4 ms·

This is obviously about control. Apple's MO with every _smaller_ supplier has been: 1. Set up office down the road 2. Poach top engineers 3. Come up with some

This is obviously about control. Apple's MO with every _smaller_ supplier has been: 1. Set up office down the road 2. Poach top engineers 3. Come up with some excuse to cancel use of supplier and integrate in house. The media and fanboys are remarkably complicit, coming up with excuses for apple's behaviour and giving very favourable coverage. In this case, intel are too big for this trick to work and apple already have loads of ARM talent so it makes perfect sense to transition. I wouldn't rule out apple trying on the whole 'we don't need a license' thing any more with Nvidia but it's probably unlikely given their size. I worked at imagination technologies who was bankrupted by Apple doing this technique and whose GPUs are still used by them so I saw this and people's remarkable lack of attention on the incredibly consistent pattern of control first hand. While all of this is obviously true, I actually think it's great that intel and AMD are receiving some serious ISA competition and it will net benefit non-apple consumers too long run. Congrats to apple for pretty impressive technical work but I do wish more would see apple for the ruthless control freaks they are. At the end of the day I think rather mundanely it's really more about money than anything else.

klelatti 6y ago
That's very sad to hear. Could you explain how close Apple's GPU is to Imagination's and why Imagination wasn't able to protect their IP?
- barnacled 6y ago
  Their GPU _is_ imagination's GPU in my opinion. Heavily customised (they had a full ARM-like license to do so) but the fundamentals are all the same. Apple claimed that they'd completely reinvented a GPU that didn't rely on any hardware IP owned by IMG whatsoever, provided no evidence of that and recent phones have bug-for-bug compatibility (as far as I heard form a friend who ran some tests). I can't tell you 100% that it's not an entirely new GPU that was somehow completely reinvented from scratch but I can tell you I think that's highly unlikely. Imagination couldn't protect their IP because they couldn't afford the lengthily court case that would ensue. Note by the way Apple have quietly started licensing IP from IMG again, long after striking ~75% off the stock price and resulting in them being acquired by a private equity firm...
  - klelatti 6y ago
    Thanks - that's dreadful. It always seemed remarkable that Apple was able to come up with a leading GPU architecture without in some way infringing someones' IP (and that would be most likely to be Imagination's given the circumstances). I guess taking your biggest (ex)customer to court isn't something that any company would do lightly especially when that company has the deepest pockets in the world and you're not in the best financial position yourself. It's a shame that more light can't be shed in the press - if Apple cares about one thing it's their brand.
    - barnacled 6y ago
      No IMG would have happily taken them to court it just wasn't financially viable and apple have effectively infinite resources. IMG were fools to rely on apple so much but this isn't a new development. Apple have repeatedly done this same process to a number of suppliers. There was a good website that listed all of the offices apple opened near suppliers before cutting them off, but it went offline :( IMG should have been much more careful but instead went all-in splashing the cash they got from apple and acting like it was forever. Pretty dumb. Apple can rely on the media giving them positive coverage. At the time I was amazed at even how much benefit of the doubt even the BBC gave them (US company bankrupting a UK one you'd think they'd back the UK one eh?) I was also amused to be 'inside' a story discussed on HN, and unsurprised at how far off many were. Tons of apple rationalisation syndrome as usual and lots of 'how dare IMG be so arrogant' etc. The reality is Apple are extremely ruthless and have been trying to take control of everything for quite some time now.

klelatti 6y ago

That's very sad to hear. Could you explain how close Apple's GPU is to Imagination's and why Imagination wasn't able to protect their IP?

barnacled 6y ago
Their GPU _is_ imagination's GPU in my opinion. Heavily customised (they had a full ARM-like license to do so) but the fundamentals are all the same. Apple claimed that they'd completely reinvented a GPU that didn't rely on any hardware IP owned by IMG whatsoever, provided no evidence of that and recent phones have bug-for-bug compatibility (as far as I heard form a friend who ran some tests). I can't tell you 100% that it's not an entirely new GPU that was somehow completely reinvented from scratch but I can tell you I think that's highly unlikely. Imagination couldn't protect their IP because they couldn't afford the lengthily court case that would ensue. Note by the way Apple have quietly started licensing IP from IMG again, long after striking ~75% off the stock price and resulting in them being acquired by a private equity firm...
- klelatti 6y ago
  Thanks - that's dreadful. It always seemed remarkable that Apple was able to come up with a leading GPU architecture without in some way infringing someones' IP (and that would be most likely to be Imagination's given the circumstances). I guess taking your biggest (ex)customer to court isn't something that any company would do lightly especially when that company has the deepest pockets in the world and you're not in the best financial position yourself. It's a shame that more light can't be shed in the press - if Apple cares about one thing it's their brand.
  - barnacled 6y ago
    No IMG would have happily taken them to court it just wasn't financially viable and apple have effectively infinite resources. IMG were fools to rely on apple so much but this isn't a new development. Apple have repeatedly done this same process to a number of suppliers. There was a good website that listed all of the offices apple opened near suppliers before cutting them off, but it went offline :( IMG should have been much more careful but instead went all-in splashing the cash they got from apple and acting like it was forever. Pretty dumb. Apple can rely on the media giving them positive coverage. At the time I was amazed at even how much benefit of the doubt even the BBC gave them (US company bankrupting a UK one you'd think they'd back the UK one eh?) I was also amused to be 'inside' a story discussed on HN, and unsurprised at how far off many were. Tons of apple rationalisation syndrome as usual and lots of 'how dare IMG be so arrogant' etc. The reality is Apple are extremely ruthless and have been trying to take control of everything for quite some time now.