Rumor: Amazon May Buy SoC Business from TI

[exfileme]

An Israeli financial newspaper claims that Amazon is in talks with Texas Instruments to buy its SoC business. So silly.

Rumor: Amazon May Buy SoC Business from TI : Read more

 

[chewy1963]

Ah yes the Commodore/Tramiel school of business... Buy your supplier! That worked great for Commodore! er wait, no it didn't

 

[curiosul]

Apple is not a chip maker (as far as I know) ...

 

[puddleglum]

[citation][nom]curiosul[/nom]Apple is not a chip maker (as far as I know) ...[/citation]I think he was refering to cow chip.

 

[Estix]

Amazon buying TI would be less a move for themselves, and more a move against Barnes and Noble, by controlling the supplier of their largest Ebook Reader competitor.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]chewy1963[/nom]Ah yes the Commodore/Tramiel school of business... Buy your supplier! That worked great for Commodore! er wait, no it didn't[/citation]

Intel is their own supplier for manufacturing and it works out so well for them that they're one of the largest technology companies.

[citation][nom]curiosul[/nom]Apple is not a chip maker (as far as I know) ...[/citation]

Apple more or less designs their SoCs, but Apple doesn't manufacture them last I checked.

 

[SneakySnake]

Apple creates and designs their chips, and they use Samsung's foundries to product them

 

[Camikazi]

[citation][nom]SneakySnake[/nom]Apple creates and designs their chips, and they use Samsung's foundries to product them[/citation]
They didn't do much designing until the A6 before that they just used Samsung CPUs (Hummingbird for A4 and Exynos for A5/X) with PowerVR GPUs really. The A6 is where they started actually designing things and really make it a custom package.

 

[rosen380]

I think chip-maker generally refers to the designing part, more than the physical making of the chip. So, Apple qualifies now that they are doing the design part.

If Apple isn't a chip-maker because Samsung does the actual 'making', then do Microsoft and Sony don't make gaming consoles, Nike doesn't make shoes, Apple doesn't make phones, tablets and media players, etc...

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]rosen380[/nom]I think chip-maker generally refers to the designing part, more than the physical making of the chip. So, Apple qualifies now that they are doing the design part.If Apple isn't a chip-maker because Samsung does the actual 'making', then do Microsoft and Sony don't make gaming consoles, Nike doesn't make shoes, Apple doesn't make phones, tablets and media players, etc...[/citation]

They aren't makers of any of those unless they actually make the products. Making something doesn't refer to designing it, it refers to making it. Designing the chips is what refers to designing them.

 

[rosen380]

But when someone refers to Nike or Reebok as shoe-makers, no one jumps up and says-- hey those guys don't make any shoes, they just design them. When someone calls Apple a chip-maker, about a billion people step up to make the correction.

Likewise, when Apple sells a product with a $250 BoM for $600 built by virtual slave labor, you have people protesting outside of Apple stores. When Nike sells a pair of Jordans for $200 that have a $2 BoM and are made in similar or worse conditions, you really don't see the same...

So long as every time someone says, "Who makes the XBOX 360?", the answer is Foxconn, I guess I'm OK with not calling Apple a chip-maker.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]rosen380[/nom]But when someone refers to Nike or Reebok as shoe-makers, no one jumps up and says-- hey those guys don't make any shoes, they just design them. When someone calls Apple a chip-maker, about a billion people step up to make the correction.Likewise, when Apple sells a product with a $250 BoM for $600 built by virtual slave labor, you have people protesting outside of Apple stores. When Nike sells a pair of Jordans for $200 that have a $2 BoM and are made in similar or worse conditions, you really don't see the same...So long as every time someone says, "Who makes the XBOX 360?", the answer is Foxconn, I guess I'm OK with not calling Apple a chip-maker.[/citation]

Well, this is the tech industry, so the average person is more likely to know the difference between making and designing something here. This is a tech site, so we tend to not talk about shoe here. I bet you that similar responses would be made if Nike was brought up here in such a way in an article, assuming that many people cared to read it and/or comment on it.

 

[Camikazi]

[citation][nom]rosen380[/nom]But when someone refers to Nike or Reebok as shoe-makers, no one jumps up and says-- hey those guys don't make any shoes, they just design them. When someone calls Apple a chip-maker, about a billion people step up to make the correction.Likewise, when Apple sells a product with a $250 BoM for $600 built by virtual slave labor, you have people protesting outside of Apple stores. When Nike sells a pair of Jordans for $200 that have a $2 BoM and are made in similar or worse conditions, you really don't see the same...So long as every time someone says, "Who makes the XBOX 360?", the answer is Foxconn, I guess I'm OK with not calling Apple a chip-maker.[/citation]
Actually people who care and know about shoes have said the same about Nike many times over the years and they have been accused of using slave labor. The reason a Nike article here won't get that kind of attention is cause this is a tech site so few here care about shoes but we do care and know about tech and will make those corrections. Go to any sneaker enthusiast site and see how they talk about and dissect Nike and all shoe makers the same way we do to Apple and other companies. People tend to correct things they know about and this site attracts techies so those types of errors about tech companies will be corrected. Was a nice try but a little more research would have helped you since bringing up Nike was a bad idea.