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

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 112
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member

    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.    

    As I mentioned earlier, reliability and trustworthiness are two different things.

    And I think your thinking regarding robotics is a little too short term.

    Even Korea is heavily investing in this technology:

    http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-09-11/south-koreas-robotics-ambitions-beware-japan

    The only downside I see is when the robots rise up and kill us.

    But seeing as the net income per person will have dropped maybe we could consider that a good thing?
  • Reply 62 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.

     

    There are several pieces to the Samsung conglomerate. Samsung "the mobile company" is the one that is copying Apple, smearing HTC and Apple and others, and is basically being unethical. Samsung "the semiconductor company" is effectively a different company and is fine.

     

    Samsung "the semiconductor company" has numerous customers, including Samsung and Apple. If there were a hint of any IP breach, they would lose a lot of business.

     

    Samsung "the mobile company" has a completely different customer base (and moral compass).

     

    I'm very sure that Samsung "the semiconductor company" has strong "firewalls" between their different (rival) customers' products.

  • Reply 63 of 112
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    formosa wrote: »
    There are several pieces to the Samsung conglomerate. Samsung "the mobile company" is the one that is copying Apple, smearing HTC and Apple and others, and is basically being unethical. Samsung "the semiconductor company" is effectively a different company and is fine.

    Samsung "the semiconductor company" has numerous customers, including Samsung and Apple. If there were a hint of any IP breach, they would lose a lot of business.

    Samsung "the mobile company" has a completely different customer base (and moral compass).

    I'm very sure that Samsung "the semiconductor company" has strong "firewalls" between their different (rival) customers' products.

    Samsung is a single company (regardless of divisions) run by a single family with a proven history of criminal activity.

    Who says this?

    Well, apart from the results of the most basic of searches, Samsung's former chief legal counsel for one:

    http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/30/3709688/samsung-25-years-lee-kun-hee

    What happened with Apple is not unique. Samsung did the exact same thing to Sony over a decade ago. And they have done it to many other companies as well. Partner. Pilfer. Profit. This is Samsung's (very successful) modus operandi.

    And if you buy from them you support this.
  • Reply 64 of 112
    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'd better" had I? Again, this is a discussion forum, not a court of law. I do not have to encapsulate the entirety of each post into a single self contained statement showing my sources and workings out. The discussion has already provided reasons why what I mentioned may prove to be possible, anyone reading the thread and contributing in the spirit of discussion would accept that, but not you, you're the judge and jury.
  • Reply 66 of 112
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

     

    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?


     

    Who?  Intel, GF, TSMC, Apple.

     

    Did Samsung let other parts know about the 64bitness of the A7?  They may not have known since they were shut out of development by Apple for earlier stealing.  That go around all they probably got was the multi-layer design for the lithography machines and little more.

  • Reply 67 of 112
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    stuffe wrote: »
    "I'd better" had I? Again, this is a discussion forum, not a court of law. I do not have to encapsulate the entirety of each post into a single self contained statement showing my sources and workings out. The discussion has already provided reasons why what I mentioned may prove to be possible, anyone reading the thread and contributing in the spirit of discussion would accept that, but not you, you're the judge and jury.

    Then you will be ignored.

    Then flipped over.

    Then challenged.

    Then flipped over again.

    Then challenged AND ignored.

    And then ignored then challenged.

    Until you can take no more challenging and ignoring and are thrown away, on the side of the road, like an old wedding dress.

    ????
  • Reply 68 of 112
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nht View Post

     

     

    Who?  Intel, GF, TSMC, Apple.

     

    Did Samsung let other parts know about the 64bitness of the A7?  They may not have known since they were shut out of development by Apple for earlier stealing.  That go around all they probably got was the multi-layer design for the lithography machines and little more.




    Do you think it is possible to manufacture a processor without knowing how many bits it is?  You manufacture processors without testing the final product?  They can't count the memory address lines?

