Samsung the Supplier is not the same as Samsung the Smartphone Maker.
There is no "enemy" in this relationship.
I thought there was a good understanding of this and acceptance that Samsung Display and Semiconductor were good (including a good relationship with Apple) as compared to their electronics/mobile division that has earned them the copycat reputation (not such a good relationship with Apple or other companies such as Dyson). However, it appears what I thought and reality may be different.
Since Apple is such a large customer, I would be surprised if there wasn't a dedicated internal team at Samsung (display and semiconductor) for Apple. It's possible Apple has altered the wording of their contracts with Samsung to penalize any leaking of info between divisions after the issues they've had. Samsung is a good component manufacturer for Apple and one them seem to have to keep going back to even when they try to scale back their portion of manufacturing so I think it will be hard to stop working with them at all.
I think this might be a win-win for both. Samsung just needs to decide what's best for them: competing head-to-head with Apple or becoming a trusted supplier.
Why not do both? Companies compete in one area while cooperating in another all the time. Apple and IBM were competitors in the PC market, and then cooperated on the PowerPC architecture (with Motorola, who competed with IBM in workstation and server processors, then cooperated on PPC and then competed on embedded processors). All the major memory vendors compete with each other and are part of JEDEC, where they cooperate on defining memory standards.
The idea that giant companies view each other as "friends" and "enemies" is generally not accurate. Companies have 'interests' – if working with another company (or another division within a company) furthers those interests they will do so.
Define a Samsung Troll. I have a Samsung phone and a Samsung external USB HD. There are 2 iMacs, 3 Apple Laptops, 3 iPods, an iPhone and an airport express in the house. Oh, and a dysfunctional Apple SE in the loft.
I think Apple is winning slightly.
Well you are for one
"winning slightly"
typical example of bad grammar, there are no degrees of winning, one either wins or loses
typical example of bad grammar, there are no degrees of winning, one either wins or loses
Putting aside your facetious pedantry. If a competition is underway and has not yet concluded, it is not uncommon, and is perfectly correct to say that a party in said competition is 'in a winning position'; 'winning on points' and numerous other such usages. I very much doubt I have made my last purchase. 'Wins or loses' imply a past tense so are inappropriate concepts.
According to people familiar with matter, Samsung employees working on the special team also help develop display technologies for Apple and are thus not allowed to share product information with colleagues outside the group. Affording this level of secrecy to a single client can hardly be considered business as usual, but makes sense for a company like Apple, which so highly values discretion.
This is not at all unusual in the electronics industry where IP is a critical asset, and Apple is famously secretive.
It is totally "business as usual" .
Samsung is a huge company that derives significant revenue for manufacturing components, particularly displays, memory and SoC chips for Apple and other clients, who happen to compete with other Samsung end product divisions.
Actual adults run these companies, their bottom line performance is going to motivate decision-making more than childish disputes.
Apple could move to TSMC for their CPUs. However, Samsung is still the leader in flash memory and among the leaders in display technology. It would be in Apple's best interests to work with Samsung.
Samsung hasn't stolen any of Apple's IP for use in their Exynos chips. They are using using generic ARM designs. They are using their process advantage over TSMC in producing those chips. Their scale and the fact that they make all of the components for their own phones has been their decided advantage over their rivals. Apple is going to crush Samsung's mobile device sales, but their manufacturing is still top notch.
It is Google that actually stole from Apple, much like MSFT did previously. But Apple is much more prepared to deal with it this time.
Besides, Samsung has helped to grow the ARM ecosystem. That has been a very good thing. Intel is now on the outside looking in and no longer poses a threat to Apple or computing in general.
ARM is willing to license to anyone, unlike Intel. Apple's CPU design team is top notch and much better than Intel's at this point. Once Samsung, TSMC and Global Foundries achieve process parity with Intel, x86's days are numbered.
MSFT and Intel nearly closed Apple's doors. Samsung hasn't even come close to that. Apple has contributed to Intel's x86 designs also. Intel makes those x86 CPUs available to anyone else willing to purchase them. Samsung hasn't designed its own Exynos CPUs with contributions from Apple. In fact, Samsung had been using chips from Qualcomm previously.
Samsung is not "evil" and they haven't behaved that way. Google is a different story, however and I will be partying the day Apple removes Google as the default search engine on iOS.
Apple could move to TSMC for their CPUs. However, Samsung is still the leader in flash memory and among the leaders in display technology. It would be in Apple's best interests to work with Samsung.
Samsung hasn't stolen any of Apple's IP for use in their Exynos chips. They are using using generic ARM designs. They are using their process advantage over TSMC in producing those chips. Their scale and the fact that they make all of the components for their own phones has been their decided advantage over their rivals. Apple is going to crush Samsung's mobile device sales, but their manufacturing is still top notch.
It is Google that actually stole from Apple, much like MSFT did previously. But Apple is much more prepared to deal with it this time.
Besides, Samsung has helped to grow the ARM ecosystem. That has been a very good thing. Intel is now on the outside looking in and no longer poses a threat to Apple or computing in general.
