Intel wants to manufacture Apple Silicon

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 61
    heinzelheinzel Posts: 120member
    sflocal said:
    lmasanti said:
    Do we remember the times in which Apple made the chips in Samsung's factories and Samsung copied the technology?
    They copied the ads… Why not the chips?
    (They copy so wrongly the ads that the future of their chip is in serious condition.)
    Samsung copied the iPhone, not Apple's chips.  Samsung semiconductor did get caught passing Apple's agreements to Samsung Mobile, given Samsung a heads-up on what Apple was planning next. 
    The first iPhones (iPhone, 3G, 3GS) were actually built around Samsung processors. Starting with the A4 in iPhone , which shared the same Intrinsity-designed Cortex A8 core with Samsung's mobile processor of the time, Samsung and Apple processors diverged. Apple bought Intrinsity after the A4 was done, and every Apple ARM SoC after that was in its own league (likely also thanks to the low-power/high performance IP they had acquired with PA-Semi). Samsung tried to replicate this with their Mongoose processors, but while somewhat performant, they were also (too) hot. I don't remember Samsung's chip manufacturing arm sharing information with the rest of Samsung, I thought they were firewalled-off pretty well.
    d_2watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 61
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  
    Why? They never have before, and that when they were actually Intel chips. 


    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 61
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  
    No, they would refuse to with Intel because Intel has failed to deliver on any of its targets for the past ten years. 
    williamlondonBeatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 61
    I think those "Go PC" ads worked wonders and everyone ran off to buy AMD-based PCs!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 61
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,239member
    If Apple decides to use M1 chips made by Intel, will Apple have to put those big blue stickers on their Macs that say "Intel Inside"?
    They didn't before -- check any Intel Mac -- so why would they in this hypothetical scenario that isn't going to happen.

    Tim Cook, after laughing at the very idea, probably told Intel's CEO "call me when you can hit a deadline and get to 3nm."
    williamlondonBeatsbonoboblotoneswatto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 61
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,561member
    chasm said:
    If Apple decides to use M1 chips made by Intel, will Apple have to put those big blue stickers on their Macs that say "Intel Inside"?
    They didn't before -- check any Intel Mac -- so why would they in this hypothetical scenario that isn't going to happen.
    You are correct. I was just being humorous.
    Beats
  • Reply 27 of 61
    EsquireCatsEsquireCats Posts: 1,268member
    Intel should take a moment to pay attention to Apple’s snub of all things nvidia. Then they can revisit their current approach.  

    Being an Apple supplier gives a company massive secondary benefits. We can see that the companies that are long time partners with Apple have steadily pulled ahead of competition because they are well funded for R&D and Apple frequently gets involved more directly to ensure their success (such as massive upfront investment, direct R&D participation and defining future technology product focus/ tech pathways.)
    This then allows those same companies to market their technology in other products. eg Look at the rise, fall and rise again of Sony’s digital film/photography line up. It’s now the likes of canon and nikon which can’t keep up with sensor technology. 
    bonobobwatto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 61
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Rayz2016 said:
    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  
    Why? They never have before, and that when they were actually Intel chips. 
    They never have what? Been competitive? You're saying Intel has never been competitive?  I don't think I need to bother refuting that.
    Rayz2016 said:

    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  
    No, they would refuse to with Intel because Intel has failed to deliver on any of its targets for the past ten years. 
    And if they turn it around then Apple shouldn't hold it against them out of pettiness. Intel were getting eaten away by IBM and then AMD in the 90s too, but then they brought it back with the Core Duo series.
    bonobob
  • Reply 29 of 61
    dk49dk49 Posts: 265member
    lmasanti said:
    Do we remember the times in which Apple made the chips in Samsung's factories and Samsung copied the technology?
    They copied the ads… Why not the chips?
    (They copy so wrongly the ads that the future of their chip is in serious condition.)
    Is it that easy to copy chip designs? I am sure there are IPs and patents to protect such scenarios.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 61
    qwerty52qwerty52 Posts: 367member
    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  

    Why? Maybe because Apple should reschedule so many times the release of new Mac models, because Intel wasn’t ready with its chips?
    At the moment Intel is a sick company, company in crisis. 
    In place of their misleading adds against Apple, they should use their resources to think about, how can they reorganize their own company. How can they make a progress in production of new modern chips, so they can make the company competitive again.
    But no! The Intel’s CEO decided to act like the other two losers: Zuckerberg and Sweeney 
    Beatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 61
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    qwerty52 said:
    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  

    Why? Maybe because Apple should reschedule so many times the release of new Mac models, because Intel wasn’t ready with its chips?
    At the moment Intel is a sick company, company in crisis. 
    In place of their misleading adds against Apple, they should use their resources to think about, how can they reorganize their own company. How can they make a progress in production of new modern chips, so they can make the company competitive again.
    But no! The Intel’s CEO decided to act like the other two losers: Zuckerberg and Sweeney 
    They are reorganising the company, that what this article is about!  You're exclusively focussing on the acts of the marketing department and ignoring what the rest of the business is doing, all while criticising it.

