Slashdot Mirror


Apple To Buy ARM?

gyrogeerloose writes "An article in the London Evening Standard claims that Apple has made an $8 billion offer to acquire ARM Holdings. For those few Slashdotters who don't already know, ARM makes the processor chips that power Apple's iPad, iPhone, and iPod Touch. However, ARM processors are also used by other manufacturers, including Palm and, perhaps most significantly, companies building Android phones. This explains why Apple might be willing to spend so much on the deal — almost 20% of its cash reserves. Being able to control who gets to use the processors (and, more importantly, who doesn't) would give Apple a huge advantage over its competitors."

19 of 695 comments (clear)

  1. Buying ARM for a leg? by mmkkbb · · Score: 5, Funny

    A leg is about 20% of your body mass, so...

    --
    -mkb
    1. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by teh31337one · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This will be an Antitrust goldmine. And people say Microsoft are evil. Urgh.

    2. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      ARM was founded by Apple and Acorn (of BBC Micro fame). During the 90s when Apple was in danger of going bust it sold off its stake in ARM. Now that Apple has a few quid in the bank, it wants ARM back. Assuming the rumours are true. Anyway, it's not so strange.

    3. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by sznupi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, Microsoft are evil.

      That said, the summary has gross understatement...it's not just Palm or Android phones, it's essentially all phones. And unspeakable number of other consumer devices (heck, in your PC there are most likely more ARM cores than x86 ones...)

      This is one deal which EU might not let through.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by teh31337one · · Score: 5, Informative

      How is this an antitrust goldmine? Apple doesn't sell the most phones and it doesn't sell the most dollars from phone sales. Your comment makes no sense.

      Almost all smartphones use ARM processors. Nexus one, HTC desire, HTC incredible, Sony Ericson Xperia x10, iPhone, iPad etc, the list goes on. Even Nintendo DS and Nvidia's Tegra chip uses ARM processors. If Apple bought ARM, they'd have control over prices and royalties.

    5. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Except that unfortunately Apple doesn't have the market share necessary for anti trust to kick in."
      But ARM does.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I doubt Apple would want to buy ARM and then kill the sales to ARM's other customers. If they're going to spend $8 billion just to piss it away by killing ARM's revenue they'd be better served by spending the money to subsidize iPhone sales by cutting the price.

      Even as a Mac & iPhone user I don't want Apple to acquire ARM. It could set back the competition considerably while they move to new chips or architectures ... and competition is what drives all the device makers to improve their products. Without someone to chase and/or breathing down their neck Apple won't be driven to make advances in their products at the pace they should.

    7. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by DrgnDancer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I just don't know where to begin. There are several points around which the "Apple is evil, this will kill the industry" hysteria fails:

      1)This is a rumor. It's a completely unsubstantiated rumor. It may be true, there are a number of reasons it could be a good move for Apple, but it's sure as Hell not a fact yet. Calling Apple "evil" for something they may or may not even be doing seems a bit harsh.

      2) In the event that this rumor turn out to be true, the deal will face regulatory scrutiny from agencies in (at the minimum) the US and EU. Probably several Asian countries as well. So assuming that Apple is considering this bit of "evil", several country's regulatory agencies will have to be either "evil" or "stupid" before it becomes a problem.

      3) Assuming that Apple is really planning to make this bid, and it gets by the regulators, there are lots of reasons Apple would buy ARM, then simply continue with business as usual. ARM is hugely profitable. Buying them, then continuing their business model, would simply increase Apple's profits. Of course they would guide ARM's development to make things that Apple needs in particular, but a lot of those thing are the same as any other CPU customer would want. In this scenario Apple, at worst, is getting to guide ARM's dev model while getting their own licenses at a discount. Nice for them, but not game changing.

      4) Assuming the worst case scenario, Apple buys ARM, gets it past the regulators, then takes their new found power and starts abusing it; is it really all that bad? They won't simply be able to cancel all the license agreements ARM already has. They'll have to slowing cut off the supply of ARM tech to the industry as old agreements expire and new tech isn't licensed. Given that it will have to be a slow process, there's plenty of time for a new player (or players) to simply inch into the niche as ARM is inched out. I'm sure Intel, AMD, or some other company no one has heard of yet would love to take over ARM's spot.

      TL;DR: This is a rumor not a fact. It'll have to get by the regulators if it happens. If it turns out that it is real, and the regulators go for it, Apple may not abuse it. There's plenty of good reasons to leave things as they are mostly. If all of the worst possibilities occur, it still doesn't seem like it would be that awful for the industry, though it would certainly shake things up.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    8. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Some of the phones use Qualcomm's Snapdragon which is not ARM based.

