Print 64 comment(s) - last by retrospooty.. on Oct 16 at 10:24 AM

Jim Mergard made his name during a 16-year stint with AMD

It's been a wild ride for Jim Mergard, a respect name in the chipmaking and processor design industry.  Mr. Mergard enjoyed a successful 16-year stint with Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD), before leaving the chipmaker in late 2011.  According to The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Mergard's specialty was low power systems-on-a-chip (SoCs).  He reportedly was the "brains" behind development of AMD's hot-selling "accelerated processing units", guiding them through the prototype phase.

He joined up with Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) earlier this year during a recruiting push at Samsung's new chip design and production facilities in Texas.  However, that stint proved short-lived as multiple sources report that he has jumped to the other team -- Samsung's archrival Apple, Inc. (AAPL).

Speculation is running wild regarding whether Mr. Mergard's expertise will be used simply to produce better SoCs for i-devices, or for a more novel project, such as an in-house computer central processing unit.  

For years Apple heavily used and contributed to the PowerPC architecture.  But some suspect it may have second thoughts about switching to Intel Corp. (INTC) chips.  After all, Apple prefers to keep as much of its ecosystem as it can in-house, leaving the rest to anonymous unnamed suppliers.  Intel's desire for prominent branding represents somewhat of a values conflict for Apple.

Jim Mergard
Jim Mergard has joined up with Apple [Image Source: The Tech Journal].

But only time can tell what possibilities might be looming for the new recruit.

For now it's just one more example of Apple's long track record of aggressively poaching its market rival's best talent.  That poaching has led to numerous complaints over the years, but under the new leadership of Tim Cook Apple shows no signs of stopping the aggressive tactic.

Source: WSJ

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Ho hum
By simsony on 10/13/2012 5:07:59 PM , Rating: 2
And your ignorance is numbingly shocking. Especially when you put it forth as a defense.

Quicktime VR was (note the was!) a file format and not a capturing or imaging technology. Like jpeg. It required the use of special cameras (to get offseting data), the VR stands for Virtual Reality.

It has nothing to do with panoramic shooting and image stitching, which is mostly about software and image processing. Google maps uses it to build StreetView.

Software packages were created that allow for offline processing and saving in the QTVR format from normal images.

I remember my consumer grade Canon camera's free Powershot software doing that circa 1998. It would have been available in paid software well before that. The software has now moved on device and works realtime. Again the likes of Nikon, Canon and Sony have had that for a while on camera.

Perhaps most importantly Apple themselves deprecated the format years ago, because there was nothing special about it, other than being proprietary. Just liken they rehashed the MOV format to a renamed MP4 container. Quicktime no longer opens the format at all on 64 bit systems.

Apple has a image format called pict. I guess they invented photography too? /sarcasm

Please give your self a moment and ask why Apple hasn't sued everyone else doing panoramic capture if they invented it.

That you do not consider this, shows your bias and your zealotry.

RE: Ho hum
By retrospooty on 10/13/2012 9:17:17 PM , Rating: 2
well, you can't really expect Apple fans to know anything about anything when it comes to technology. LOL

the fact of the matter is Apple invents a little and copies alot. why it bothers some people to hear that I don't know. Too much of their identity is tied up in the crappy lying company they support.

RE: Ho hum
By TakinYourPoints on 10/13/2012 11:06:26 PM , Rating: 2
Funny, maybe its the circles I run in but most of the people I know who use Macs tend to be on the higher end of the technical knowledge scale. Software developers, programmers, scientists, artists, etc etc, they all know quite a bit more than the average user who either does data entry, word processing, or browses Facebook.

Hell, none of my friends at Google run Windows, zero, they all use Macs and Linux. Several of my friends at Microsoft use Macs, and I still remember all of the Macbooks at the JPL labs during the Mars rover landing. It makes sense too, OS X is the "Unix that works". There's a lot to be said for having a well supported Unix-based desktop platform with a lot of software on it.

I myself am way more tech oriented than most of the haters here. I ran SLI on my i7 PC for years before going to a single GTX 680, and I've been using SSDs in all of my machines since 2009. I'm pretty sure reclaimer is still playing WoW on a Core 2 Duo or something lame like that.

RE: Ho hum
By retrospooty on 10/14/2012 10:26:10 AM , Rating: 2
pointing out your own accolades and a bunch of people who need to run UNIX for work is nice but it says very little about the average Mac user. Most of them are totally clueless and that's why they buy Macs. Most people the ability to build their own PC wouldn't be caught dead near a Mac or any other OEM PC.

you are throwing out extreme examples to try to disprove a point that you know is true.

RE: Ho hum
By TakinYourPoints on 10/14/2012 3:38:42 PM , Rating: 2
Most people the ability to build their own PC wouldn't be caught dead near a Mac or any other OEM PC.

Depends. Once you get into laptops then the question isn't so easy given that building a laptop isn't really an option. The majority of Mac sales are laptops. I know loads of people that even if they don't have a Mac desktop, they certainly have a Mac laptop.

Part of the reason is that OS X is an excellent laptop OS, and part of it is pinned on OEMs. Most laptops outside of Lenovos and Macs are trash. Ones that do measure up, HP Elitebooks for example, are so expensive that they make a retina MBP look like a bargain.

you are throwing out extreme examples to try to disprove a point that you know is true.

Right, because everyone that uses a PC is a super genius and everyone that uses a Mac is an idiot. Please, given that Windows has a majority of the market it can be easily in inferred that that the attributes you pin on the "casual" Mac user is easily applied to the average PC user as well. Hell, most technically illiterate people I know are the ones who need help with their cheap Windows machines because something screwed up or it got infected because they click every GD thing in their browser.

A higher percentage of OS X users actually uses MS Office and other professional software packages than Windows users, but it isn't the first thing I'd bring out in a discussion either. This is obviously because the OS X userbase is so much smaller, thus skewing more professional. Obviously it is a consumer platform as Windows is, but the cost of entry combined with its UNIX underpinnings also means that it'll appeal to more professionals. Hell, most of Apple's customers were workstation professionals back in the PPC days, before Apple focused on being a mass market company.

Either way, I still think that placing a blanket statement like that on respective userbases like that is silly. I know technically proficient people on either platform. I myself am on both. People on message boards insist on taking the discussion there though, which is ridiculous.

RE: Ho hum
By retrospooty on 10/14/2012 5:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
whatever man, you make way too much of a tongue in cheek comment and jump off writing paragraphs about that while ignoring the whole point of this thread. The fact that Apple copies more than they are copy. reclaimer inferred that Apple poaching Samsung employees kind of shows that Samsung has something that Apple wants. Apple poaches a lot of people from Google as well and you know it. They claim they're being copied yet everyone else is coming out with most things first and they're hiring people away from everyone else, which is perfectly fair' they just need to drop the copy falsehood and innovate.

You notice that you are avoiding that like the plague? answer that or STFU

RE: Ho hum
By Reclaimer77 on 10/14/2012 1:45:18 PM , Rating: 1
I haven't played WoW in over a year, and as I stated several times which you keep ignoring, I said the Core2 is but ONE of my machines.

And hey, that Core2 I buil, with LOTS of customizations SSD's and a sweet overclock tuned by yours truly, is still getting it done when I need it today. You apparently have a very narrow view of what being "tech oriented" is all about.

And honestly, you're displaying the typical narcissism and condescension that causes everyone to hate Apple zealots. Listen to yourself, you're more "tech oriented" because you ran SLI early?? That's your measuring stick? Buying stuff makes you 'tech oriented' lol.

I was the first on my block to have a Tandy computer, take that mr 'tech savvy' :P. It was nothing but a glorified all-in-one keyboard you hooked up to a TV and I had to write custom programs to do ANYTHING on it. I mean seriously if that's the argument you want to make, I think a lot of posters here would laugh.

Are you just trying to come off like an asshole, or is that just how you roll all the time?

RE: Ho hum
By TakinYourPoints on 10/14/2012 3:46:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well, yeah, having and fiddling with the latest toys (you're not the only one who overclocks, I got my i7 up to 4ghz easy) on the block does make me more tech oriented. When you mentioned your C2D you sure as heck made it sound like your main rig, anything else I should know about?

With you its either "Mac users are technically ignorant" or "Mac users are narcissistic showing off their cool stuff". Pick one dude, cry some more.

And no, I don't think I'm the a-hole in the discussion; you're the guy who thinks Bill Gates is an idiot and should hoard his fortune. Disgusting.

RE: Ho hum
By Reclaimer77 on 10/14/2012 4:40:34 PM , Rating: 2
Right I see, so you're more tech oriented AND a better person to boot. Anything else I should know? /sarcasm

And no, I don't think I'm the a-hole in the discussion; you're the guy who thinks Bill Gates is an idiot and should hoard his fortune. Disgusting.

