TSMC confirmed as manufacturer of Apple's 20nm A8 processor

1356

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 112
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    Samsung still makes screens for Apple correct?

    So if Apple can find a better screen manufacturer this could hurt them even more. With a sapphire plant opening up *maybe* this manufacturer can be Apple themselves.
  • Reply 42 of 112
    Marvin wrote: »
    Between the iPhone and iPad, Apple makes over 200m devices per year. Say each processor is $50, that's $10b revenue. Even if it's not 100% of the volume, it's still a few billion. Samsung makes over $300b revenue per year so it won't affect them much.

    $300 billion? You must be talking about Samsung Group, because Samsung Electronics is well below that. Take out consumer electronics and mobile and their components/display division is around $50-60 billion a year. Apples share of that division is a significant amount.

    And the key point is those billions are going to a competitor, and that Samsung plants will be running at a reduced capacity since there's nobody anywhere near Apples size to pick up the slack.
  • Reply 44 of 112
    ksecksec Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Smackdowninator View Post



    Don't get too excited - Samsung may well end up having more advanced fabrication processes than TSMC for the A9 chipset and could end up fabricating the A9 instead of TSMC.

     

    The reason why A8 isn't being fabbed by Samsung is because Samsung decided to skip 20nm and go directly to 14nm. Although A9 was suppose to go back to Samsung on 14nm, recent development has seen Samsung 14nm may be delayed, and TSMC managed to speed up their 16nm+ by a quarter. Which means with the current close collaboration between TSMC and Apple they are likely to continue and work together on the A9.

  • Reply 45 of 112
    ksec wrote: »
    The reason why A8 isn't being fabbed by Samsung is because Samsung decided to skip 20nm and go directly to 14nm. Although A9 was suppose to go back to Samsung on 14nm, recent development has seen Samsung 14nm may be delayed, and TSMC managed to speed up their 16nm+ by a quarter. Which means with the current close collaboration between TSMC and Apple they are likely to continue and work together on the A9.

    The faster Samsung is replaced by reliable suppliers, the better.
  • Reply 46 of 112
    How Samsung ever managed to make reliable chips I dont know considering the poor quality of all their other products. Unlike many on here Im not against Android per se, just think Samsung hardware, phones, TVs everything is very poor.
  • Reply 47 of 112
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    The faster Samsung is replaced by reliable suppliers, the better.



    In what way are Samsung not a reliable supplier?

     

    Doesn't Samsung invest in the USA and employ Americans to make their processors for Apple?  Why are so many people ecstatic at the idea Samsung might loose all of that business with a possible negative impact on jobs and investment in the US?

  • Reply 48 of 112
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

     

    In what way are Samsung not a reliable supplier?

     

    Doesn't Samsung invest in the USA and employ Americans to make their processors for Apple?  Why are so many people ecstatic at the idea Samsung might loose all of that business with a possible negative impact on jobs and investment in the US?


     

    If Samsung leaves the US then someone else will buy the fab.

     

    Samsung is not a reliable supplier because they steal the IP being developed for the client and this has had a negative impact on US companies.

  • Reply 49 of 112
    badmonkbadmonk Posts: 1,077member
    A Samsung free iPhone is a good thing. They are like Germans invading Russia. This is their Stalingrad. It will be another chip in the wall of the chaebol.
  • Reply 50 of 112
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    cnocbui wrote: »

    In what way are Samsung not a reliable supplier?

    Doesn't Samsung invest in the USA and employ Americans to make their processors for Apple?  Why are so many people ecstatic at the idea Samsung might loose all of that business with a possible negative impact on jobs and investment in the US?

    Samsung are not reliable because they cannot be trusted. They have demonstrated that a number of times with a number of different companies.

    And the USA should not prostitute itself to another country just because they supply employment and investment.

    Employment and investment would be better if it came from within.

    An investment in robotics by the United States will bring more jobs, income, and power back to it and reduce the need to rely on other countries.
  • Reply 51 of 112
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nht View Post

     

     

    If Samsung leaves the US then someone else will buy the fab.

     

    Samsung is not a reliable supplier because they steal the IP being developed for the client and this has had a negative impact on US companies.


    Who?



    So when Samsung made the 64 bit A7 - where is there any evidence they stole any of the IP or even so much as let other parts of the conglomerate know that Apple's next processor would be 64 bit?

  • Reply 52 of 112

    According to the wiki page on TSMC they fab chips for qualcomm, mediatek, apple and others.  I had no idea they were such a large producer.

     

    "In August 2014, it was reported that TSMC's production capacity for the fourth quarter of 2014 was already almost fully booked, a scenario that had not occurred for many years. The tight capacity was described as being caused by a ripple-effect due to TSMC landing CPU orders from Apple, which has also brought in other peripheral IC orders for iPhone, iPad and iWatch devices. This has forced chip suppliers for mobile devices to scramble for more wafer production capacity.[43]"

     

    Seems like there is plenty of global demand for chips in general, there should be ample table scraps for samsung to fill pipeline demands not met by companies like TSMC. 

  • Reply 53 of 112
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,394member
    gtr wrote: »
    Samsung are not reliable because they cannot be trusted. They have demonstrated that a number of times with a number of different companies.

