6 ms·

I would have thought Apple was a better strategic fit for Arm and likely to be able to pay bigger bucks too.

by spzb 6y ago

ksherlock 6y ago
Apple helped create ARM, as we know it, in 1990. They sold off their remaining stake around 2000 as they were beleaguered and needed the money. They chose not to buy in 2016, when SoftBank did.
mantap 6y ago
I don't think Apple would be allowed to buy ARM, there would be serious competition implications.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  And you think a company like like Nvidia (another hardware company) owning the same tech doesn't have precisely the same competition implications?
wmf 6y ago
People are speculating that Nvidia might end Arm core licensing, but Apple would definitely shut it down. Apple's culture is totally incompatible with Arm's business model.
- DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
  That doesn't preclude Apple owning it but operating it as an independent subsidiary. Even if it wasn't a subsidiary Apple already operates some divisions and teams differently, such as its Webkit team (one of the few teams where employees are allowed to have Github.com user accounts...)
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    Many employees are allowed to have GitHub accounts; since they used it prior to being hired :P The WebKit team uses GitHub because this is where web standards development happens.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  What how would Apple shutdown what Nvidia is doing? If they buy ARM they can stop selling licenses for it if they like. Of course they have to honor any prior contracts with other customers but when those run out, adios. Apple has their own license to use ARM architecture/ISA as long as they like, so what Nvidia does when they own ARM is really no concern to the fruit company
  - wmf 6y ago
    I mean if Apple buys Arm, Apple will shut down Arm. No A80, no N3, no X3, etc.
  - fulafel 6y ago
    Do you have a reference about Apple having a perpetual license? I just found many articles that claimed they have an ARM "architecture license" but no specifics, and 8 years ago in 2012 ARM PR'd the deal as "long term" which might be relatively close to today.
perardi 6y ago
Besides the screaming anti-trust issues they’d run into, that’s not really Apple’s business model, is it? Selling IP to other companies? I get they would want to control their own ISA, but I can almost imagine them creating their own, versus buying ARM and then being forced to maintain existing licenses.
- klelatti 6y ago
  Except they owned almost 50% of Arm in the 1990s and were very supportive of their business model.
  - SahAssar 6y ago
    Back then apple's business was quite different. They licensed their OS, they collaborated on stuff like the pippin, they were not sure if their future was in software or hardware. The apple now is a very different beast.
    - perardi 6y ago
      Yup. That was also the Mac clone era of Apple. There is none of that DNA left.
- manquer 6y ago
  Why should they continue the ARM model ? . They could shutdown that revenue stream, keeping competitors behind on chip design to justify the huge premium on apple devices is worth that kind of money.
valuearb 6y ago
There is no strategic fit for ARM at Apple. They have a perpetual license already and design their own chips. They don’t need the customer and antitrust headaches to pay over 10x revenues for the ARM licensing business.
- manquer 6y ago
  I am not sure any antitrust concerns would remotely be applicable in the case of an apple buy.there is no overlap of ARM biz to apple. Same as google or MS buying phone manufacturers and shutting down/selling parts they don't like. Apple could shutdown the licensing just to keep competitors behind, if they did that it would set back all their android competitors by 5-10 years atleast and potentially fragment the chip market . Maintaining the iphone chip dominance is definitely worth 40B .
  - valuearb 6y ago
    Their competitors already have their licenses. They’d continue to develop newer versions, and Apple couldn’t stop them. Some fragmentation would occur (though they’d probably create an industry group to coordinate). So Apple would create minimal disruption and a huge antitrust case that they would lose. Why do you think Apple would be this dumb?

I would have thought Apple was a better strategic fit for Arm and likely to be able to pay bigger bucks too.

by spzb 6y ago

I would have thought Apple was a better strategic fit for Arm and likely to be able to pay bigger bucks too.

Apple helped create ARM, as we know it, in 1990. They sold off their remaining stake around 2000 as they were beleaguered and needed the money. They chose not to buy in 2016, when SoftBank did.

mantap 6y ago

I don't think Apple would be allowed to buy ARM, there would be serious competition implications.

stjohnswarts 6y ago
And you think a company like like Nvidia (another hardware company) owning the same tech doesn't have precisely the same competition implications?

wmf 6y ago

People are speculating that Nvidia might end Arm core licensing, but Apple would definitely shut it down. Apple's culture is totally incompatible with Arm's business model.

DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
That doesn't preclude Apple owning it but operating it as an independent subsidiary. Even if it wasn't a subsidiary Apple already operates some divisions and teams differently, such as its Webkit team (one of the few teams where employees are allowed to have Github.com user accounts...)
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Many employees are allowed to have GitHub accounts; since they used it prior to being hired :P The WebKit team uses GitHub because this is where web standards development happens.
stjohnswarts 6y ago
What how would Apple shutdown what Nvidia is doing? If they buy ARM they can stop selling licenses for it if they like. Of course they have to honor any prior contracts with other customers but when those run out, adios. Apple has their own license to use ARM architecture/ISA as long as they like, so what Nvidia does when they own ARM is really no concern to the fruit company
- wmf 6y ago
  I mean if Apple buys Arm, Apple will shut down Arm. No A80, no N3, no X3, etc.
- fulafel 6y ago
  Do you have a reference about Apple having a perpetual license? I just found many articles that claimed they have an ARM "architecture license" but no specifics, and 8 years ago in 2012 ARM PR'd the deal as "long term" which might be relatively close to today.

perardi 6y ago

Besides the screaming anti-trust issues they’d run into, that’s not really Apple’s business model, is it? Selling IP to other companies? I get they would want to control their own ISA, but I can almost imagine them creating their own, versus buying ARM and then being forced to maintain existing licenses.

klelatti 6y ago
Except they owned almost 50% of Arm in the 1990s and were very supportive of their business model.
- SahAssar 6y ago
  Back then apple's business was quite different. They licensed their OS, they collaborated on stuff like the pippin, they were not sure if their future was in software or hardware. The apple now is a very different beast.
  - perardi 6y ago
    Yup. That was also the Mac clone era of Apple. There is none of that DNA left.
manquer 6y ago
Why should they continue the ARM model ? . They could shutdown that revenue stream, keeping competitors behind on chip design to justify the huge premium on apple devices is worth that kind of money.

valuearb 6y ago

There is no strategic fit for ARM at Apple. They have a perpetual license already and design their own chips. They don’t need the customer and antitrust headaches to pay over 10x revenues for the ARM licensing business.

manquer 6y ago
I am not sure any antitrust concerns would remotely be applicable in the case of an apple buy.there is no overlap of ARM biz to apple. Same as google or MS buying phone manufacturers and shutting down/selling parts they don't like. Apple could shutdown the licensing just to keep competitors behind, if they did that it would set back all their android competitors by 5-10 years atleast and potentially fragment the chip market . Maintaining the iphone chip dominance is definitely worth 40B .
- valuearb 6y ago
  Their competitors already have their licenses. They’d continue to develop newer versions, and Apple couldn’t stop them. Some fragmentation would occur (though they’d probably create an industry group to coordinate). So Apple would create minimal disruption and a huge antitrust case that they would lose. Why do you think Apple would be this dumb?