Why Apple's new GPU efforts are a major disruptive threat to Nvidia

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 76
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    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. 
    Niche?  Niche for whom?
  • Reply 62 of 76
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    jfanning said:

    "They switch focus"
    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. 
    No it wasn't, and you know that.  And again, their network division was still their primary income at that time.  Daniel, Nokia wasn't the right example to use for your rant, you usually try hard to not say something wrong in your episodes, but in this case you have cocked up.  They are still a market leader in their primary industry, they also own a tonne of intellectual property, to which they are able to make a lot of money, why is it wrong for them to do this?

    singularity
  • Reply 63 of 76
    DanielEranDanielEran Posts: 290editor
    jfanning said:
    jfanning said:

    "They switch focus"
    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. 
    No it wasn't, and you know that.  And again, their network division was still their primary income at that time.  Daniel, Nokia wasn't the right example to use for your rant, you usually try hard to not say something wrong in your episodes, but in this case you have cocked up.  They are still a market leader in their primary industry, they also own a tonne of intellectual property, to which they are able to make a lot of money, why is it wrong for them to do this?

    A company doesn't have to lose everything to resort to being a patent troll.
    What I wrote was a change in focus from serving customers to enforcing patents. 

    Nokia had been leading in smartphones and cocked it all up. Then invited Microsoft in to destroy it. 

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/10/10/how-apples-iphone-rapidly-destroyed-nokias-world-leading-symbian-platform
  • Reply 64 of 76
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    A company doesn't have to lose everything to resort to being a patent troll. 
    What I wrote was a change in focus from serving customers to enforcing patents. 

    Nokia had been leading in smartphones and cocked it all up. Then invited Microsoft in to destroy it. 

    What you wrote was wrong. They were a market leader in networks, and still are.  Nokia still services their customers, they have a number of customers, their main focus (networks) mean they are not really a consumer company like Apple. I'm not sure why you don't want to accept this fact.  This doesn't make them a patent troll, this provides them the ability to licence their patents to customers, providing additional streams of revenue.

  • Reply 65 of 76
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,310member
    freeper said:

    mytdave said:

    ...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).
    1) none of the 2016 PC makers were in existence during the PC revolution of the 70s and 80s, dur. My comment was Apple is the only player still standing from the PC revolution. I'm guessing you weren't alive then. 

    2) Apple sucks up the vast majority of profit in mobile. 

    3) my point stands that they can't have had this smashing success without being smart. 

    4) didn't read the rest. troll harder dude 
    edited April 2017
  • Reply 66 of 76
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,310member
    gatorguy said:
    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? 
    No. My point was that despite Intel not ever having Apple as a processor customer for iphone, and despite Apple not selling their processor to others, Apple's success has hurt Intel. 
  • Reply 67 of 76
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,310member
    jfanning said:
    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. 
    Niche?  Niche for whom?
    Sales. Gaming is niche. 
  • Reply 68 of 76
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    jfanning said:
    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. 
    Niche?  Niche for whom?
    Sales. Gaming is niche. 

    US$100 billion in sales is niche?
    singularitygatorguydasanman69
  • Reply 69 of 76
    DanielEranDanielEran Posts: 290editor
    jfanning said:
    A company doesn't have to lose everything to resort to being a patent troll. 
    What I wrote was a change in focus from serving customers to enforcing patents. 

    Nokia had been leading in smartphones and cocked it all up. Then invited Microsoft in to destroy it. 

    What you wrote was wrong. They were a market leader in networks, and still are.  Nokia still services their customers, they have a number of customers, their main focus (networks) mean they are not really a consumer company like Apple. I'm not sure why you don't want to accept this fact.  This doesn't make them a patent troll, this provides them the ability to licence their patents to customers, providing additional streams of revenue.

    If Apple gave up on selling Macs and started suing every other PC maker over patents it had regarding everything from keyboards to UI to software, it wouldn't matter if most of Apple's money still came from iOS. Apple would be, like Nokia did, shifting its focus from consumers to enforcing patents. 

    Nokia's networking business doesn't have any relevance to its shift from selling phones to monetizing phone patents. 
  • Reply 70 of 76
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    jfanning said:
    A company doesn't have to lose everything to resort to being a patent troll. 
    What I wrote was a change in focus from serving customers to enforcing patents. 

    Nokia had been leading in smartphones and cocked it all up. Then invited Microsoft in to destroy it. 

