backtop


Print 63 comment(s) - last by TakinYourPoint.. on Jul 8 at 3:45 AM

Samsung will now fill the void by making chips for the likes of Qualcomm and even for its own products

If Apple and Samsung's turbulent relationship was made into a soap opera, this episode would feature continued separation between the two and Apple's "other lover."

Apple recently signed a new supply deal with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) for iPhone and iPad chips. These orders from Apple will reportedly account for 8 percent of TSMC's 2014 total revenue if Apple buys 30 percent of its chips there, according to Credit Suisse analysts.

If Apple bumps this up to 60 percent in 2015, it will make up 15 percent of TSMC's revenue for that year. 

Apple has been distancing itself from Samsung due to competition between Apple's iPhone and Samsung's Android-powered smartphones (such as the Galaxy line). The two have also had an ugly patent war that has soured relations over the years.

Apple's new deal with TSMC isn't great news for Samsung, but it will likely fill the void by making chips for the likes of Qualcomm and even for its own products. 


[Image Source: Nerd Array]

At the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) back in January, Samsung's President of LSI business Stephen Woo said that it's crucial for the South Korean electronics maker to focus on alternatives to Apple when it comes to the chip sector. In fact, Samsung has been supplying Exynos quad-core chips to Chinese smartphone company Meizu and also to Lenovo's K860 LePhone.

According to Goldman Sachs, Apple will purchase about $8.8 billion USD worth of chips from Samsung this year, which is about 80 percent of Apple's allowance for processors, memory chips and screens. But Apple is expected to move 30 percent of its business away from Samsung next year and about 80 percent by 2017.

It's unlikely that Apple will give all of its chips business to TSMC, since it doesn't want to put all of its eggs in one basket. TSMC will begin supplying the processors in early 2014. 

Chips aren't the only hardware Apple and Samsung are phasing out in their relationship. Samsung Display, which has provided Apple with liquid crystal display (LCD) panels for its iPhones and iPads over the years, officially severed its contract with the iDevice maker last fall. Samsung cited cost as the main issue, since Apple has started using Samsung competitors with better prices for displays. Hence, Apple was expecting bigger discounts from Samsung. 

Sources: The Wall Street Journal, Market Watch



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Samsung displays
By TakinYourPoints on 7/2/2013 1:52:55 PM , Rating: 2
In some threads you bash LCD in favor of OLED because of things like black level. Here you defend LCD against plasma, a similarly priced technology that side-by-side with OLED has similar black level and color characteristics. I know because I work with calibrated OLED and plasma side-by-side in color correction suites all the time (the plasma still has slightly better off-angle viewing angles btw).

The difference is that I'm not taking this home anytime soon: http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/cat-monitors/cat-oled...

I don't know if this is ignorance or hypocrisy coming from you.


RE: Samsung displays
By retrospooty on 7/2/2013 1:58:47 PM , Rating: 2
"I don't know if this is ignorance or hypocrisy coming from you."

What is wrong with your head that you turn everything into such a critical debate? Nowhere did I say anything about image Q on LCD being better. I said no-one cares about plasma, when you said "no-one cares about LCD" Clearly LCD sells a hell of alot and people do care about it. Plasma had too much glare and too much heat. For that alone I dont want it. Is that OK with you?


RE: Samsung displays
By testerguy on 7/2/2013 2:55:59 PM , Rating: 2
It's fine if you don't want it, but that wasn't the claim you made.

You directly claimed that nobody cares about Plasma - already clearly wrong given Taken's points. You also indirectly backed up your incest twin-brother/father Reclaimers point that people who like Plasma haven't realised that LCD has caught up or surpassed it - like it's some kind of objective truth that LCD is better (when to any informed person that is simply not the case).

If you were just talking about what you want, you wouldn't have elicited the responses you got. If you don't want a 'critical debate' - don't condescend a group of people (plasma enthusiasts) by claiming that 'nobody cares about Plasma' or that they are all failing to realise something you know.

And I say this as someone who doesn't like Plasma TV's, purely because I like bezels as thin as possible. Just improve your logic, please.


