Should Apple Buy AMD?

[HyperMac5]

I voted no because that would be the end of Hackintoshes. I think what companies are trying to do is make stuff not upgradable and obsolete after 3-4 yrs because now it's all about profit. If Apple buys AMD Intel will lose out on a lot of business and maybe even struggle like AMD is now. It would also create a monopoly in the PC CPU market, so the government might not even approve the purchase. An upside is that iDevices will be improved, but still I love desktops and I don't think we are ready to move to mobile computing just yet.

 

[Yukon Kid]

I cannot say that I agree with the comments for and against.

everyone talks like they really know what goes on in apples mind.

Look into the history of Apple and you will see that many things where done because of the lead that Job's forced.

Intel was involved from the beginning as apple used them, the PPC was a device that was supposed to service the PC world as much as Apple when it came to the operating system, why do you think it was so easy to develop the windows emulation for the G5.
Jobs vision was not proprietary it just seemed that way because he wanted the user to never have problems.
Apple is now directing the manufacture of the A5, A6 chips used in the iphones and itv ipods etc. but so do the other phone makers.
I believe that Apple is heading into the use of one chip for the complete line of devices. This makes 1 operating system across everything. This would make a truly portable world as your phone, tablet, tv etc would be able to share the same data and icloud account. This is the dream Jobs had from the beginning. Microsoft looks like they are close to being there first.

 

[HKintosh]

This is exactly why [...] MS offered them a huge loan

It wasn't a loan, it was a way for MS to keep their face after using Apple QuickTime for Windows code for Video for Windows (see http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Apple_v._San_Francisco_Canyon)

Anyway ... I don't think that Apple should buy AMD. Yes ... it wouldn't be nice if there was no more hackintoshing but that cannot be Apple's reasoning for doing so or not.

Buying AMD would essentially mean returning to the PowerPC processor era, i.e. proprietary processors and potentially not being able to compete with the performance of Intel processors. Look at AMDs lineup right now ... there's really nothing worth buying - unless you want/need to save a couple of your currency units (and don't want to run Mac OS). On the other hand, Apple has some capable CPU engineers and might use AMD's technology as a basis and turn it into something competitive but I don't see that.

I think that Apple is mostly happy with Intel - apart from Intel's UltraBook campaign.
It should say "Inspired by Apple" not "Inspired by Intel"

 

[andrec]

No. It should be of great help to Intel and Nvidia and will no longer manufacture graphic cards for everyone.
I don't see Apple as a component manufacturer. The current push to raise the price of tablets and phones
near the price of a portable computer will not be fun either.

The cheap processor still has a lot of use for undeveloped countries, for education, for science.

As it was mentioned before, I also see Apple consolidating the whole line to few processors and platforms.
iMac and Minis are already a laptop in a different case. If they only need two processors, there will be no need
to have the cow.

 

[totenkopf4]

APPLE buys AMD

Why it should if you look at the unit cost of each item in a Apple Desktop and laptop the CPU is the most costly to buy even in quantity - so buying AMD would in time reduce that cost.


This would complete Steve Jobs "thinking" of a vertical market - from design on all fronts through manufacturing marketing and sales.
This would be the last piece in the puzzle for Apple plan for vertical integration.

Benefits
Control of the complete manufacturing arena to support Apple development - as they now have to "work with Intel" to incorporate ideas into the silicon. And be depending upon Intel schedule - Intel Time so to speak. Whereas if they had their own manufacturing they would be on Apple Time and that would solve the development slowdown in silicon design to test to market.
I am sure that Apple's back room of Brainiac's would want a CPU to have OSX and IOS support in native mode no emulation needed (faster that way).That way they combine the different OS's together. (Microsoft and Goggle should be wary of this ). Especially if it supported Windows code (Phone and W 8).Like they do now in "Boot Camp" or in an OSX VM window.