That's bullcrap and you know it. You'll NEVER find me having called Gates an "idiot", ever. I challenge you to find that.

You know what, I don't really need this crap. You get in a hopeless debate with Retro, who has you by the balls, and you keep deflecting it with BS about "Reclaimer this, reclaimer that" as if that's going to pull you out of the hole you're in. Why even bring me up when I'm not even the one you're arguing with? I'll tell you why, it's because you've got nothing else but insults, personal attacks, and straw men. Whatever point you were actually trying to make was blown away long ago.

Last time you got this retarded over Apple you resorted to "trailer park" comments about me, lashed out over how "ignorant" everyone on DT is (despite your continued visitation) and stormed off in a huff for a few months. Looks like you're repeating that trend now, I just have one request: This time don't come back.

RE: Ho hum
By TakinYourPoints on 10/14/2012 5:42:51 PM , Rating: 2
From a Bill Gates philanthropy thread a few days ago:

I think it's a great thing what he's doing...lmao okay, I can't even pull that BS off with a straight face. No, it's a big waste of money imo, but whatever, it's his to waste.

You sure don't seem to think Gates is being smart about his fortune, wiping out polio and all that nonsense.

You get in a hopeless debate with Retro, who has you by the balls

He said that Apple copied Samsung with photo-stitching apps, something that is ridiculous given that other such apps have been on iOS for years prior, and outside of smartphones for long before that. He had nothing by the balls, it was a stupid post and I called him on it.

As for using Apple "inventing" things as an excuse to make that post, that's also ridiculous. "Inventing" things is never the point with Apple. Their significance is in the execution, where their execution on existing technology creates new product categories where others follow. Base technology is one thing, but implementation is just as important. Its been going on for three decades, it isn't just luck.

Why even bring me up when I'm not even the one you're arguing with?

Because you, along with Swash and Motoman, are among the most extreme examples of idiocy and bad posting here. I don't mind disagreeing with someone at all. I think retrospooty generally makes good posts, but sometimes his emotion pushes him into posts like the ones above. What does bother me is when the ways people use to debate are so broken and based on sensationalism. Fact checking goes out the window and rhetoric takes over.

I also don't recall ever leaving here for a few months. I checked over my post history to be sure and there are no significant gaps. It really is my problem given that the level of writing here is so bad and I really should know better than to participate. Unfortunately DT is on the sidebar of Anandtech, an actual good site that I've been going to for over a decade. Then this happens:

RE: Ho hum
By retrospooty on 10/14/2012 6:46:12 PM , Rating: 2
OK' all bs aside. I said that Apple copied panoramic photos from samsung because the Galaxy S 3 just came out and it's the highest selling Android phone it's a direct competitor to the iPhone and now the iPhone came out with the same feature. Nowhere did I say samsung invented it I said apple copied it, that is the point, and that is the point that you refuse to address. Apple copied that, and plenty other tech as well, and copies all the time going back decades... I'm not sure why you're dancing around that subject, is it something you just can't admit too or won't admit too?

RE: Ho hum
By TakinYourPoints on 10/14/2012 10:51:39 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, its just a point that I don't agree with. Panaoramic photo taking has existed for years, and it already existed for years on iOS. Apple doing their own implementation on panoramic photo taking doesn't happen overnight, especially given how long they take to make something. I do not think that Apple put panoramic photo taking into the iPhone 5 because of the Galaxy alone, sorry.

If you want to dodge and turn this into a semantic argument now then I'm not interested.

RE: Ho hum
By retrospooty on 10/14/2012 11:09:57 PM , Rating: 2
right back at'cha buddy

RE: Ho hum
By TakinYourPoints on 10/15/2012 5:58:38 AM , Rating: 2
<3 :)

RE: Ho hum
By Reclaimer77 on 10/15/2012 1:47:36 PM , Rating: 2
You sure don't seem to think Gates is being smart about his fortune, wiping out polio and all that nonsense.

That's light years from saying "he's an idiot" is it not? Just admit you were using hyperbole and lets move on. This talking point didn't get traction the first time you tried it, and it's not working now either.

Because you, along with Swash and Motoman, are among the most extreme examples of idiocy and bad posting here.

And you're not? Woooo, we got some serious confirmation bias here.

I love how you bring up Swash. Not because you're wrong about him, but it's just ironic that you use the same exact arguments he does, yet view yourself as being above him as well.