    What you wrote was wrong. They were a market leader in networks, and still are.  Nokia still services their customers, they have a number of customers, their main focus (networks) mean they are not really a consumer company like Apple. I'm not sure why you don't want to accept this fact.  This doesn't make them a patent troll, this provides them the ability to licence their patents to customers, providing additional streams of revenue.

    If Apple gave up on selling Macs and started suing every other PC maker over patents it had regarding everything from keyboards to UI to software, it wouldn't matter if most of Apple's money still came from iOS. Apple would be, like Nokia did, shifting its focus from consumers to enforcing patents. 

    Nokia's networking business doesn't have any relevance to its shift from selling phones to monetizing phone patents. 
    There's a difference between you shifting focus from consumers, and consumers shifting their focus from you. Nokia didn't pivot fast enough to the paradigm shift Apple created with the iPhone, and when they finally did it was a case of too little too late with their uninspired offerings. 
    jfanning
  • Reply 71 of 76
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    jfanning said:
    A company doesn't have to lose everything to resort to being a patent troll. 
    What I wrote was a change in focus from serving customers to enforcing patents. 

    Nokia had been leading in smartphones and cocked it all up. Then invited Microsoft in to destroy it. 

    What you wrote was wrong. They were a market leader in networks, and still are.  Nokia still services their customers, they have a number of customers, their main focus (networks) mean they are not really a consumer company like Apple. I'm not sure why you don't want to accept this fact.  This doesn't make them a patent troll, this provides them the ability to licence their patents to customers, providing additional streams of revenue.

    If Apple gave up on selling Macs and started suing every other PC maker over patents it had regarding everything from keyboards to UI to software, it wouldn't matter if most of Apple's money still came from iOS. Apple would be, like Nokia did, shifting its focus from consumers to enforcing patents. 

    Nokia's networking business doesn't have any relevance to its shift from selling phones to monetizing phone patents. 

    Daniel, what are you going on about?  We get you love Apple, and they can do what ever they like and you would still love them, but using Nokia as you example of a patent troll  is blantently wrong, and you still haven't put forward anything that proves that it is.  You used the wrong example there, get over it.
  • Reply 72 of 76
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,532member
    jfanning said:
    jfanning said:
    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. 
    Niche?  Niche for whom?
    Sales. Gaming is niche. 

    US$100 billion in sales is niche?
    PC gaming h/w sales are niche.
  • Reply 73 of 76
    singularitysingularity Posts: 1,329member
    brucemc said:
    jfanning said:
    jfanning said:
    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. 
    Niche?  Niche for whom?
    Sales. Gaming is niche. 

    US$100 billion in sales is niche?
    PC gaming h/w sales are niche.
    World wide PC  gaming hardware reached $30 billion last year. Approx  $13 billion in the high end side. So small when compared to iPhone sales etc but not to be sniffed at.
  • Reply 74 of 76
    RoyTyrellRoyTyrell Posts: 2member
    Competition is a good thing. But, honestly, right now Nvidia is in a league of their own. No one can touch the P100 and it is ripping up supercomputing records.

    As a consumer I would love to see Apple (or whoever) step up and truly challenge them. But right now there is simply no denying they *own* the gpgpu space -- they invented it.

    I am watching my 1080 Ti rip through massive matrix operations (10^12 x 10^12) with awe.... milliseconds...

    When Apple make a card that can find optimal solutions for sparce matrix of that order in the time it takes to drink a cup of coffee. Then Nvidia will have to worry
  • Reply 75 of 76
    GBallerGBaller Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    I think Nvidia is not understood like it should to the Apple faithful. People who are using iPhones and iPads are using Nvidia's technology and not even knowing it. 

    If if you are a user of Amazon Cloud, Netflix, Instagram, Google cloud services, Facebook, Microsoft cloud all these cloud services use Nvidia chips to run on.

     The iCloud is not in the same arena. Sure I pay for iCloud but it's to backup my apps and music. But it's not great at the type of stuff you can do with Google or Amazon. 

    Apple does well because you can use these services on the hardware platform that consumers love. Getting the best of both worlds. 

    It it didn't matter how great Nvidia's chip were, they were in the Zune. Cloud services are agnostic. 
  • Reply 76 of 76
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    jfanning said:
    Niche?  Niche for whom?
    It’s a pretty small portion of the whole market. I’d guess in small part because developers refuse to make games that take advantage of multicore machines and actually have better performance despite us getting to, what, 18 cores now.
Sign In or Register to comment.