RUMOR: Apple buys Taiwan fab to stamp its own chips

“Despite all that talk that Apple is striking a deal with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSMC) to produce the A8 chips and later, there’s now a rumor that the fruity iPhone maker will make its own chips, thus entering the fab industry thanks to a purchase of an unnamed chip fabricator,” Kevin Parrish reports for Tom’s Hardware.

“Hints of TSMC’s involvement with A-Series manufacturing surfaced back in January, indicating that Apple was sampling TSMC as a foundry with a trial production of its A6X SoC,” Parrish reports. “Then in April, The Korea Times said that Samsung will not be a part of the A7 chip either. One of Samsung’s local partners in Korea told the paper that Apple was sharing confidential A7 info with TSMC.”

Parrish reports, “TSMC is expected to produce Apple’s A9 and A9X starting around the end of 3Q14. These will be used in next-gen iPhone and iPad products for 2015 whereas the A8 will be used for an iPhone slated to launch in early 2014. That said, Apple’s foundry purchase makes sense. Not only will the fruity company not need to solely rely on other sources to produce its chips, but offer foundry services to other companies, making a little extra cash on the side.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related article:
Apple exploring U.S.-based chipmaking deal with Globalfoundries – July 13, 2013


      1. Next time someone punches you in the face repeatedly as they are on top of you pinning you to the ground, please tell them “you feel threatened”. Dumbass.

        1. Let me get this straight if someone is on top of me punching me like crazy is ok to defend myself ? Yes sounds logical, but ok when is it ok to follow me without any Merritt and again is it rapest, muggers, thieves, pickpockets are the ones that do the following? Listen if Zimmerman was following me the way he did and you know he did I think I would have approached him and a fight would have broke out right! But hey here’s the mystery he has a gun his father is a judge but I get killed be cause I defended myself against a perpetrator. Just saying.

          1. The question is “who was standing who’s ground”? Martin was in a place he legitimately belonged, was confronted by an unknown assailant, defended himself and when the fight was going badly for him, the assailant blew him away. Florida’s gunfight law isn’t exactly black and white. Or is it?

            1. Let’s hope someone else uses the same Florida flimsy self defense plea against Zimmerman when they feel threatened by him and blow HIM away. We can allow these kind of Barney Fife vigilante’s loose misinterpreting and blowing away everyone in sight. Even one bullet in these kinds of guy’s front pocket is one too many. If GZ hadn’t had a gun he would not have approached. Case closed.

            2. Peter is out for Blood — advocating Zimmerman die. Whatever. To the clueless emotional out there: anyone with a brain expected this verdict.

              Back to Apple, good move.

            3. Move on when a kid can be shot in cold blood in his own neighborhood with no legal repercussions? I feel that’s a bit bigger than Apple and demands more of your attention right now.

            4. You telling me what to do with my time? I won’t return the same.

              The verdict was correct and followed the law. You don’t like it, too bad. Keep kicking a dead horse, only in Hollywood, will it get up and walk again.

            5. As usual, nothing constructive to add to the conversation. Why don’t YOU go away?

              Here all the rules of MY GAME. As evidenced by your childish egotistical habit to always have the last word to make yourself feel superior and sleep at night — knock yourself out …

            6. Let’s see now, ATF means what again? Clear focus on the ‘A’ and the ‘F’ in this name.


              Everytime a gun injures or kills in self-defense, one is used:

              11 times for a completed or attempted suicide
              7 times in a criminal assault or homicide
              4 times in an unintentional shooting death or injury
              Source: Journal of Trauma, injury, Infection and Critical Care (1998)

            7. Your source is dubious at best.

              Try this on, easily manipulated one:

              6. Gun suicide is a bigger killer than gun homicide. From 2000 to 2010, “firearm-related suicides significantly outnumbered homicides for all age groups, annually accounting for 61 percent of the more than 335,600 people who died from firearm-related violence in the United States,” says the report. Firearm sales are often a warning: Two studies found that “a small but significant fraction of gun suicides are committed within days to weeks after the purchase of a handgun, and both also indicate that gun purchasers have an elevated risk of suicide for many years after the purchase of the gun.”

              7. Guns are used for self-defense often and effectively. “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year … in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008,” says the report. The three million figure is probably high, “based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys.” But a much lower estimate of 108,000 also seems fishy, “because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.” Furthermore, “Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

              Full report:

              That’s just one link to refute your FUD. I can find hundreds your not interested in and won’t make a dent in your thick skull, simpleton.