      Yes it is. Qualcomm buy the most expensive ARM license, which gets you all of the sources for the design and the ability to change anything. The Snapdragon is a modified Cortex A8 (reworked FPU pipeline and a few other changes). It uses the ARM instruction set and is based on a design licensed from ARM.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    9. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by Ion+Berkley · · Score: 5, Informative

      Its a quite accurate statement to say Apple is a founder. ARM originally stood for "Acorn RISC machine" and was developed internally at Acorn. When ARM was incorporated as an independent entity it was done so with Acorn and Apple as 40% owners and VLSI technology (at that time the sole manufacturer) as a 20% owner. At that time the name was changes to "Advanced RISC Machines". Apple had more than Newton in the big picture at that time including laser printers. The ARM610 was indeed developed specifically for the Newton, with a special MMU by ARM as one of its earliest projects. ARM cpu's (in many case multiple ones) are in every cellular handset I'm aware of in the last decade not just smartphones. ARM cpu's are being used by most of the next wave of startup companies in low power server design..look at Smoothstone for an example. And of course they are making serious inroads in Netbook design, both NVIDIA's Tegra and Qualcomm's Snapdragon are giving Intel plenty sleepless nights right now. The last ARM design I did put an ARM7n in every electricity meter...in other words our entire tech world is already built around this architecture.

      The royalties on the older designs are tiny and not going to be affected by an acquisition, don't expect any significant cost changes to be noticeable at retail even if it were possible to renegotiate the royalty schedules. After some stagnation in the last decade where ARM struggled to break out of the the low cost embedded space the company is suddenly looking strong again and it could be quite possible that Apple wants to go this way as an insurance policy, because they fear other big stalkers might acquire a company they are increasingly strategically reliant on.

    10. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by Sandbags · · Score: 5, Informative

      Most currently marketed phones use ARM, perhaps. This is FAR from a monopoly on production however. In fact, if it was, ARM would already likely be under investigation if there was any fishy stuff since Apple is so small comparatively.

      So, here's the current line-up:
      - ARM (11, Cortex A8, ARMv7, etc)
      - nVidia (tegra, Tegra 2, which has existing license on the ARM core architecture set that can not be taken away by a merger with Apple).
      - Marvell XScale (also ARM based, but licenses only instructions, not the core architecture).
      - Qualcomm Scorpion (an ARM clone, also licensed, combined with ATI graphics
      - Intel Atom
      - Moorestown MeeGo.
      - Samsung. yet another licenses ARM core design, but using alternative architecture.
      So, not exactly a monopoly (not even a duopoly) but, there's more...

      Don't think for a second ATI is not designing their own. Rumor has it Big Blue is also...

      Then, there's other issues, most notably FRAND. ARM is a reference architecture, and is already open licensed. That license must be offered to ALL comers provided fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory pricing, or Apple would be in a world of shit.

      Then, there's the idea that it is COMPLETELY LEGAL to be a monopoly! It is only illegal to ABUSE monopoly position to unfairly stifle competition or emergent alternatives. Since they're already covered by FRAND, it's pretty hard for Apple to do anything aggressive that way.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    11. Re:Buying ARM for a leg? by bkr1_2k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Prices will never go below a certain level. If the unwashed masses start using Apple products then the aura of smug superiority will vanish.

      Have you looked around? Everyone and their brother has an iPod or iPhone these days. I hate to break it to you, but the "unwashed masses" have been using Apple products for the last couple of years. The only "aura of smug superiority" I've seen about them are the Mac commercials and the attitudes of people here on slashdot.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
  2. Please don't... by will.perdikakis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ARM is one of the better generic processors for embedded and small systems. Apple purchasing them may (read: will) limit the usage of ARM or price them out of the market.

    As much as I appreciate what Apple is doing with mobile computing, a move like this (assuming they change the current state of ARM) is going to affect the industry (even markets that do not directly compete with Apple) in a non-positive way.

    I hope this doesn't happen, but if it does, I hope they leave the current ISA/availability/pricing scheme alone and just use ARM resources to improve their own products, but that is unlike Apple.

    --
    -Will P.
  3. Re:They wont be having my shares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You do know the company was jointly founded by Apple, Acorn and VLSI in the first place?

  4. Antitrust by necro81 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Being able to control who gets to use the processors (and, more importantly, who doesn't) would give Apple a huge advantage over it's competitors.

    And it is for this very simple reason that it would be blocked on antitrust grounds. Even if the slightly more lax regulators in the US would permit it, you can bet the Europeans wouldn't (ARM Holdings is based in the UK).

  5. Qualcomm, now Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Last week there was a rumor that Qualcomm was going to buy ARM. Now there's speculation about Apple.

    It's possible that Steve Jobs took the Qualcomm rumors seriously, and bid for ARM just to make sure that Qualcomm didn't end up buying the company.

    http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/arm-holdings-apple-nokia-oem-semiconductors/3/8/2010/id/27176

  6. Re:Nice Qoute by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ya I don't know why the assumption is that someone else wouldn't step in to the market. Someone like, say, Intel perhaps. Right now, there isn't a ton of interest in new designs in that space because of ARM. They work well, are low powered, and licensed such that they can be implemented cheaply by many people. Intel used to use ARM architecture in their Xscale chips (which are quite popular) before they sold that division to Marvell. As such, there's not a big reason to try and muscle in to the market, you probably aren't likely to make a lot.

