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

Apple is America's semiconductor problem

semiconductor-digest.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 246 posts

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#121

Post by icehawk »

pie420 wrote: post #69
asdasdsddd wrote: post #59

> Apple buys a far larger share of smartphone and computer semiconductors, given that it accounts for half of global smartphones sales and earns 85% of all smartphones I feel like I'm getting trolled by the author who is citing sales and profits instead of units produced as a metric.

units sold dont matter when the competition is selling $100 smartphones at a loss. The fact that one company is making 85% of the profits in an entire industry as massive as SMARTPHONES should be terrifying, but i guess we don't care about monopolism for some reason

Do smartphones that get sold at $100 not have chips in them?

Because the article is talking about semiconductor manufacturing, and the total numbers of semiconductors purchased.

Profits and monopolies are a different article.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#122

Post by rbanffy »

necovek wrote: post #73
causal wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I'm a little confused by the premise. How would reshoring chip production be easier if Apple weren't out there buying chips? I get that they are buying up all of the TSMC chips in some segments. Doesn't that just create demand for an alternative? I can't cohere the themes of this article.

The point there seems to be that Apple is pretending to invest and align with moving production to US, but it's really gobbling up the entire foreign production and not at all interested in the "patriotic" narrative, even if they are marketing themselves as such. Basically, it's mostly: Apple is lying with their marketing, here's what proves they really don't care about moving production to US, but only about price a…

Tim Cook has an obligation towards the shareholders and takes it seriously. As an Apple shareholder who doesn’t live in the US, moving to US chip suppliers would not help with his obligations towards me.

I do like the US - don’t get me wrong - but Apple is in the business of making devices, not making investments the government should be at least facilitating.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#123

Post by Barrin92 »

kergonath wrote: post #102
Barrin92 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How would reshoring chip production be easier if Apple weren't out there buying chips? Because Apple's dominant position as a monopsonist means it has price setting power and depresses the profits in the chip industry, making all but the cheapest locations effectively unsustainable. Monopsonists essentially absorb the profits of their suppliers. This is for example why nationalized health services are cheap.

This does not sound like a complete picture. Apple might depress the prices for themselves, but not for other fab customers. On the contrary, if there is a supply issue, with one customer getting all the production, then prices should go up overall, helping competing fabs. In a situation with a huge production shortfall, it becomes a matter of initial capital, with which governments can help effectively (either with…

>but not for other fab customers

there aren't that many, that's the point. Apple is responsible for most of its suppliers revenue as the article points out, otherwise it wouldn't have price setting power to begin with.

We aren't in a supply shortage, with the exception of a bunch of AI related chips (the only thing the media talks about, hence the skewed perception) we've bin in a supply glut. Semiconductor revenue declined by 11% last year. AI chips aren't the only chips in the world, DRAM makers like Micron, an American manufacturer are the kinds of companies that are effectively at the mercy of Apple because of how outsized of a portion of the market they are.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#124

Post by Jtsummers »

necovek wrote: post #112
vundercind wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was a Windows and Linux user for nearly two decades before really giving Mac an shot, and still engage regularly with both. My first smartphones were Android. I’ve done tons of development work on both the iOS and Android platforms, and been exposed to a mountain of devices from both. As far as I’m concerned nobody’s even trying to compete with Apple. There are other personal computing products but none of them add…

That's a weird look. What is that market segment nobody is even trying to compete in? Integrated ecosystem is something a number of players have tried and failed at, as they simply don't have the resources to build it up and sustain it until they are competitive. Apple has started small too: tiny little iPods with iTunes + digital content sales really put them back on the map, before they scored a hit with iPhone whi…

> iPhone which was an iPod touch with a modem.

I mean, that's not totally wrong, but by the release dates completely backwards. The iPod Touch is an iPhone without the modem.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#125

Post by freedomben »

mcphage wrote: post #43

> In 2017, when Apple announced it was moving away from using UK-based Imagination Technologies for graphics processors, the company lost two thirds of its value overnight. I'm not sure what the author is suggesting here. They licensed technology from Imagine Technologies, so therefore they must continue licensing their technology? Also: Imagine Technologies is a chip designer, not a chip fabricator. It's stuck in at…

> I'm not sure what the author is suggesting here. They licensed technology from Imagine Technologies, so therefore they must continue licensing their technology?

I think you're overreading it. I don't think the author is arguing that Apple must stay a customer. Rather they are making a point about how much power Apple has a company. They clearly have the power to make or break other companies. That of course doesn't make the rest of the article correct, but the point about Apple being very powerful does make sense to me.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#126

Post by wrsh07 »

BenFranklin100 wrote: post #111
BenFranklin100 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given Android has 71% of the worldwide market share it’s difficult to make the argument Apple holds a monopoly on the smartphone market [1]. Even in the US, until about 2020, Android had a higher subscriber base, and there is no reason the situation could not reverse and iOS drop below its July 2023 53% subscriber market share [2]. Moreover, give iPhones are significantly more expensive than comparable Android phones…

As a tagalong to my comment, I really wish Android phone makers would get their act together and give Apple better competition. If the trends of the last ten years hold up, iPhones might actually become a monopoly product at some point. ;)

Can I encourage you to start the android company you want to see? I'm confident you can get funding