            8. You must be right. All those counties in the world with low rates of gun deaths need more guns to make them as ‘safe’ as the US. More guns are obviously the solution to the world’s problems.

            9. You watch too much TV. Guns are used legitimately in the US by millions of people every day. Ethical hunters and target shooters are dead set against alcohol use anywhere near firearms. Guns are tools, like hammers, screwdrivers, and chainsaws. Just like those other tools, they can be mis-used to commit crimes.

              Your statistics about defensive gun use are wildly inaccurate. FBI statistics show that guns are used hundreds of thousands of times per year in the US by would-be victims to thwart criminals, usually without a shot being fired.

              As for the Zimmerman case, according to the facts introduced at trial, the prosecution did not prove 2nd degree murder. The evidence didn’t support that charge. That is the fault of the prosecution in its over-reaching charges.

              As a practical matter, current case law on the use of concealed handguns in a potential self-defense situation call for the armed citizen to avoid being the aggressor, something Zimmerman did not do when he followed Martin. Had the altercation happened as he was aggressively following or confronting Martin, Zimmerman would have been hard pressed to successfully plead self-defense. However, Zimmerman broke off the pursuit to return to his vehicle, whereupon he was accosted by Martin, who now becomes the aggressor. Martin could just as easily have walked on home and he’d be alive today, but instead he attacked Zimmerman, who was retreating at the time. As the victim of Martin’s attack, Zimmerman was justified in using deadly force if he felt his life was in danger. The jury apparently agreed with Zimmerman’s assessment of the situation. I would tend to agree, given that the evidence supports Zimmerman’s description of Martin being on top of him and banging his head repeatedly against the concrete sidewalk. There is also the issue of Martin trying to get control of Zimmerman’s firearm. At that point Zimmerman has to conclude that Martin wants to use it to harm him.

              And please remember that Martin was no saint. The photos of Martin at the age of about 12 that are continuously published don’t suggest Martin’s criminal record. or the fact that he was living with relatives due to his involvement with gangs, drugs, and crime at home. He wasn’t quite the innocent he was portrayed to be.

            10. As long as they aren’t innocent, it is ok to kill someone, right? Who is the judge of that innocence? The person with the gun or the fastest with their gun? Gee, I think I am ‘getting’ the gun culture now!

            11. All excellent facts, Zeke.

              The photos of Martin at age 12 looking innocent and boyish cute are all we see in the media and used on protest signage.

              We don’t see pictures of Martin, 6’1″ and age 17 at the time of his aggressor attack on Zimmerman. Also mot widely distributed in the BIG media are pictures of a bloodied and swollen Zimmerman after the attack.

              When dictionaries rewrite the definition ‘Kangaroo Court’ they should include a reference to this trial.

            12. Either you didn’t comprehend what I just wrote or you are purposely mischaracterizing it. Martin was the one who ultimately had the choice to avoid a fight or not. He chose to be the aggressor.

              But I understand that you aren’t interested in the facts or logic or law. You’re interested only in justifying your own point of view, which is disconnected from the reality of the situation.

              “As long as they aren’t innocent, it is ok to kill someone, right?”

              Who (besides you) said that? That’s not at all what anyone is saying. But it sounds good if you can put those words in my mouth, right?

              “Who is the judge of that innocence? The person with the gun or the fastest with their gun? Gee, I think I am ‘getting’ the gun culture now!”

              That’s a really slimy thing to come back with. I gave you a reasoned argument based on the law and the facts, and you come back with sarcasm and ridicule. Gee, I think I’m beginning to “get” the anti-gun culture now.

            13. It is obvious 3l3c7ro is not interested in facts, logic or the unvarnished truth. He has not made one convincing argument or an enlightening statement regarding the verdict. Go back to your bowl of fruit loops watching cartoons which make more sense than your ridiculous sideshow posts.

            14. Martin was hitting Zimmermans head against cement. That is not ‘defending himself’ that’s a load of crap. Martin essentially put a bullet into his own body by his actions.

          2. There are two very helpful keys on the keyboard to assist in getting your meaning across. They reside just below the ‘k’ and ‘l’ keys. Without these punctuation marks, it is very difficult to understand what you are saying. I had to read few words twice (or more) to try to figure out the ambiguities.

            Even after reading your missive, I can’t understand how it relates to Apple manufacturing its own chips or having them made by TSMC.