     

     

  • Reply 69 of 112
    cnocbui wrote: »

    Do you think it is possible to manufacture a processor without knowing how many bits it is?  You manufacture processors without testing the final product?  They can't count the memory address lines?

    What does the memory have to do with it? The Retina iPad had the widest memory lanes AnandTech had ever seen in an ARM processor and that was only 32-bit.

    Why can't Apple do the design have someone else fab it, Apple does the testing, and tells them what they need to change?

    And with the Samsung label on the previous chips and these chips being complex SoCs how do we know if Samsung was involved with dabbing all aspects of the chip?
  • Reply 70 of 112
    This is just so fantastic.

    This is how this whole Samsung thing likely went down (I am a lawyer):

    Samsung is operated by greedy seemingly unethical sleaze (just read reports of their evil doings in Korea ..e.g. the key shareholders).

    They had the golden goose - Apple / Steve Jobs - and golden contract/relationship - guaranteed BILLIONS in revenue and profit for decades.

    But their sleazy scummy character prevailed - why don't we stick it to Mr. Jobs/Apple and take all the profit/revenue from the phone "we make the darned processor, we are the center of the universe".

    Problem - they got it all wrong. The center of the Universe was Steve Jobs and Apple - and remains Apple - Tim Cook - and the Apple team of Engineers creativity and direction set up by Steve Jobs.

    Koreans tell their lawyer to deal with it - drag it out - we will make billions in meantime and win since we are the center of the Universe. Lawyers really believe they are STUPID/ARROGANT/SLEEZE - but they do what they are paid to do and required to do - defend them and represent to the best that they can with an impossible situation - because they likely know they are just arrogant non creative yuck who are not really the center of the Universe.

    Well I give a grand cheer to Tim Cook and Apple today - TSMC is now an outstanding partner with Apple - and I bet they would never be like Samsung unethical scum, which is unique.

    This story marks a pending celebration. The outstanding new ecosystem update by Apple, over the top new iphone/pending pads/watch .. Samsung rip-off products will not sell at all henceforth and they will make chump change on processors et al.

    Bottom line - I see Samscum in serious financial problems shortly%u2026 firings will commence -[ they will need to downsize. Stock will plunge.

    Samsung is the most ungrateful disgusting organization that I have seen in my years (possible equal - Google with betrayal - directorship and copycat of the actual phone) --- its great that they will be the example in business schools for decades of bad business practice

    Great comment!

    I consider this news to be a feather in the cap for DED.

    He predicted that Apple was moving to TSMC, but it didn't happen—was it before the 5s? However, he was clearly on the right lines. There were a lot of people here who disputed his reasoning, but I think the only mistake he made was with the timing. Apple must have been in major negotiations then to transfer their chips to TSMC, but the 5s was too soon.

    So well done Dilger, and here's to a fruitful partnership between Apple and TSMC.
  • Reply 71 of 112
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post



    I predict the next two earnings calls are going to look pretty bad for Samsung.

     

    I predict they're not. Samsung makes an enormous range of products. I don't think there are going to be any profit warnings just because they're not making chips for iPhones at the moment.

  • Reply 72 of 112
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post



    So well done Dilger, and here's to a fruitful partnership between Apple and TSMC.

     

    `Yeah, well done Dilger for predicting that Apple would reduce its reliance upon a major competitor in the mobile phone market! What levels of prescience he must have to produce such a prediction. A few more might even counteract the monomaniacal drivel he churns out week after week after week.

  • Reply 73 of 112
    euphonious wrote: »
    So well done Dilger, and here's to a fruitful partnership between Apple and TSMC.

    `Yeah, well done Dilger for predicting that Apple would reduce its reliance upon a major competitor in the mobile phone market! What levels of prescience he must have to produce such a prediction. A few more might even counteract the monomaniacal drivel he churns out week after week after week.

    Having a bad life, I see.
  • Reply 74 of 112
    Originally Posted by stuffe View Post

    "I'd better" had I?

     

    Yep, it’s called common sense.

     

    Again, this is a discussion forum, not a court of law.


     

    Indeed. So your right to be heard… doesn’t exist.

     

    I do not have to encapsulate the entirety of each post into a single self contained statement…


     

    That’s what a post is.

     

    …showing my sources and workings out.


     

    You do if you’re making an otherwise unsubstantiated claim.

     

    The discussion has already provided reasons why what I mentioned may prove to be possible


     

    I’d then like to see reasons that TSMC couldn’t provide a die shrunken chip.

  • Reply 75 of 112
    cnocbui wrote: »
    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?
    I don't usually respond to trolls I've blocked, but this comment is so stupid I couldn't resist.

    Samsung doesn't have any 64bit processors so it's impossible for them to have stolen any IP.

    solipsismx wrote: »
    What does the memory have to do with it? The Retina iPad had the widest memory lanes AnandTech had ever seen in an ARM processor and that was only 32-bit.

    Why can't Apple do the design have someone else fab it, Apple does the testing, and tells them what they need to change?

    And with the Samsung label on the previous chips and these chips being complex SoCs how do we know if Samsung was involved with dabbing all aspects of the chip?
    Apple has an entire team of engineers that actually work out of space in the Samsung fabs. They work hand-in-hand with Samsung engineers when producing processors. It's not like making a couple of changes to a document, saving it and then getting it printed. There's NO WAY Samsung couldn't tell the A7 was 64bit, that portions were hand laid, how many cores it had or what the cache sizes were.

    euphonious wrote: »
    I predict they're not. Samsung makes an enormous range of products. I don't think there are going to be any profit warnings just because they're not making chips for iPhones at the moment.
    Irrelevant. They have different divisions so you can't compare the total output from all of them. They (Samsung Mobile) already posted the last two earnings calls had weaker demand from flagships and increased demand from "mass market" (their words) devices. With the huge interest in the iPhone 6, there's no way that Samsung flagship sales won't take another hit. And that's the only part of their mobile division that actually makes money.
  • Reply 76 of 112
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post





    I don't usually respond to trolls I've blocked, but this comment is so stupid I couldn't resist.



    Samsung doesn't have any 64bit processors so it's impossible for them to have stolen any IP.




    Apple has an entire team of engineers that actually work out of space in the Samsung fabs. They work hand-in-hand with Samsung engineers when producing processors. It's not like making a couple of changes to a document, saving it and then getting it printed. There's NO WAY Samsung couldn't tell the A7 was 64bit, that portions were hand laid, how many cores it had or what the cache sizes were.

     

    Thank you for proving my points for me.

  • Reply 77 of 112
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    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.


    I think the individual worker who will loose their job would care less about some company.

  • Reply 78 of 112
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post





    Samsung doesn't have any 64bit processors so it's impossible for them to have stolen any IP.

     

    Well none that is currently on the market but it is silly to think that they're not gearing up to produce them by the end of this year, early next year, which means they currently do have one as it takes a while to design a chip, took Nvidia 5 years to make their Denver. I think it will defianlty be this year as Nvidia will release theirs next month and Qualcomm just recently released one.

  • Reply 79 of 112
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TechLover View Post

     

     

    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.


    Companies are out for profit, not social benefit. Honestly, I don't see US multinationals (AAPL, MSFT, GOOG etc) repatriating any overseas revenue when you compare the tax rate they can enjoy in countries like Iceland. The US needs a tax reform, not another congressional inquisition

  • Reply 80 of 112
    Great comment!

    I consider this news to be a feather in the cap for DED.

    He predicted that Apple was moving to TSMC, but it didn't happen—was it before the 5s? However, he was clearly on the right lines. There were a lot of people here who disputed his reasoning, but I think the only mistake he made was with the timing. Apple must have been in major negotiations then to transfer their chips to TSMC, but the 5s was too soon.

    So well done Dilger, and here's to a fruitful partnership between Apple and TSMC.

    TSMC began dramatically increasing capacity in 2012 which is likely the reason DED was incorrect about the time frame.
Sign In or Register to comment.