Again if Apple did buy AMD then this would allow then to do simple silicon fix to prevent OSX installs onto non Apple hardware.
This is the simplest method to do to curtail Apple hacking - the software method is counter productive - would cost more to implement compared to the return on the investment to Apple. It all depends upon how Upset Apple is over Hacks. As they got the cash to do almost anything.

Why - we now seen how software distribution for OSX is now done - Apple has now closed the ways we make hacks in the past and only by using the Grand Father method on older hardware with Snow Leopard can we do it - Or on a older Mac!

As we have seen by closing the way Apple distributes OSX this method has made it harder for us using new hardware. So having customized CPU hardware would eliminate any method of us Hackster's getting a clone built- this closes the loop so to speak. The old adage of a key within a key within a key; one of the principles of DES encryption.

What about current AMD designs if Apple buy's AMD nothing would change for any of the AMD channels that they currently use.
AMD is the low cost per unit leader for Cheap CPU's and w Apple Cash could undercut Intel in competition (Daddy War bucks style).

AMD's newest CPU w onboard GFX is actually faster that the Intel HD series that is in use by Intel. And its incorporating the silicon of the mid level ATI designs.

AMD has a big market with the Optoron CPU in the Server market especially outside of the USA where a negative bios exists for Intel and Microsoft. (Linux UV's AMD CPU's) The x86 architecture is limited - has been out for some 40 years (AMD and Intel signed a co license agreement for the combined knowledge that is in the x86 architecture).

AMD is planning on developing ARM 64 bit Server CPU's w AMD Fusion built into the silicon. This is a big advancement into Fabric computing - of which Apple has a big interest in (think Apple servers).This is a HP, IBM and other's current territory. (aka Big Iron)
Also AMD servers can be incorporated into a large conglomeration of processors (Parallel Computing) w more CPUs that what Intel has or can do.

If Apple acquires AMD it will have whatever AMD has in the line of IT Intellectual Properties, technologies, patens etc.
It would not be a violation of any past agreements between the current AMD and Intel if Apple was to acquire AMD.

AMD has some tech that was acquired by buyouts and then incorporates these technologies into new designs or puts them in the closet so to speak (future development).

As Apple already own's one company TSMC that makes the ARM chips for the iPhone's / i Pads - the next logical process would be to buy AMD for just the purpose of getting the x86 License that AMD owns / shares w Intel; and incorporate that into the TSNC design so that the two chip designs become one - Again this is some what of a normal business practice of a larger company taking the assets of a smaller company and using them in the next generation of products. Don't get me wrong but AMD would still exist but and make its traditional processors. It (AMD) could benefit greatly from the cash input from Apple which would but Intel in a disadvantage overtime as the low power tech that TSNC has in it ARm units could be integrated into AMD silicon.

Also if this happens Apple would have the assets of ATI which could include any unique video IP assets that were acquired when AMD purchased ATI. This could be integrated into TSNC ARM processors.

But what it really comes down to is how much legs are left in the X86 and what are the potential for unit sales in the Desktop and Laptop arena going forward - if as others have predicted that Desktops and Laptops which are currently x86 based andare headed into the sunset of existence and we are all moving to tables and hand-held's then No this not a good idea to buy AMD (unless the intent is to hurt Intel) - a better option would be co-license agreement between the two. This is a classic Standard Oil and or US Steel from last century.

Buy AMD stock long - Sell Intel stock short .... Apple go to $1000/share or more.

 

[hmttony]

I voted yes .

Unlike many of the people who voted no and say that buying AMD would lead to the end of The hackintosh . I say that if apple buys AMD is would lead to a more stable hackintoshs because legally apple would have to continue selling AMD processors / GPUs to pc markets because if they stopped it would give intel a monoply and it would make macs unable to run windows .

Buying AMD would allow apple to reduce computer prices , Increase graphical performance on their laptops and computers that dont come with desecrate graphics . It would also allow apple to develop the processor to work with Mac osx instead of developing Mac osx to work with the processor .

