Yes, a company that doesn't buy from Nvidia nor sell their tech to others is a threat to Nvidia. Brilliant conclusion, well done.
Try reading the article. The fact that they don't have Apple as a customer is the problem -- see the tablet market, where non-Apple devices have dropped off to next to nothing. Cheap Chinese knockoffs aren't going to buy expensive Nvidia GPUs.
Thats the argument being made anyway. Refute it if you can, but your post doesn't do anything but suggest you didn't really read it.
How does Apple hurt Nvidia? Yes, I read the article. Nvidia must sell millions of GPUs to the Windows PC crowd. There's a huge love affair gamers have for those awesomely powerful GTX 1070s and 1080s. Apple isn't going to build anything like that and even if it does, it will be for Macs only. Apple building GPUs for itself can't possibly seriously hurt Nvidia. Nvidia's customer base will remain mostly the same. It's too early to be drawing conclusions about disruptive threats to Nvidia. We'll have to at least see what GPU hardware Apple brings to the table.
AppleTV doesn't even come close to the Nvidia Shield in terms of raw gaming power. Again, look at Nvidia's value to Wall Street compared to Apple. Nvidia has P/E of 40 while Apple will likely struggle to maintain a P/E of 17. Wall Street loves Nvidia and big investors believe the company is unbeatable in graphics hardware. I think as long as there are Windows gamers around, Nvidia will continue to do well no matter what Apple uses for its own small OS platforms.
Gaming? Gaming is a very small niche. Fine if you want to be a niche player, but not having Apple will hurt Nvidia the same exact way it hurt Intel.
...This is particularly a problem if Apple continues to target new areas where Nvidia would like to be, including the data center, professional workstations used for high-end research work, the automotive industry, specialized imaging products, Machine Learning and the development of AR and VR content...
I like you DED, and I'm an Apple fan (iPad, iPhone, etc.) but ya know, Apple's just not that smart. They don't give a damn about the data center, professional developers, and high tech research. Besides, Nvidia is already in that space, and light years ahead of anything Apple is even contemplating.
Where I work we do extremely high-end tech development, and there is not an Apple device in sight - not because they're reviled or they're "toys" or other such nonsense, but because nothing Apple makes provides even a fraction of the capabilities we need. All our GPU development is done on Nvidia w/CUDA. If Apple ever grows up and builds something that can accommodate four of these PCIe cards, you let me know: http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla-p100.html
I see Apple and Nvidia going in very different directions. Apple is taking their tech entirely consumer (including dumb-as-bricks consumers), while Nvidia is going Pro - where all the true heavy lifting and next-level tech is being developed (and still providing GPUs for Windows desktop PCs - which are never going away mind you).
I work in an industry where we stay FAR away from Windows because they aren't powerful enough, too many viruses and we can't afford computer crashes.
Your comment is crazy talk to us.
lol. I like your comment... I didn't say we developed anything on Windows. We're not that crazy. We use CUDA with Linux... With regards to Windows, I'm just saying while that market has contracted, it's not dead and it never will be, so Nvidia will always have customers there.
His comment wasn't true to begin with. Windows machines aren't powerful enough ... yet everyone is angry at Apple because the Mac Pro is nowhere near as powerful as the best Windows workstations. So Apple responds by ... promising to deliver Mac Pros with similar power and upgradeability to what Windows workstations have always had ... starting next year. So, sure, right.
Windows viruses haven't been a thing since Windows 7, when Microsoft started building Windows Defender into the OS. People don't even buy Norton Antivirus anymore, and I can't even remember seeing the last headline about a virus, Trojan or worm attacking Windows like you used to on almost a weekly basis back in the Windows 98, ME, XP and Vista era. The only virus stories have been the media attempting to claim that they were a thing on Android, trying to turn Android versus iOS into a new version of the Windows (pre Windows 7) versus Mac debate, totally ignoring that Google learned from the failures of Microsoft, built a much more secure Linux-based OS from the get go, and as a result the alleged security problems hyped up by the media wound up causing absolutely zero end user impact which is why we no longer see media scare stories and fake news about critical Android security problems - written by "tech journalists" on their MacBooks and iPads - either.
Computer crashes, most of which were due to faulty (cheap) hardware and drivers in the first place and not the base OS itself, were NEVER a problem with enterprise class workstation and server hardware. Similar to DED's ridiculous claim that Nvidia gets most of their licensing revenue from cheap PCs that have Intel and AMD GPUs, you can tell people who 1) have no actual IT or enterprise experience or 2) only buy and use products from a single platform.
I guess if you only use and work with a small subset of products, you will 1) overrate the benefits of your own platform, 2) overstate the negatives of other platforms and 3) conclude that every other platform but yours is garbage and constantly on the precipice of failure as a result. It isn't true. Instead, the reality is that even during the darkest days of Windows 8, Macs never reached 20% of PC market share. This was back when Mac sales, benefiting from the iPhone/iPad halo plus the media hyping them as cool and hip (there was even a major Hollywood raunch comedy where iPads, Macs, iPhones and iCloud were major plot devices), were increasing year over year while PC sales, consumer AND enterprise, sank like a stone. That isn't happening anymore. Mac sales are dropping year over year and PC sales have stabilized and started to creep slightly upward.
So stuff like this isn't just wishful thinking, but it betrays a fundamental lack of knowledge of the competition's technology and products.
...This is particularly a problem if Apple continues to target new areas where Nvidia would like to be, including the data center, professional workstations used for high-end research work, the automotive industry, specialized imaging products, Machine Learning and the development of AR and VR content...
I like you DED, and I'm an Apple fan (iPad, iPhone, etc.) but ya know, Apple's just not that smart.
So not-smart that they're the only player standing from the PC revolution, suck up all the profits in mobile, and oh are the biggest and most successful public company in the history of earth. yyyeaaaah..
You seem to be making a classic mistake -- labeling things Apple isn't interested in as making mistakes or being dumb.
had they have been innovating they would have seen these technologies coming long ago, and having to buying in chip designs from VR Tech to get their chip business moving just goest to prove there is an innovative vacuum at Apple.
Oh my. That's funny, good one. Such a vacuum they're the most successful smartphone, tablet, and PC maker (and outlived all their contemporaries from the '70s and '80s). They've done this sans innovation, just by....what, exactly? "marketing"?!
Apple's GPUs will only be used in Apple products. So, for this "prediction" to be true, Apple's products are going to have to somehow put Windows PCs out of business. You Apple fans have been predicting this for 25 years. Yet macOS has like 10%-15% of the PC market. I suppose maybe 4-5 years ago you could have claimed that iPads were going to put PCs out of business, but iPad sales have dropped like a stone, to the point where Apple doesn't even have events to launch new models anymore. Also, there haven't been any major new software pushes for the iPad - either enterprise or consumer - in years. Even attempts to get schools in large numbers to switch from PCs to iPads failed, and Apple has largely stopped trying.
Also, you really are misinformed if you think that cheap PCs are the main market for Nvidia GPUs. That could not be further from the truth. The cheap GPUs are made by Intel and AMD, things like Intel HD Graphics 630. The cheapest Nvidia graphics card, the Geforce GTX 900 series, costs $125.
Nvidia makes most of their money on high end gaming and graphics workstations. Those things aren't going to be replaced even Mac Pros, let alone iPads.
Please, give it a rest. Windows isn't going anywhere. Android isn't going anywhere. And unless/until "the next big thing" comes along, Apple is going to remain a company that gets 70% of its money from iPhones, a self-contained product that has little effect on the rest of the tech world (beyond Apple's own supply chain that its). Peak iPhone/iPad ended in 2014. The competition that weathered the storm has largely seen their sales and profits rebound: Dell, Lenovo, Microsoft, Google, Samsung you name it.
The Imagination deal just means that Apple is going to stop paying $100 million a year to one of their own suppliers/licensees. That is all. It is not going to cause the 85% of people who buy PCs to start buying iPads and MacBook Airs. By the way ... did you know that the laptops that have among the cheapest Nvidia graphics card lines in them COST MORE THAN THE MACBOOK AIR? Of course you didn't, which is why you made the ridiculous claim that Nvidia gets most of their revenue from non-gaming laptops that don't have the RAM and CPU power - let alone graphics capability - to run cheap Steam games.
The iPhone has had little effect on the tech world? You have shown yourself to be completely biased with no sense of reality.
How does Apple hurt Nvidia? Yes, I read the article. Nvidia must sell millions of GPUs to the Windows PC crowd. There's a huge love affair gamers have for those awesomely powerful GTX 1070s and 1080s. Apple isn't going to build anything like that and even if it does, it will be for Macs only. Apple building GPUs for itself can't possibly seriously hurt Nvidia. Nvidia's customer base will remain mostly the same. It's too early to be drawing conclusions about disruptive threats to Nvidia. We'll have to at least see what GPU hardware Apple brings to the table.
AppleTV doesn't even come close to the Nvidia Shield in terms of raw gaming power. Again, look at Nvidia's value to Wall Street compared to Apple. Nvidia has P/E of 40 while Apple will likely struggle to maintain a P/E of 17. Wall Street loves Nvidia and big investors believe the company is unbeatable in graphics hardware. I think as long as there are Windows gamers around, Nvidia will continue to do well no matter what Apple uses for its own small OS platforms.
Gaming? Gaming is a very small niche. Fine if you want to be a niche player, but not having Apple will hurt Nvidia the same exact way it hurt Intel.
Huh? Apple has Intel for the PC market. And gaming is a "small niche" when the sales of Xboxes, Nintendo Switches and Playstations will dwarf those of the Apple TV, Apple Watch and iPad this year? Look, if gaming PCs were a small market, Nvidia wouldn't make billions annually. And Nvidia doesn't even have a monopoly on mid-range and top end GPUs for the PC market ... it isn't even close.
For this guy's claim to be true, Apple's developing their own GPU will need to somehow stop people from buying Windows and Linux PCs. The funny thing ... he didn't explain how this is going to happen. The whole claim that iPads and cheap (actual) computers like the MacBook Air and Mac Mini were going to supplant PCs is dead, so unless his thing is that there is going to be some new emerging technology that Apple will innovate and dominate - and will also somehow use this GPU - it has no chance of being true.
