Apple will announce move to ARM-based Macs later this month, says report

[Curious Pineapple]

22 hours ago, Kisai said:

Just try to get a vehicle ECU, I dare you. Or any number of the sensors on a vehicle. It will either cost you more than the car, or the dealership will refuse to service it if the manufacturer doesn't have a recall for it.

I bought 4 for my project car, from the factory they were designed to be cleared and reprogrammed for new immobilizers so that the customer wasn't forced to replace the entire lockset if the ECU failed. Also means the manufacturer doesn't have to replace the entire lock set if an ECU fails. I was at a scrap yard on Saturday, I could have removed any number of ECU's that could be easily fitted to other vehicles. There is a difference between not knowing how to do something, and not being able to shite design

 

Sensors are cheap, very cheap, and if you swap them over from one car to another they still work. £25 for a brand new Alfa Romeo crank sensor, only failed sensor on a 19 year old car known for electrical failures. Timing belt was a £60 job with all genuine parts. I fried the airbag ECU with a dash swap, choppped the wiring from my donor car and spliced it in. Same bags, same wiring layout, same bolt holes. Things just fit and work. Parts in cars are used for several generations and across several manufacturers for cost savings. Control units may be paired together in most recent vehicles, but manufacturers still sell the data needed to run diagnostics and replace parts. That's part of the reason professional diagnostic gear costs thousands, it includes the cost of buying the diagnostic and repair information from every vehicle manufacturer.

[Kisai]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

How any times do I have to say it?  other companies being bad DOES NOT EXCUSE APPLE.

So what. You putting a target on Apple and excusing everyone else. If you're turning a blindeye to everyone, and going "oh no, APPLE is doing it, it's only bad when APPLE does it" then you must really think Apple is pandering rubbish off on unsuspecting fools.

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, Kisai said:

So what. You putting a target on Apple and excusing everyone else. If you're turning a blindeye to everyone, and going "oh no, APPLE is doing it, it's only bad when APPLE does it" then you must really think Apple is pandering rubbish off on unsuspecting fools.

Read my posts again.

 

Other companies behaviors DO NOT excuse apples.  want to talk about other companies then start a new thread.    Otherwise stop trying to put words in my mouth and stop trying to excuse poor behavior by saying everyone does it.

 

EDIT: if you look at any of my posts in other threads about android I oppose the bringing up of apple as an excuse for whatever the issue with android might be, this is not some biased attempt to shit on apple, this is just me not accepting a weak defense of shit consumer treatment.

[Curious Pineapple]

5 minutes ago, Kisai said:

So what. You putting a target on Apple and excusing everyone else. If you're turning a blindeye to everyone, and going "oh no, APPLE is doing it, it's only bad when APPLE does it" then you must really think Apple is pandering rubbish off on unsuspecting fools.

Just got a quote from Samsung for a new display on a Note 9, fitted locally within an hour. £259. Bit less than the cost of a new device isn't it. No excuse for Apple shipping the damn device with a week turnaround for a price that's "not far off the cost of a new one".

 

Yeh, people that choose that level of customer service are a bunch of unsuspecting fools.

[Kisai]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Read my posts again.

 

Other companies behaviors DO NOT excuse apples.  want to talk about other companies start a new thread.    Otherwise stop trying to put words in my mouth and stop trying to excuse poor behavior by saying everyone does it.

I have not been trying to excuse other companies behavior, that is what YOU are doing.

 

If you want to see the industry change, then it either has to come from a legislative stand (eg better lemon laws, or mandatory warranty/expiry's being put on the devices themselves) or it has to come from people not buying the rubbish products in the first place.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

I have not been trying to excuse other companies behavior, that is what YOU are doing.

Quote one post where I did that.

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

If you want to see the industry change, then it either has to come from a legislative stand (eg better lemon laws, or mandatory warranty/expiry's being put on the devices themselves) or it has to come from people not buying the rubbish products in the first place.

Or it can be forced by consumers who actively report and inform other consumers of shit practices. Unfortunately  this won't happen while people like you keep trying to argue not to because "everyone does it". 

 

 

 If you truly believe it is a problem across the board, you would just click agree when someone posted that apple's consumer attitude is shit right now instead of trying to debate it.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, Kisai said:

I have not been trying to excuse other companies behavior, that is what YOU are doing.