RE: Samsung displays
By TakinYourPoints on 7/2/2013 3:07:29 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. He switched from image quality, something that plasma is still objectively better at, to saying that it better fits his specific circumstances.

Talking about what you want is fine, but switching from objective quality analysis to that is bizarre.


RE: Samsung displays
By retrospooty on 7/2/2013 3:18:24 PM , Rating: 2
"It's fine if you don't want it, but that wasn't the claim you made.You directly claimed that nobody cares about Plasma"

I was responding to Takin who said "nobody cares about LCD". Regardless of IQ, or any other feature LCD outsells plasma by a longshot, clearly if any of the 2 arent "cared" about its Plasma.

"You also indirectly backed up your incest twin-brother/father Reclaimers point that people who like Plasma haven't realised that LCD has caught up or surpassed it - like it's some kind of objective truth that LCD is better"
Actually I was backing up that he called it, what he said about Takin. If you'd bother to read before insulting, you would see that I do see plasma as a tad better IQ, but I dont like the glare therefore Its not what I want. Beyond that, I was only saying that most people buy LCD for a reason. As I mentioned, people aren't going onto the stores and saying "I want the more expensive one with the lesser IQ". It's selling for a reason.


RE: Samsung displays
By testerguy on 7/3/2013 2:03:10 AM , Rating: 2
Nobody <> Minority.


RE: Samsung displays
By TakinYourPoints on 7/7/2013 10:07:31 PM , Rating: 2
Figures of speech seem to be out of your wheelhouse.

If i say "nobody cares about Justin Beiber", what I mean is clear. Maybe I should have said "nobody who cares about quality cares about LCD"

That work for you? :)


RE: Samsung displays
By TakinYourPoints on 7/2/2013 2:57:08 PM , Rating: 2
Fair enough. This is the internet, I shouldn't be surprised people are getting so pedantic. When I said "who cares about LCD" it was an obvious figure of speech, the same way I'd say "who cares about Justin Beiber or Kesha". Sure they sell lots but they aren't good, same as LCD HDTVs. And again, forget LCDs, even Samsung's plasmas don't match up to Panasonic's. Quality and popularity are two different things.

So again, who cares? :)


RE: Samsung displays
By retrospooty on 7/2/2013 3:05:54 PM , Rating: 2
"This is the internet, I shouldn't be surprised people are getting so pedantic"

Hey, right back at'cha on that one. ;)

I agree about Beiber and Kesha and pop in general. But that isn't a good analogy, as it's purely artistic taste. Tech is specs and price. Like I said, people aren't going into stores comparing displays and choosing the more expensive one with the lower IQ. Come on. And it isn't that people are "suckered by Best Buy salesmen " BB or any other retailer doesn't have any reason to push one or the other. They stock what sells and they well what people are wanting to buy and people are buying what looks good to them and meets their requirements. If Watching TV in the dark were my only requirement I would certainly go Plasma.


RE: Samsung displays
By TakinYourPoints on 7/2/2013 3:33:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Tech is specs and price. Like I said, people aren't going into stores comparing displays and choosing the more expensive one with the lower IQ.


People buy trash consumer electronics all the time. Marketing is what matters more. People cannot properly compare displays either when Best Buy and Fry's have the worst lighting conditions and TVs set on torch mode. They give nothing for people to make an informed decision with.

Specs don't factor in either, all of the "features" added to LCDs are band-aids made to try and come up to plasma level. They don't go all the way while they add cost and input lag. There is no better tech or value with "better specs". Again, all marketing.

Furhtermore, most people don't know how to properly set up their monitors to begin with. The comparison between tech and Beiber/Kesha actually works. The number of people who know how to make their TV look good and the number of people who know good music is probably pretty similar. ;)

quote:
BB or any other retailer doesn't have any reason to push one or the other.


Sure they do. As I said, LCDs carry higher profit margins and cost less to ship because they weigh less, so retailers have huge incentive from manufacturers to push LCDs even over their own plasmas.


"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki