qwerty52

Beats said:

If Apple went with Intel for MANUFACTURING wouldn’t it be cheaper than all Windows virus machines for them because the actual DEVELOPMENT is made in-house?

Sounds like it could be a good deal. I would keep Intel as a backup though and not main supplier. 

crowley said:

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.

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.

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.