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

211–220 of 246 posts

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#211

Post by DrScientist »

actionfromafar wrote: post #208
tsunamifury wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand if you have ever worked at a high level in these companies they are hardcore evil. Maybe not in this case but they 100% do the evil thing and press it to their advantage.

Sure but there are different kinds of evil. Some larger categories are: - Screw everyone if I get more money and power - Self-aggrandazing evil - Hurt people for fun evil - Comic-book style take over the world evil I think these are sorted in order of commonality. The top one is also the kind boardrooms attract at the upper echelons, just because of how the game is played.

I think you've missed perhaps the most common one.

- get them before they get you/ we have to do it because our competitors will.

ie fear is the driver, 'survival' is the goal.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#212

Post by cgio »

DrScientist wrote: post #211
actionfromafar wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but there are different kinds of evil. Some larger categories are: - Screw everyone if I get more money and power - Self-aggrandazing evil - Hurt people for fun evil - Comic-book style take over the world evil I think these are sorted in order of commonality. The top one is also the kind boardrooms attract at the upper echelons, just because of how the game is played.

I think you've missed perhaps the most common one. - get them before they get you/ we have to do it because our competitors will. ie fear is the driver, 'survival' is the goal.

That reads like a bad rationalisation of evil. Survival at the expense of someone else is not survival, it's the law of the jungle. The law of the jungle in the jungle is not evil, but we can do better than that, and we broadly expect better than that from others. So we should do better, even if sometimes to the intentional detriment of our profits and bonuses.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#213

Post by rbanffy »

Jtsummers wrote: post #120
rbanffy wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also it would be quite scary if apple is allowed that type of vertical integration. Why would that be? It’d free up TSMC’s top shelf capacity to other manufacturers.

It would also mean that Apple built a facility that will be outdated in 1-3 years. They'd end up falling behind and have to go back to TSMC or someone else to supply components or invest billions every year to build out improved fabrication facilities. Certain kinds of vertical integration can last, but when a key part is a moving target (fab capabilities) or commodified then they are inherently time limited assuming…

> They'd end up falling behind

That'd be a risk, but they could also pull ahead if both TSMC and Intel drop the ball on one generation or another.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#214

Post by rbanffy »

e44858 wrote: post #132
rbanffy wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's why we need tariffs, to make Apple suffer financially if they refuse to move production back to the US.

As a shareholder, I wouldn't be impressed. As a supporter of a more just and equal planet, I'd be in.

Be mindful that such tariffs wouldn't hit Apple alone.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#215

Post by baxtr »

msrenee wrote: post #203
baxtr wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that as human beings we can’t live without stories as thinking tool. Although I wouldn’t call it “understanding” but “interpreting”. I wanted to say that good vs evil are hardly absolutes. No one at a large corporate comes to work saying: today I will be evil again. Instead they tell themselves they’re helping investors getting a good return, or that they’re “smashing Google for copying iOS”. There is a great…

People committing genocide also presumably don't wake up saying they're going to be evil again. Being able to justify an act to yourself doesn't make it not evil.

But then what does make something evil? Nature clearly doesn’t distinguish good vs evil. We humans do.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#216

Post by teknologist »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #186
teknologist wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To show them that their battery life could go from 2.5 hours to 8 or more, perhaps. That was the Mac experience that customers weren't asking for yet "wowed" them when it came.

> To show them that their battery life could go from 2.5 hours to 8 or more, perhaps. x86 already was on its way towards such a goal.

x86 is an overcomplicated behemoth never intended for low power computing. It’s lipstick on a pig for mobile x86 at this point

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#217

Post by dickersnoodle »

BenFranklin100 wrote: post #94
p1necone wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine sales numbers and profits are publicly available information, whereas actual # of units produced is likely not an easy number to find?

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…

>Given Android has 71% of the worldwide market share it’s difficult to make the argument Apple holds a monopoly on the smartphone market

That won't stop a hefty share of HN posters from repeating that same whinge.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#218

Post by DrScientist »

cgio wrote: post #212
DrScientist wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you've missed perhaps the most common one. - get them before they get you/ we have to do it because our competitors will. ie fear is the driver, 'survival' is the goal.

That reads like a bad rationalisation of evil. Survival at the expense of someone else is not survival, it's the law of the jungle. The law of the jungle in the jungle is not evil, but we can do better than that, and we broadly expect better than that from others. So we should do better, even if sometimes to the intentional detriment of our profits and bonuses.

Depends on whether you define evil by actions or motives.

I'd argue that the use of motives to define evil is often used as a - when they do it it's bad/ but when I do it it's fine - excuse.

For that reason I'm not really interested in the 'evil' part of this conversation - rather more what drives perceived bad outcomes.

So all I'm saying is fear is a big driver of many of those bad outcomes. That's not to justify it - but rather understand it as a first step to fixing it.

Note I'm also not saying whether the fear is rational or not.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#219

Post by talldayo »

BenFranklin100 wrote: post #155
acdha wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> iPhones are significantly more expensive than comparable Android phones This misperception is key to understanding the market, which is really two markets: Android has cheaper phones and dominates there but in the mid to high-end market the situation is reversed because the equivalent Android devices aren’t cheaper and because Qualcomm/Samsung lagged so far behind on CPU performance you’re getting something which p…

It sounds to me like you’re saying that Apple management recognized that an integrated ecosystem (phone, tablet, watch, desktop OS etc…) could offer significant value to its costumers (in Apple’s case, the customer is the end user) while providing sufficient margin to serve as a profitable business model. Google, an advertising company, was focused on giving away free stuff (Gmail, Android, etc…) as an means to build…

I don't know how you can call Android, a Free and Open Source OS, "underhanded" in comparison to it's competition. For Christ's sake; Apple is currently fighting the EU over whether or not they have the right to charge developers for using hyperlinks.

Re: Apple is America's semiconductor problem

#220

Post by ankit219 »

DrScientist wrote: post #206
trhway wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is America's semiconductor problem It isn't Apple who is the problem here, it is Intel who refused to manufacture ARM chips for Apple. So Apple didn't have much choice as there aren't much fabs around to choose from. Now Intel, sore looser, is competing for CHIPS money against TSMC/Apple (and Intel will definitely get and waste a lot of those CHIPS money thus making the problem even worse). The article, which…

Yep, the omission of mentioning the Intel/Arm dynamic in the article is very telling. Notable also is the omission of Nvida - which I also believe mostly uses TSMC.

The market changed recently. With ARM (and not sure how many others), it democratized chip design to an extent that companies could design their own requirements, simulate, add standard functionalities, and then find a third party fab which can manufacture that in bulk. The core value transferred from one company doing everything in a centralized manner to three distinct sections - chip design done by individual companies, fab + manufacturing on given designs (eg: SK Hynix, TSMC), and ARM which enables both these sections to function as they do. As with tech markets, once democratized, the overall pie increases massively. (This is a gross simplification and at conceptual level. Not this clear cut, but this is pretty much the value chain)

ARM allowed companies to focus on design, and not having to worry about manufacturing. Nvidia is mostly dependent on TSMC, but truth is they can move to SK Hynix and Samsung without a drop in quality. (Basically whoever has the capacity to build the chips at their nm level).

I laud the authorities for stopping Nvidia/ARM acquisition a couple of years ago. More than any other acquisition, this would have skewed things up massively.

Post reply on HN