4 ms·

Well I'd say it's certainly a big risk to Intel. For one, a lot of Intel customers are going in-house with chip design. Apple on its own might not hurt much, bu

Well I'd say it's certainly a big risk to Intel. For one, a lot of Intel customers are going in-house with chip design. Apple on its own might not hurt much, but add a few more like Amazon or Google, and things can really unravel. If you're an integrated chip designer and you lose volume, you're in for a lot of pain. The thing that defines Amazon in recent years is their desire to make everything a third party service (AWS, Fulfillment, etc) and they may in fact do that for their own chips. So while Apple may never sell their chips to anyone, Amazon may decide to enter the merchant chip business (if they decide it's not a competitive advantage). Maybe they wouldn't sell it to Microsoft or Google, but certainly other companies that they don't compete with that operate their own servers (Facebook). And then Intel would really be losing volume.

stcredzero 8y ago
The thing that defines Amazon in recent years is their desire to make everything a third party service (AWS, Fulfillment, etc) and they may in fact do that for their own chips. AWS was Amazon monetizing its own infrastructure. Maybe they're thinking of monetizing AWS's infrastructure? Instead of being in the gold rush, sell the pickaxes and backpacks in a general store. Then, when people realize there's a lot of money in those stores, start selling store shelves and offer wholesale logistics.
- justicezyx 8y ago
  > AWS was Amazon monetizing its own infrastructure. AWS builds infrastructure and monetize them. AWS's hardware usage far exceeds what they need for their other businesses.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- thinkling 8y ago
  AWS wasn't Amazon.com's infrastructure. The store didn't run on AWS for a long time. I believe it was more Amazon monetizing spare hardware capacity.