11 ms·
Apple's A7 is Made By Samsung
- bdcravens 13y agoInteresting for those curious about the new processor. The fact that it's Samsung, a company supposedly at odds with Apple, isn't much of a story. It's not even news: (from July 1!) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324682204578513882349940500.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732468220457851... They've provided parts to Apple for years, and their bottom line and stock price have been rewarded. (represents about 15-20% of their components sales) The mobile division and the components divisions in the company operate fairly separately. That's why the oft commented, "They should just stop shipping parts to Apple to punish them for the lawsuit!" is kinda ridiculous. When it was RUMORED that Samsung lost a significant contract for Apple chips to a competitor, they lost $10B in market cap: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/16/us-samsung-chips-idUSBRE84F0BT20120516 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/16/us-samsung-chips-i...
- junto 13y agoWhat is Samsung's primary stock ticker symbol?
- capkutay 13y agoThey trade in south korea so you wouldn't find it in the us markets.
- cocoflunchy 13y agoIt appears to be SSNLF, or 005930.KS? http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=005930.KS http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=005930.KS
- w1ntermute 13y agoSome more info: this is on the Korea Exchange[0], and it's Samsung Electronics only. 0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea_Exchange http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korea_Exchange
- math0ne 13y agoJust looking at that chart it seems like they aren't doing that great, how could that possibly be given they are doing so well in the mobile and laptop markets...
- capkutay 13y agoThey trade in south korea so you wouldn't find their stock in US markets if you searched for it there..
- fieldforceapp 13y agoWhat is interesting is that this reported $5B application processor contract with Samsung is likely drying up after the iPhone5S (plus next iPad rev?) as Apple transitions to TSMC. It therefore implies that all TSMC designs will likely be 64-bit, which will now likely change the planning for other pure-play foundries dreaming of that $5B order from Cupertino: http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1319218 http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1319218
- bsullivan01 13y ago>>That's why the oft commented, "They should just stop shipping parts to Apple to punish them for the lawsuit!" is kinda ridiculous. They can't just stop or they'll face bankruptcy by paying Apple damages. No doubt Apple made them sign an ironclad contract...and most likely a few years notice is part of it. Apple isn't stupid. Not to mention that Samsung isn't doing Apple any favors, they're making a fortune because of the Apple contract. If they decide not to renew it, that's their prerogative but I'm sure Apple has plan A and B ready. Someone else will gladly take their money
- ChuckMcM 13y agoI always felt they could take what ever the damages award ended up to be, divide that by the volume of chips they send Apple, And then raise the price per chip that much. Don't not ship, just make sure that the patent damages don't cause any hit to the bottom line.
- greedo 13y agoI'm pretty sure that Apple would have negotiated prices into the chip contract. After all, this isn't the US signing a cost plus defense contract.
- bsullivan01 13y agoI always felt they could take what ever the damages award ended up to be Like the other poster said, prices are almost certainly fixed--or else they'd face extortion as iPhone got more popular--but does anyone even dare calculate how much damages (including punitive) you have to pay Apple that's shipping some 100 million iPhones a year? Samsung and every corporation on earth would be bankrupt, not to mention that their stock would crash the minute word got out, almost certainly face DOJ, EU anti-trust and other issues etc etc. Samsung singed the contract and they have to abide by it or else... Not to start a war or anything, but Samsung decided to compete with their customer, not the other way around. Do we already need a reminder of pre-iPhone phones?
- ChuckMcM 13y ago
- Oculus 13y agoHow isn't Apple afraid that Samsung could steal their chip designs? Do they pick Samsung because they simply have no other option?
- melange 13y agoThey are afraid of this, and are moving away from Samsung as fast as they can, but indeed for now, Samsung is the only option.
- jevinskie 13y agoBecause there are IP laws that companies won't blatantly violate. External appearance notwithstanding.
- panacea 13y agoThe rift is a fabrication.
- sgarman 13y agoI think the threat of Apple taking their business elsewhere is larger then any gain from "stealing" the chip design.
