Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#261

Post by Forgeties79 » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 7:33 PM UTC

WillPostForFood wrote: post #209

yurishimo wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got a bridge to sell you if you think that Apple is going to bring any of their manufacturing to the US...

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c86jx18y9e2o Apple has responded and has started moving a lot of manufacturing out of China. It just makes sense for risk management.

From your article:

> Meanwhile, Vietnam will be the chief manufacturing hub "for almost all iPad, Mac, Apple Watch and AirPods product sold in the US".

> We do expect the majority of iPhones sold in US will have India as their country of origin," Mr Cook said.

Still not made in the US and no plan to change that. They will be selling products made in India/Vietnam domestically and products made in China internationally.

The tariffs are not bringing these jobs home.

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#262

Post by wtallis » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 7:34 PM UTC

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #260

Aurornis wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this scale and volume, it's not really about good faith. Changing fabs is non-trivial. If they pushed Apple to a point where they had to find an alternative (which is another story) and Apple did switch, they would have to work extra hard to get them back in the future. Apple wouldn't want to invest twice in changing back and forth. On the other hand, TSMC knows that changing fabs is not really an option and Apple…

Apple is the company that just over 10 years ago made a strategic move to remove Intel from their supply chain by purchasing a semiconductor firm and licensing ARM. Managing 'painful' transitions is a core competency of theirs.

Which acquisition are you referring to? Apple bought PA Semi in 2008 and Intrinsity in 2010.

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#263

Post by hinkley » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 7:37 PM UTC

anoojb wrote: post #138

Fiveplus wrote: post #6

Calling Nvidia niche feels a bit wild given their status-quo right now, but from a foundry perspective, it seems true. Apple is the anchor tenant that keeps the lights on across 12 different mature and leading-edge fabs. Nvidia is the high-frequency trader hammering the newest node until the arb closes. Stability usually trades at a discount during a boom, but Wei knows the smartphone replacement cycle is the only pr…

So let's say TMSC reciprocated Apple's consistency as a customer by giving them preferential treatment for capacity. It's good business after all. However, everyone knows that good faith reciprocity at that scale is not rewarded. Apple is ruthless. There are probably thousands of untold stories of how hard Apple has hammered it's suppliers over the years. While Apple has good consumer brand loyalty, they arguably tre…

Apple loaned TSMC money in order to build manufacturing capacity back around the M1 era. They’ve done that for a number of suppliers and the “interest payments” were priority access to capacity. Everyone was complaining about how Apple got ARM chips while others had to wait in line.

That said, they did that for a sapphire glass supplier for the Apple Watch and when their machines had QC problems they dropped them like a rock and went back to Corning.

But is that really any different from any other supplier? And who tf do you think they’re going to drop TSMC for right now? They are the cock of the walk.

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#264

Post by leoc » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 7:39 PM UTC

anoojb wrote: post #138

Fiveplus wrote: post #6

Calling Nvidia niche feels a bit wild given their status-quo right now, but from a foundry perspective, it seems true. Apple is the anchor tenant that keeps the lights on across 12 different mature and leading-edge fabs. Nvidia is the high-frequency trader hammering the newest node until the arb closes. Stability usually trades at a discount during a boom, but Wei knows the smartphone replacement cycle is the only pr…

So let's say TMSC reciprocated Apple's consistency as a customer by giving them preferential treatment for capacity. It's good business after all. However, everyone knows that good faith reciprocity at that scale is not rewarded. Apple is ruthless. There are probably thousands of untold stories of how hard Apple has hammered it's suppliers over the years. While Apple has good consumer brand loyalty, they arguably tre…

Even if Apple isn't very good at reciprocating faithful service from its suppliers, there's also the matter of how it treats suppliers who cause it problems instead.

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#265

Post by philistine » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 7:45 PM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #215

anoojb wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's say TMSC reciprocated Apple's consistency as a customer by giving them preferential treatment for capacity. It's good business after all. However, everyone knows that good faith reciprocity at that scale is not rewarded. Apple is ruthless. There are probably thousands of untold stories of how hard Apple has hammered it's suppliers over the years. While Apple has good consumer brand loyalty, they arguably tre…

At this scale and volume, it's not really about good faith. Changing fabs is non-trivial. If they pushed Apple to a point where they had to find an alternative (which is another story) and Apple did switch, they would have to work extra hard to get them back in the future. Apple wouldn't want to invest twice in changing back and forth. On the other hand, TSMC knows that changing fabs is not really an option and Apple…

Apple has used both Samsung and TSMC for its chips in the past. Until the A7 it was Samsung, A8 was TSMC, and the A9 was dual-sourced by both! Apple is used to switching between suppliers fairly often for a tech company; it's not that it's too hard for them to switch fab, it's that TSMC is the only competitive fab right now.

