WSJ: Apple finally ties the knot with TSMC
According to the latest information, it appears that both sides had wanted to pull the trigger on this deal much earlier, but at the time TSMC could not produce chips with the power and speed required by Apple. The deal that both parties agreed to will not take effect until next year which means that at least for one more cycle, Apple's new mobile devices will be powered by arch enemy rival Samsung. Apple still sources some of its components from the Korean manufacturer, but has turned to firms such as Toshiba for flash memory, and LG Display, Japan Display and Sharp for panels.
TSMC started talking with Apple as early as 2010 about supplying the company with chips, but company CEO Morris Chang turned down Apple's request to have manufacturing space set aside for it and also rejected Apple's offer to make an investment in the project.
While Wednesday's story said that TSMC would start rolling out its 20nm Ax chips by this September, Friday's report says that the silicon won't be available to Apple until next year leaving Apple no choice but to stick with Samsung for the remainder of 2013.
source: WSJ via AppleInsider
1. PapaSmurf (Posts: 5807; Member since: 14 May 2012)
Not into effect until next year? Let's see how this goes for both Samsung and Apple.
4. darkkjedii (Posts: 8885; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Honestly, I think they'll miss each other Smurf. Samsung makes awesome chips, apple sells tons of phones. Match made in heaven, if they could just get along.
9. joey_sfb (Posts: 1859; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
Apple grand vision for the future has been narrow to a crosshair that is set on destroying Android. A fast moving target. So until Android is totally destroyed we could expect no innovation from Apple. Expect more 2007 tech products to be served to their fans.
16. darkkjedii (Posts: 8885; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
I agree with you, other than the 2007 tech part. I think apples being forced by the advancements in tech, and is moving forward. To big of a company not to, act when forced. Think about it, how far would Chevy let Porsche move the 911 ahead of the Vette, before acting. I'm using that analogy, cuz the 911 and Vette have been rivals for a while. And the 911 forced Chevy to create the second gen ZR-1 in 1990, which subsequently blew the doors off the 911, testarosa, and contach...not sure if I spelled that rite.
17. Berzerk000 (Posts: 3503; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)
I never understood Apple's logic there. They are constantly suing the manufacturer that makes the heart of all their products, seems kind of stupid.
22. rusticguy (Posts: 2810; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
Why are you surprised. They are STUPID.
27. darkkjedii (Posts: 8885; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Seems very stupid to me too. I just wish I new all, that was going on behind closed doors between these two giants. It's gotta be more to this thane meets the eye. Berzerk it's like when does it end?
28. Berzerk000 (Posts: 3503; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)
I think I've said something like this to you before; the only way it will end is if one of them buries the other in money. It's sad that it's the only solution, but that's the world of litigation.
31. darkkjedii (Posts: 8885; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Very true. I like your commentary also bro...intelligent.
2. alpinejason (Posts: 249; Member since: 06 Sep 2011)
about time apple moves away from that copy cat SAMSUNG
3. jdoee100 (Posts: 261; Member since: 04 Jun 2013)
lol..I'm gonna have fun watching this unfold. I read somewhere that apple came back to samsung for displays or some other component, because other companies couldn't quite produce like samsung. Once, TSMC can't produce chips like samsung, apple'll come back with their tail between their legs. If it were me, I wouldn't take them back. But, samsung'll probably take them back, but not with the same sweet terms as before. Samsung will end up laughing all the way to the bank.lol
5. darkkjedii (Posts: 8885; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Why are you lol'ing, with you're entire post being pure anti apple speculation?
11. joey_sfb (Posts: 1859; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
well I am anti Apple because Apple is anti consumer. if they play it fair like the rest of the major brands without their nonsensical lawsuit I might even buy their latest Mac book air.
13. jdoee100 (Posts: 261; Member since: 04 Jun 2013)
Me too. Believe or not, I really like Mac air. Their pad is awesome.
15. darkkjedii (Posts: 8885; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Ok makes sense, instead of people's usual childish banter. You actually have something to say.
6. darkkjedii (Posts: 8885; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
And why, and how could you have fun watching this unfold? Do you have nothing else to do? IJS...
7. jdoee100 (Posts: 261; Member since: 04 Jun 2013)
Relax. What's it to you whether i laugh or smile? What's it to you how i spend my leisure time? If you don't like it, then ignore it. Yikes, man.
