Tim Cook has gotten a lot of crap for things like assembling Macs in the US because of cost. The cost of running a fab is absurd. I don't see Apple ever buying a fab.
Source? I can't believe anyone would complain about that, especially since we don't even know the price of the new MacPro yet.
Aikouka
Lifer
- Nov 27, 2001
- 30,383
- 912
- 126
iOS copying Android? Weren't most of the lawsuits over physical factors?
I don't see it as a surprise because most of Apple's beef was with Samsung Mobile, which is a separate division within Samsung of the foundry business. Of course, there were some allegations of IP spillage, but that's a slightly separate matter. Anyway, the point is that I highly doubt that the chief of Samsung Foundries enjoyed losing Apple as a customer. Unless they could find customers to replace all of the business (i.e. wafers), they would end up reporting lower revenues to the head honchos at Samsung corporate. That just looks bad on Samsung Foundries.
Ultimately, it's in my experience from my time in the corporate world, that when it comes to really large companies, that separate divisions tend to be fairly autonomous from each other. However, they still report up, and they all want their reports to look good.
Well, thinking about it... Samsung may "borrow" some IP to make their processors faster, but ultimately, who cares? As much as we like to ooh and aah at benchmarks, how often do they make us switch ecosystems? In the high-end devices, the CPUs are arguably fast enough that most users don't even notice a difference in daily use.
I think he meant Apple wouldn't dare sue over physical designs now that they've borrowed so many software ideas from android. Notification bar, widgets in the new version of iOS, etc.
The notification bar has been there for a while now, so that's hardly new. Also, since when did iOS get widgets? That's the first I've heard of it. Otherwise the big changes to the software's visual look come more from Windows Phone or Web OS than Android.
Also Samsung hasn't made any of their new designs look anything remotely like an iPhone so Apple doesn't have much room to sue over there. Also, the appeals from all the old cases are still largely ongoing, so I think they really don't have time for new suits until the old ones start getting cleared out.
But there's also a side question here relating to Intel.
Wasn't Intel's big advantage, shouted from the rooftops, that they were so far ahead of everyone in the node process?
Well, that advantage went out of the window.
And they've even delayed the 14 nm to next year instead of this year(as originally planned). 10 nm will be there 2016, at the earliest.
Also, given what we now know with the doctered AnTuTu benchmarks for the Bay Trail SoC(where the SoC just plain skipped large parts of the benchmark, plus that AnTuTu is heavily favouring Intel SoC's because of the select tests used that disproportionally benefit Intel's technology), the whole "Intel is now coming in and crushing ARM" argument seems weaker than ever.
Wasn't Intel's big advantage, shouted from the rooftops, that they were so far ahead of everyone in the node process?
Well, that advantage went out of the window.
And they've even delayed the 14 nm to next year instead of this year(as originally planned). 10 nm will be there 2016, at the earliest.
Also, given what we now know with the doctered AnTuTu benchmarks for the Bay Trail SoC(where the SoC just plain skipped large parts of the benchmark, plus that AnTuTu is heavily favouring Intel SoC's because of the select tests used that disproportionally benefit Intel's technology), the whole "Intel is now coming in and crushing ARM" argument seems weaker than ever.
They are. It's one thing for a company to have it in the pipes and another for them to be making chips on it. Intel has said they'll have production underway on 14nm by the end of the year, but Samsung isn't expected to have their lines running for at least a year after that.
Samsung is certainly investing a lot of money in chip fabrication though. It makes a certain amount of sense though. They can sell any extra capacity that they don't need or want to use and it cuts out a middleman to help them reduce costs when making their own devices.
They're really the only profitable Android handset manufacturer and the only other company that has shown any profit (LG) also makes some of their own components. Having a competitive chip fab of their own is going to be vital to Samsung to keep profits up, especially as some of the bigger Chinese manufacturers start to branch out and expand into new markets.
Unless you can tell us which company has a bigger advantage than Intel in process node(which you can't because there isn't such a company), your entire rant is completely useless.
That can easily backfire, though. Look at that Austin fab they built just for Apple processors. Now Apple will abandon them and they have to reuse it for something else or let it die. Samsung may get another customer but there's no guarantee that that customer won't flee should Samsung start stealing their IP...
Another piece of good news:
Apple and Samsung are in talks to settle all patent disputes with both parties suggesting the possibility of royalties.
Apple and Samsung are in talks to settle all patent disputes with both parties suggesting the possibility of royalties.
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
- May 9, 2004
- 8,443
- 124
- 106
Basically Intel now can be summed up as "We're have 14nm so we will win the market! Fvck that noise called business strategy and economics!"
Apple and Samsung have always been in talks to settle all patent disputes behind the scenes. This is nothing new.
I'm sure the two sides are always talking. But, I've said for years, this will all end up in some kind of large, multi-year patent cross license. The courtroom battles that we've endured for the past few years have all been about setting the field position for each company as to how strong their portfolio is. Once it's been established, then terms can be come to.
Not really. They ideally wouldn't want anyone else using anything that they perceive as owning in some capacity, but that's a practical impossibility and even if you win the court case, the damages don't approach the necessary amount to make it a non-financially viable strategy.
This will eventually happen. If anything does force it, it will be Samsung needing to renew a licensing deal for all the 4G patents that Apple bought a while back. They need them and Apple has to license them, but they can just as easily ask for whatever Samsung has been asking for their SEPs.
What? Apple came to an agreement with HTC and others that settled all disputes and HTC paid Apple royalties. How is this any different?
Because practically, Apple can't have ongoing suits against every single Android manufacturer in all of the different venues. They'd need to take on additional lawyers at that point. Also, HTC wasn't making phones that looked like an iPhone in addition to possibly infringing on Apple's software patents. From a tactical perspective it also made sense in that Apple could claim that they were willing to settle for a fair deal and point to the deal that HTC took during their trial.
Ideally that doesn't change that Apple would prefer that other companies not use anything that Apple perceives as belonging to themselves.
Just because you have money doesn't mean you'd be allowed to do it. Anti-trust would bust up any such deal when you consider the parts TSMC makes essentially for its competitors. You can't buy them and say "Sorry, can't use these fabs anymore, go somewhere else!" Not allowed.
Basically this deal would be a boost for both Apple and Samsung. Samsung will make the brains of Apple iPhones and iPads, whereas Apple will remain dependent on Samsung because of the upgrade to the architecture that no other company has the technological advancement to achieve. Not even Intel can achieve this (Broadwell/Skylake will be 14nm hopefully by 2015... no promises though). Not even AMD.
I bet you all a million dollars that in 2015 the whole Apple and Samsung monopoly over the smartphone market will change very little, if at all compared to the current situation.
When one reads that profits have fallen for the majority of Android smartphone makers (exception of Samsung and LG) and their market share have fallen dramatically (eyes on HTC), then you know there is a slim chance of a comeback. Basically all these smaller smartphone manufacturers like ZTE, Huawei, Sony, etc will continue to be smaller smartphone manufacturers and very may well be exiting the smartphone industry soon because of lack of marketing. There is hope for ZTE and Huawei though, because China is a huge market. But there is very little hope for success in the west because Huawei was caught for spying on the US government and transmitting that information to Beijing.
I bet you all a million dollars that in 2015 the whole Apple and Samsung monopoly over the smartphone market will change very little, if at all compared to the current situation.
When one reads that profits have fallen for the majority of Android smartphone makers (exception of Samsung and LG) and their market share have fallen dramatically (eyes on HTC), then you know there is a slim chance of a comeback. Basically all these smaller smartphone manufacturers like ZTE, Huawei, Sony, etc will continue to be smaller smartphone manufacturers and very may well be exiting the smartphone industry soon because of lack of marketing. There is hope for ZTE and Huawei though, because China is a huge market. But there is very little hope for success in the west because Huawei was caught for spying on the US government and transmitting that information to Beijing.
Last edited:
Now you're stating speculation and rumors as facts. I think you're getting a bit ahead of yourself. Also, Samsung is behind Intel in terms of technology...
Apple needs to know that it cannot create chip level hardware so it needed samsung back, we may see more patent wars in future
Samsung can use its apple fab to build the new exynos advanced soc that Samsung is announcing next week!
How exactly?
They compete in different fields.
Samsung makes high-end TV's (best selling in the US), theater solutions, smartphones (best selling Androids), digital cameras, robotic turrets for the army (exported to the US and other western countries), printer solutions, monitors (best selling after LG), processors etc.
Intel only makes processors.
Samsung is already mass-producing 14nm processors whereas Intel is still stuck at 22nm with Haswell. This doesn't exactly translate to "better technology" because a smartphone processor has lower clock speeds and are much smaller than desktop PC or laptop processors. But yes, Samsung and Intel can not be directly compared.
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter