Apple Outsources A5 Chip Manufacture ... To Texas
Lindan9 writes "In a 9 billion dollar investment, Apple's A5 chips will now be produced in Austin, TX, in a new Samsung factory that is apparently 'the largest-ever foreign investment in Texas.'" According to the article, the factory's been churning out chips since the beginning of this month.
US is now officially destination country for cheap outsourcing.
Dear America, do you want to work or not?
Nope. Samsung used somebody's else's operating system (Android) and put it in a form factor which:
a) Had been done before Apple did it
b) Is pretty obvious - the only real variation possible is the roundness of the corners, everything else follows function (it's a screen!)
No sig today...
Construction is temporal. We're trying to _reduce_ energy usage, believe it or not.
You might be. Countries or states that would like a growing economy are not among those interesting in giving in to entropy.
To be fair, it looks like this actually created 500-700 jobs.
One would think being "Fair" would be to quote the jobs figure from the original Reuters article - 1100 for just the chips, never mind the flash - instead of a number pulled from thin air but put forth as fact.
You go ask your local chamber of commerce if they care at all about 1100+ technical jobs appearing where they are.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I don't know why I'm replying to an AC, but--
Err, Samsung has been one of Apple's major suppliers for a long time now, in the billions of dollars range. They've been making a huge chunk of the chips that go into everything for years and years-- long before any of these lawsuits started.
There's nothing counter-intuitive about it. Apple is one of Samsung's largest customers and has been for ages.
The lawsuit from Apple's side is a design issue, not functional: nearness to the product is irrelevant. They aren't suing about how chips work or are made: its design from an artistic/aesthetic POV, not design from an architectural or engineering POV, that they're suing over. (I'm not defending the lawsuits or the existence of design patents, just noting the difference)
It doesn't matter how the damn thing looks. Every friggin LCD TV manufactured since the dawn of LCD TVs look and feel the same. If it weren't for the glowing 'Sony' emblem on mine, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between it and a Vizo, Samsung, or any other brand sitting on the shelf next to each other. Ditto for pretty much every LCD monitor, as well. If you're stupid enough to buy a Samsung tablet, thinking you're getting an iPad, then you deserve neither. Caveat emptor, you stupid "consumer". I'm a customer, and I look at what I'm purchasing to make sure it's what I want.
Just because something is black with rounded corners, doesn't mean it's patentable. I hope Apple gets their asses handed to them soon over their bull shit patents.
--- Keep the choice with the user..
Weren't they just SUING them? Now they want a Samsung factory making chips for them?
In the Real World, relationships are way more complex than one headline or story the media loves to harp on. Samsung is producing chips now which means Apple was talking to them about that something like two years ago...
Businesses are composed of many different units and the guys who make the chips are about as far removed from the Galaxy Tab as a whale is from an owl.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Business relationships among large corporations are not so simplistic as slashdotters like to assume.
1)
Pre existing contracts are not usually nullified by new lawsuits unless specified in the terms of said contract.
2)
Large companies, such as Samsung, often have multiple business units that operate mostly independently and may or may not care, or even know details of, legal action underway in another business unit. There are even examples (Sony and Fox come to mind.) of one division of a company suing another division of the same corporation.
3)
Assumptions made by slashdotters about the morality notwithstanding; among companies past a certain size, and both Apple and Samsung qualify, lawsuits (and especially patent lawsuits) don't imply malice or hard feelings of any particular kind. They're simply negotiation or competition by alternate means.
Nope. Samsung used somebody's else's operating system (Android) and put it in a form factor which:
a) Had been done before Apple did it
b) Is pretty obvious - the only real variation possible is the roundness of the corners, everything else follows function (it's a screen!)
It's not the form factor that Apple is suing over, it's the industrial design of a specific implementation of that form factor. Apple has not sued, threatened to sue, or otherwise made any sort of huff about the dozens of other tablets that have been around both before and after the iPad, just those that bear a striking resemblance to the iPad.
The Galaxy Tab is a near clone. Apple is right to sue over it if they hold their own design to be distinctive (which it is). This isn't about a rectangle, rounded corners, or black borders, it's about a unique collection of attributes that is immediately recognizable as an iPad.
That's not so bad. I think the biggest problem will be the language barrier. Texans have a peculiar version of English that could potentially lead to millions of dollars wasted when the managers in Cupertino try to communicate exactly what they want over the phone...
Are you claiming that only (or even mostly) citizens of East Asian countries own Samsung stock? Here's a hint: Multinational publicly traded corporations are called "multinational" because not only do they operate in multiple countries but they also have shareholders in multiple countries.
So how come the Samsung looks more like an iPad than it looks like the 2001:A Space Oddessy tablet?
What bullshit.
1. Destroy economy so wages are depressed
2. U.S. now source of cheap labor
3. Best of both worlds - outsourced wages with domestic location
4. Profit!
5. Rich get richer, poor get poorer
6. Repeat as desired
And they'll have a built-in market, with all those people in the U.S. who are flush with cash.
Wait...
I think I'm sensing a flaw in your logic about that actually being the plan, here...
If only I could put my finger on the place it was broken...
And then push to kill that region of your brain so you'd stop saying stupid things like this.
-- Terry
When you can site 2001: A Space Oddessy as prior art, that gives Samsung license to tell Apple to go eat a bowl of dicks.
Errm, you can "site" something as long as you want, if it doesn't actually fit, you are blowing smoke. And since the device in 2001 doesn't actually look like an iPad (or any other device sold today), that's what you just did. Nice Debunkification here.
Fandroids hate facts.
Factories in China are known for making clones in the same factory after hours. If you can count the numbers of a critical chip exported, you can delay the introduction of clones to market. Yes, I know you can not prevent copies eventiually
Here I have pointed out a figure from a current article published today, and you bring up some crusty thing from six months ago just to try and pull yourself out of the hole you made? And to top it off, it only offers one end of the 500-700 range given...
Just admit you made up the numbers and should actually read before posting next time.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
All honest work is noble. Anyone who does an honest day's work and tries to do a good job should have our respect. They certainly have mine.