4 ms·
The Apple bid might be real? A simple rumour typically doesn't merit a 25% rise.
by wlievens 16y ago
The Apple bid might be real? A simple rumour typically doesn't merit a 25% rise.
- masklinn 16y ago> The Apple bid might be real? Feels weird. What sense would it make precisely? ARM only does basic code design, they already have a fabless constructor or two, what would Apple gain by buying ARM, shutting it down and making designs only for Apple themselves?
- joubert 16y agoControl of the chip company that produces the silicon (design) for just about all mobile devices? And symbolically ARM would be folded into one of the 3 companies that created it originally.
- masklinn 16y agoArm does not produce silicon, they produce designs. And again, what would Apple gain from that control, the right to withhold new ARM generations from e.g. HTC? Unless the Apple execs have gotten very stupid recently, they probably understand that not only would the EU and the US regulatory agency would pay them a visit if they even initiated the move of buying ARM, doing that kind of withholding would land them in scorching hot water. It's one thing to have strange practices when you're the second or third player on the smartphone market (and basically non-existent in the wider mobile phone market in terms of number of units), it's another one to have anti-competitive practices when you have a monopoly on mobile chips. And ARM most definitely has that, there are few if any other architecture for mobile/embedded systems at all, and ARM has pretty much all of the market for mid to top-end embedded stuff.
- towndrunk 16y agoMaybe they have some nice IP and few patents that Apple would like to use against the A4 or future chip designs.
- 10ren 16y agoARM dominates, yes. BTW: the other company mentioned is also a fabless core designer: Imagination Technologies. They are a bit lower-end than ARM, but disruption tends to come from below... They have some cool ideas for customized many-core, with a mix of CPU and DSP. My hunch has been that that's where Moore's Law will go: specialized silicon (like specialized organs in your body; or specialized firms in the economy.)
- jsz0 16y agoA more innocent explanation could be that Apple really believes in the ARM platform's continued success and thinks it's a good investment. Good way to hedge their bets. You can buy an iPhone and give them a big profit margin or you can buy an Android phone and give them the 30-50 cents ARM license fee.
- cakesy 16y agoThis is true, but Apple has a lot of money, and the recent two buys of chip companies hasn't made a great deal of sense. Sure, they use these companies, but it means they no longer can get the best designs from any company, they are limited to the companies they own. In many ways, a disadvantage, whereas there is loads of money being poured into ARM designs now.
- illumin8 16y agoVery highly unlikely. Apple only has to pay $0.33 licensing fees for every A4 processor it sells. This cost is so close to zero the saying "why buy the cow when the milk is free?" should apply here. Not only that, the antitrust concerns would tie Apple up in court for years. This would be like Microsoft buying Intel in the middle of the DOJ investigation. Not gonna happen.
- mcav 16y agoHow is this different than Apple buying PA Semi? Also, Apple's not a monopoly.
- protomyth 16y agoPA Semi gave them specific IP and engineers for low-power chip design. ARM already licenses its IP and designs for a very low price. At best, I could see Apple buying a minority percentage like they used to own just to keep someone else from messing with them.
- illumin8 16y agoPA Semi doesn't make chips used by all of the top smartphone vendors. Apple isn't a monopoly, but there are still antitrust concerns when you buy a company that all of your competitors must license from.