Apple should simply buy AMD as I told Tim and Phil to.
AMD likely comes with a ton of baggage that Apple does not want.
If possible (and it probably is possible), it's better to make long term deals with AMD.
Heck, for all we know, such deals may have already been made. It's pretty amazing to me that AMD did not go out of business. Perhaps Apple made a strategic investment there that kept AMD afloat and will have long term benefits to Apple (that's total speculation, of coursE).
I doubt that Apple invested in AMD. That would be public knowledge. I also don't see the point. Even now, with AMD's new CPU IP they're behind Intel, though not by as much.
I agree that they wouldn't make an investment in the legal/accounting sense that would require disclosure. But they could do it in the economic sense of the word. From a legal/accounting perspective, it might be a pre-payment for future products. The return on the investment would be discounted price on those future products.
Note that Jim Keller was involved in designing Ryzen. Keller worked at Apple on the A# chips (he also worked previously at AMD; also on the Alpha way back when). So Apple had good reason to believe Ryzen would be a good design and worth the pre-payment.
Last I read, Keller is still working for Tesla.
Pretty much defines the value of electronics to Automobile design if Jim's involved.
Apple already has a working GPU. I'd put money on it. The 15-24 months listed isn't how long Apple will take to design a new GPU from scratch. It's how long they'll sell older iOS devices that currently use Imagination GPUs.
Exactly, there were signs Apple started working on this since 2013, here is an article from this very site discussing it. http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/29/apple-reportedly-takes-on-12-former-amd-engineers-for-orlando-gpu-team: It normally takes about 4-5 to bring out a GPU if you are doing it internally, if work on this started in 2013 then now would be within the timeline. So I believe the A11 in Sept. will contain an in-house design CPU/GPU, damn that's exciting to see what Apple can do when costs can't hold them back.
This story is jumping around everywhere. I first thought it was an April Fool's joke, but then I checked the date.
this brings up all sorts of questions.
Yes, I think there is a lot more to this story than anything we will ever hear about: -- Apple poaches employees from a partner -- Apple tries to buy the partner but fails -- Apple walks away from a long term partner and, by doing so, may cause that partner to fail...
I think what we are seeing & reading may be the tip of the iceberg....
the value of small companies is ticklish. If Apple is really trying to obtain them for a lower price, then fine. But as far as I know, Imagination is the one that made this public. Apple's purchasing them or not, or disuse of their IP would have no material value to the Apple in financial terms, but it would have a massive effect on Imagination, so they would need to report it.
Mel, I think it was Apple who made this public which a a bit on an unusual step for them isn't it?
EDIT: Nope it was Imagination who announced it, tho I suppose they would have an obligation to under disclosure rules? Dunno.
There is an absolute requirement for IMG to disclose this. Anything that has a material effect on a company's finances needs to be reported. Apple doesn't need to announce it because there is no material effect for them. But Apple could make a statement to clear up what they may think are issues that are incorrectly stated.
Apple already has a working GPU. I'd put money on it. The 15-24 months listed isn't how long Apple will take to design a new GPU from scratch. It's how long they'll sell older iOS devices that currently use Imagination GPUs.
Exactly, there were signs Apple started working on this since 2013, here is an article from this very site discussing it. http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/29/apple-reportedly-takes-on-12-former-amd-engineers-for-orlando-gpu-team: It normally takes about 4-5 to bring out a GPU if you are doing it internally, if work on this started in 2013 then now would be within the timeline. So I believe the A11 in Sept. will contain an in-house design CPU/GPU, damn that's exciting to see what Apple can do when costs can't hold them back.
Apple had been buying small GPU graphic design houses before 2013.
I don't know why talks of Apple purchasing Imagination fell through. They're total capitalization is pocket change for the tech giant and they have a very good architecture. If they had, any potential future legal action would of been moot. Why...does Apple like being stingy and litigious?
This story is jumping around everywhere. I first thought it was an April Fool's joke, but then I checked the date.
this brings up all sorts of questions.
Yes, I think there is a lot more to this story than anything we will ever hear about: -- Apple poaches employees from a partner -- Apple tries to buy the partner but fails -- Apple walks away from a long term partner and, by doing so, may cause that partner to fail...
I think what we are seeing & reading may be the tip of the iceberg....
Nice conspiracy theory, but what you are describing takes place routinely in the tech industry as employees shuffle from one company to a competitor and companies are bought up routinely, hundreds by Apple so they probably explore buyouts of a thousand. Also, it's not Apple's fault that they are so large that when they shift technology they have impact on suppliers who have become wealthy based on their previous Apple contracts.