    However, if Apple decides to play king dick and charge a lot or simply say "Nope, nobody but us can have these chips," well that changes things. It isn't as though all the other mobile phone makers will shrivel up and die, rather they'll look for new hardware and someone like Intel will be happy to provide it for them.

    However, that aside, you have to consider that businesses are often very careful about the licenses they make. When licensing an architecture like ARM, they may well get a full architecture license that lets them implement any of the designs they've licensed, in any form, in perpetuity. That sort of contract comes with a company when you buy it. You don't get to throw out their obligations. So while Apple could for sure change new agreements, any of the ones that stand they can't.

    There's also the question of how willing companies that do the implementation of ARM, like Marvell, and fabs would be to play ball with Apple. Apple is only a small part of their business. So if Apple suddenly says "Nobody but us can have ARM," maybe Marvell says "Fine we aren't going to sell you any ARM chips." Now Apple has to design the final chip implementation, which isn't the same as the basic architecture. Then maybe the fabs say "Screw you, you've hurt our business cutting off ARM chips, we won't fab your product." Now they have to build or buy their own fab, which is massively expensive.

    Hardball can be played multiple ways in the business world and you often find out there is a lot of mutually assured destruction situations out there. I can't see a situation where Apple trying to keep ARM to themselves would do anything but cause a competitor to ARM to arise and be used.

  7. Re:Be very afraid. by liamoshan · · Score: 5, Funny

    His followers will be recognized by the rimless glasses, black faux turtlenecks, and razor stubble.

    When cursing others, the Follower, aka FanBoy...

    Change "Follower" to "Macolyte" and you're onto a winner

  8. History repeating itself? by WebCowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As has been stated before, Apple has had a relationship with ARM holdings since it was founded (as Apple had equity in the company when it was founded out of the ashes of the Acorn computer company). Apple didn't abuse its position then. Of course, Apple wasn't so big and successful at the time, whereas now it dominates in mobile media players and holds a great deal of market share with the iPhone.

    Here is an interesting thing though...history seems to be repeating itself, just with different players. In the 1970s MOS technologies created the 6500 series of microprocessors--the 6502 being the famous, very long lived design. They had a fab and produced their own designs but also ended up licensing the design out to others (the two biggest being Rockwell International and Western Design Center, the latter was founded by a former MOS employee who held a patent on part of the 6502 design that entitled him to a license). Just as the 6502 started taking off in the desktop calculator market Texas Instruments went and started making calculators too--using their own chips that suddenly became much more expensive for third parties.

    Jack Tramiel at Commodore was facing possible extinction of his entire electronics line because of the TI-induced shakeout (Older folks, especially from Canada, might remember Commodore as a maker of typewriters and filing cabinets and calulators). Pretty much all calculator makers who used TI chips suddenly found it impossible to compete with TI and those who couldn't re-engineer their designs quickly or rely on other products quickly died (MITS probably wouldn't have been pushed to do the Altair if it hadn't been pushed out of the calculator market by TI). Jack didn't want to fall victim to a bullying chip maker and figured to compete Commodore had to make its own chips like TI, so Commodore bought MOS technology.

    Here is an interesting fact: Commodore continued licensing to Rockwell and WDC, and continued to make and sell chips openly on the market, including to direct competitors in the personal computer market. Every single Apple I and Apple II and 8-bit Atari (from the 2600 game up to the 130XE computer) and 8-bit Acorn/BBC Micro was built around a chip design controlled ny Commodore (and maybe even manufactured in their fab). Though Commodore made for a very tough competitor, there is no evidence they overtly abused their position as a chip supplier to dominate the market and in fact Apple and Atari both outlived Commodore. So, it is possible that with Apple owning ARM this scenario could happen again.

    So how will history repeat itself? Apple cannot ever revoke current licensees rights to use their current designs, but they could "pull a TI" (even against TI ironically) and either make it very expensive to continue licensing or could refuce to renew, meaning competitors/third-parties could not make NEW ARM-based chips. Alternatively, they could go the "Commodore way" and maintain ARM as a separate (though wholly owned) company that keeps operating as normal, and all our Android phones would be safe.

    Of course, Jobs runs the show and being the techno-Nazi that he is might be tempted to go for world domination/industry control by cutting android hardware sales off at the knees. However he is still pretty smart and knows that would be a very bad idea. Consider:

    * ARM designs are used EVERYWHERE. Industrial processors, embedded computer systems and so on where Apple doesn't compete--in fact the majority of ARMs revenue relies on non-mobile/wireless business. They'd lose more than they'd gain by shutting out those licensees.

    * If they were overtly selective in suppliying chips or licensing their IP to others then they'd face the wrath of antitrust regulators that are much more aware and active in high-tech now.

    * They could cut out Android or WinMo hardware makers but both those platforms can be ported quite easily to other hardware. In fact those platforms already run on non-ARM platofrms. Apple could run roughshod over HTC but it