Bad posting? Now it's getting deep. I'm one of the best posters here, bar none :)

Anyway it's been REALLY fun, but there's more important things to discuss. However you did succeed in steering this discussion away from Apple and on to everything and everyone else. So congratulations on that I guess, mission accomplished.

RE: Ho hum
By name99 on 10/15/2012 2:18:41 PM , Rating: 2
I know I should ignore the idiots but, christ, the level of stupidity here has become detached from reality.
Go read the damn QuickTime VR wiki entry, moron.

The earlier comments in this thread made a bunch of moronic comments about how Apple was copying the idea of panoramas from earlier cameras. The point of my comment was that QTVR, released as I said in 1994, was already in the business of making panoramas. I was not claiming that Apple was the first to do this. I WAS claiming that Apple was doing it before Microsoft, Android, Nokia, and all these other companies Apple supposedly copied from.

Furthermore QTVR included a stitcher which could stitch together standard photos. It could exploit special lenses, but did not require them.
You're welcome to correct me if you have real evidence, but as far as I can tell, Apple WAS the first company to release commercial stitching software. Panoramas before 1994 either utilized special hardware or weren't stitched together, just manually aligned. Apple were followed by IPIX eighteen months later, then by more or less open software in 1998.

Finally, thanks to all the people who insist that I'm an idiot who knows nothing about this. I worked at an office in Apple a few doors down from Ken Turkowski, the guy who put QuickTime VR together, and spoke to him on a number of occasions; but of course that sort of inside knowledge is nothing compared to the deep insights that are given by the universe to the true hater, who no longer needs details like facts or dates to show him what really happened in the past.

RE: Ho hum
By retrospooty on 10/15/2012 2:43:38 PM , Rating: 2
Once simple point you are missing. Photostiching software on a PC or Mac is NOT panoramic photos on a Phone.

One is an editing software and one is a camera. See the difference?

RE: Ho hum
By name99 on 10/15/2012 4:01:54 PM , Rating: 2
"LOL, ya, I was thinking the same thing a few days ago when I saw a commercial for the iPhone 5 and its revolutionary panoramic camera mode... You know, the one they copied from Samsung?"

"If anything, Apple stole the panoramic camera mode from existing apps that have been out for a few years. Samsung certainly didn't invent a panoramic camera mode any more than Apple "revolutionized" it or stole it from Samsung."

"Exactly. I've been using Microsoft's Photosynth app on iOS for years now. It is the best panorama app by miles, and like many Microsoft apps it still isn't on Android."

"Take a pill man. We were just having a laugh at how its OK for Apple to copy, but not others' and how Apple spins things they copy as if they invented it."

"The Point was Apple copied it. And let's be clear you are not the judge of what makes a good post. You cant leave a single thread alone that portrays apple poorly... that alone is a problem."


I was responding to posts like the above.
And your response to my history lesson is "it's completely different if it's done on a phone instead of on a desktop"? You think this is a powerful rejoinder? So in your opinion, ANY software that used to be done on a desktop is completely novel when done on a phone?

Whatever. You obviously have zero interest in either facts or common sense.

RE: Ho hum
By retrospooty on 10/15/2012 4:21:09 PM , Rating: 2
You are just not getting it. Its not about being different on a phone or a PC. Its not a "desktop vs phone" software issue, Its editing software vs. a live camera. One requires you to take saved media and edit it and the other takes a pic as is from an actual camera.

Let me slow it down for you: Software is not equal to a camera. one is a set of instructions in a programming language and the other is a physical device with a lens and an aperture with the purpose of capturing images instantly. The two are no closer related than Photoshop is to a camera that can do its own red eye reduction.

RE: Ho hum
By name99 on 10/15/2012 5:01:15 PM , Rating: 2
And how do you respond to a comment like this that is so absolutely clueless?

There WERE cameras that perform panoramas using only " physical device with a lens and an aperture with the purpose of capturing images instantly". Here's a list of them.

Your camera phone is not on that list. Why? Because it doesn't utilize weird lenses, rotating mirrors, or any other unusual hardware. Instead it uses SOFTWARE to do the job. Software running the same algorithms that Ken Turkowski was coding up in 1994.
I mean, christ, how ignorant do you have to be to imagine that a digital camera is not primarily a software device?

RE: Ho hum
By retrospooty on 10/15/2012 5:13:02 PM , Rating: 2
Of course its software. One is editing software on a computer, and the other is for an instant digital camera. Like I said, "The two are no closer related than Photoshop is to a camera that can do its own red eye reduction." (via software of course).

"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki