that over original, passionate content such as this. One can find that horse-shit on 72,932 other sites. These types of article are why I come here. 

  • Reply 51 of 111
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,384member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    I wouldn't call him stupid by any measure. He's wrong, but he seems to do so in a deliberate, trollish way.



    He can clearly write and research well — the Teckstuds and DaHarders of this forum.., not so much — he just chooses to take an anti-Apple stance on everything without any desire to be fair and balanced. He's to tech what FOX is to news.


     


    At least FOX gets paid to troll, so one can understand their motivations. They wouldn't do it for free. People like KDarling? They seem to troll to fill an emptiness inside them, or possible as an avenue to direct unhappiness they feel towards themselves or their lives. It's the only explanation I can think of, as I can never imagine going to forums of companies and products I hate, racking up thousands of posts composed of negative comments and hate towards those companies/products. I dislike Samsung and can say a myriad of negative things about their products, but I'd feel more than pathetic registering on forums of Samsung fansites and spending my time trolling there. 

  • Reply 52 of 111
    Why can't Apple simply work with intel ?

    You mean like on Thunderbolt, stuffing Core i7 chips into Macs, etc?
  • Reply 53 of 111
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    I wouldn't call him stupid by any measure. He's wrong, but he seems to do so in a deliberate, trollish way.



    He can clearly write and research well — the Teckstuds and DaHarders of this forum.., not so much — he just chooses to take an anti-Apple stance on everything without any desire to be fair and balanced. He's to tech what FOX is to news.


     


    Then, while I sit meditating, levitating, and gravitating towards some serious frikkin' enlightenment in my zen rock garden, I would need to ask:


     


    "Who is the bigger fool? The fool who doesn't know he is a fool but acts in that manner because it is in his nature, or the fool that knows he is a fool, has to tools to not be a fool, but continues to act that way anyway..."


     


    Ponder this, grasshoppers, and be at one with the universe...

  • Reply 54 of 111
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by crazy_mac_lover View Post



    Why can't Apple simply work with intel ?


    Because producing chip technology for customers from a rival chip designer (ARM) that compete directly with your own (Atom) is not very good business.  Having said that intel is hurting enough that they have started doing just that.

  • Reply 55 of 111
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

    …compete directly with your own (Atom) is not very good business.


     


    They still make Atom chips? image


     


    Not that I don't want them to eventually get it right, but they're not gonna get it right fast enough.

  • Reply 56 of 111
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


     


    Dilger, stay away from the funny mushrooms - there's a good lad.

     



    I happen to agree with him.  Apple has had good press for sure, but lately its the Press in general and the analysts, with the stock market that have needed to "stay away from the funny mushrooms".


     


    They have collectively made apple there favorite whipping boy with nothing based even remotely in fact.  More from the hallucinations induced by said "funny mushrooms" they have been consuming.

  • Reply 57 of 111
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RichL View Post


     


    Samsung Mobile and Samsung Semiconductor are effectively separate companies. How a long time Samsung Mobile didn't even use Samsung chips in the majority of its phones and it's been reported that Samsung Mobile don't get a discount on the chips. 


     


    Maybe Apple was smart enough to realize that it wasn't Samsung Semiconductor copying Apple's designs or ridiculing the company.



    Oh please!  You honestly believe that rigid corporate firewall crap samsung is spewing about the information firewall between its mobile division and its semiconductor division?!!   Hint:  it does not exist, there one big happy company and they look at apples A series chip plans every time apple gives them a new one so they can copy it into there exynos designs.


     


    Like the article states the move away from samsung to tsmc cant happen fast enough for that very reason.


     


    For the record too as an edit:  Apple does not use the A15 or the A9 designs in there iPhone 5. They follow the ARMv7 spec which the A15 and the A9 uses.  They design there  A series from the ground up to that spec so that there compatible with the ARM instruction set.

  • Reply 58 of 111
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    They still make Atom chips? image


     


    Not that I don't want them to eventually get it right, but they're not gonna get it right fast enough.



    Agreedimage

  • Reply 59 of 111
    undedunded Posts: 43member
    Project management takes time--from cradle to grave. But everyone here knows that. Doing business with competitors is never a good idea. Same goes with competing with your customers. But Samsung, for now, makes a lot of money doing that and will continue to do so. I don't have point to make, just babbling. Bring it on you bastards of the Internet who only talk shit online. If I see you in person, I'll shove my fist in your face and eat your dog too. Or your cat if you have a cat. Wait what? This is not the PETA forum?! Damn, lost as ever.
  • Reply 60 of 111
    Why can't Apple simply work with intel ?
    Because Apple deigns it's own chips that they put into their mobile devices, Intel also deigns chips, and Intel's business is based on selling Intel deigned and built chips, not manufacturing Apple's deigns chips for use in only Apple's devices. Intel is debating doing that, to offload the loss in revenue from the slumping PC market, but until intel decides to do so for Apple, Apple cannot work with Intel.
Sign In or Register to comment.