Besides, I just like watching arrogant companies like apple go down in flames.
10. jdoee100 (Posts: 261; Member since: 04 Jun 2013)
no prob. My statements have more acid than necessary because of samsung haters/trolls, "copy cat SAMSUNG," "samscam,",etc,,,
14. darkkjedii (Posts: 8885; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Understood, I'm not one by the way. You're rite though there's too much hate against Samsung, due to their constant progress.
18. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 571; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)
Apple isn't the one who stands to lose $10 billion here. I'll let you guess who does.
30. roscuthiii (Posts: 1658; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
No... what Apple stands to lose could be much more. They've tried recently branching out to other suppliers and came back to Samsung for a reason: production yield and quality control.
A bad batch parts from TSMC or not meeting the necessary supply numbers could do some serious tarnishing of Apple's brand. Or at least throw another big haymaker to AAPL.
Meanwhile... it's not like Samsung is not selling phones. Being able to divert resources from making Apple's parts to their own parts (or even another company if they want to take advantage of the opening) could be a boon to Samsung as long as it generates equal to or more than what Apple was paying. Of which they are known for typically paying suppliers far less then others.
I'd never thought that the two rivals of such competitiveness should have gotten into bed together as much as they did in the first place... but now that they are, I'm not sure that getting out of bed is that great a move either. A marriage made in Silicon Hell.
32. jdoee100 (Posts: 261; Member since: 04 Jun 2013)
"A marriage made in Silicon Hell," hey, i like that. Apple probably didn't think samsung would be able to come up as fast as they have. Besides, no other companies were willing to meet apple's terms. Despite high risks, samsung took big risks and it paid off for them in full spades. However, apple created a monster competitor in the process.
It was a marriage that made all the sense at the time for both of them. Samsung probably took most of the risks though, because if iphone had not panned out, samsung would've been left with huge overcapacity issues. For apple, their worst nightmare came true.
Could it have been avoided? Who knows? But, apple definitely would not have enjoyed the same smooth sailing last few years without samsung.
26. WHoyton1 (Posts: 1616; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)
You my friend are the definition of a r*tard..... Name one product Samsung have copied from apple...,,
12. MrMagoo (Posts: 12; Member since: 28 Jun 2013)
Bad news, samsung chips are awesome, I think this is a mistake.
19. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 571; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)
Samsung just manufactures the chips, they don't design them. Unlike Samsung, Apple has an ARM architecture license, so they can actually design custom ARM silicon. Samsung is just a spec manufacturer.
20. ama3654 (Posts: 233; Member since: 27 Nov 2012)
Care to explain further, i see Samsung licensee everywhere
24. rantao333 (Posts: 140; Member since: 21 May 2013)
"A processor license is the license to use a microprocessor or GPU that ARM has designed. You can’t really change the design, but you get to implement it however you’d like. For example, SAMSUNG'S EXYNOS 5 Octa implements four ARM Cortex A7 cores and four ARM Cortex A15 cores - these are processor licenses. ARM will provide guidelines as to how to implement these designs in silicon, "
"The final option is an architecture license. Here, ARM would license you one of its architectures (e.g. ARMv7, ARMv8) and you’re free to take that architecture and implement it however you’d like. This is what Qualcomm does to build Krait, and what Apple did to build Swift."
APPLE clearly has better technology in designing chip than SAMSUNG, and this is FACTS!
25. ama3654 (Posts: 233; Member since: 27 Nov 2012)
But why are Samsung processors much faster and battery efficient than Apple processors?, the first A15 processors came from Samsung, Apple don't have the technology to manufacture their own processor someone has to do it for them?, and why did they have to move to Intel for laptop and desktop processors, i think they just can't cope.
29. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 571; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)
It's not, literally, an apples to apples comparison. There are a lot of variables (clock speed, architecture, core count, etc) that are different, and design constraints and optimizations to take into account.
As for not physically fabbing their own chips, foundry operations are cost prohibitive and often not profitable unless gray is your only business. ARM, themselves, fabs zero silicon, nor does AMD, Nvidia, Apple, or IBM. That is purely business decision.
21. PermanentHiatus (Posts: 229; Member since: 22 Jun 2012)
TSMC's logo is hideous.
But then again, it matches iOS 7's icons perfectly.
23. rusticguy (Posts: 2810; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
Yup absolutely flat design ... not dne in rain bow clors though.