    And the USA should not prostitute itself to another country just because they supply employment and investment.

    Employment and investment would be better if it came from within.

    An investment in robotics by the United States will bring more jobs, income, an power back to it and reduce the need to rely on other countries.

    It's very likely Google robots are already building Apple products. Foxconn has a new robotic manufacturing plant in Chengdu, China with Google software driving the production. If you look at Apple's supplier list for this year you'll find that Hon-Hai plant listed.

    In the near future Foxconn is expected to move some of their production to the US and expanded use of their robots when they do wouldn't be a surprise.
  • Reply 54 of 112
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post

    It may have escaped your attention that this is a "rumour" site, therefore any and all are free to think out loud as things that may, or may not, happen in the future.


     

    Your point is what? You’d better have something to back up your supposition or don’t be surprised when it’s challenged or ignored.

     

    I note you have no caustic response to my comment that you are essentially picking arguments for fun. 


     

    Because it has nothing to do with the topic of discussion. If you like, I can certainly explain why you should not be allowed to say anything you want anywhere you want and expect to get away with it, but you already know the answer to that. It seems like a waste of time.

  • Reply 55 of 112
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GTR View Post





    Samsung are not reliable because they cannot be trusted. They have demonstrated that a number of times with a number of different companies.



    And the USA should not prostitute itself to another country just because they supply employment and investment.



    Employment and investment would be better if it came from within.



    An investment in robotics by the United States will bring more jobs, income, an power back to it and reduce the need to rely on other countries.



    They have been extremely reliable as a manufacturer - it's all the others who haven't been.

     

    What have robotics got to do with preserving US jobs?  Robotics taking over all jobs is a nightmare scenario that has been advocated since the 90' and it always seems to have shortcomings and fails to eventuate - thank goodness.

     

    Still, if seeing Samsung pack up in the US and all those US workers loose their jobs is what everyone really wants, well let it happen.  I find that attitude very odd.

     

    PS - hey TS, I was up in Connemara today. :-)

  • Reply 56 of 112
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    It's very likely Google robots are already building Apple products. In the near future Foxconn is expected to move some of their production to the US and expanded use of their robots when they do wouldn't be a surprise.

    Apple robots would be preferable.

    Hardware has never been Google's strong point.

    Plus, production performance would be enhanced if the robots weren't collecting information, sending it to Google, getting infected, and not being supported after short periods of time.

    ????
  • Reply 57 of 112
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,394member
    gtr wrote: »
    Apple robots would be preferable.

    Hardware has never been Google's strong point.

    Plus, production performance would be enhanced if the robots weren't collecting information, sending it to Google, getting infected, and not being supported after short periods of time.

    ????

    LOL! :D
  • Reply 58 of 112
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    cnocbui wrote: »

    They have been extremely reliable as a manufacturer - it's all the others who haven't been.

    What have robotics got to do with preserving US jobs?  Robotics taking over all jobs is a nightmare scenario that has been advocated since the 90' and it always seems to have shortcomings and fails to eventuate - thank goodness.

    Still, if seeing Samsung pack up in the US and all those US workers loose their jobs is what everyone really wants, well let it happen.  I find that attitude very odd.

    Reliability and trustworthiness are two very, very different things.

    Robotics has the ability to level the playing field in regards to countries that take advantage of cheap labour.

    Like it or not, robotics are coming. Foxconn is already implementing robot technology and there is no reason why the USA and other countries should not as well.

    And don't worry about Samsung employees losing their jobs. They can become Apple employees. Or robot technicians. Whatever they prefer.

    ????
  • Reply 59 of 112

    Samsung are not reliable because they cannot be trusted. They have demonstrated that a number of times with a number of different companies.



    And the USA should not prostitute itself to another country just because they supply employment and investment.



    Employment and investment would be better if it came from within.



    An investment in robotics by the United States will bring more jobs, income, an power back to it and reduce the need to rely on other countries.

     

    Indeed, apple should invest more in US jobs.  It is a US company after all.  Maybe repatriate some cash and pay a little bit of taxes too while they are at it.  Seems like the right thing to do anyway, they are the largest company in the world after all.  They can afford to do the right thing better than any company on the planet.

  • Reply 60 of 112
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GTR View Post





    Samsung are not reliable because they cannot be trusted. They have demonstrated that a number of times with a number of different companies.



    And the USA should not prostitute itself to another country just because they supply employment and investment.



    Employment and investment would be better if it came from within.



    An investment in robotics by the United States will bring more jobs, income, an power back to it and reduce the need to rely on other countries.



    err, when it comes to delivering chips... they can be trusted.  TSMC whiffed on building Aseries chips a couple of times now.

    Sometimes you have to take the losses with the wins.   the iPhone 5s couldn't have been made without Samsung.

     

    As for the USA... you're barking up the wrong tree.  Corporations feed lobbyists, lobbyists feed congress and the WH, Congress and the WH set the trade agreements to make sure our corporations make a sh*tload of money, by paying the absolute lowest wage they can for the creation and assembly of their stuffs.

     

    as for robotics, I don't think you understand the economics of robotic assembly.  It may keep jobs onshore, but the jobs will become semi-skilled and eventually the net income per person will drop.    

Sign In or Register to comment.