- Camillo 13y agoChips are just rectangles, and they're not even rounded. Therefore Apple has no valid claim on any chip design. /s
- sanxiyn 13y agoChips are just rectangles, and softwares are just bits.
- Osmium 13y agoAt a guess, I imagine it's really difficult to rip off a chip design just by looking at raw circuit designs (unless you're copying the entire chip). Wouldn't it take a great amount of expertise to look at some plans for a chip and say "oh, that's why it works so well!"?
- stephengillie 13y agoSomehow, companies like Apple (and nVidia) get to call themselves "completely vertically integrated" even though they don't own any fabs. I've never understood this.
- leoc 13y agoThere's at least one claim out there that Apple has a fab now: http://semiaccurate.com/2013/07/12/apple-has-their-own-fab/ http://semiaccurate.com/2013/07/12/apple-has-their-own-fab/ . (I suppose one question is when Google will get one...)
- wwweston 13y ago"Completely" is not true, but maybe completeness isn't the important/essential advantage of verticals.
- stephengillie 13y agoI'm learning from my comment that "completely" is entirely relative to a group and their narrative.
- nwhitehead 13y agoI've always heard "vertically integrated" as a separate category from "IC design house". Supply chains are long and the endpoints vary depending on the context.
- sliverstorm 13y agoSamsung is considered completely vertically integrated by many, even though they don't mine their own raw materials or operate their own power plants to power their factories. I've never understood that either.
- bodski 13y agoI wouldn't be too sure! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Engineering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Engineering
- tzury 13y agoLet me figure this out: Samsung manufactures Touchscreen, CPUs and perhaps other chips for Apple, yet Apple sue them from time to time over software patents and design ideas. Can someone help me understand this?
- mikeash 13y agoSay you sell lumber, and I sell furniture, and buy a lot of my raw materials from you. You start making furniture too, and your furniture seems a little too inspired by mine, maybe going over the line of what's legal, so I sue you. However, your lumber is still top quality despite that, so I keep buying your lumber even while suing you over your furniture.
- bdcravens 13y agoIn your example, 15-20% of your lumber sales are to me, so regardless of what happens with the furniture situation, you still want to keep selling me lumber. It's a symbiotic relationship.
- macspoofing 13y agoWhich part is hard for you to understand? That Apple has patents that are applicable irrespective of the underlying hardware?
- mistercow 13y agoMaybe Apple leveraged some advantageous deal with them in exchange for not suing them anymore
- programminggeek 13y agoYes, when you are working with a company and sharing trade secrets only to have them turn around and take those secrets to make their own devices that compete directly with yours and then they make commercials making fun of said products and your customers, that doesn't really help the business relationship.
- 13y ago
- umsm 13y agoIf anyone is interested as to the feats of this processor, this is an interesting review: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/2 http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/2
- jasonlingx 13y agoNot sure if OP realises that the unsubscribe and edit your subscription links work for his account.
- argumentum 13y agomade != manufactured Title is a bit confusing.
- scrrr 13y agoApple CEO has a glass of wine with Samsung CEO, laughing while reading fanboys of both companies fight about which company is best. wink
- ihsw 13y agoSamsung and Apple are both massive companies with an immense amount of overlap, so one of them boycotting the other would be like the US boycotting China. It just doesn't make sense. Although it's only prudent that they still keep each-other at arms length, and scrutinize every business decision with the other.
- revelation 13y agoHuh? Is Apple running a fab in their backyard? What exactly do they own in terms of technology that others rely on?
- wmeredith 13y agoThey own a customer base willing to pay them billions of dollars per quarter.
- georgemcbay 13y agoThe suggestion was that the relationship is mutually beneficial, not that it was bi-directional in terms of components traded. Apple is like the USA to Samsung's China in this specific relationship in that the product (components in this case) pretty much goes one way, but both still rely on the relationship. Samsung makes some of the components Apple needs, Apple buys those components. Apple needs Samsung for inexpensive chip fab, Samsung needs Apple for the revenue provided in return.