 

If you want to see the industry change, then it either has to come from a legislative stand (eg better lemon laws, or mandatory warranty/expiry's being put on the devices themselves) or it has to come from people not buying the rubbish products in the first place.

I just showing this edit in case you missed it:

14 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

EDIT: if you look at any of my posts in other threads about android I oppose the bringing up of apple as an excuse for whatever the issue with android might be, this is not some biased attempt to shit on apple, this is just me not accepting a weak defense of shit consumer treatment.

 

 

[Kisai]

13 minutes ago, Curious Pineapple said:

Just got a quote from Samsung for a new display on a Note 9, fitted locally within an hour. £259. Bit less than the cost of a new device isn't it. No excuse for Apple shipping the damn device with a week turnaround for a price that's "not far off the cost of a new one".

 

Yeh, people that choose that level of customer service are a bunch of unsuspecting fools.

And your point is? A Samsung Note 9 is USD $600, previously owned or $1300 new, yet likely won't get Android 11, as Samsung hasn't supported more than 2 major versions of Android.  So you just paid £259 to get 4 more months out of your two year old phone.

 

Apple didn't even make a suggestion of repairing the iPhone 6S, but since the Xs Max was out (that's 5 models newer) I wasn't going to pay to repair the 6s, even if that was an option, having had Apple previously replace the battery in in the 6s, it could easily have been their fault. At the time, even the office I work at, was still issuing people 6s's. Now they're on 8's.

 

If someone wants to repair their phone to get more life out of it, I hate to break it to you, but you aren't getting more life out of most Android devices because they are not designed to last more than 2 years.

[Kisai]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I just showing this edit in case you missed it:

 

 

So what you're saying is that I'm not playing by your rules that nobody is obligated to play by.

 

Click the "Community Standards" link

Quote

No harassment, discrimination or abuse of any kind.

• This includes insults and accusations (fanboy, troll, shill etc).

To me, this was a civil conversation until you decided that a balwark needed to be between Apple and everyone else.

 

[Curious Pineapple]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

And your point is? A Samsung Note 9 is USD $600, previously owned or $1300 new, yet likely won't get Android 11, as Samsung hasn't supported more than 2 major versions of Android.  So you just paid £259 to get 4 more months out of your two year old phone.

Well firstly I didnt break it, was just a quote. Secondly as I said, it's nowhere near the new cost of the device unlike Apple who would rather push a customer into a new device than just repairing the perfectly usable old one. Does Apple say "well, you can just go out and buy a used phone for the same price as we're about to charge you"? No, they offer a refurb in exchange for a 6 (plus money) that they "can't repair", then refurb that and sell it on to some other unsuspecting fool.

 

Even if I did need a new screen, Android supports applications for a lot longer than Apple devices do.

 

5 minutes ago, Kisai said:

If someone wants to repaid their phone to get more life out of it, I hate to break it to you, but you aren't getting more life out of most Android devices because they are not designed to last more than 2 years.

I have a Galaxy S2 that still works fine and runs modern applications. Hate to break it to you, but you're talking crap again.

[mr moose]

33 minutes ago, Kisai said:

So what you're saying is that I'm not playing by your rules that nobody is obligated to play by.

 

Click the "Community Standards" link

To me, this was a civil conversation until you decided that a balwark needed to be between Apple and everyone else.

 

??

 

So far all you have done is tell me that "everyone does it",  If you truly believe "everyone does it" then you would also accept that apple does it, and if you accept that apple does it then why are you hell bent on telling about all the other companies?  Trying to water down apples behavior by deflecting to other companies is pointless unless your intention is to dismiss the allegations against apple.

 

So again where did I say it was ok for other companies to do it but not apple,  show me where I am targeting apple?

 

You can't, because A I never did as I was only talking about apple in an apple thread.  There is no excuse for apples behavior, either it can be defended without bringing up another companies behavior or it can't.  If you can't defend it on it's own merits then there is nothing to defend PERIOD.

 

 

EDIT (as an afterthought): I can't work out why it's an insult to highlight that whataboutism is a weak defense for when a company treats it's customers like shit.   Especially if the person I am talking to is maintaining they aren't defending Apple. 