    No one is saying that Apple should get themselves in a position where they are totally reliant on Intel for A and M series chips, but having another supplier would not be a bad thing.  Diversified supply chains are better at dealing with production problems. 

    Obviously if Intel aren't up to the task then don't use them, but that's what talks and trial production runs are there to establish.
    muthuk_vanalingamqwerty52bonobob
  • Reply 32 of 61
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    dewme said:
    The music has stopped and Intel is left standing without a chair. Now they want to sit on Apple's lap.

    Seriously though, I do agree with the sentiment that the US chip making sector needs to make sure it doesn't find itself as a whole lacking a chair when it comes to owning foundry capabilities. Some of the closer to pure capitalistic decisions that have made in the name of maximizing ROI and ratios like IRR may leave us without the skills and competencies to be as self sufficient as we need to be, especially if we're not the only big fish in the pond.

    Ultimately it comes down to simple free market capitalism:  Can we do it "Better, faster, cheaper and more reliably" than anybody else?
    If the answer is "yes" then we win.
    If the answer is "no" then they win.

    This is not rocket science.

    Meanwhile China powers on intent on breaking free of western hegemony.   From CNBC:
    • Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC), China’s largest and most important chipmaker, is building a new factory in Shenzhen that will cost $2.35 billion.
    • The company and the government of the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen will jointly put capital into the project.
    • SMIC is key to China’s plans to boost self-sufficiency in the semiconductor industry amid tensions with the U.S.
    So, who would you bet on:  Intel or the combined forces of China and SMIC?
    Or, to take a different approach:   What is our government doing to support industries like chip manufacturing in the U.S.?
    So far all we've done is:
    --  Rely on private, free market capitalism.   But that didn't work
    --  Rely on protectionism.  That didn't work either
    --  Rely on triggering a cold war with our largest trading partner.   It looks like that is blowing up in our faces.

    Maybe we should focus on giving all we got to be the best that we can be.
    If that's better than any other country then we win.  
    ...  All we have to do is do it better, faster, cheaper and more reliably than anybody else.
    ....... This is not rocket science.
    ..............Unless you don't believe that we can do it.


    edited March 2021 qwerty52
  • Reply 33 of 61
    thedbathedba Posts: 759member
    If Apple decides to use M1 chips made by Intel, will Apple have to put those big blue stickers on their Macs that say "Intel Inside"?
    They didn’t do it when they actually did have “Intel inside”, why would they do it now?

    GeorgeBMacwatto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 61
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  

    Pretty short sighted. Apple has more reasons than those crappy attack ads. I would let them suffer and die after those ads  MAYBE buy the leftovers when they’re cheap. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 61
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Beats said:
    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  
    Pretty short sighted. Apple has more reasons than those crappy attack ads. I would let them suffer and die after those ads  MAYBE buy the leftovers when they’re cheap. 
    Apple have made snotty attack ads too, and neither Intel or Microsoft refused to work with them.  Being petulant about business is a fast track way to lose business.

    Intel aren't dying any time soon.
    muthuk_vanalingamGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 36 of 61
    qwerty52qwerty52 Posts: 367member
    crowley said:
    qwerty52 said:
    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  

    Why? Maybe because Apple should reschedule so many times the release of new Mac models, because Intel wasn’t ready with its chips?
    At the moment Intel is a sick company, company in crisis. 
    In place of their misleading adds against Apple, they should use their resources to think about, how can they reorganize their own company. How can they make a progress in production of new modern chips, so they can make the company competitive again.
    But no! The Intel’s CEO decided to act like the other two losers: Zuckerberg and Sweeney 
    They are reorganising the company, that what this article is about!  You're exclusively focussing on the acts of the marketing department and ignoring what the rest of the business is doing, all while criticising it.

    No one is saying that Apple should get themselves in a position where they are totally reliant on Intel for A and M series chips, but having another supplier would not be a bad thing.  Diversified supply chains are better at dealing with production problems. 

    Obviously if Intel aren't up to the task then don't use them, but that's what talks and trial production runs are there to establish.

    I would like nothing more, than to see Intel as a reliable partner for Apple. I would love it.
    But they need to reorganize to be able to meet Apple's demands.
    This should be the priority number one of the new CEO, not the stupid adds. I can’t imagine that the marketing department started this campaign without permission and knowledge of the CEO.
    And this is why I have my doubts about this manager.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 61
    tobiantobian Posts: 148member
    dewme said:
    The music has stopped and Intel is left standing without a chair. Now they want to sit on Apple's lap.