This story is jumping around everywhere. I first thought it was an April Fool's joke, but then I checked the date.
this brings up all sorts of questions.
Yes, I think there is a lot more to this story than anything we will ever hear about: -- Apple poaches employees from a partner -- Apple tries to buy the partner but fails -- Apple walks away from a long term partner and, by doing so, may cause that partner to fail...
I think what we are seeing & reading may be the tip of the iceberg....
Not sure if it was reported in AI before, but I am fairly confident reading in GSMArena long back (more than 1 year) that Apple is working on its own GPU for future generation iphones, ditching Imagination technologies. So I am not surprised by this news. As to poaching of employees, Imagination should have fought with Apple legally then and there, if they had any valid case. Cribbing about it now - they are not going to gain anything. They are a small fish in the sea and would be eaten alive.
Sorry folks, but there isn't anything illegal about "poaching" employees. In fact, it's illegal to try and stop the practice as the tech industry found out years back when the big players agreed not to hire each other's employees. It's called the free market, and talented people are always going to be sought by competitors.
Kinda makes being an Apple supplier a crapshoot doesn’t it.
Always, in any business. In nearly all cases you should never be so vested into a single supplier because it gives them too much of an advantage, even if they do plan to stay. ImgTech looks to get around 1/3rd of their annual revenue from Apple.
Of course, Apple's value in ImgTech is hurt by this, but that's chump change for them. I expect ImgTech to bounce back if they can still keep coming out with great mobile GPUs for the industry. Remember that Apple's devices are only a small percentage of the world's total mobile market.
Apple already has a working GPU. I'd put money on it. The 15-24 months listed isn't how long Apple will take to design a new GPU from scratch. It's how long they'll sell older iOS devices that currently use Imagination GPUs.
It seems implausible that they wouldn't have started on the project least a year or two ago.
The question I have is how the licensing works. Does up to 24 months means that they won't be using any ImgTech GPUs in 2 years? That seems unlikely since they're still selling the iPhone 7 series, and will likely be selling it, iPads, and Watches with the GPU after that time. My guess is that the license for a GPU allows them to use it indefinitely for a device (or at least for several years after it was licensed). Because of this, we could even see an Apple designed GPU coming this year. There's simply not enough data to know when they started their project and when they will have a design ready to fab.
Apple has been creating it's own CPU for a number of years now. It was only a matter of time before they also started working on their own GPU. Why wouldn't they?
Apple has been creating it's own CPU for a number of years now. It was only a matter of time before they also started working on their own GPU. Why wouldn't they?
We've talked about it before. It seems obvious. They've even bought a GPU company in the past, albeit that was after Jobs returned and before the iPod even came out. More recently they've bought semiconductor companies and increased investments in chips design staff, as well as stepped up the number of chips they've released.
Samsung uses Mali ARM GPUs and has for years, which has capabilities - i.e. 4K and VR - that Imagination does not yet have and was supposed to be working to integrate into their NEXT products. And if they decided to switch from Mali, they can use the Qualcomm Adreno line, which also supports features that the current Imagination chips do not.
Seriously, do not throw out stuff like this. Samsung has made good products - without any need to copy features from or be influenced by Apple - for years. Which is why the iPhone 8 is going to be a lot more like the Samsung Galaxy S8 than the iPhone 7, which itself far more resembles Samsung's phones than it does the iPhone 3G/4/5. Time to stop beating that horse - which died a long time ago - and move on. Especially since it is hilarious that an Apple fan would accuse Samsung of copying COMPONENTS used by Apple when Apple's devices are and will be made using Samsung's memory chips, screens and who knows what else. Even the SOC's that Apple technically buys from Samsung competitors are often physically manufactured in Samsung's foundries. Samsung: #2 smartphone, smart watch and tablet maker in the world ... and who the #1 maker of smartphones, smart watches and tablets buys A LOT of components from and often by necessity, not choice (as will be the case when Apple goes to Samsung for OLED screens as Samsung is the only company capable of manufacturing enough to meet the demand).
Threaten to sue if your customer makes their own product... This is the core of business now, not invention. Everything that could reasonably be patented has been, and they've long ago moved on to unreasonable patents. The whole system is a disaster.
It's a good strategy for playing future buyout games as other players in the game who necessarily have incomplete information will have to succumb to Apple's terms as they will be known to carry out their threats. Whether this is a good moral position, I don't want to get into.
Samsung uses Mali ARM GPUs and has for years, which has capabilities - i.e. 4K and VR - that Imagination does not yet have and was supposed to be working to integrate into their NEXT products. And if they decided to switch from Mali, they can use the Qualcomm Adreno line, which also supports features that the current Imagination chips do not.
Seriously, do not throw out stuff like this. Samsung has made good products - without any need to copy features from or be influenced by Apple - for years. Which is why the iPhone 8 is going to be a lot more like the Samsung Galaxy S8 than the iPhone 7, which itself far more resembles Samsung's phones than it does the iPhone 3G/4/5. Time to stop beating that horse - which died a long time ago - and move on. Especially since it is hilarious that an Apple fan would accuse Samsung of copying COMPONENTS used by Apple when Apple's devices are and will be made using Samsung's memory chips, screens and who knows what else. Even the SOC's that Apple technically buys from Samsung competitors are often physically manufactured in Samsung's foundries. Samsung: #2 smartphone, smart watch and tablet maker in the world ... and who the #1 maker of smartphones, smart watches and tablets buys A LOT of components from and often by necessity, not choice (as will be the case when Apple goes to Samsung for OLED screens as Samsung is the only company capable of manufacturing enough to meet the demand).
tell me the last innovative product Samsung made? .............................crickets...............…
They make the best facial recognition software for beings who exist in a two-dimensional plane.
All this really says is that GPU tech has plateaued. Apple made their own ARM chips because CPU tech plateaued (yes they got faster, but that is a consequence of die shrinks, nothing else. A CPU you bought in 2007 is the same as one you bought in 2017, only faster due to die shrinks.) And we've reached the end of what can be accomplished with die shinks. Any further die shrinks will come with a much larger increase in per chip costs. So don't expect sub 10nm processes in anything for a while. You'll just see multiple refinements of the previous die process with a larger chip that takes more power.
And yes, pretty much GPU tech has plateaued for mobile designs. If you want more GPU power you need to move up to the iPad/Tablet platform and have a much larger battery. There's probably still some more innovation left in the GPU pipe, but like the CPU tech, they're going to be refinements, not leaps.
Hence, Apple will probably just go with their own IP core for the GPU of the mobile devices. Don't expect to see this in Laptops or Desktops where Apple can just buy CPU and GPU's that are suitable. Apple's end-game appears to be to eliminate the desktop/laptop space entirely by making the iphone/ipad your one-and-only computer, and you just drop the iphone into a docking station to get the full iMac/Mac Pro experience *shudder*
I just don't see how neglecting their professional users has done anything but push Mac Users away from the Apple Ecosystem.
Professional users are morons. They think that they need all the latest and greatest power but in truth it's EXACTLY like you just stated with the CPU and GPUs on the desktop/laptop plane. Apple shouldn't update the desktop and laptop machines simply to plug in a new CPU or GPU that doesn't actually provide any real advantage. The real advantage comes not from the hardware now but from the software and that's what the "pros" SHOULD be looking at not some spec on something that Intel, AMD, or Nvidia are writing which has no bearing on real life anyway.
Pro apps that make use of Metal will outperform the hardware simply because of the way Metal is tied into the OS. This means there is NOTHING that can't potentially be done on a "pro" level that can't be done on an iPad so long as the SOFTWARE is written to allow it. There is no real advancement being done on desktop/laptops at the moment other than speed bumps that you mention so don't ever think Apple has given up on these markets and given up on pro users when in fact it's pro users have given up on Apple simply because a machine hasn't been updated in three years. I mean can the "pros" NOT do what they've been doing for a long time now that their machines are three years old? NO. And they're not going to be better off by getting a machine with the latest and greatest CPUs when you're only getting a 0.1GHz speed bump. So can the "pros" please shut up about Apple not caring about them when it's not even their fault that you're not getting any advancements.
Apple hasn't been neglecting their pro users at all. Apple has done heaps in macOS for pro users the problem is the apps that "pro" users are using aren't being developed to make use of those features of macOS simply because they don't want to lose their Windows users. Compare the speeds that Photoshop has for rendering to the speeds that Pixelmator has for doing the same things and you'll see that Pixelmator often wins hands down. That's not a hardware thing that's a software thing because Pixelmator leverages features of macOS. The problem is pro users felt let down by Final Cut and Logic before they gave it a real chance simply because it did things different to how they used to do things despite the fact they can now do far more powerful things using these apps than the ones they now use. So the problem for pro users isn't that Apple has neglected them with a lack of hardware updates it's that pro users don't understand what is happening in the tech world and have gone off to underpowered software because of some vain ideology that Apple doesn't care about them anymore.
Like I said, "pro" users are morons and masters of their own demise.
The move away from Imagination may be part of an attempt by Apple to take more control over the design of its hardware. Apple was said to be in talks to acquire Imagination early last year, though ultimately no such deal was made.
Apple has also taken time to poach a number of Imagination's staff over the last two years, including GPU architects and designers. These employees could help Apple to produce its own graphics architecture, potentially saving it from having to pay royalty fees to Imagination for using its intellectual property.
According to Imagination's statement, Apple has asserted that it has been "working on a separate, independent graphics design in order to control its products."
Imagination is also seemingly suggesting there could be a legal fight in the future over the in-house graphics architecture move, declaring Apple has not presented any evidence to substantiate its assertion that it will no longer require Imagination's technology, without violating Imagination's patents, intellectual property, and confidential information. While evidence has been requested by Imagination, Apple has declined to provide any to the company.
Imagination believes that it would be extremely challenging to design a brand new GPU architecture from basics without infringing its intellectual property rights, so in the statement about the matter, Imagination does not accept Apple's assertions. The company has also attempted to discuss potential alternative commercial arrangements with Apple for the current license and royalty agreement.
All this really says is that GPU tech has plateaued. Apple made their own ARM chips because CPU tech plateaued (yes they got faster, but that is a consequence of die shrinks, nothing else. A CPU you bought in 2007 is the same as one you bought in 2017, only faster due to die shrinks.) And we've reached the end of what can be accomplished with die shinks. Any further die shrinks will come with a much larger increase in per chip costs. So don't expect sub 10nm processes in anything for a while. You'll just see multiple refinements of the previous die process with a larger chip that takes more power.
And yes, pretty much GPU tech has plateaued for mobile designs. If you want more GPU power you need to move up to the iPad/Tablet platform and have a much larger battery. There's probably still some more innovation left in the GPU pipe, but like the CPU tech, they're going to be refinements, not leaps.
Hence, Apple will probably just go with their own IP core for the GPU of the mobile devices. Don't expect to see this in Laptops or Desktops where Apple can just buy CPU and GPU's that are suitable. Apple's end-game appears to be to eliminate the desktop/laptop space entirely by making the iphone/ipad your one-and-only computer, and you just drop the iphone into a docking station to get the full iMac/Mac Pro experience *shudder*
I just don't see how neglecting their professional users has done anything but push Mac Users away from the Apple Ecosystem.
Wouldn't the docking station cost as much and have similar hardware & I/O as the iMac/Mac Pro?
No, as in a laptop's docking station, it would have: Keyboard, mouse and a screen plus a few additional ports. No mother board, RAM, storage, CPU or GPU. Basically it just connects a computer to various input/output peripherals.
The move away from Imagination may be part of an attempt by Apple to take more control over the design of its hardware. Apple was said to be in talks to acquire Imagination early last year, though ultimately no such deal was made.
Apple has also taken time to poach a number of Imagination's staff over the last two years, including GPU architects and designers. These employees could help Apple to produce its own graphics architecture, potentially saving it from having to pay royalty fees to Imagination for using its intellectual property.
According to Imagination's statement, Apple has asserted that it has been "working on a separate, independent graphics design in order to control its products."
Imagination is also seemingly suggesting there could be a legal fight in the future over the in-house graphics architecture move, declaring Apple has not presented any evidence to substantiate its assertion that it will no longer require Imagination's technology, without violating Imagination's patents, intellectual property, and confidential information. While evidence has been requested by Imagination, Apple has declined to provide any to the company.
Imagination believes that it would be extremely challenging to design a brand new GPU architecture from basics without infringing its intellectual property rights, so in the statement about the matter, Imagination does not accept Apple's assertions. The company has also attempted to discuss potential alternative commercial arrangements with Apple for the current license and royalty agreement.
All this really says is that GPU tech has plateaued. Apple made their own ARM chips because CPU tech plateaued (yes they got faster, but that is a consequence of die shrinks, nothing else. A CPU you bought in 2007 is the same as one you bought in 2017, only faster due to die shrinks.) And we've reached the end of what can be accomplished with die shinks. Any further die shrinks will come with a much larger increase in per chip costs. So don't expect sub 10nm processes in anything for a while. You'll just see multiple refinements of the previous die process with a larger chip that takes more power.
And yes, pretty much GPU tech has plateaued for mobile designs. If you want more GPU power you need to move up to the iPad/Tablet platform and have a much larger battery. There's probably still some more innovation left in the GPU pipe, but like the CPU tech, they're going to be refinements, not leaps.
Hence, Apple will probably just go with their own IP core for the GPU of the mobile devices. Don't expect to see this in Laptops or Desktops where Apple can just buy CPU and GPU's that are suitable. Apple's end-game appears to be to eliminate the desktop/laptop space entirely by making the iphone/ipad your one-and-only computer, and you just drop the iphone into a docking station to get the full iMac/Mac Pro experience *shudder*
I just don't see how neglecting their professional users has done anything but push Mac Users away from the Apple Ecosystem.
Mac is the past Bro.
Why should Apple invest heavily in the past? Its so obvious that iPad/iPhone/wearables are the future.
Go 10 years in the future. Do you think PC/laptop will be BIGGER than TODAY? Hell no. Shrink. Shrink. Shrink. The future is iPad/iPhone/Wearables. So obvious.
Apple will still make Mac's but don't expect them to dedicate a ton of resources to it
I don't think Mac are the past. There is still a serious need for that form factor. But, technology in that form factor has matured and stabilized. While Apple has been criticized for not keeping up with the Jones's, I give them credit for not pushing out "new and improved" products that are only marginally improved from the prior version. There are a lot of Apple devotees who would shell out a few thousand for any new product Apple puts out. I congratulate Apple for not taking advantage of their faith and loyalty
Comments
Pretty much defines the value of electronics to Automobile design if Jim's involved.
Apple had been buying small GPU graphic design houses before 2013.
Of course, Apple's value in ImgTech is hurt by this, but that's chump change for them. I expect ImgTech to bounce back if they can still keep coming out with great mobile GPUs for the industry. Remember that Apple's devices are only a small percentage of the world's total mobile market.
The question I have is how the licensing works. Does up to 24 months means that they won't be using any ImgTech GPUs in 2 years? That seems unlikely since they're still selling the iPhone 7 series, and will likely be selling it, iPads, and Watches with the GPU after that time. My guess is that the license for a GPU allows them to use it indefinitely for a device (or at least for several years after it was licensed). Because of this, we could even see an Apple designed GPU coming this year. There's simply not enough data to know when they started their project and when they will have a design ready to fab.
None of this should be a shock to anyone.
Seriously, do not throw out stuff like this. Samsung has made good products - without any need to copy features from or be influenced by Apple - for years. Which is why the iPhone 8 is going to be a lot more like the Samsung Galaxy S8 than the iPhone 7, which itself far more resembles Samsung's phones than it does the iPhone 3G/4/5. Time to stop beating that horse - which died a long time ago - and move on. Especially since it is hilarious that an Apple fan would accuse Samsung of copying COMPONENTS used by Apple when Apple's devices are and will be made using Samsung's memory chips, screens and who knows what else. Even the SOC's that Apple technically buys from Samsung competitors are often physically manufactured in Samsung's foundries. Samsung: #2 smartphone, smart watch and tablet maker in the world ... and who the #1 maker of smartphones, smart watches and tablets buys A LOT of components from and often by necessity, not choice (as will be the case when Apple goes to Samsung for OLED screens as Samsung is the only company capable of manufacturing enough to meet the demand).
Pro apps that make use of Metal will outperform the hardware simply because of the way Metal is tied into the OS. This means there is NOTHING that can't potentially be done on a "pro" level that can't be done on an iPad so long as the SOFTWARE is written to allow it. There is no real advancement being done on desktop/laptops at the moment other than speed bumps that you mention so don't ever think Apple has given up on these markets and given up on pro users when in fact it's pro users have given up on Apple simply because a machine hasn't been updated in three years. I mean can the "pros" NOT do what they've been doing for a long time now that their machines are three years old? NO. And they're not going to be better off by getting a machine with the latest and greatest CPUs when you're only getting a 0.1GHz speed bump. So can the "pros" please shut up about Apple not caring about them when it's not even their fault that you're not getting any advancements.
Apple hasn't been neglecting their pro users at all. Apple has done heaps in macOS for pro users the problem is the apps that "pro" users are using aren't being developed to make use of those features of macOS simply because they don't want to lose their Windows users. Compare the speeds that Photoshop has for rendering to the speeds that Pixelmator has for doing the same things and you'll see that Pixelmator often wins hands down. That's not a hardware thing that's a software thing because Pixelmator leverages features of macOS. The problem is pro users felt let down by Final Cut and Logic before they gave it a real chance simply because it did things different to how they used to do things despite the fact they can now do far more powerful things using these apps than the ones they now use. So the problem for pro users isn't that Apple has neglected them with a lack of hardware updates it's that pro users don't understand what is happening in the tech world and have gone off to underpowered software because of some vain ideology that Apple doesn't care about them anymore.
Like I said, "pro" users are morons and masters of their own demise.