          3. I’m entitled to walk where I wish to on public grounds or in my neighborhood. If I walk up to someone I’m unfamiliar with in my neighborhood at night and ask him or her what he’s doing there and that person attacks me and knocks me to the ground smashing my head into the ground. If I have a fun on me that person will have a bullet hole in them. This will happen in any of the 50 states and in Puerto Rico or Guam.

            1. Even after you have called the police and been advised to wait for their arrival? Zimmerman could have stayed in his car. Martin had just as much right to be there as Zimmerman and had no responsibility to put up with Zimmermans harassment. One thing we will never know in this case is Martins side of the story. Killing the witnesses is a time-tested method of getting away with murder. It was going to be murder from the second Zimmerman got out of his car with a concealed gun.

            2. Zimmerman broke off the pursuit to return to his vehicle, whereupon he was accosted by Martin, who now becomes the aggressor. Martin could just as easily have walked on home and he’d be alive today, but instead he attacked Zimmerman, who was retreating at the time. As the victim of Martin’s attack, Zimmerman was justified in using deadly force if he felt his life was in danger. The jury apparently agreed with Zimmerman’s assessment of the situation.

            3. That’s Zimmermans version of the story after a year and a half of rehearsal . Since his first act after the murder was to try to get some money and his passport together to flee the country, I think his actions at the time told the true story. We’ll never hear Martins version of the events.

            4. All the jury has is what is presented in evidence. They cannot surmise or fantasize about what happened. According to the evidence at hand, there’s no case for 2nd degree murder. According to the evidence, at the time he was accosted Zimmerman was in retreat. That precludes the necessary intent needed to prove murder.

      2. Most legal experts were saying before the verdict was in the prosecution did NOT prove its case.

        If you read stories from the last couple hours more legal experts have come out in favor of the verdict, like Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz and an article in the Miami Herald. Hardly, conservative sources.

        Justice has been served because the jurors used their heads and not their hearts inflamed by the usual PC cabal, racist Sharpton and the complicient media.

        Stay tuned for the next chapter: ACLU and DOJ to LAUNCH their narrow minded suspect agenda on an acquitted good citizen.

      3. “I think I’m done with Florida if someone can just “feel” threatened there and legally shoot me dead.”

        Your “done” with Florida, well, thank you very much. Your lack of facts and intellect is as deep as a birdbath.

      4. Was it right for Zimmerman to kill out of his personal fears? I strongly believe it was wrong for him to shoot the kid and he should therefore be punished for recklessly ending another human being’s life with decades of jail time. But I respect that there’s differences of opinions, and I could think differently if I was on the jury and heard all the evidence presented.

        1. If the prosecution had gone for manslaughter conviction instead of 2nd degree murder, Zimmerman may have received a different verdict. I think the prosecution overreached due to public pressure. My heart goes out to the family of Trayvon Martin; he shouldn’t be dead. But I think the jury made the right decision based on the charge against Zimmerman the evidence presented in trial.

          1. Precisely! Great to read a rational, thinking post that looks at ALL the evidence and follows the rule of law. The blind and biased emotional overreaction and cherry picking of facts is MORE of a danger to society, day in and day out, than one self-defense verdict.

      5. The take away: it doesn’t pay to be an upityass high-on-pot fool and come to a gun fight with only your fists. I’m hiring The Z-man to cover our neighborhood. fuckyou!

      6. “stand your ground” the best law of the land on the planet. But if you want to be a victim and never defend yourself, hey it’s your choice. when confronted by a tug we all should use guns in self defense.

        1. Totally agree! “Stand your ground” laws should be a national/international law. Police resources cannot be everywhere at all tomes and citizens need the backing of law enforcement to protect themselves and not end up a victim.

        2. A man breaks in to my home with a gun.
          My life, my family, my possessions, my money are threatened.
          However, it is illegal, in my country to use a gun or any weapon in self defence in this situation.

          If I do decide to defend myself and the criminal is hurt and dies – I am charged with man slaughter.

          Crime pays – even more so when they too have rights.
          And, thats when the law goes horribly wrong.

          1. Horribly wrong does not begin to describe the unequal treatment of citizens.

            Is it even possible — criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens?

            That’s just wrong!