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#127

Post by fundad »

ankit219 wrote: post #107

A weird article. Apple was not the first or the only company to look to East Asia for cheap manufacturing, elctronic equipments, chips, or cheap labor. The trend was started and accelerated by motor companies and hardware just followed suit. Then, some other points are just...there. Apple is America's semiconductor problem because Apple is so big it purchases things in bulk and gets discounts - like every other big c…

A few other things jumped out to me: - Automotive's advanced features require chips but not the most advanced chips (by design, for reliability). - Micron's HQ is in the US but has operated globally since 1998 including design. ("Micron really went global in terms of its operations once it acquired the TI DRAM operations in 1998") - TSMC's 90% share of global semi is why Apple can get the exclusive on advanced processes. - Isn't a lot of CHIPs Act money help prop up Intel who didn't succeed in mobile and is laying off thousands anyway? - Apple did not cause poor pay and working conditions in China, the conditions, pay and environmental protections are how China attracts businesses. - Apple can not tax you because they can not arrest you if you don't pay 30% commission. - Massimo is medical device company, I'm curious how big a semi concern they are.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#128

Post by alephnerd »

fundad wrote: post #127
ankit219 wrote: post #107

A weird article. Apple was not the first or the only company to look to East Asia for cheap manufacturing, elctronic equipments, chips, or cheap labor. The trend was started and accelerated by motor companies and hardware just followed suit. Then, some other points are just...there. Apple is America's semiconductor problem because Apple is so big it purchases things in bulk and gets discounts - like every other big c…

A few other things jumped out to me: - Automotive's advanced features require chips but not the most advanced chips (by design, for reliability). - Micron's HQ is in the US but has operated globally since 1998 including design. ("Micron really went global in terms of its operations once it acquired the TI DRAM operations in 1998") - TSMC's 90% share of global semi is why Apple can get the exclusive on advanced proces…

> Automotive's advanced features require chips but not the most advanced chips

Exactly, and if Matt Stoller was honest he would bring up that point.

Most automotive chips use 28nm, 40nm, and 60nm nodes and China has been very competitive in this space now because of existing capacity built from OSAT and AMTP consolidation in China by Taiwanese and Malaysian/Singaporean players like UMC before the 2019 HK protests, MediaTek, and ASMPT from the 2000s-2010s.

It's analog chips, 28nm/40nm nodes and Packaging that have been getting a significant amount of CHIPS funding, as well as similar funding from the Japanese, Taiwanese, South Korean, Malaysian, and Indian governments recently.

From a NatSec perspective, it's those kinds of nodes that have a critical impact as most weapons systems can subsist on a Intel i7 and Nvidia Maxwell comparable CPU and GPU.

Think EWS, C-RAMs, Guidance Systems, etc.

> Isn't a lot of CHIPs Act money help prop up Intel who didn't succeed in mobile and is laying off thousands anyway

Those layoffs are staff who don't have experience with High NA EUV processes (aka staff who didn't skill up). I can safely say that.

The CHIPS funding is a mix of subsidizing High NA EUV nodes as well as domestic OSAT and AMTP/Packaging capacity.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#129

Post by AceJohnny2 »

BenFranklin100 wrote: post #111
BenFranklin100 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given Android has 71% of the worldwide market share it’s difficult to make the argument Apple holds a monopoly on the smartphone market [1]. Even in the US, until about 2020, Android had a higher subscriber base, and there is no reason the situation could not reverse and iOS drop below its July 2023 53% subscriber market share [2]. Moreover, give iPhones are significantly more expensive than comparable Android phones…

As a tagalong to my comment, I really wish Android phone makers would get their act together and give Apple better competition. If the trends of the last ten years hold up, iPhones might actually become a monopoly product at some point. ;)

> I really wish Android phone makers would get their act together and give Apple better competition

Google and Samsung tried and failed. Google with their flagship Pixel line, which just doesn't sell well, so they moved downmarket. Samsung with their Galaxy line, but they're always playing catchup/copycat to Apple.

The sad fact is that 1) Google sucks at hardware, 2) Samsung sucks at taste.

Apple really has a magical combination of (arguably) good taste, and operating chops to deliver the hardware at scale.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#130

Post by bsder »

darklion wrote: post #77
bsder wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition of monopoly has changed drastically over the course of time and will continue to do so. Regardless of what you call it, any market vertical that you can define with less than 5 genuine competitors invariably winds up being anti-consumer and needs to get broken up. Apple is the focus here, but Google is no better and neither is Microsoft. Search, messaging, email, video--all of these are easily definabl…

> All of these need to get broken up until we have at least a half-dozen competing companies in those spaces. You seem to be forgetting, we had your “at least a half-dozen competing companies" situation in the past. It was called the late 2000s and the early 2010s. And the reason it disappeared is not the traditional “everybody merges until only two or three are left standing”, it’s because iOS and Android were so mu…

> it’s because iOS and Android were so much better than the competition that every other phone manufacturer starved to death or switched to Android.

I would argue that it was because Apple and Google could cross-subsidize the market from their other buisnesses.

Google viewed the ISPs as an existential threat and saw both mobile and fiber as a way to disintermediate them. Apple saw phones as an existential threat to iPod which was a huge chunk of their revenue.

Google didn't release Android until 2008. As of 2009 Nokia still had 33% market share and even Samsung(13%) and RIM (15%) beat Apple (11%).

> iOS and Android were so established the newcomers couldn’t successfully compete.

That is practically the definition of monopoly, you know?

Post reply on HN