Apple Hopes To Drop Samsung As Chip Supplier

danomac writes "Apple is testing out new chip suppliers, trying to find a supplier other than Samsung. Apple is currently suing Android phone manufacturers, and Samsung is included in the lawsuit. 'Apple faces several hurdles should it want to make a switch to TSMC, including patents and chip design issues as well as a push by Samsung to retain the business. ... Analysts and other sources had previously said TSMC, the world's largest contract chip maker, was set to become a supplier of a next-generation processor chip to Apple, likely starting next year. However the chip may not be called the A6, as some reports have indicated, the sources said. TSMC is an obvious candidate to win processor business from Apple as it has budgeted $7.8 billion this year to update technology and add capacity. It also has experience with the architecture of British chip designer ARM Holdings Plc, widely used by Apple to make power-efficient mobile chips."

Comments

It's kind of obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

The next iPad will be powered by an Arduino!

Correction

[Chris Down]

"Consumers hope to drop Apple as computer supplier"

Re:Correction

[Andreas Mayer]

Here here! What is "uninstall" in Mac terms?

Drop into the trash.

And it's "hear, hear".

Re:So...

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Or maybe they see the value in having a supplier that doesn't represent a conflict of interest.

Surprising?

[hahn]

Is this really so surprising? Apple creates end products to sell to consumers and buys parts from Samsung. Samsung creates chips (as well as other parts) to sell to companies but also sells competing end products to consumers. TSMC only creates and sells chips to companies, but nothing to end consumers. And now that TSMC's foundries have been updated, it's kind of a no-brainer isn't it?

Re:Surprising?

[stevew]

You have to understand that TSMC has a different business model than Samsung. TSMC is the largest Chip Fab in the world - bar none. It is ONLY a chip fab. The article is actually in error when it implies that the relationship between ARM and TSMC is a big deal. The relationship between Samsung and ARM is likely exactly the same! They BOTH have a license to ARMs IP. The BIG difference between the two is that TSMC doesn't have System Architecture experience. They take designs from others - and create masks, then fab them for you. Most of the "fabless" semiconductor companies in the world use either TSMC or UMC (the number 2 player..)

Samsung is different in that they do both Architecture/Implementation of the design along with fabrication. TSMC doesn't really have that ability.

What Apple would have to do is take on the Architecture/Implementation roll by themselves and send the design to TSMC for fabrication. That would put Apple more in the "fabless" semiconductor business. What they do now is they buy most of the design from Samsung, i.e. they use Samsung's IP on their chip, then Samsung implements the device, and fabs it. They ship the completed device to Apple.

Hope this straightens out some of the differences between the two approaches.

Re:Surprising?

[UnknowingFool]

What Apple would have to do is take on the Architecture/Implementation roll by themselves and send the design to TSMC for fabrication. That would put Apple more in the "fabless" semiconductor business. What they do now is they buy most of the design from Samsung, i.e. they use Samsung's IP on their chip, then Samsung implements the device, and fabs it. They ship the completed device to Apple.

Except that Apple has been designing their own chips since the A4 and Samsung manufactures it. I'm sure that Samsung has assisted Apple like they would any other customer but considering that Apple bought PA Semi and Intrinsity (two chip design companies) for their personnel and expertise, I would say their A4 and A5 designs are not bought from Samsung.

Re:Surprising?

[Dahamma]

Yep! And it goes beyond that. Apple now designs its own custom chip, and so has effectively become a fabless semiconductor company. Why would Apple want to share its proprietary designs with a *competing* company already involved (as either the thief or victim) in several industrial espionage incidents when it can just use a "neutral" (not to mention the largest) contract fab like TSMC?

Re:Conflict of Interest

[h4rr4r]

Please do say what they stole. As far as I can tell apple is complaining about some bogus design patents and some typical bullshit software patents.

Re:Conflict of Interest

[aaaaaaargh!]

Nothing. Apple is just dominated by aggressive, corporate-type lawyers, that's why they patent things like round corners and putting icons in a grid. That's what Apple considers "innovation" nowadays...as boring as their latest products.

Re:So...

[UnknowingFool]

Even if the lawsuits didn't exists, I would have foreseen Apple doing this sooner or later. First of all, having only one supplier for a critical component is risky. Second, Samsung is producing Apple chips on their 45nm line whereas the rumor is that TSMC will fab Apple's chips on their 28nm line which in itself is a huge improvement for Apple in terms of cost.

Re:Conflict of Interest

[h4rr4r]

They had devices that looked like that before the iPhone came out. Form follows function. Icons will be on a grid, the face will be made of glass, and the edge has metal trim. Nothing innovative there.

Good luck with that

[A nonymous Coward]

The problem with letting morals interfere with business decisions is knowing where to stop. Now that they've made it plain how little tolerance they have for independent thinking suppliers, the rest are going to be a bit skittish, either in their dealings with Apple, or in their own R&D. Either way, Apple is sending the message that it doesn't want first tier brilliant thinkers, only second tier yes-men.

I have a friend who lets his religious fundamentalism go crazy. I sent some Thomas the Tank Engine chocolate lollipops for Christmas stocking stuffers, and was told that Thomas is a Disney property, Disney supports health insurance for domestic partners, and therefore my stocking stuffers were unwelcome.

So what next? Don't let UPS deliver anything because the driver might be gay, or support human rights? Where does he draw the line? It's one thing (however silly it is) to not buy Disney products himself because they have gay employees, but to chew me out for not following his politics is absurd.

Re:Looks like AMD might be going under then

[tyrione]

AMD did a lot with finfets, so I wouldn't expect the transistor structure to be a problem ... but they're completely fucked with patterning until EUV hits. Intel has chromeless pixelized masks pretty much on lock down patent wise and it's a huge advantage.

You do realize that it's not just AMD but IBM that co-developed much with AMD, right? If you think Intel has it all locked down you better spend a few hundred hours reading up on IBM patents.

Adding a supplier doesn't mean dropping one

[Andreas Mayer]

I still don't see why adding a new chip supplier has to mean dropping the old one.

Maybe Apple just want's to make sure it can still build new devices even if one supplier has problems.
Maybe they need additional suppliers to meet the increasing demand (yes, there is increasing demand for iOS devices).
Maybe they hope to gain something by having competing suppliers. Lower prices and/or better products. Faster, more efficient chips etc.

After all, Apple is a company and is doing business to make money; not to win a troll award.