There are rumours that Intel might have won some business from them in 2 years. I could totally see Apple turning to Intel for the Mac chips, since they're much lower volume. I know it sounds crazy, we just got rid of Intel, but I'm talking using Intel as a fab, not going back to x86. Those are done.

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#266

Post by philistine » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 7:47 PM UTC

boringg wrote: post #179

anoojb wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's say TMSC reciprocated Apple's consistency as a customer by giving them preferential treatment for capacity. It's good business after all. However, everyone knows that good faith reciprocity at that scale is not rewarded. Apple is ruthless. There are probably thousands of untold stories of how hard Apple has hammered it's suppliers over the years. While Apple has good consumer brand loyalty, they arguably tre…

Counter argument is that is NVIDIA friendly to their supply chain? I have to think that maybe they are with their massive margins because they can be - their end buyer is currently willing to absorb costs at no expense. But I don't know, and that will change as their business changes. Your underlying statement implies that whoever is replacing apple is a better buyer which I don't think is necessarily true.

Nvidia is famously a pain to work with. Apple vowed never to use their chips, Microsoft and Sony can't get them to make any GPU for their consoles.

The only complete package integrator that manages to make a relationship work with Nvidia is Nintendo.

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#267

Post by simonh » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 7:49 PM UTC

boringg wrote: post #199

marcosdumay wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your customers are known to be antagonistic to business partners, the correct answer is to diversify them as much as you can, even at reasonable costs from anything else. That means deprioritizing your largest customer.

Fair I feel like that also speaks to nation+states trade policy. Also theres the devil you know and the devil you dont know.

Yep, you can be close allies with a nation and have many shared interests, and even a trade deficit with them as we in Britain did, and then they stab you in the back with tariffs.

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#268

Post by bob1029 » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 8:05 PM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #244

bob1029 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Semiconductor manufacturing is not an incremental step for Apple. It's an entirely new kind of vertical. They do not have the resources to do this. If they could they would have by now.

How do they not have the resources? Certainly they have the cash resources. At this point it would be corporate suicide if they were not outlining a strategy to own their own fab(s).

> Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. plans to spend a record of up to $56 billion this year to feed the world’s insatiable appetite for chips, as it grapples with pressure to build more factories outside Taiwan, especially in the U.S. [0]

Apple has less cash available than TSMC plans to burn this year. TSMC is not spending 50 billion dollars just because it's fun to do so. This is how much it takes just to keep the wheels on the already existing bus. Starting from zero is a non-starter. It just cannot happen anymore. So, no one in their right mind would sell Apple their leading edge foundry at a discount either.

There was a time when companies like Apple could have done this. That time was 15+ years ago. It's way too late now.

[0]: https://www.wsj.com/business/earnings/tsmc-ends-2025-with-a-...

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#269

Post by 7speter » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 8:05 PM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #215

anoojb wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's say TMSC reciprocated Apple's consistency as a customer by giving them preferential treatment for capacity. It's good business after all. However, everyone knows that good faith reciprocity at that scale is not rewarded. Apple is ruthless. There are probably thousands of untold stories of how hard Apple has hammered it's suppliers over the years. While Apple has good consumer brand loyalty, they arguably tre…

At this scale and volume, it's not really about good faith. Changing fabs is non-trivial. If they pushed Apple to a point where they had to find an alternative (which is another story) and Apple did switch, they would have to work extra hard to get them back in the future. Apple wouldn't want to invest twice in changing back and forth. On the other hand, TSMC knows that changing fabs is not really an option and Apple…

I would imagine they could split their orders between different fabricators; they can put in orders for the most cutting edge chips for the latest Macs and iPhones at TSMC and go elsewhere for less cutting edge chips?

Re: Apple is fighting for TSMC capacity as Nvidia takes center stage

#270

Post by randall » Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 8:06 PM UTC

philistine wrote: post #266

boringg wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counter argument is that is NVIDIA friendly to their supply chain? I have to think that maybe they are with their massive margins because they can be - their end buyer is currently willing to absorb costs at no expense. But I don't know, and that will change as their business changes. Your underlying statement implies that whoever is replacing apple is a better buyer which I don't think is necessarily true.

Nvidia is famously a pain to work with. Apple vowed never to use their chips, Microsoft and Sony can't get them to make any GPU for their consoles. The only complete package integrator that manages to make a relationship work with Nvidia is Nintendo.

I think that works out tremendously well for Nintendo, especially when you look at the Wii-U vs the Switch.

I shot a video at CNET in probably 2011 which was a single touchscreen display (i think it was the APX 2500 prototype iirc?) and it has the precise dimensions to the switch 1.

Nintendo was reluctantly a hardware company... they're a game company who can make hardware, but they know they're best when they own the stack.