> "i still don't think they would want to give apple a CPU platform that was undoubtedly better than their flagship phone so soon after releasing it" You need

> "i still don't think they would want to give apple a CPU platform that was undoubtedly better than their flagship phone so soon after releasing it" You need to bear in mind that the division of Samsung that sells the chips is totally separate from the division that sells the phones. The silicon division doesn't particularly care about the phone division - they care about their bottom line alone. And Apple turning up with a dump truck of cash, which is basically what they've been doing to secure component supplies, is not something they wil turn down lightly. Apple is somewhat unique among consumer electronics companies in that it is very singly focused. Samsung, along with Sony, Microsoft, and others, are multi-conglomerates, with vast reaching business interests, and Samsung's chip fab division only really cares about the profits their division is making. Money from Apple, money from an internal cross-charge: profit is profit. > "3. ARM aren't really a supplier to apple, they just licence designs. ARM have no manufacturing expertise." I don't think this is what you mean. You mean ARM have no expertise manufacturing at scale. ARM have extensive manufacturing expertise, because they need to supply reference designs that work in production. ARM has manufacturing expertise because they need to produce designs that are easy to manufacture.