        3. I guess my problem with “stand your ground” it the imprecision of exactly whose ground is whose. I’ve been in stores in Florida with pencil-necked, sawed-off little twerps with their almost concealed weapons walking around looking bitchy. This is disaster looking for a place and time to happen. Perhaps if stand your ground carried a mandatory 1 year sentence if you kill anyone, no matter what, I’d feel like proper care was going to be exercised before whipping it out seemed like the next best action to take.

  1. Parrish reports, “TSMC is expected to produce Apple’s A9 and A9X starting around the end of 3Q14. These will be used in next-gen iPhone and iPad products for 2015 whereas the A8 will be used for an iPhone slated to launch in early 2014.

    What the heck – “whereas the A8 will be used for an iPhone slated to launch in early 2014.”?! iPhone slated to launch in EARLY 2014???? What is going on?!

    1. The issue here is that they mixed up things. Apple contracted TSMC, but only under conditions that Apple will own the equipment and it will be exclusive customer of manufactured products.

      Under this condition, there is no need for Apple to directly own whole plant.

      1. DeRS,
        Now that sounds like an Apple type move. Own your IP and critical hardware. Stuff that is expensive and you can move if you change your mind.

        Apple did this for the milling machines it bought for aluminum cases for computers and phones. Bought out the world supply of them. When other companies tried to acquire the milling machines they had to wait over a year.

        Good move Apple.

        1. the pharmaceutical companies have even better protection over processes, patents and research. in Europe new medications take 12 years to get approval and therefore also are awarded 12 years protection from copied generics.
          In America the process is 7 years, however a 5 year protection plan.

          Why is technology and innovation a mere 1 year or less, and copies and competition occur immediately.

          This needs to change.

    1. As someone who had read a lot, you must realize that variety in terms or names makes reading more enjoyable and repetition is often used for emphasis. Saying Apple in every sentence becomes monotonous. Does that answer your question?

  2. Yeah but in a way it would be cool if Apple not only made their own chips taking away a huge income source for Samsung but stole away more from Samsung’s other customers making them take an even bigger hit than just Apple’s considerable business. I like the way that might roll out.

    1. Apple does not need to buy Intel but could buy up one of the under utilized plants and hire the laid off workers from Intel. Both companies come out ahead and Apple could produce both the A series of IOS chips and the Intel chips under license for Macs.

      1. No, I’m saying they could put intel chips in apple hands and take them out of the windows world.

        Leaving windows suffers as AMD only. That would force them to become mac users.

        Would be good for my share values

          1. Microsoft has been abusing their monopoly for decades and they got away with it.

            I care about my share value and apple user experience

            Nothing else

        1. That kind of forced change would be unethical and therefore un-Apple like. An abuse of a monopoly like that would bring the wrath of the people on Apple (and all appropriate government offices).

  3. I’m happy to hear the rumor that Apple might be building its own chips in the future, but is this something that will turn a profit or is it just something to protect Apple from short supply. However, with the death of the iPhone being widely tossed about in the news media it appears they won’t have to worry about things like a shortfall of processors anymore since far fewer iPhones will be sold in the future. Who would Apple be supplying? I suppose they’re talking about companies needing ARM-class mobile processors, so is Apple going to be supplying processors for Android hardware? That seems rather frightening.

    1. This is a new low, even for you. When have iPhone quarterly sales numbers on a YoY basis EVER declined? HINT: NEVER! Even last quarter they were up over the same quarter a year ago. Just because the Galaxy S4 is a flop, along with the Nokia and Blackberry offerings the word on Wall Street now is that smart phone sales are declining. It couldn’t possibly be that Wall Street was WRONG about Apple’s competitors’ products killing the iPhone, could it? Heavens no! Wall Street is never wrong, and when it looks like they are they spin the facts to save face.

      The truth is that iPhone sales have been growing more rapidly than Samsung’s for some time now. It’s also true that Nokia and Blackberry are dead in the water, offering irrelevant hardware and software. The future looks bright for Apple.

  4. I think the Global Foundries rumor makes the most. They have a modern facility in New York that needs clientele. And Apple would be wise to use someone who speak their own language and isn’t so far away. Especially with all the “made in the US” stuff going around.

  5. Who can blame Apple of wanting to wash their hands of Samsung? It the best solution to keep their IP from be copied and ripped off. Tim Cook is no idiot. It’s the only solution to keep their IP safe.

    1. Agreed, in order to keep the IP safe… why in Asian?
      “Apple buys Taiwan fab to stamp its own chips.”

      Just buy out Intel and AMD and keep the IP in the homeland.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.