Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Iphone Apple Hardware

Apple Gets Its First Batch of iPhone Chips From TSMC 45

Posted by timothy
from the pronounced-just-like-it-looks dept.
redletterdave (2493036) notes that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) has shipped its first batch of microprocessors to Apple as the iPhone maker looks to diversify its overseas suppliers. Apple will continue to rely on Samsung for its microprocessors, but as the rivalry between Apple and Samsung heats up in the mobile and soon wearable arenas, the deal with TSMC allows Apple to be less reliant on Samsung and therefore have more leverage with respect to price negotiations for future chips, as TSMC has supplanted Samsung Electronics as Apple's chief chipmaker for iPhones and iPads. Since 2011, Apple has been striking deals with other display and chip makers around Asia to reduce its dependence on Samsung. As a result of this slowdown in sales, Samsung on Monday announced operating income for its fiscal second quarter had sunk to a two-year low, blaming 'weak' sales of low- and medium-end smartphones, strong competition and subpar demand.
It may not be a household name like Intel or AMD, but TSMC is the world's biggest chip maker by revenue.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Gets Its First Batch of iPhone Chips From TSMC

Comments Filter:
  • by TWX (665546) on Thursday July 10, 2014 @01:08PM (#47425199)
    I suspect that a good part of Samsung's slowing sales is consumers that are tired of spending more money all of the time to do the same thing. I've got a Galaxy SII. It does everything that I need it to do. It's paid for. I don't foresee any needs that a newer phone would fulfill, so short of a broken phone or a paradigm shift I don't see a need to shell out several hundred dollars to have essentially the same functionality.

    Geek-chic likes to talk about and to chase the latest gadgets, but the hype really isn't as widespread as reports would indicate, and even those that have chased the newest have often gotten tired of doing it without any real, tangible improvements.
  • by gaiageek (1070870) on Thursday July 10, 2014 @02:17PM (#47425719) Homepage
    "... blaming 'weak' sales of low- and medium-end smartphones."

    I'd suggest that their weak sales has something to do with the fact that their phones are ridiculously overpriced. Samsung seems to think that they're the 'Apple' of Android phones and that they can price their offerings accordingly. Look at their Galaxy S4 Mini and just announced S5 Mini models: mid-range devices (both have only 1.5GB RAM) with flagship prices.

    Then there's Samsung's "budget" phones. They also just announced the Galaxy Ace 4 [gsmarena.com]. The most obvious difference from last year's Ace 3 [gsmarena.com]? They cut the RAM in half, from 1GB to 512MB. That's right, they actually made the specs worse. Maybe we should thank them for not making the processor slower, too (they both have 1GHz dual-cores).

    Meanwhile, we've hit the point of having very decent Android phones from the competition available for $100 or less purchased outright (see LG Optimus F6). The S4 Mini, now a year old, is still running $300+ purchased outright. Why would the average buyer spend an extra $200 for incremental upgrades like an 8MP camera vs 5MP, 1.5GB of RAM instead of 1GB?

    Samsung's had a great run, but I think we're seeing the beginning of the end, with the competition nipping at their ankles.

"Life, loathe it or ignore it, you can't like it." -- Marvin the paranoid android

Working...