Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

gov.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 217 posts

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#131

Post by rcxdude »

thu2111 wrote: post #63
jonplackett wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were too scared of looking 'closed for business' in the middle of the disaster that was/is Brexit.

Brexit only fully happened a few months ago, so it is hardly related to this. Any considerations w.r.t. looking 'open for business' would certainly still apply. But sure, make everything about Brexit, why not.

The full legal consequences of brexit have still not fully come into force yet (there are various grace periods still to elapse: the most recent was the start of this month and there is still another extended to 1st October). And the secondary effects will likely take years to become apparent.

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#132

Post by tw04 »

robert_foss wrote: post #128
tw04 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> these companies will simply hollow ARM out (slash R&D, cut staff etc) to pump up the target’s value, before flogging it off or breaking it up. That's a very real concern with Softbank (and why I questioned why regulators were allowing the acquisition in the first place). I don't think you can be any further from the mark implying that's Nvidia's plan. Nvidia wants ARM to flourish, they would have no interest in kil…

ARM can't flourish under Nvidia, which customer would prefer to buy IP from a potential competitor rather than from a neutral provider. The ecosystem business model that defines Arm simply doesn't have any space for them being perceived as biased this way or that way.

>ARM can't flourish under Nvidia, which vendor would prefer to buy IP from direct competitor rather than from a neutral provider.

I would imagine plenty. Take a look at the list of vendors that sell Nvidia GPUs despite the fact that Nvidia sells directly into the market.

>The ecosystem business model that defines Arm simply doesn't have any space for them being perceived as biased this way or that way.

I don't know, Intel's recent announcement that they're going to start licensing their IP directly contradicts that. I don't think Intel would waste what will likely be a fairly large amount of money spinning up a new business unit without first doing some market research and ensuring there's demand for it.

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#133

Post by finikytou »

seniorivn wrote: post #115
finikytou wrote: post #102

ARM is a strategic company and unique in europe. it is UK crown jewel. Selling it to Nvidia is like USA selling Google to Huawei.

you should've used european company instead of huawei, with huawei you turn it into political and even ideological debate

I dont see huawei as ideologically worse than google.

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#134

Post by jorvi »

Vvector wrote: post #129
robert_foss wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ARM can't flourish under Nvidia, which customer would prefer to buy IP from a potential competitor rather than from a neutral provider. The ecosystem business model that defines Arm simply doesn't have any space for them being perceived as biased this way or that way.

The companies that directly compete with Nvidia (AMD & Intel) are not ARM customers. ARM's biggest customers are mobile phones, which could benefit from an Nvidia GPU

Considering how well Apple's M1 is performing, I suspect within 10 years the majority of new desktops and laptops sold will be ARM-based, with both Intel and AMD having to either adapt or languish.

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#135

Post by caslon »

tokyojoe wrote: post #52

The semiconductor supply chain is now almost completely disaggregated ie everyone specialises in just a small part of the value chain. ARM’s speciality is in CPU design and it has carved out for itself the enviable position of being the defacto standard for mobile applications - almost every single phone on the planet has ARM processor(s) running it. And their products are in dozens of other end applications segments…

ARM also gives the UK strategic leverage in any trade negotiations. Would we knowingly allow Rolls-Royce Jet Engines to be flogged off? No. Ditto ARM.

Doesn't this/shouldn't this basically encourage countries like the United States to completely ignore intellectual property laws? If not, why not?

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#136

Post by smachiz »

tw04 wrote: post #132
robert_foss wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ARM can't flourish under Nvidia, which customer would prefer to buy IP from a potential competitor rather than from a neutral provider. The ecosystem business model that defines Arm simply doesn't have any space for them being perceived as biased this way or that way.

>ARM can't flourish under Nvidia, which vendor would prefer to buy IP from direct competitor rather than from a neutral provider. I would imagine plenty. Take a look at the list of vendors that sell Nvidia GPUs despite the fact that Nvidia sells directly into the market. >The ecosystem business model that defines Arm simply doesn't have any space for them being perceived as biased this way or that way. I don't know,…

When you're thirsty, you buy from the person selling water. I don't think you'll find a lot of love lost between the OXMs and nvidia. I'm sure they would love more competitors in the space.

We have people licensing Arm and building interesting CPUs (Ampere).

I'm not sure that the NVIDIA acquisition would be good for the market or for Arm.

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#137

Post by jorvi »

jonplackett wrote: post #112
bregma wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a malapropism for "fobbed off", which means to trick someone into buying something of inferior quality or value.

Don’t think that’s right. Flogging something means to sell it, usually in a careless kind of manner.

This thread is the first time I've ever heard of 'flogging' meaning selling something off hurriedly. The predominant way I've seen it used is to refer to administering punishment via whipping.

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#138

Post by tw04 »

smachiz wrote: post #136
tw04 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>ARM can't flourish under Nvidia, which vendor would prefer to buy IP from direct competitor rather than from a neutral provider. I would imagine plenty. Take a look at the list of vendors that sell Nvidia GPUs despite the fact that Nvidia sells directly into the market. >The ecosystem business model that defines Arm simply doesn't have any space for them being perceived as biased this way or that way. I don't know,…

When you're thirsty, you buy from the person selling water. I don't think you'll find a lot of love lost between the OXMs and nvidia. I'm sure they would love more competitors in the space. We have people licensing Arm and building interesting CPUs (Ampere). I'm not sure that the NVIDIA acquisition would be good for the market or for Arm.

You haven't explained why Intel is entering the licensing business. If vendors have no desire to get their licensing from a company that competes in the space, there should be no demand for licensing from Intel, all of those OXMs should be going to ARM.

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#139

Post by smachiz »

tw04 wrote: post #138
smachiz wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're thirsty, you buy from the person selling water. I don't think you'll find a lot of love lost between the OXMs and nvidia. I'm sure they would love more competitors in the space. We have people licensing Arm and building interesting CPUs (Ampere). I'm not sure that the NVIDIA acquisition would be good for the market or for Arm.

You haven't explained why Intel is entering the licensing business. If vendors have no desire to get their licensing from a company that competes in the space, there should be no demand for licensing from Intel, all of those OXMs should be going to ARM.

You haven't demonstrated that anyone /is/ entering into contracts with Intel.

Intel has done lots of things that it turns out people didn't want to do (with them).

Re: Proposed acquisition of ARM Limited by NVIDIA: public interest intervention

#140

Post by willvarfar »

tokyojoe wrote: post #52

The semiconductor supply chain is now almost completely disaggregated ie everyone specialises in just a small part of the value chain. ARM’s speciality is in CPU design and it has carved out for itself the enviable position of being the defacto standard for mobile applications - almost every single phone on the planet has ARM processor(s) running it. And their products are in dozens of other end applications segments…

> Would we knowingly allow Rolls-Royce Jet Engines to be flogged off?

Not quite a flogging off, but the MiG 15 engine was a copy of the Rolls Royce Nene engine which a soviet trade delegation won in a bet on a game of billiards.

Post reply on HN