Yes, some former Apple partners are struggling. But not all are. Nvidia is one of the MANY former Apple partners that are doing just fine. The companies that went by the wayside after Apple dropped them tended to be small companies like Imagination and GT Advanced. The bigger companies - like Corning - just found other partners for their components as well as continued to sell their own products. Also, unlike GT Advanced and Imagination, Apple was never a major revenue source for Nvidia in the first place. Nvidia got the vast majority of their revenue from PC makers during their deal with Apple, and continued to do so after their deal with Apple, and will continue to do so long after Imagination is long gone and the alleged PC killer the iPad is a niche novelty product that practically no one buys like the iPod.
...This is particularly a problem if Apple continues to target new areas where Nvidia would like to be, including the data center, professional workstations used for high-end research work, the automotive industry, specialized imaging products, Machine Learning and the development of AR and VR content...
I like you DED, and I'm an Apple fan (iPad, iPhone, etc.) but ya know, Apple's just not that smart. They don't give a damn about the data center, professional developers, and high tech research. Besides, Nvidia is already in that space, and light years ahead of anything Apple is even contemplating.
Where I work we do extremely high-end tech development, and there is not an Apple device in sight - not because they're reviled or they're "toys" or other such nonsense, but because nothing Apple makes provides even a fraction of the capabilities we need. All our GPU development is done on Nvidia w/CUDA. If Apple ever grows up and builds something that can accommodate four of these PCIe cards, you let me know: http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla-p100.html
I see Apple and Nvidia going in very different directions. Apple is taking their tech entirely consumer (including dumb-as-bricks consumers), while Nvidia is going Pro - where all the true heavy lifting and next-level tech is being developed (and still providing GPUs for Windows desktop PCs - which are never going away mind you).
Note that I did not suggest that Nvidia's technology isn't impressive or powerful. Nor that Apple is necessarily interested in trying to sell the state of the art in high end pro technology.
What i I wrote was that Apple's entry of a new GPU technology could accelerate the disruption Nvidia is already feeling in PCs. Perception is focused on what Nvidia could potentially do. What it actually makes its money from is PC graphics.
Steve Jobs tried to make money with high end Pixar graphic computers and Next workstations. Both were state of the art, incredible machines that lost money.
He made billions making cgi cartoons, translucent computers and pocket computers that mostly play games, browse Facebook and engage in idle chat.
Still, I think Apple is actually contemplating some cool ideas that will also make money.
All I'm saying is that I have no reason to believe Apple will ever take these markets seriously, and they are so far behind Nvidia it's inconceivable they'd ever be able to catch up
"PC guys are not just going to figure this out. They're not going to just walk in."
Apple's GPUs will only be used in Apple products. So, for this "prediction" to be true, Apple's products are going to have to somehow put Windows PCs out of business. You Apple fans have been predicting this for 25 years. Yet macOS has like 10%-15% of the PC market. I suppose maybe 4-5 years ago you could have claimed that iPads were going to put PCs out of business, but iPad sales have dropped like a stone, to the point where Apple doesn't even have events to launch new models anymore.
Who exactly has been predicting Apple would put Windows out of business for 25 years? Links? Sounds like you just made up straw man. Thwack thwack! Hit it again! Yeah!
As for iPad, its sales have dropped and plateaued, but that's because it was the fastest and biggest seller in CE history. Faster than iphone was. Yet, even stabilized, its sales are ginormous and represent a Fortune company on its own if spun off. So yeah nice try trying to make that a failure, but it's anything but. Try again.
How does Apple hurt Nvidia? Yes, I read the article. Nvidia must sell millions of GPUs to the Windows PC crowd. There's a huge love affair gamers have for those awesomely powerful GTX 1070s and 1080s. Apple isn't going to build anything like that and even if it does, it will be for Macs only. Apple building GPUs for itself can't possibly seriously hurt Nvidia. Nvidia's customer base will remain mostly the same. It's too early to be drawing conclusions about disruptive threats to Nvidia. We'll have to at least see what GPU hardware Apple brings to the table.
AppleTV doesn't even come close to the Nvidia Shield in terms of raw gaming power. Again, look at Nvidia's value to Wall Street compared to Apple. Nvidia has P/E of 40 while Apple will likely struggle to maintain a P/E of 17. Wall Street loves Nvidia and big investors believe the company is unbeatable in graphics hardware. I think as long as there are Windows gamers around, Nvidia will continue to do well no matter what Apple uses for its own small OS platforms.
Gaming? Gaming is a very small niche. Fine if you want to be a niche player, but not having Apple will hurt Nvidia the same exact way it hurt Intel.
Huh? Apple has Intel for the PC market. And gaming is a "small niche" when the sales of Xboxes, Nintendo Switches and Playstations will dwarf those of the Apple TV, Apple Watch and iPad this year? Look, if gaming PCs were a small market, Nvidia wouldn't make billions annually. And Nvidia doesn't even have a monopoly on mid-range and top end GPUs for the PC market ... it isn't even close.
For this guy's claim to be true, Apple's developing their own GPU will need to somehow stop people from buying Windows and Linux PCs. The funny thing ... he didn't explain how this is going to happen. The whole claim that iPads and cheap (actual) computers like the MacBook Air and Mac Mini were going to supplant PCs is dead, so unless his thing is that there is going to be some new emerging technology that Apple will innovate and dominate - and will also somehow use this GPU - it has no chance of being true.
Yes, some former Apple partners are struggling. But not all are. Nvidia is one of the MANY former Apple partners that are doing just fine. The companies that went by the wayside after Apple dropped them tended to be small companies like Imagination and GT Advanced. The bigger companies - like Corning - just found other partners for their components as well as continued to sell their own products. Also, unlike GT Advanced and Imagination, Apple was never a major revenue source for Nvidia in the first place. Nvidia got the vast majority of their revenue from PC makers during their deal with Apple, and continued to do so after their deal with Apple, and will continue to do so long after Imagination is long gone and the alleged PC killer the iPad is a niche novelty product that practically no one buys like the iPod.
1) If you don't think Intel screwed up by telling Jobs "thanks but no thanks" when he went to them for mobile processors, then you're in a different universe. They even admitted this was a major, major mistake.
2) Nobody said ipads were PC killers here except you. Thwack thwack! Beat that straw man! It was labeled a post-PC device, and the word post means "after", not "replace". Jobs was clear from day one -- cars and trucks. ipad is a car.
3) your claim that ipad is a novelette product that "nobody buys" further shows your disconnect from reality, the numbers, and your agenda.
...This is particularly a problem if Apple continues to target new areas where Nvidia would like to be, including the data center, professional workstations used for high-end research work, the automotive industry, specialized imaging products, Machine Learning and the development of AR and VR content...
I like you DED, and I'm an Apple fan (iPad, iPhone, etc.) but ya know, Apple's just not that smart.
So not-smart that they're the only player standing from the PC revolution, suck up all the profits in mobile, and oh are the biggest and most successful public company in the history of earth. yyyeaaaah..
You seem to be making a classic mistake -- labeling things Apple isn't interested in as making mistakes or being dumb.
They are not the only player standing from the PC revolution. Lenovo, HP, Dell and Asus all sold more PCs than Apple did in 2016, Acer sold almost as many, and all 5 companies are plenty profitable. Well except for HP, but their problem is their other divisions dragging down the profits that their PC sales generate. They do not suck up all the profits in mobile. Samsung and Huawei made billions in mobile last year, and several other companies made hundreds of millions. Even the minister of disinformation who wrote this very wrong column had to change his annual "Apple made 100+% of mobile profits in 201x!" to "Samsung only made 1/4 as much as Apple did in 2016!"
The biggest and most successful public company in the history of the earth? That is correct ... but it is also entirely due to the iPhone. As this column pointed out, Nvidia does not make GPUs for mobile devices. They license GPUs for PCs and do so the tune of $7 billion a year. And to repeat AGAIN, as the ($100 million a year) Imagination deal ONLY concerns mobile devices, Apple cutting Imagination loose and designing their own MOBILE GPUS that will only be sold in APPLE PRODUCTS (Nvidia GPUs aren't even sold in Macs that have Intel CPUs) has nothing to do with Nvidia's business which takes place in a realm where Apple doesn't compete in. Or rather, barely competes, as Macs account for only 5% of Internet traffic as compared to Windows' 31%.
DED made the ridiculous mistake of comparing the small, obscure Apple partners and suppliers like GT Advanced and Imagination to global conglomerates like Nvidia whose business with Apple never amounted to much in their bottom line in the first place. In fact Nvidia BOUGHT one of Apple's former suppliers when they went belly up! Nothing that Apple does will threaten anything that Nvidia does, because Apple will never crack 15% in the computer market, and has never cracked 20% of the computer market in any quarter since Wintel began to dominate the computer market in the 1990s (computers being desktops and laptops, never including mobile devices as DED wanted them to be counted as back before iPad sales fell off the cliff ... causing DED to stop demanding that analysts count iPads as computer sales).
Your entire premise is wrong, and honestly feels like a heavy-handed attempt to prove "Apple Greatness" simply for the sake of proving "Apple Greatness".
You're talking about a premium company with ultra premium prices (Apple) dethroning a premium company with premium prices (nVidia), simply by entering a market the latter company dabbles in.
Do you honestly believe that people will want an Apple sandbox to run AI in? Hell no! It will be an in-house solution for them at best. And how many Android users out there will accept a premium price add-on for their car that is 2-5x the competitor's product, and doesn't fully integrate with their phone? Apple should pray for being option 2 in a vehicle integration package.
You're living in a fallacy, man.
Ha ha. Of all the comments here on both sides. yours made me laugh the most. #Acolyte
...This is particularly a problem if Apple continues to target new areas where Nvidia would like to be, including the data center, professional workstations used for high-end research work, the automotive industry, specialized imaging products, Machine Learning and the development of AR and VR content...
I like you DED, and I'm an Apple fan (iPad, iPhone, etc.) but ya know, Apple's just not that smart.
So not-smart that they're the only player standing from the PC revolution, suck up all the profits in mobile, and oh are the biggest and most successful public company in the history of earth. yyyeaaaah..
