6 ms·

Nothing stops Apple from giving no craps about ARM CPU roadmaps though. They could just license what they need and build a completely custom everything on top w

Nothing stops Apple from giving no craps about ARM CPU roadmaps though. They could just license what they need and build a completely custom everything on top without needing it to be a standard implementation in anyway. So long as whoever is buying ARM is legally mandated to provide licenses - Apple doesn't have to rely on them actually pushing out new CPUs/modules/features. Historically I think they have just licensed the ISA and built their own thing on top. Maybe they needed the Big.Little stuff in the past but for the future they seem to be confident enough not to need anything from ARM or do it themselves.

klelatti 6y ago
My impression (based on a talk with both Simon Seegars - ARM CEO - and Jeff Williams - Apple COO - onstage) is that the relationship is pretty close. You'd expect that ARM would be pretty responsive to the needs of one of its highest profile customers especially given the history and there is no reason why that would change with any sale.
- blinkingled 6y ago
  That's the current story - where ARM is independent. If a competitor buys it and decide to not invest as much in ARM or keep things for themselves that's where this discussion plays off. I was saying it won't matter much for Apple but on the other hand Apple buying them would be a much worse outcome for the industry as a whole.
  - klelatti 6y ago
    I'm reasomably sure that Apple does care about the ISA that will soon power 100% (to a reasonable approximation) of its products. My (less than fully clear) point was that there is a strong relationship there and that it's two way. Sure, Apple has escape routes if things go wrong but it's very very unlikely they will be needed.
    - pankajdoharey 6y ago
      So What Stops Apple from hiring the ARM Team and design the next generation of big.LITTLE independent of ARM, without actually purchasing ARM the company?
      - klelatti 6y ago
        If reports are correct they did hire some of the Imagination GPU design team. So they probably could but whilst the relationship is good the best of all worlds is a strong ARM team plus a strong team in-house.
        pankajdoharey 6y ago
        Actually Apple benefits if the ARM Core team isn't very good, the rest of the industry would suffer if Mali GPU's dont get upgrades. Already they are behind iPhones, a poor team at ARM Ensures competition doesn't catchup. But all this might change should NVIDIA buys it and adds their own GPUS to the SOC.
        klelatti 6y ago
        Lots of existing GPU alternatives already - including Nvidia (Tegra) so can't see this as a game changer.
        pankajdoharey 6y ago
        Nvidia Tegra is a rent seeking expensive chip. Nvidia has a habit of stopping people from using certain chips through EULA. None of the car manufacturers are using Nvidia Tegra in their autonomous drives for this reason. Even Tesla which started out with Tegra stopped using it.
  - pankajdoharey 6y ago
    I think if someone anyone who buys a 32+ Billion dollar company would want to get returns from it, so surely they won't stop investing. The problem really is if it is someone like NVIDIA then they have this rent seeking behaviour. Which almost everyone is trying to run away from. For instance In the cloud NVIDIA shuns the usage of its commodity GPU's through the use of EULA and force you to buy there expensive and overpriced Cloud GPU solution. This kind of behaviour effectively puts NVIDIA in the category of Ransomware. So I am only concerned that Nvidia doesn't buy it. Anyone else is fine.
    - wahern 6y ago
      > Anyone else is fine. Even Qualcomm?
      - pankajdoharey 6y ago
        Well Yeah forgot about them, Qualcomm too has this rent seeking behaviour with their Modems where they ask for a share of the profits from the phones. Maybe someone from the industry who doesn't rent seek.
fluffything 6y ago
> So long as whoever is buying ARM is legally mandated to provide licenses Why would they? With Intel, AMD, IBM with PowerPC, etc. CPU ISAs are not a monopoly. Whoever buys ARM might want to do that to start cranking up licensing fees, and might not give a damn if this results in customer loses.
- blinkingled 6y ago
  If you have a perpetual license like Apple and many others do - that's a mandate to honor it forever.
  - fluffything 6y ago
    The question is at which price. Those mandates _never_ fix the price. At best, they might restrict how often ARM is allowed to raise it, and maybe even by how much, but that would be it.

klelatti 6y ago

My impression (based on a talk with both Simon Seegars - ARM CEO - and Jeff Williams - Apple COO - onstage) is that the relationship is pretty close. You'd expect that ARM would be pretty responsive to the needs of one of its highest profile customers especially given the history and there is no reason why that would change with any sale.

blinkingled 6y ago
That's the current story - where ARM is independent. If a competitor buys it and decide to not invest as much in ARM or keep things for themselves that's where this discussion plays off. I was saying it won't matter much for Apple but on the other hand Apple buying them would be a much worse outcome for the industry as a whole.
- klelatti 6y ago
  I'm reasomably sure that Apple does care about the ISA that will soon power 100% (to a reasonable approximation) of its products. My (less than fully clear) point was that there is a strong relationship there and that it's two way. Sure, Apple has escape routes if things go wrong but it's very very unlikely they will be needed.
  - pankajdoharey 6y ago
    So What Stops Apple from hiring the ARM Team and design the next generation of big.LITTLE independent of ARM, without actually purchasing ARM the company?
    - klelatti 6y ago
      If reports are correct they did hire some of the Imagination GPU design team. So they probably could but whilst the relationship is good the best of all worlds is a strong ARM team plus a strong team in-house.
      - pankajdoharey 6y ago
        Actually Apple benefits if the ARM Core team isn't very good, the rest of the industry would suffer if Mali GPU's dont get upgrades. Already they are behind iPhones, a poor team at ARM Ensures competition doesn't catchup. But all this might change should NVIDIA buys it and adds their own GPUS to the SOC.
        klelatti 6y ago
        Lots of existing GPU alternatives already - including Nvidia (Tegra) so can't see this as a game changer.
        pankajdoharey 6y ago
        Nvidia Tegra is a rent seeking expensive chip. Nvidia has a habit of stopping people from using certain chips through EULA. None of the car manufacturers are using Nvidia Tegra in their autonomous drives for this reason. Even Tesla which started out with Tegra stopped using it.
- pankajdoharey 6y ago
  I think if someone anyone who buys a 32+ Billion dollar company would want to get returns from it, so surely they won't stop investing. The problem really is if it is someone like NVIDIA then they have this rent seeking behaviour. Which almost everyone is trying to run away from. For instance In the cloud NVIDIA shuns the usage of its commodity GPU's through the use of EULA and force you to buy there expensive and overpriced Cloud GPU solution. This kind of behaviour effectively puts NVIDIA in the category of Ransomware. So I am only concerned that Nvidia doesn't buy it. Anyone else is fine.
  - wahern 6y ago
    > Anyone else is fine. Even Qualcomm?
    - pankajdoharey 6y ago
      Well Yeah forgot about them, Qualcomm too has this rent seeking behaviour with their Modems where they ask for a share of the profits from the phones. Maybe someone from the industry who doesn't rent seek.

fluffything 6y ago

> So long as whoever is buying ARM is legally mandated to provide licenses Why would they? With Intel, AMD, IBM with PowerPC, etc. CPU ISAs are not a monopoly. Whoever buys ARM might want to do that to start cranking up licensing fees, and might not give a damn if this results in customer loses.

blinkingled 6y ago
If you have a perpetual license like Apple and many others do - that's a mandate to honor it forever.
- fluffything 6y ago
  The question is at which price. Those mandates _never_ fix the price. At best, they might restrict how often ARM is allowed to raise it, and maybe even by how much, but that would be it.