ARM is willing to license to anyone, unlike Intel. Apple's CPU design team is top notch and much better than Intel's at this point. Once Samsung, TSMC and Global Foundries achieve process parity with Intel, x86's days are numbered.
MSFT and Intel nearly closed Apple's doors. Samsung hasn't even come close to that. Apple has contributed to Intel's x86 designs also. Intel makes those x86 CPUs available to anyone else willing to purchase them. Samsung hasn't designed its own Exynos CPUs with contributions from Apple. In fact, Samsung had been using chips from Qualcomm previously.
Samsung is not "evil" and they haven't behaved that way. Google is a different story, however and I will be partying the day Apple removes Google as the default search engine on iOS.
I'm quite familiar with Samsung and Apple Products and would add a few points:
Neither Samsung or Apple make "all of the components" in their phones or own all the IP used. Your suggestion Samsung does is simply incorrect. No Samsung phone I have ever seen is all Samsung particularly Smartphones where they depend of other companies for some critical IP. By the way, it's quite common for OEM to get "custom versions" of ICs that have their name on the package put another company's IP and technology inside, this is particularly the case for some specialty RF, analog and MEMS devices. If you understand that Samsung has licensed ARM IP you are one step closer to reality. Your own observation that Samsung has/does use Qualcomm suggests agreement.
Who ever called Samsung "evil"? Not me. A well-established "fast-follower" (copy cat) to be sure (in fact they were famous for specifically targeting Sony to copy and "beat" in the 90's, it was a well-established objective defined by their CEO) and their typical strategy has been to first license technology to learn and then beat the cost and out-innovate their partners. Again, Sony, Motorola and Apple products and technology copied by Samsung are well documented. That is not "evil" it's the typical "fast-follower" strategy employed by many companies, particularly Taiwanese and Korean, and before them, Japanese. These are undisputed facts.
You are also wrong about Intel, who does a lot of IP licensing including ARM. Sometimes, like Apple, they just buy companies to obtain the IP but they definitely have a huge cross-licensed IP portfolio. ALL major IC companies, fab or fabless have similar situations, very few device companies "own the stack" except for some very specialised deices. Samsung in particular has licensed a lot of Sony IP, particularly for cameras and displays (in addition to now having a lot of their own IP as well).
Apple has always partnered for critical devices. In memory they have always multiple-sourced (most OEMs do) and their standard portfolio includes Samsung, Hynix, Elpida, ==> Intel/Micron and Fujitsu/AMD ==> Spansion, SanDisk, even some IBM/Toshibe in older products.
In FBDs they have history with Toshiba, Sony, ==> Japan Display, Samsung, LG, AU optronics, etc.
Comments
Samsung the Supplier is not the same as Samsung the Smartphone Maker.
There is no "enemy" in this relationship.
I thought there was a good understanding of this and acceptance that Samsung Display and Semiconductor were good (including a good relationship with Apple) as compared to their electronics/mobile division that has earned them the copycat reputation (not such a good relationship with Apple or other companies such as Dyson). However, it appears what I thought and reality may be different.
Since Apple is such a large customer, I would be surprised if there wasn't a dedicated internal team at Samsung (display and semiconductor) for Apple. It's possible Apple has altered the wording of their contracts with Samsung to penalize any leaking of info between divisions after the issues they've had. Samsung is a good component manufacturer for Apple and one them seem to have to keep going back to even when they try to scale back their portion of manufacturing so I think it will be hard to stop working with them at all.
I think this might be a win-win for both. Samsung just needs to decide what's best for them: competing head-to-head with Apple or becoming a trusted supplier.
Why not do both? Companies compete in one area while cooperating in another all the time. Apple and IBM were competitors in the PC market, and then cooperated on the PowerPC architecture (with Motorola, who competed with IBM in workstation and server processors, then cooperated on PPC and then competed on embedded processors). All the major memory vendors compete with each other and are part of JEDEC, where they cooperate on defining memory standards.
The idea that giant companies view each other as "friends" and "enemies" is generally not accurate. Companies have 'interests' – if working with another company (or another division within a company) furthers those interests they will do so.
Samsung is scum
Define a Samsung Troll. I have a Samsung phone and a Samsung external USB HD. There are 2 iMacs, 3 Apple Laptops, 3 iPods, an iPhone and an airport express in the house. Oh, and a dysfunctional Apple SE in the loft.
I think Apple is winning slightly.
Well you are for one
"winning slightly"
typical example of bad grammar, there are no degrees of winning, one either wins or loses
Well you are for one
"winning slightly"
typical example of bad grammar, there are no degrees of winning, one either wins or loses
Putting aside your facetious pedantry. If a competition is underway and has not yet concluded, it is not uncommon, and is perfectly correct to say that a party in said competition is 'in a winning position'; 'winning on points' and numerous other such usages. I very much doubt I have made my last purchase. 'Wins or loses' imply a past tense so are inappropriate concepts.
Samsung is scum
Are.
Keep you friends close and you enemies closer
Don't you mean 'your'? Such bad grammar - tsk tsk.
This is not at all unusual in the electronics industry where IP is a critical asset, and Apple is famously secretive.
It is totally "business as usual" .
Samsung is a huge company that derives significant revenue for manufacturing components, particularly displays, memory and SoC chips for Apple and other clients, who happen to compete with other Samsung end product divisions.
Actual adults run these companies, their bottom line performance is going to motivate decision-making more than childish disputes.
Samsung hasn't stolen any of Apple's IP for use in their Exynos chips. They are using using generic ARM designs. They are using their process advantage over TSMC in producing those chips. Their scale and the fact that they make all of the components for their own phones has been their decided advantage over their rivals. Apple is going to crush Samsung's mobile device sales, but their manufacturing is still top notch.
It is Google that actually stole from Apple, much like MSFT did previously. But Apple is much more prepared to deal with it this time.
Besides, Samsung has helped to grow the ARM ecosystem. That has been a very good thing. Intel is now on the outside looking in and no longer poses a threat to Apple or computing in general.
ARM is willing to license to anyone, unlike Intel. Apple's CPU design team is top notch and much better than Intel's at this point. Once Samsung, TSMC and Global Foundries achieve process parity with Intel, x86's days are numbered.
MSFT and Intel nearly closed Apple's doors. Samsung hasn't even come close to that. Apple has contributed to Intel's x86 designs also. Intel makes those x86 CPUs available to anyone else willing to purchase them. Samsung hasn't designed its own Exynos CPUs with contributions from Apple. In fact, Samsung had been using chips from Qualcomm previously.
Samsung is not "evil" and they haven't behaved that way. Google is a different story, however and I will be partying the day Apple removes Google as the default search engine on iOS.
Apple could move to TSMC for their CPUs. However, Samsung is still the leader in flash memory and among the leaders in display technology. It would be in Apple's best interests to work with Samsung.
Samsung hasn't stolen any of Apple's IP for use in their Exynos chips. They are using using generic ARM designs. They are using their process advantage over TSMC in producing those chips. Their scale and the fact that they make all of the components for their own phones has been their decided advantage over their rivals. Apple is going to crush Samsung's mobile device sales, but their manufacturing is still top notch.
It is Google that actually stole from Apple, much like MSFT did previously. But Apple is much more prepared to deal with it this time.
Besides, Samsung has helped to grow the ARM ecosystem. That has been a very good thing. Intel is now on the outside looking in and no longer poses a threat to Apple or computing in general.
ARM is willing to license to anyone, unlike Intel. Apple's CPU design team is top notch and much better than Intel's at this point. Once Samsung, TSMC and Global Foundries achieve process parity with Intel, x86's days are numbered.
MSFT and Intel nearly closed Apple's doors. Samsung hasn't even come close to that. Apple has contributed to Intel's x86 designs also. Intel makes those x86 CPUs available to anyone else willing to purchase them. Samsung hasn't designed its own Exynos CPUs with contributions from Apple. In fact, Samsung had been using chips from Qualcomm previously.
Samsung is not "evil" and they haven't behaved that way. Google is a different story, however and I will be partying the day Apple removes Google as the default search engine on iOS.
I'm quite familiar with Samsung and Apple Products and would add a few points:
Neither Samsung or Apple make "all of the components" in their phones or own all the IP used. Your suggestion Samsung does is simply incorrect. No Samsung phone I have ever seen is all Samsung particularly Smartphones where they depend of other companies for some critical IP. By the way, it's quite common for OEM to get "custom versions" of ICs that have their name on the package put another company's IP and technology inside, this is particularly the case for some specialty RF, analog and MEMS devices. If you understand that Samsung has licensed ARM IP you are one step closer to reality. Your own observation that Samsung has/does use Qualcomm suggests agreement.
Who ever called Samsung "evil"? Not me. A well-established "fast-follower" (copy cat) to be sure (in fact they were famous for specifically targeting Sony to copy and "beat" in the 90's, it was a well-established objective defined by their CEO) and their typical strategy has been to first license technology to learn and then beat the cost and out-innovate their partners. Again, Sony, Motorola and Apple products and technology copied by Samsung are well documented. That is not "evil" it's the typical "fast-follower" strategy employed by many companies, particularly Taiwanese and Korean, and before them, Japanese. These are undisputed facts.
You are also wrong about Intel, who does a lot of IP licensing including ARM. Sometimes, like Apple, they just buy companies to obtain the IP but they definitely have a huge cross-licensed IP portfolio. ALL major IC companies, fab or fabless have similar situations, very few device companies "own the stack" except for some very specialised deices. Samsung in particular has licensed a lot of Sony IP, particularly for cameras and displays (in addition to now having a lot of their own IP as well).
Apple has always partnered for critical devices. In memory they have always multiple-sourced (most OEMs do) and their standard portfolio includes Samsung, Hynix, Elpida, ==> Intel/Micron and Fujitsu/AMD ==> Spansion, SanDisk, even some IBM/Toshibe in older products.
In FBDs they have history with Toshiba, Sony, ==> Japan Display, Samsung, LG, AU optronics, etc.
No one has all the technology, ever.