Report: Apple To Switch From Samsung to TSMC For ARM CPU Production 178
another random user writes "Apple is planning to shift production of its ARM-based microprocessors from Samsung to the Taiwanese chip-baking giant TSMC as early as next year, according to a report by the China Economic News Service (CENS). The report cites CitiGroup Global Markets analyst J.T. Hsu as saying that TSMC will be Apple's sole supplier of 20nm quad-core processors, with volume production to begin in the fourth quarter of 2013. He also noted that Apple began its 20nm chip-verfication process at TSMC in August of this year. Hsu told CENS that the future quad-core chips were intended for Apple's 'iPad, iTV and even Macbook,' turning up the heat on two rumors that have been simmering for months: that Apple is planning a move into the television market, and that an ARM-based MacBook is in the works."
Well if they want ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well if they want to be independent from Samsung, that's the way to go of course. ...
This thing is a new reaction to this trial which bothers both of us, normal people vs Apple fanboys
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
o please apple won't make a tv (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Well if they want ... (Score:1, Insightful)
I don't even own a phone yet I seem morally obliged to support Android over Apple.
Why would that be? Google is the world's biggest advertising company, and all their actions are aimed at hurting companies that might interfere with that. That's why you have Google+ attacking Facebook, Google Apps attacking Microsoft, and Android attacking Apple. None of these are there to make money for Google, they are just meant to keep their competitors busy. Google just spent $12 billion on Motorola, to get patents to attack Apple and Microsoft even more, in a business where Google doesn't actually make any meaningful money, just to attack companies that might eventually get into the advertising business.
So what makes you morally obliged to support an OS created by the world's biggest enemy of privacy solely for the purpose to hurt its competitors?
Re:Well if they want ... (Score:2, Insightful)
They're the only ones that let you run what code you want on your device without needing to get it pre-approved by the mothership? They release the source for their operating system (except for that one release where the engineers were embarrassed by it but management shoved it out the door)?
Re:Well if they want ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Google only uses its patents defensively, never attacking like Apple does. Its products compete by being better and more innovative, not through litigation.
They are far from perfect but Apple has actually gone over to the dark side.
Re:Well if they want ... (Score:1, Insightful)
Why would that be? Google is the world's biggest advertising company, and all their actions are aimed at hurting companies that might interfere with that. That's why you have Google+ attacking Facebook, Google Apps attacking Microsoft, and Android attacking Apple. None of these are there to make money for Google, they are just meant to keep their competitors busy. Google just spent $12 billion on Motorola, to get patents to attack Apple and Microsoft even more, in a business where Google doesn't actually make any meaningful money, just to attack companies that might eventually get into the advertising business.
You keep using that word but you clearly don't know what it means.
Re:Well if they want ... (Score:0, Insightful)
Very true. But it is a bit of a zero sum game isn't it? Along with all that freedom you get a lot of security problems. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in love with the tight grip apple has on their kingdom but you have to admit it zero sums the other way.
Made in Taiwan (Score:0, Insightful)
Made in Korea -> Made in Taiwan
This means they will sell cheap crap for big money. Who would buy it? Oh...
Re:No ARM MacBook (Score:3, Insightful)
a full blown laptop to compete with Microsoft's Surface
That's not how Apple works. Their business model is to identify market segments with no competitors, enter them, hype their product until it's identified with that market segment, and then move on to the next one before the race to the bottom takes over.
Re:Well if they want ... (Score:2, Insightful)
I prefer to be treated as an adult, not as a child. I'll be responsible for security on my own device, thank you.
Re:No ARM MacBook (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft couldn't even make a clean transition between 32 and 64 bit.
Difference is Apple could release 64-bit on their terms, Microsoft is at the whims of the hardware manufacturers.
Apple could put out the G5 series as they saw fit. Microsoft is expected to throw something together the moment the hardware becomes available.
Plus having used XP 64-bit since it was available. Most of the issues were with incompatible drivers. With Apple that is not a problem, their is only one or two of each piece of hardware that is your entire "options" so producing a dozen drivers verses having to produce hundreds by all the hardware manufacturers.
Re:No ARM MacBook (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not how Apple works. Their business model is to identify market segments with no competitors, enter them, hype their product until it's identified with that market segment,
I guess it worked on you then since you've forgotten all these MP3 players (Creative etc.), phones (Nokia, Sony Ericsson etc.), tablets (Microsoft etc.) that was before Apple. Of course they've picked their angle of attack to find trendsetters and increase market share quick, but I'd say Apply has pushed a fair number of competitors aside. They're really not into green-fielding completely new types of products, they ambush niches and rapidly increase their size into big markets. I do agree they're looking to be the biggest player though they won't start anything where they'll be second or third fiddle.
Re:No ARM MacBook (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, that's something else I've noticed about Apple. Their hype/marketing/RDF/whatever is so good that many laypeople mistakenly believe that Apple invented a lot of that stuff. GUI, MP3 player, smartphone, thin tablet (Archos was trending in that direction before the iPad), touchscreens, multi-touch, pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, and on and on. Most of my non-tech friends think Apple invented all of those, even though they invented none of it. The last time I've seen mass misunderstanding to this extent was right after Windows 95, when a lot of my non-tech friends thought Microsoft invented the Internet.
The one thing Apple is really good at though is understanding laypeople. They know how to design and product and UI so that the average Joe will know how to use it and even enjoy it. The opposite of most Linux distros. I think that's one of the reasons they're disliked by technophiles. Technophiles would rather try to teach laypeople how the technology works. Apple just dumbs it down to their level. Laypeople of course prefer the latter approach, which is why Linux on the desktop is still a niche market.