- revelation 13y agoI think you are overestimating how much Samsung needs Apple as a customer. Gigantic companies as Samsung are simultaneously active in any number of large markets. They do not need single customers, they do not even need whole markets. They are essentially investment holdings that will move out and into markets as they mature or are commoditized.
- drawkbox 13y agoThey also make their retina displays and many components. http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/04/samsung-tablet-ipad-retina-display/ http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/04/samsung-tablet-ipad-r...
- kunai 13y agoI'm not sure how this is significant. Many of Apple's core technologies and hardware are produced by Samsung or with Samsung's help, e.g. Retina display for MacBook Pro, A4 and previous chips, and SSDs in the MacBook Pro and MacBook Aero. It's quite disappointing to see this on the frontpage, in all honesty.
- mikeash 13y agoThere was a lot of talk about the A7 being potentially made by another company. In that context, saying that nothing has changed is still significant.
- bdcravens 13y agoFanboys will be fanboys.
- seabrookmx 13y agoI agree. I feel like I see this posted all the time (in comments on various threads) and there's always a large group that is shocked and/or don't understand. It's silly.
- soci 13y agoIMHO Samsung and Apple compete on marketing and not in technology. That's why you can find Samsung chips in Apple devices. So, the vertical integration Samsung has in the manufacturing process is not great competitive advantage. However, Apple is strongly vertical integrated in the retail side. This makes a difference.
- jack-r-abbit 13y agoMy favorite part about this is that Gruber has been repeating the speculation that the chip was not manufactured by Samsung. He turned out to be wrong. When others are wrong with their "Claim Chowder" (as he likes to call it) he shits all over then. But this is all you get from him when he is wrong: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/09/20/a7 http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/09/20/a7
- melange 13y agoGruber reported the speculation as just that - speculation. He didn't write crazy opinions about how 'Samsung was doomed' or how 'Samsung's CEO should step down' etc. etc. His swift acknowledgement of when he was wrong was entirely appropriate. The people who be calls out with 'claim chowder' make ludicrous assertions, and never acknowledge they were wrong. Very different.
- jack-r-abbit 13y agoHe has used that speculation to kind of refute other people's different speculations. So he did more than just report it... he bought into it and used it to tell other people they were wrong.
- pohl 13y agoThat would be interesting to read. Can you cite a specific instance?
- jack-r-abbit 13y agohttp://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/09/17/dilger-misek http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/09/17/dilger-misek
- pohl 13y agoI'm disappointed. I thought you would link to something where he told someone that they were wrong. Instead, he said conditionally that if the speculation pans out, then he "may be" wrong about a reason why something was observed. It wasn't a refutation, but just offering an alternative hypothesis. That seems like a perfectly guarded statement, self-aware of its speculative basis.
- gdilla 13y agoCorrection. Apple's A7 is fabricated by Samsung. It is wholly designed by Apple. They're just using Samsung's foundry.
- Mikeb85 13y agoIt's actually mostly designed by ARM holdings. Apple simply designs the SoC layout and chooses the components.
- mendocino 13y agoThe GPU is a design from Imagination Technologies, the CPU is an Apple design. What part of the SoC is "mostly designed by ARM"?
- Mikeb85 13y agoThe CPU. Apple licenses ARM's reference designs, then creates an SoC around that.
- mendocino 13y agoThe last SoC where this has been the case is the A5 (using the the ARM Cortex-A9 MP). The Apple A6 and A7 don't use ARM cores and neither does Qualcomm in their Snapdragon SoCs.
- seabrookmx 13y agoARM just comes up with the instruction set. The cores are still designed by Samsung, Qualcomm, NVidia, etc.
- nicholassmith 13y agoSamsung as a chip fab is not the same Samsung that designs phones. They fall under the same name umbrella, but likely they have individual targets to meet annually, and Apple is one of the biggest chip consumers in town. It's a good fit, I never get why people are surprised by that.
- ek 13y agoIt's also fun that they found the M7, considering that the initial teardown left iFixit with the impression that it was just some marketing buzzword for a part of the A7. As has been mentioned in the thread, it is still an off-the-shelf component, but at least we know the truth now (that the "M7" really still is a separate IC).