In the End buying AMD would be great benefit to apple . It would cut down their production cost and increase their profit , Thus Allowing apple to become the first company to be valued at a trillion dollars .

 

[bradl]

I voted yes .

Unlike many of the people who voted no and say that buying AMD would lead to the end of The hackintosh . I say that if apple buys AMD is would lead to a more stable hackintoshs because legally apple would have to continue selling AMD processors / GPUs to pc markets because if they stopped it would give intel a monoply and it would make macs unable to run windows .

Buying AMD would allow apple to reduce computer prices , Increase graphical performance on their laptops and computers that dont come with desecrate graphics . It would also allow apple to develop the processor to work with Mac osx instead of developing Mac osx to work with the processor .

In the End buying AMD would be great benefit to apple . It would cut down their production cost and increase their profit , Thus Allowing apple to become the first company to be valued at a trillion dollars .

But why would it be the end to the hackintosh? I would argue the opposite: it would benefit and continue the hackintosh effort altogether.

Apple would finally integrate AMD's architecture into their kernel and ethos (kexts, etc.). If they did, and AMD were to continue to make the CPUs able to be purchased by the consumer, you get the ability to make hackintoshes out of AMD chips as well as Intel chips.

Now.. if Intel were to go back to soldering the chips onto the board, like they did pre-Pentium days, you'd lose that ability to make a hackintosh out of an Intel CPU.

The key here is what would Apple do with the CPU line, should they buy AMD. If Intel goes back to pre-ZIF socket days, and Apple pulls AMD's line from the shelves, then you'd lose the ability to build a hackintosh completely. Intel lost a huge portion of the market back in the mid-90s to competition when they opened up the socket instead of soldering the chip onto the board. That's what made it a boon for the consumer. Before then, it was all proprietary, where we all paid premium for a computer with no means of upgrading by hand. If Intel goes back to that, the hackintosh is screwed. You should worry more about that than Apple buying AMD.

BL.

 

[mykuls]

They (Apple) are going to do what they want to do. I built AMD pcs for about 13 years before I built my Hackintosh as my first Intel build. AMD has been in a steady decline with their good ideas not quite living up to expectations. I used AMD cpus primarily for their cost/performance, but even that trait has deminished.

AMD now reminds me of Apple in the mid to late 90's. I am not sure I want Apple to swing in to be their savior and kill their momentum.

 

[costi_pit2002]

you know what would be hillarious? If it were the other way around...

 

[morganb]

^ LOL

I dont want them to buy AMD as I want them to still use a ubiquitous platform that helps me with hackintosh projects.

Will they? Depends on what they aim to do. As it stands I dont feel that AMD are a premium brand, I feel that they are perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a gamer-centric budget alternative. I dont think that apple really would want to have their branding associated with that so there has to be more going on under the hood as it where. I think grabbing the company from the graphics perspective makes sense but currently I just don't buy that they can offer Apple anything in the CPU department as it stands.

Would you agree that AMD could be under pressure from Intel right now? If the stakeholders at AMD felt that the ongoing CISC war between them and Intel was no longer profitable then the best alternative is to stop fighting and concentrate on something else. Perhaps they are not so far from a desktop RISC solution (or already have it) but just need investment? What better solution would there be if the Apple mothership descended and said "your diversity will be added to ours".

If purchasing AMD gives them access to a lot of infrastructure, then we could imagine that purchasing AMD is a step towards building Mac Pro's that were totally scaleable just by throwing loads of extra cores at them. AMD would be especially attractive if they were a significant way down the road to producing quality RISC based machines. I seem to remember that Apple ported MacOS to Risc a while ago but I could be wrong?

I know its a big stack of what ifs but I m fairly sure that Apples computer market share is increasing, AMD's CISC portfolio probably is not as competitive as it used to be and we do know that some well known server brands are beginning to use RISC chips.

Still its probably all just bull****. I haven't had much sleep lately and I do love conspiracy theories.