 

[Fnige]

15 hours ago, mr moose said:

So again where did I say it was ok for other companies to do it but not apple,  show me where I am targeting apple?

 

 

On 6/15/2020 at 6:58 AM, mr moose said:

You seem to be skipping around the core problem we are discussing,  apple want you to buy new not scavenge parts,in some cases even if you can get the parts new they can't be repaired due tot he way apple have made the product,  that completely negates the ability to scavenge parts from a wrecked device.  Your grasping at straws now because you have been shown that the automotive industry is the polar opposite of what apple currently is and desires to be in the future

 

[mr moose]

3 hours ago, SlimyPython said:

 

two quotes snipped.

That's not me saying it's o.k for others to do it but not apple.  That's me pointing out that what the automotive industry doing is not the same as what apple is doing.   You can buy parts for cars from the OEM as well as generic aftermarket,  you can't do that with apple.

[Tellos]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

That's not me saying it's o.k for others to do it but not apple.  That's me pointing out that what the automotive industry doing is not the same as what apple is doing.   You can buy parts for cars from the OEM as well as generic aftermarket,  you can't do that with apple.

You can also have independent mechanics source parts for fixes without fear the dealership will suddenly try to sue them or get customs to confiscate the parts.

[Tellos]

13 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

update: i'll let the URL speak for itself
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/06/21/leaks-suggest-no-hardware-at-wwdc/

So again the announcement isint coming because apple can't actually afford to build its own stuff. Basically when it announces it's building four new fabs to build its own I'll buy it. Their not spending a few tens of billions to do that in two years.

[hishnash]

2 hours ago, Tellos said:

fabs to build its own I'll buy it

Apple does not need to build its own fabs it has priority at TSMC it gets TSMC new nodes 6 months before AMD due to the amount of money apple pump into TSMC each year. 

[Tellos]

7 hours ago, hishnash said:

Apple does not need to build its own fabs it has priority at TSMC it gets TSMC new nodes 6 months before AMD due to the amount of money apple pump into TSMC each year. 

Apple wants to make it's own however see apple has never liked not having 100% control it's why they get into fights with vendors.

[mr moose]

4 hours ago, Tellos said:

Apple wants to make it's own however see apple has never liked not having 100% control it's why they get into fights with vendors.

Apple can afford to build it's own fabs (they literally could do it from cash assets if they wanted), but there is a large difference between building your own fabs and designing your own CPU.  Apple do not need to do either,  but their own in house CPU design suits their business model while owning their own fabs is something they don't seem to show any interest in.

[r3d0c]

On 6/9/2020 at 8:06 PM, Kisai said:

That's not how it works.

 

When you write code in C or C++ and you actually use intrinsics , anything that would normally be "tight assembly" is replaced with C code on platforms that do not have an equivalent library. Thus simply changing the target from x86-64 to aarch64 works in that scenario. However legacy programs, those written in 32-bit code and those written using in-house tools and libraries (such as Adobe's software, who took three whole version cycles last time to switch from Power to x86 32-bit, and only switched to x64 kicking and screaming on both Windows and OSX) will not be there on day one and may not be there for 4 years. Hence why Apple came out with the Rosetta layer, and the Mac Classic layer that worked on OSX 10.4/10.5. 

 

There's a whole host of software types that are simply not gong to switch at all, and this is why we're unlikely to see this switch entirely across the mac platform. It's likely only to happen to the laptop slot the "Air" takes up, not the Mac Pro. But the Air is already not a good option for people if they can buy the iPad Pro since the iPad Pro already has more performance than Air does.

 

But here we go again with how investors don't know jack about how computers are made. These other vendors producing "ARM" laptops? They are doing it to produce a cheap near-rubbish product to run as a revival of the previously rubbish nettop/netbook tier, because there is much more profit to be had in selling rubbish that only runs a web browser.

you were saying? lmao, so many "experts" on this forum

[r3d0c]

4 hours ago, Tellos said:

Apple wants to make it's own however see apple has never liked not having 100% control it's why they get into fights with vendors.

they want control over their own process but they're not going to start building fabs, they get priority and special treatment at TSMC already

i don't think you realize how expensive and time consuming it would be for apple to get into the fab business and only manufacture a relatively small amount of chips

[Tellos]

10 hours ago, rhn94 said:

they want control over their own process but they're not going to start building fabs, they get priority and special treatment at TSMC already

i don't think you realize how expensive and time consuming it would be for apple to get into the fab business and only manufacture a relatively small amount of chips

I do it'd cost BILLIONS to start and BILLIONS a year to keep running. But apple gets into fights with vendors over the level of control they have. And they do it OFTEN. Apple wants LITERALLY 100% total control they want the rights to develop off what they have for new equipment. its why many get into lawsuits over such.The only way they will ever get that control is making their own chips.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Tellos said:

The only way they will ever get that control is making their own chips.

That's not how industrial IP works,  they don't lose control just because they contract someone else to make their product. They not only retain all the same control over the process, but they also don't have the risks that come with building/operating a fab, which as I said earlier they can afford several times over just out of cash.   A fab costs $10-20B to build, apple have $245B in cash assets. They can afford to be independent of everyone if it really was beneficial to them.  

[hishnash]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

They can afford to be independent of everyone if it really was beneficial to them.  

Apple normally prefer to have multiple possible vendors they can go to for a product, that way they can reduce risk and play them off against each other for price.

 

They like the own the IP but if possible sub-contract out the physical production to multiple other providers to distribute the production over regions of the world but also multiple companies.

 

This reduces dependence on one single provider, both a cost saving but also a flexibility improvement since it is important for apple to rapidly change production of products throughout the year as demand waxes and wanes (most apple products, outside of the first month of a new product release, are produces Just-In-time rather than stockpiled in advance).

if they move physical production in house (build their own fabs) they take on a lot of risk, what if that region of the world suddenly has large trade tariffs placed on it... what if there is a local issue that shuts it down.  Apple could make 3 fabs geo-located around the world (and they might at some point) but more likely they will buy out fab IP and then license other companies to use that to produce the products for apple in such a way that those companies can only use that IP for apple. 

Even with apples depeancy on TSMC im sure they also have working samples with Samson Fabs as well so if they realy need to they can switch and apple will make sure that TSMC are well aware that apple would be able to switch (might not be as good as TSMCs coverings but would be close).

The other issue is apple's demand is very seasonal, so if they built their own fabs (unless they started to ship server parts etc) they would be sitting at 20% load most of the year waiting for the new chips designs to be finalised. And what would apple do with all the 1 year old fab tec that they would not have much use for, TSMC can use that to produce chips for other parties who don't need the latest node but non of us expect apple to rent out their fab space to third parties that is very much not apple.
 

[Master Disaster]

12 hours ago, rhn94 said:

they want control over their own process but they're not going to start building fabs, they get priority and special treatment at TSMC already

i don't think you realize how expensive and time consuming it would be for apple to get into the fab business and only manufacture a relatively small amount of chips

It wouldn't be a small amount of chips though. If Apple changed 80% of the current product stack to use Apple chips exclusively (assuming they just leave the high end desktop stuff on X86) that would likely equate to hundreds of thousands of chips per year. Remember they don't just use Apple CPUs, they also use controller components, lockout/DRM chips and other SoCs in these devices, all of which they could bring in house.

 

Heck theoretically they could develop and fab 100% of their own silicon inside 80% of their own products. It might cost them an astronomical sum to get this up and running but once it is running it would very quickly pay for itself.

 

Lets not forget, Apple are the richest company on the planet with a net value hovering close to $1T. Building a new fab, staffing it, creating the RnD department, staffing it and setting up the supply chain would still be chump change to them.

[hishnash]

30 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

assuming they just leave the high end desktop stuff on X86

They have been very clear they are moving everything to apples own chips.  but that will not have that much of an impact.

remember apple already sell more iPads every year than macs!

 

32 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Building a new fab, staffing it, creating the RnD department, staffing it and setting up the supply chain would still be chump change to them.

Apple is more likely to buy some fabs than build from the ground up through. They recently purchased all of intels modem deviation for example. If apple see a new fab tec that might be the next big thing they will buy it outright, they might already have an are just waiting for it to mature... chances are they have a few different bets on the table hopping at least one pays out.  The other thing apple does a lot of is invest into existing fab (efectivly fronting them cash) so that they build exclusive fabs for apple/give apple pirority