    Seriously though, I do agree with the sentiment that the US chip making sector needs to make sure it doesn't find itself as a whole lacking a chair when it comes to owning foundry capabilities. Some of the closer to pure capitalistic decisions that have made in the name of maximizing ROI and ratios like IRR may leave us without the skills and competencies to be as self sufficient as we need to be, especially if we're not the only big fish in the pond.

    Ultimately it comes down to simple free market capitalism:  Can we do it "Better, faster, cheaper and more reliably" than anybody else?
    If the answer is "yes" then we win.
    If the answer is "no" then they win.

    This is not rocket science.

    Meanwhile China powers on intent on breaking free of western hegemony.   From CNBC:
    • Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC), China’s largest and most important chipmaker, is building a new factory in Shenzhen that will cost $2.35 billion.
    • The company and the government of the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen will jointly put capital into the project.
    • SMIC is key to China’s plans to boost self-sufficiency in the semiconductor industry amid tensions with the U.S.
    So, who would you bet on:  Intel or the combined forces of China and SMIC?
    Or, to take a different approach:   What is our government doing to support industries like chip manufacturing in the U.S.?
    So far all we've done is:
    --  Rely on private, free market capitalism.   But that didn't work
    --  Rely on protectionism.  That didn't work either
    --  Rely on triggering a cold war with our largest trading partner.   It looks like that is blowing up in our faces.

    Maybe we should focus on giving all we got to be the best that we can be.
    If that's better than any other country then we win.  
    ...  All we have to do is do it better, faster, cheaper and more reliably than anybody else.
    ....... This is not rocket science.
    ..............Unless you don't believe that we can do it.


    Better, faster and cheaper doesn’t work! If you want it better and faster, it won’t be cheaper. If you want it better and cheaper, it wont be faster.. and if faster and cheaper, it wont be better. This is golden rule!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 61
    TomETomE Posts: 172member
    Apple will not do anything stupid , if they can help it.  They have an advantage or two, and hopefully will not give this up.  Intel has been behind for a long time in Manufacturing the small nanometer , low-power chips. They have to do something.  I don't lke to see the US behind and dependent upon other countries .  There is such a thing as being too generous.  So Far, TSMC has done a great job - Intel has not.  Intel has not met schedules, etc. and each time has caused Apple problems.  The M Series is Apple pulling ahead based upon their acquisitions of the last decade.  They are focused.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 61
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    qwerty52 said:
    crowley said:
    qwerty52 said:
    crowley said:
    If Intel can make it and be competitive with TSMC and Samsung, then absolutely Apple should engage with them.  No way they would do as some suggest and play hardball because of soreness over a couple of ads.  

    Why? Maybe because Apple should reschedule so many times the release of new Mac models, because Intel wasn’t ready with its chips?
    At the moment Intel is a sick company, company in crisis. 
    In place of their misleading adds against Apple, they should use their resources to think about, how can they reorganize their own company. How can they make a progress in production of new modern chips, so they can make the company competitive again.
    But no! The Intel’s CEO decided to act like the other two losers: Zuckerberg and Sweeney 
    They are reorganising the company, that what this article is about!  You're exclusively focussing on the acts of the marketing department and ignoring what the rest of the business is doing, all while criticising it.

    No one is saying that Apple should get themselves in a position where they are totally reliant on Intel for A and M series chips, but having another supplier would not be a bad thing.  Diversified supply chains are better at dealing with production problems. 

    Obviously if Intel aren't up to the task then don't use them, but that's what talks and trial production runs are there to establish.

    I would like nothing more, than to see Intel as a reliable partner for Apple. I would love it.
    But they need to reorganize to be able to meet Apple's demands.
    This should be the priority number one of the new CEO, not the stupid adds. I can’t imagine that the marketing department started this campaign without permission and knowledge of the CEO.
    And this is why I have my doubts about this manager.
    Again, they are reorganising, and it's costing them $20bn, far more than a series of adverts, and a far higher priority.  You seem to think that Intel and its CEO can't do more than one thing at the same time. 

    From the article:
    Intel on Tuesday announced it will invest some $20 billion to build a pair of chip fabs in Ocotillo, Arizona, with plans to dedicate at least a portion of the output to a new foundry subsidiary, reports CNBC.

    Called Intel Foundry Services, Intel's new chip manufacturing arm will produce the silicon based on the company's favored x86 architecture, as well as ARM designs like those used in Apple's A- and M-series SoCs. Intel senior vice president Randhir Thakur is in charge of the operation.

    Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger told press that IFS will be run as its own unit and is currently working with Amazon, Cisco, IBM and Microsoft on the initiative, according to Engadget. The company is also looking to gain Apple's interest.
  • Reply 40 of 61
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,454member
    jokes aside, US gov should either help TSMC build R&D centers and factories in the US, and/or companies like Apple should help save domestic chip manufacturing
    TSMC already has a fab in Camas, WA and they are building one out in AZ. Maybe build out another... if there is still demand after the AZ one is done (I know it’s getting close). 
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.