You seem to be making a classic mistake -- labeling things Apple isn't interested in as making mistakes or being dumb.
They are not the only player standing from the PC revolution. Lenovo, HP, Dell and Asus all sold more PCs than Apple did in 2016, Acer sold almost as many, and all 5 companies are plenty profitable. Well except for HP, but their problem is their other divisions dragging down the profits that their PC sales generate. They do not suck up all the profits in mobile. Samsung and Huawei made billions in mobile last year, and several other companies made hundreds of millions. Even the minister of disinformation who wrote this very wrong column had to change his annual "Apple made 100+% of mobile profits in 201x!" to "Samsung only made 1/4 as much as Apple did in 2016!"
The biggest and most successful public company in the history of the earth? That is correct ... but it is also entirely due to the iPhone. As this column pointed out, Nvidia does not make GPUs for mobile devices. They license GPUs for PCs and do so the tune of $7 billion a year. And to repeat AGAIN, as the ($100 million a year) Imagination deal ONLY concerns mobile devices, Apple cutting Imagination loose and designing their own MOBILE GPUS that will only be sold in APPLE PRODUCTS (Nvidia GPUs aren't even sold in Macs that have Intel CPUs) has nothing to do with Nvidia's business which takes place in a realm where Apple doesn't compete in. Or rather, barely competes, as Macs account for only 5% of Internet traffic as compared to Windows' 31%.
DED made the ridiculous mistake of comparing the small, obscure Apple partners and suppliers like GT Advanced and Imagination to global conglomerates like Nvidia whose business with Apple never amounted to much in their bottom line in the first place. In fact Nvidia BOUGHT one of Apple's former suppliers when they went belly up! Nothing that Apple does will threaten anything that Nvidia does, because Apple will never crack 15% in the computer market, and has never cracked 20% of the computer market in any quarter since Wintel began to dominate the computer market in the 1990s (computers being desktops and laptops, never including mobile devices as DED wanted them to be counted as back before iPad sales fell off the cliff ... causing DED to stop demanding that analysts count iPads as computer sales).
You are aware that Tegra failed, miserably I might add, in the mobile market precisely at the time that Apple's A series processor was becoming the leader in SOC's.
I'll chalk up a win against Nintendo for that, since Nintendo exited the market.
If Apple was a threat to NVidia, surly we would have better graphics in the Mac at this point? The iOS graphics situation is a lot different than the desktop. Apple does have the advantage though seeing as they refuse to put PCI slots in anything.
Since Nokia (for example) makes the varst majority of its income from their Network division, how is their protection of their intellectual property a switch of focus?
The network division was all it had left after its phone business collapsed and was sold off to Microsoft.
Your entire premise is wrong, and honestly feels like a heavy-handed attempt to prove "Apple Greatness" simply for the sake of proving "Apple Greatness".
You're talking about a premium company with ultra premium prices (Apple) dethroning a premium company with premium prices (nVidia), simply by entering a market the latter company dabbles in.
Do you honestly believe that people will want an Apple sandbox to run AI in? Hell no! It will be an in-house solution for them at best. And how many Android users out there will accept a premium price add-on for their car that is 2-5x the competitor's product, and doesn't fully integrate with their phone? Apple should pray for being option 2 in a vehicle integration package.
You're living in a fallacy, man.
Welcome to the forums with your first comment.
The fallacy is that Apple is "ultra premium" in pricing. Prior to iPhone, there were several $1000+ phones, they just didn't sell in high volumes. Apple made $600 phones mainstream. Samsung sells more expensive models, although it can't sell as many premium devices.
Before iPad, Samsung and others were trying to sell bulky Windows tablets that started at $1000+. iPad was introduced $500. A year later Google's Android 3.0 partners tried to sell more expensive, larger tablets but nobody wanted them. Microsoft tried selling more expensive tablets too. Failure all around.
The fact that the high volume market for phones and tablets is all super cheap commodity today is only because companies apart from Apple couldn't manage to support sales at a higher quality tier. Not because they didn't try.
Nvidia sells products at very very high prices because it has limited competition for the technology it owns. Except for mobile, where Nvidia totally failed to sell anything.
Scrape per away the marketing BS, which Nvidia excelled at, and the company is ripe for disruption.
Apple's GPUs will only be used in Apple products. So, for this "prediction" to be true, Apple's products are going to have to somehow put Windows PCs out of business. You Apple fans have been predicting this for 25 years. Yet macOS has like 10%-15% of the PC market. I suppose maybe 4-5 years ago you could have claimed that iPads were going to put PCs out of business, but iPad sales have dropped like a stone, to the point where Apple doesn't even have events to launch new models anymore. Also, there haven't been any major new software pushes for the iPad - either enterprise or consumer - in years. Even attempts to get schools in large numbers to switch from PCs to iPads failed, and Apple has largely stopped trying.
Also, you really are misinformed if you think that cheap PCs are the main market for Nvidia GPUs. That could not be further from the truth. The cheap GPUs are made by Intel and AMD, things like Intel HD Graphics 630. The cheapest Nvidia graphics card, the Geforce GTX 900 series, costs $125.
Nvidia makes most of their money on high end gaming and graphics workstations. Those things aren't going to be replaced even Mac Pros, let alone iPads.
Please, give it a rest. Windows isn't going anywhere. Android isn't going anywhere. And unless/until "the next big thing" comes along, Apple is going to remain a company that gets 70% of its money from iPhones, a self-contained product that has little effect on the rest of the tech world (beyond Apple's own supply chain that its). Peak iPhone/iPad ended in 2014. The competition that weathered the storm has largely seen their sales and profits rebound: Dell, Lenovo, Microsoft, Google, Samsung you name it.
The Imagination deal just means that Apple is going to stop paying $100 million a year to one of their own suppliers/licensees. That is all. It is not going to cause the 85% of people who buy PCs to start buying iPads and MacBook Airs. By the way ... did you know that the laptops that have among the cheapest Nvidia graphics card lines in them COST MORE THAN THE MACBOOK AIR? Of course you didn't, which is why you made the ridiculous claim that Nvidia gets most of their revenue from non-gaming laptops that don't have the RAM and CPU power - let alone graphics capability - to run cheap Steam games.
This reminds me of the old men in the 80s who told me minicomputers were not going to be replaced by a bunch of PCs.
I don't know of anyone predicting that "Apple's products are going to have to somehow put Windows PCs out of business." I did predict that Microsoft's monopoly position could be threatened by Apple at the high end and Linux at the low end if the need for Win32 went away. That's what Apple accomplished, with Google promoting Linux on mobile devices.
But when you say nothing is changed and Microsoft hasn't been affected, look back to its pre-iPad earnings and marvel at where its $10B Office and $10 billion Windows consumers licensing business went. Today Microsoft is focused on the "cloud and devices" because its old model of sitting on a monopoly didn't last.
"iPad sales have dropped like a stone, to the point where Apple doesn't even have events to launch new models anymore."
Apple turned much of its iPad business into larger iPhone sales (making more money and shortening the replacement cycle). The only reason it didn't have a launch party for the new iPad is because is was a minor refresh. It launches new iPad Pro models.
DED's ridiculous claim that Nvidia gets most of their licensing revenue from cheap PCs that have Intel and AMD GPUs, you can tell people who 1) have no actual IT or enterprise experience or 2) only buy and use products from a single platform.
The "claim" comes from Nvidia's 10K. I didn't read the rest of your wordsalad.
It's scary how deceiving the past few articles by you are. Not sure if you understand Nvidia as a company to be honest. You do understand at least the major working parts that are driving Nvidia's growth and potential future success correct? I'll assume not because of the article you wrote so here:
Consumer GPU's have been funding Nvidia's main revenue driver but powering the following stuff:
Highend GPU's for workstations and HPC (high performance computing) are very spontaneous blips in revenue but proving to drive wider adoption (data scientists now creating tools allowing more common people to tap into both workstation and home GPU, ie TensorFlow is a good example or CUDA based programming)
Changing form factors and building full scale embedded platforms (tegra, drive)
Building a software ecosystem around Nvidia and CUDA (Deep Learning, Computer Vision, Advanced Rendering, etc)
Cloud Providers now lowering cost to take advantage of the above (Azure, AWS, Google Cloud) now providing the average worker ability to use frameworks originally designed by people having access to very high end hardware now can rent it out cheaply
VR/AR growth being driven by GPU's ability to drive rendering at a speed to make immersion more viable
Are you starting to understand Nivida as a company and what is going on? I'll continue to be an ass because I don't think you get the concept of screen grabbing a point in time on a stock where a downgrade was announced and using that with no correlation to Apple dumping Imagination.
Apple and Nvidia are in very much different sectors and going after completely different land grabs.
The condescending tone of your post reminds me of the Zune fans who used to list off the promises Nvidia was making about Tegra and how awesome is was going to be, for year after year for years. Today, of course, Nvidia is working on big products, but it currently makes most of its revenues from PC gaming. Perhaps it can get its GPUs established in cars and server closets and actually make significant money there, but remember that it faces competition from other seeking to do the same thing.
What the article outlined is that Nvidia had been largely competing against other GPU makers. Mobile put it in the position of having to compete against a disrupting innovation on the low end. It failed to respond. So what if Nvidia is forced to compete in new ways, from former partners who are now massively larger?
"I'll continue to be an ass because I don't think you get the concept of screen grabbing a point in time on a stock where a downgrade was announced and using that with no correlation to Apple dumping Imagination."
This line is nearly unreadable, but it sounds like you're trying to suggest that I planned Img's announcement to occur at the same time as a minor retreat in Nvidia's stock price and am seeking to correlate the two events. What I actually intended to convey is that Nvidia has been limping along as a PC GPU vendor for years, and then suddenly excited investors over just the last year with huge expectations that it will be the only company building cars and AI engines.
It sounds like you're an NVDA investor, so I understand the rage (and being an "ass"). Try to separate your emotions from your intellectual capacity when posting comments.
How does Apple hurt Nvidia? Yes, I read the article. Nvidia must sell millions of GPUs to the Windows PC crowd. There's a huge love affair gamers have for those awesomely powerful GTX 1070s and 1080s. Apple isn't going to build anything like that and even if it does, it will be for Macs only. Apple building GPUs for itself can't possibly seriously hurt Nvidia. Nvidia's customer base will remain mostly the same. It's too early to be drawing conclusions about disruptive threats to Nvidia. We'll have to at least see what GPU hardware Apple brings to the table.
AppleTV doesn't even come close to the Nvidia Shield in terms of raw gaming power. Again, look at Nvidia's value to Wall Street compared to Apple. Nvidia has P/E of 40 while Apple will likely struggle to maintain a P/E of 17. Wall Street loves Nvidia and big investors believe the company is unbeatable in graphics hardware. I think as long as there are Windows gamers around, Nvidia will continue to do well no matter what Apple uses for its own small OS platforms.
Gaming? Gaming is a very small niche. Fine if you want to be a niche player, but not having Apple will hurt Nvidia the same exact way it hurt Intel.
Oh, so your argument is Nvidia may lose Apple as a customer, impacting their revenues in much the same way as Imagination may be?
Comments
Thats the argument being made anyway. Refute it if you can, but your post doesn't do anything but suggest you didn't really read it.
Windows viruses haven't been a thing since Windows 7, when Microsoft started building Windows Defender into the OS. People don't even buy Norton Antivirus anymore, and I can't even remember seeing the last headline about a virus, Trojan or worm attacking Windows like you used to on almost a weekly basis back in the Windows 98, ME, XP and Vista era. The only virus stories have been the media attempting to claim that they were a thing on Android, trying to turn Android versus iOS into a new version of the Windows (pre Windows 7) versus Mac debate, totally ignoring that Google learned from the failures of Microsoft, built a much more secure Linux-based OS from the get go, and as a result the alleged security problems hyped up by the media wound up causing absolutely zero end user impact which is why we no longer see media scare stories and fake news about critical Android security problems - written by "tech journalists" on their MacBooks and iPads - either.
Computer crashes, most of which were due to faulty (cheap) hardware and drivers in the first place and not the base OS itself, were NEVER a problem with enterprise class workstation and server hardware. Similar to DED's ridiculous claim that Nvidia gets most of their licensing revenue from cheap PCs that have Intel and AMD GPUs, you can tell people who 1) have no actual IT or enterprise experience or 2) only buy and use products from a single platform.
I guess if you only use and work with a small subset of products, you will 1) overrate the benefits of your own platform, 2) overstate the negatives of other platforms and 3) conclude that every other platform but yours is garbage and constantly on the precipice of failure as a result. It isn't true. Instead, the reality is that even during the darkest days of Windows 8, Macs never reached 20% of PC market share. This was back when Mac sales, benefiting from the iPhone/iPad halo plus the media hyping them as cool and hip (there was even a major Hollywood raunch comedy where iPads, Macs, iPhones and iCloud were major plot devices), were increasing year over year while PC sales, consumer AND enterprise, sank like a stone. That isn't happening anymore. Mac sales are dropping year over year and PC sales have stabilized and started to creep slightly upward.
So stuff like this isn't just wishful thinking, but it betrays a fundamental lack of knowledge of the competition's technology and products.
So not-smart that they're the only player standing from the PC revolution, suck up all the profits in mobile, and oh are the biggest and most successful public company in the history of earth. yyyeaaaah..
You seem to be making a classic mistake -- labeling things Apple isn't interested in as making mistakes or being dumb.
For this guy's claim to be true, Apple's developing their own GPU will need to somehow stop people from buying Windows and Linux PCs. The funny thing ... he didn't explain how this is going to happen. The whole claim that iPads and cheap (actual) computers like the MacBook Air and Mac Mini were going to supplant PCs is dead, so unless his thing is that there is going to be some new emerging technology that Apple will innovate and dominate - and will also somehow use this GPU - it has no chance of being true.
Yes, some former Apple partners are struggling. But not all are. Nvidia is one of the MANY former Apple partners that are doing just fine. The companies that went by the wayside after Apple dropped them tended to be small companies like Imagination and GT Advanced. The bigger companies - like Corning - just found other partners for their components as well as continued to sell their own products. Also, unlike GT Advanced and Imagination, Apple was never a major revenue source for Nvidia in the first place. Nvidia got the vast majority of their revenue from PC makers during their deal with Apple, and continued to do so after their deal with Apple, and will continue to do so long after Imagination is long gone and the alleged PC killer the iPad is a niche novelty product that practically no one buys like the iPod.
As for iPad, its sales have dropped and plateaued, but that's because it was the fastest and biggest seller in CE history. Faster than iphone was. Yet, even stabilized, its sales are ginormous and represent a Fortune company on its own if spun off. So yeah nice try trying to make that a failure, but it's anything but. Try again.
2) Nobody said ipads were PC killers here except you. Thwack thwack! Beat that straw man! It was labeled a post-PC device, and the word post means "after", not "replace". Jobs was clear from day one -- cars and trucks. ipad is a car.
3) your claim that ipad is a novelette product that "nobody buys" further shows your disconnect from reality, the numbers, and your agenda.
They do not suck up all the profits in mobile. Samsung and Huawei made billions in mobile last year, and several other companies made hundreds of millions. Even the minister of disinformation who wrote this very wrong column had to change his annual "Apple made 100+% of mobile profits in 201x!" to "Samsung only made 1/4 as much as Apple did in 2016!"
The biggest and most successful public company in the history of the earth? That is correct ... but it is also entirely due to the iPhone. As this column pointed out, Nvidia does not make GPUs for mobile devices. They license GPUs for PCs and do so the tune of $7 billion a year. And to repeat AGAIN, as the ($100 million a year) Imagination deal ONLY concerns mobile devices, Apple cutting Imagination loose and designing their own MOBILE GPUS that will only be sold in APPLE PRODUCTS (Nvidia GPUs aren't even sold in Macs that have Intel CPUs) has nothing to do with Nvidia's business which takes place in a realm where Apple doesn't compete in. Or rather, barely competes, as Macs account for only 5% of Internet traffic as compared to Windows' 31%.
DED made the ridiculous mistake of comparing the small, obscure Apple partners and suppliers like GT Advanced and Imagination to global conglomerates like Nvidia whose business with Apple never amounted to much in their bottom line in the first place. In fact Nvidia BOUGHT one of Apple's former suppliers when they went belly up! Nothing that Apple does will threaten anything that Nvidia does, because Apple will never crack 15% in the computer market, and has never cracked 20% of the computer market in any quarter since Wintel began to dominate the computer market in the 1990s (computers being desktops and laptops, never including mobile devices as DED wanted them to be counted as back before iPad sales fell off the cliff ... causing DED to stop demanding that analysts count iPads as computer sales).
I'll chalk up a win against Nintendo for that, since Nintendo exited the market.
If Apple was a threat to NVidia, surly we would have better graphics in the Mac at this point? The iOS graphics situation is a lot different than the desktop. Apple does have the advantage though seeing as they refuse to put PCI slots in anything.
The fallacy is that Apple is "ultra premium" in pricing. Prior to iPhone, there were several $1000+ phones, they just didn't sell in high volumes. Apple made $600 phones mainstream. Samsung sells more expensive models, although it can't sell as many premium devices.
Before iPad, Samsung and others were trying to sell bulky Windows tablets that started at $1000+. iPad was introduced $500. A year later Google's Android 3.0 partners tried to sell more expensive, larger tablets but nobody wanted them. Microsoft tried selling more expensive tablets too. Failure all around.
The fact that the high volume market for phones and tablets is all super cheap commodity today is only because companies apart from Apple couldn't manage to support sales at a higher quality tier. Not because they didn't try.
Nvidia sells products at very very high prices because it has limited competition for the technology it owns. Except for mobile, where Nvidia totally failed to sell anything.
Scrape per away the marketing BS, which Nvidia excelled at, and the company is ripe for disruption.
This reminds me of the old men in the 80s who told me minicomputers were not going to be replaced by a bunch of PCs.
I don't know of anyone predicting that "Apple's products are going to have to somehow put Windows PCs out of business." I did predict that Microsoft's monopoly position could be threatened by Apple at the high end and Linux at the low end if the need for Win32 went away. That's what Apple accomplished, with Google promoting Linux on mobile devices.
But when you say nothing is changed and Microsoft hasn't been affected, look back to its pre-iPad earnings and marvel at where its $10B Office and $10 billion Windows consumers licensing business went. Today Microsoft is focused on the "cloud and devices" because its old model of sitting on a monopoly didn't last.
"iPad sales have dropped like a stone, to the point where Apple doesn't even have events to launch new models anymore."
Apple turned much of its iPad business into larger iPhone sales (making more money and shortening the replacement cycle). The only reason it didn't have a launch party for the new iPad is because is was a minor refresh. It launches new iPad Pro models.
The "claim" comes from Nvidia's 10K. I didn't read the rest of your wordsalad.
The condescending tone of your post reminds me of the Zune fans who used to list off the promises Nvidia was making about Tegra and how awesome is was going to be, for year after year for years. Today, of course, Nvidia is working on big products, but it currently makes most of its revenues from PC gaming. Perhaps it can get its GPUs established in cars and server closets and actually make significant money there, but remember that it faces competition from other seeking to do the same thing.
What the article outlined is that Nvidia had been largely competing against other GPU makers. Mobile put it in the position of having to compete against a disrupting innovation on the low end. It failed to respond. So what if Nvidia is forced to compete in new ways, from former partners who are now massively larger?
"I'll continue to be an ass because I don't think you get the concept of screen grabbing a point in time on a stock where a downgrade was announced and using that with no correlation to Apple dumping Imagination."
This line is nearly unreadable, but it sounds like you're trying to suggest that I planned Img's announcement to occur at the same time as a minor retreat in Nvidia's stock price and am seeking to correlate the two events. What I actually intended to convey is that Nvidia has been limping along as a PC GPU vendor for years, and then suddenly excited investors over just the last year with huge expectations that it will be the only company building cars and AI engines.
It sounds like you're an NVDA investor, so I understand the rage (and being an "ass"). Try to separate your emotions from your intellectual capacity when posting comments.