261–270 of 279 posts
How long until Apple does a hostile takeover? /s I assume regulators would block a hostile takeover like they would a regular buyout if there are concerns regarding market power?
Apple with their special license couldn't care less about ARM.
This idea that they have a special license keeps getting thrown about.
But nobody has ever been able to provide any proof or otherwise reference a believable source.
Until proven otherwise, it's a myth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on what you mean by usable. If you don't need long term support, strong software ecosystem support, and performance parity, it's great. It'll be a few more years before everything comes together, but hopefully not too many.
The RISC V fanboism is rampant here with bunch of them repeating their marketing slogan in the comments. There is nothing inevitable about RISC V. If anything it has lot of mountains to climb before it can be considered a challenge to the existing instruction set. It may or it may not do that. Being open does not automagically make it happen.
Lots of companies have made their decisions, projects are kicking off -- for example Samsung just started porting .NET and Tizen to RISC-V for use in their future TVs and other products. LG similarly. It will take five years for the products resulting from that to emerge, but they are coming.
The RISC-V ISA didn't even formally exist as a frozen spec a little over four years ago. Ratification in July 2019 was the starting gun for many to start projects. The results of that are just emerging in the last months -- the VisionFive 2, tne Lichee Pi 4A, the 64 core Milk-V Pioneer.
A lot more things have gone into the pipeline since then, and will be emerging in the next two to three years. Things up to around Apple M1 performance ... from multiple companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> want rentier incomes with low risk. I don't know if I buy your point about inherited wealth but there is what I'd describe as a stifling culture of rentseeking that, if not actively encouraged is certainly tolerated and overlooked, at many levels of society, and across both businesses and public organisations. And once you become aware of it you start to realise how obnoxious and oppressive it is. We certainly don'…
"there is a culture of rent seeking" must be the understatement of the year. What the UK understands as "entrepreneurship" is buying property to rent. This is everyone from your grandma to the shiniest MBAs.
[0] I'm sure there are exceptions: in fact I know there are. There are always exceptions. 20-odd years ago for a while I shared a flat with a couple of guys where the private landlord deliberately charged far below market rent in order to be able to offer affordable accommodation to people who weren't well off. Good people, the family that owned that place.
During the height of the covid tech bubble, Nvidia offered to buy ARM for $40b. Right now, Softbank wants a $60b - $70b valuation when many tech stocks have lost 90%+ and some large caps have lost 30% - 50%. What justifies such crazy increase in value? Also, I believe Nvidia overpaid for the company regardless. Nvidia was willing to pay $40b because they want a world-class CPU design team to integrate their GeForce I…
ARM changed the licensing and now wants % of price of every end device sold.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well no one can predict the future but what's your reasoning that such an important technology partner to such massive companies will all of a sudden stop innovating and become less significant?
Intel was also an important partner to Apple at one point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s a reflection of earnings potential. If nvidia can average 50% Y/Y earnings growth for the next 5 years, and stock price remains flat, that 223 falls to 30.
It is a reflection of exactly that, but this completely dismissed all the risks: - Maybe new ml-tech is invented that does not require as heavy equipment. - Maybe AI does not grow as fast as expected. - Maybe a competitor comes along and pricing comes under pressure. - Maybe supply chain issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how that is anyone holding anyone back? Why would you want to take funding from someone expecting no stress or hassle?
> Why would you want to take funding from someone expecting no stress or hassle? The important word here is "money". There isn't a surfeit of money available from more suitable investors.
It's obviously not just about 'money'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook very probably has a group long-term disability insurance policy which adequately its employees in that case. Google did when I worked there many years ago. Some supports might also come from Social Security Disability Insurance, Medicare, and loans or withdrawals from retirement accounts that are far better funded at Facebook US than at Facebook UK.
> long-term disability insurance policy It eventually runs out. Medical bankruptcy is pretty widespread in the US.
Medical bankruptcy is indeed pretty widespread in the US, but not among people with Facebook or Google benefits, not even those with career-ending disabilities. You’re underestimating the inequality of benefits within the US.
Not a permanent work stoppage example, but here is one relevant anecdote: I have personal knowledge of someone who got severely crippled by a freak accident that would have made most Americans go bankrupt and never be able to work again, including a need for repeated brain surgery. His FAANG employer benefits paid for what he needed, and although he was permanently wheelchair bound, he was eventually even able to return to work part-time (of course not initially) because of how good their benefits are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why would Apple ever want to own ARM? You answered your own question: > Quite honestly, ARM falling on its face hard is actually a benefit to Apple. That would mean that Apple Silicon and iPhone SoCs have less competition.
No I didn't answer my own question because a hostile takeover of ARM can cost $70b and it doesn't guarantee that ARM would fall on its face after the acquisition because it has long-term contracts.
Sure, but the question was "why would Apple want to own ARM", not "is it worth the cost?"
> it doesn't guarantee that ARM would fall on its face after the acquisition because it has long-term contracts
Having full control of the company would guarantee that as much as any other method could by a mirroring argument, as far as I can see.