Would Apple want to buy AMD?

[MacsRgr8]

See this

I won't think Apple would want to use AMD CPUs instead of Intels as they have learned the hard lesson: "if you can't beat them, join them" (regarding CPUs)
Apple turned to Intel because they are the biggest CPU maker and simply is the safest bet.

But Apple could buy AMD and use their own Apple branded CPUs in coming Macs and / or iOS devices.

 

[Goftrey]

Interesting..

I think the furthest Apple should go with AMD is using their GPU's in their Macs, but, hey, maybe this is the new up-coming era from Apple?!

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Apple would never be approved to buy AMD due to the fact that it would greatly reduce competition in the processor world.
Apple would not keep selling CPUs to the public and would be the only one to use them.

 

[MacsRgr8]

Apple would never be approved to buy AMD due to the fact that it would greatly reduce competition in the processor world.
Apple would not keep selling CPUs to the public and would be the only one to use them.

Adobe got the approval to acquire Macromedia. That greatly reduced competition in the design / web software world.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Adobe got the approval to acquire Macromedia. That greatly reduced competition in the design / web software world.

But there was still other valid competition in that world.
Without AMD there would be no other x86 CPU producer top it off Apple history would count against them heavily. They would lock down all AMD products to just Apple.

 

[Demosthenes X]

Apple would never be approved to buy AMD due to the fact that it would greatly reduce competition in the processor world.
Apple would not keep selling CPUs to the public and would be the only one to use them.

This is a fair point. However, Apple is a small enough player in the computer market that it might go through. Competition rulings aren't just based on the number of firms in the market, but also their size. I can see a case being made for Apple and AMD both having small enough market share that an acquisition wouldn't affect competition...

 

[Rodimus Prime]

This is a fair point. However, Apple is a small enough player in the computer market that it might go through. Competition rulings aren't just based on the number of firms in the market, but also their size. I can see a case being made for Apple and AMD both having small enough market share that an acquisition wouldn't affect competition...

Well AMD is the only other major x86 chip supplier. That would take that out of the market effectively removing intel's competitor 99% of that market.

Also do not forget AMD is also one of the major players in the graphic card market. Imagen a lock down on AMD chip design for graphic card. That would also kill that market as well.

Apple buying AMD would be bad for everyone but really Apple and maybe intel and I could even see intel saying hell no to it as well since then they would be under major problems with the DOJ being the only player in the x86 market.

 

[Goftrey]

Well AMD is the only other major x86 chip supplier. That would take that out of the market effectively removing intel's competitor 99% of that market.

Also do not forget AMD is also one of the major players in the graphic card market. Imagen a lock down on AMD chip design for graphic card. That would also kill that market as well.

Apple buying AMD would be bad for everyone but really Apple and maybe intel and I could even see intel saying hell no to it as well since then they would be under major problems with the DOJ being the only player in the x86 market.

If they were to buy into AMD, maybe they'd use AMD hardware and drop the Intel platform, which would still mean there'd be Intel and AMD out there....

 

[TSE]

I was actually thinking of something before.

If ARM architecture gets popular enough and powerful enough for regular computers in the future, which it might very well end up like, could Intel possibly buy AMD, use their graphics division, and claim they aren't a monopoly because they still have to compete with ARM?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

If they were to buy into AMD, maybe they'd use AMD hardware and drop the Intel platform, which would still mean there'd be Intel and AMD out there....

Not really. Just for Apple. Dell, HP, Sony ect could not use AMD any more and they all do.
The home builder market would loss AMD completely. You could be damn sure Dell, HP and Sony would all sue to stop it because they know intel would be able to raise prices on them to make up any losses from Apple and nothing they could do about it. The consumer would loss.

 

[jav6454]

Apple buying AMD is a bad thing as long as Apple locks down everything. I would dislike Apple pulling all GPUs and CPUs from market to lock them to Apple products. This would effectively give Intel and nVidia global monopoly on the CPU and GPU business. Bad thing.

But if Apple keeps selling CPUs and GPUs at the same pace AMD has so far. Then I am all for it. Apple's cash can pump into AMD's CPU R&D which is failing horribly right now. Thanks to Bulldozer's flop, Intel can price gouge us...

 

[roadbloc]

Apple are not going to buy AMD.

/thread

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Apple buying AMD is a bad thing as long as Apple locks down everything. I would dislike Apple pulling all GPUs and CPUs from market to lock them to Apple products. This would effectively give Intel and nVidia global monopoly on the CPU and GPU business. Bad thing.

But if Apple keeps selling CPUs and GPUs at the same pace AMD has so far. Then I am all for it. Apple's cash can pump into AMD's CPU R&D which is failing horribly right now. Thanks to Bulldozer's flop, Intel can price gouge us...

But AMD did get a massive chunk of cash from a lawsuit against Intel about the illegal practices to keep them out of the market.
From the article it seem AMD was doing a lot better after they proved a pretty powerful case AMD.

 

[vvswarup]

Apple buying AMD is a bad thing as long as Apple locks down everything. I would dislike Apple pulling all GPUs and CPUs from market to lock them to Apple products. This would effectively give Intel and nVidia global monopoly on the CPU and GPU business. Bad thing.

But if Apple keeps selling CPUs and GPUs at the same pace AMD has so far. Then I am all for it. Apple's cash can pump into AMD's CPU R&D which is failing horribly right now. Thanks to Bulldozer's flop, Intel can price gouge us...

Stop with this "Apple locks everything down while everybody else is open" BS!!!!!! What you call "locking everything down" is building an integrated system. Microsoft licenses Windows to everyone and develops Office for other platforms besides Windows because it helps them make money. If they found they could make more money by writing Office only for Windows, they'd do it.

With that said, I think Apple would be utterly stupid to buy AMD. I fail to see what AMD could give them that buying from Intel doesn't. The only purpose it would serve is that Apple would not have to depend on Intel to supply chips, but that's not worth $5 billion.

 

[benthewraith]

Stop with this "Apple locks everything down while everybody else is open" BS!!!!!! What you call "locking everything down" is building an integrated system. Microsoft licenses Windows to everyone and develops Office for other platforms besides Windows because it helps them make money. If they found they could make more money by writing Office only for Windows, they'd do it.

Apple would refuse to license the use of AMD technology in other computers.

 

[maflynn]

While intriguing, I don't see the synergy, that is the fitting in to apple's plans. Plus I think as others posted, the gov't will step in if they think there is a risk of impacting competition.

 

[Flynnstone]

Interesting ...
Some of it false.
The quote from Anton Shilov, "Apple has never attempted to develop its own central processing units and used off-the-shelf chips for many reasons" is wrong. Apple, IBM & Motorola formed a group to develop the Power PC architecture. And for a short time, they were faster than the x86.

I think x86 is dying. Its powerful but inefficient. x86 scalar performance is hitting the wall. ARM is getting more scalar performance & more cores.

Intel is worried about ARM.

iPhone with an ARM dual core is a phone. A powerful phone.

The iPad with an ARM core is blurring the lines of what a PC is.
MacBook Air with x86 is not that much different than an ARM iPad.

Does Apple have MacBooks & Airs running with ARM processors? Rhetorical question ... of course they do.
Can these laptops run x86 code. Probably. Can they run it well ...

Would Steve Jobs buy AMD ... I doubt it.
Would Tim Cook buy AMD. That is ... possible.

Is Intel the most powerful processor company ....

An interesting stat I heard a few years ago.
If you rounded to the nearest whole percent, what is the percentage of all processors running Windows? ... 0.
I don't think the percentage has improved any.

 

[Abstract]

I don't know if Apple has any interest in investing in CPU development. They're not only trying to sell the fastest hardware.

They're trying to sell you well-designed solution that allows you to do things. They're selling you "fast enough", but "please use our services and buy our digital products". They're out to make products you can live with, and use pain-free.


I really don't see how Apple would benefit from owning a CPU company. They don't seem interested in that end of the market. The Mac Pro is certainly not looking good, and Apple doesn't seem to care.

 

[Flynnstone]

True I can't see Apple wanting to own a CPU company such as AMD. Too complicated with selling to competitors.
But I can see, sort of, owning a GPU company.
But still .... too complicated.

 

[jbzoom]

Apple more interested in ARM technology, stays friends with AMD to keep Intel in line

AMD has been more successful than Intel in reducing X86 power consumption and integrating graphics. Its Lano core including a cpu and a gpu on a single chip was under consideration for the Air and may yet be so. Apple continues to buy Radion graphics for its higher end machines to keep AMD sweet and Intel on its toes.
But the ARM roadmap is a very exciting one for Apple, Microsoft and even Google. ARM licensing of low power multi-core cpu and gpu designs for inclusion in System-on-chip mobile computing is driving Microsoft to offer full Windows (rather than just windows-for-mobile) for ARM cores and will also drive convergence of iOS and OSX at Apple.
Meanwhile, with Chrome a failure as an X86 operating system and Android a huge success as an ARM operating system, the next wave of both Google-system and Microsoft-system netbooks/low-end laptops are likely to run with ARM cpus and either ARM Mali or Imagination PowerVR integrated as single chip systems. This is not great news for Intel, AMD or NVidia and entirely eliminates the point of Apple buying AMD.

 

[johnhw]

I'd see culture indifference so that could be a problem. I don't think Apple wants AMD but I think they rather want ARM. It's much more logical since they make 50% of their dosh with mobile devices.

 

[zap2]

Ehh, while this might allow Apple to make CPU/GPUs more designed for their chips, but honestly it seems more trouble then it's worth, like why both? AMD can make decent chips as is. Plus Apple's work with Intel means they depend on each other for a bunch of things(like Thunderbolt)

 

[vvswarup]

Apple would refuse to license the use of AMD technology in other computers.

But I'm not denying that. What I am objecting to is this characterization of Apple as the "evil, proprietary corporation" while Google is the "good, open corporation." Google goes for "open," which is debatable, because that's the best way for them to make money. Apple is closed because it's the best way to make money.

And why would Apple license the use of AMD to other companies if they bought AMD? Better yet, why should they license AMD to others if they buy AMD?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

But I'm not denying that. What I am objecting to is this characterization of Apple as the "evil, proprietary corporation" while Google is the "good, open corporation." Google goes for "open," which is debatable, because that's the best way for them to make money. Apple is closed because it's the best way to make money.

And why would Apple license the use of AMD to other companies if they bought AMD? Better yet, why should they license AMD to others if they buy AMD?

They should license it out because with out them doing that it would complete change the face of both Graphic cards and CPUs. x86-64 is AMD technology. In In graphic cards you have Nvidia and AMD chipset designs.

Apple history of locking down stuff is the reason why the DOJ would never approve the Apple buying them up. It would change the face of the CPU and graphic card way to much plus the illegitimate fear of Apple knee capping everyone else.

 

[chaosbringer]

AMD cannot unilaterally extend Intel's licensing rights to a third party without Intel's consent..

if Apple buys AMD, that terminates the licensing from AMD to make x86 processors and the ones based on the licensed technology, at least if/until Intel licenses it to them