Printable View
Samsung may be eyeing up AMD and Acer Packard-Bell(Source:Inquirer) :confused:
Quote:
We know that Acer is in acquisition mood, so this one could be a goer. But AMD and Samsung? It's not impossible, and would certainly give Intel a fit of the heebie jeebies.
But, like I said, these are just rumours in the channel so I wouldn't bet your last dollar on these ones.
Intresting rumor. Not sure if I'd like an even bigger company while surely at least it would be more stable and have a larger bank account to help out which would be nice.
samsung for amd makes lots of sense, and its not the first day the rumor has been floating around.
but i just dont see why acer would buy packard bell; acer is already going strong in the euro market (correct me if i am wrong). makes sense for them to buy gateway to get into the US market, where their presence is less than asus.
Could amd be buy? I have understand that it can't without loosing x86 licence...
If AMD want out of x86 business it would make sense.
Inq listening to the stoner from the mail room again?Quote:
Originally Posted by major_john
Precisely. Buy AMD and no more x86.Quote:
Originally Posted by nemrod
I guess theinq was some low water in the hits and needed something to attract new.
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderd...g-hostile-bid/
Rumor also has Samsung being swallowed :confused:
isn't it against the law to be a monopoly in the usa, so if samsung did purchase amd, and lost the x86 licence , wouldn't it be in intel's best interest to renew it to samsung, to avoid having major lawsuits?
Aint they already a monopoly in that way? And what about MS, they seem to go well in hand with US law. And its not like it would be hard to change the company base.Quote:
Originally Posted by gdogg
Some people apparently don't quite understand just how big Samsung isQuote:
Originally Posted by red
samsung isnt BIG is HUGEEEE
Ye, 80billion$ revenue and 128000 employees.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] leviathan18
Think MS+Intel with only 3/4th of the employees of the 2.
you hit the nail. the whole thing amd can't be sold without losing x86 license is nonsense. intel would be forced to renew that licence again whether they like it or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by gdogg
why do they think samsung buying amd doesnt make sense?
x86 cpus and gpus is all they need to build an entire pc.
display check
dram check
graphics dram check
compact flash check
hdd check
optical drive check
gpu missing
x86 cpu missing
mainboard missing
who cares about mainboards?
thats as trivial as a pc case in the end...
if samsung has their own cpus and gpus they can basically create an entire samsung pc, everything in house.
after all intel and micron are good friends amd needs good memory firm to help her with the world growing demands for ram.
plus a thought: samsung is a ram developer herself we might see ram for intel and ram for amd cpu paths had already been split?
from samsung point of view as i see it amd got into troubles with the ati acquisition.
samsung is such a giant it is a very smart move of her in a world which stand on the multi core barrier
we can't afford to lose the 2nd cpu manufacturer in the world to Intel which had forced that.
if those stories are true.
If Samsung was US based i think so too. Do you really think Intel would have been forced to renew AMDs license that time if AMD was not US based?Quote:
Originally Posted by dexman
Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
You forgot cases, water blocks and psu's..maybe OCZ should place a bid?
interesting thing is i remember i think onepagebook had some "amd" ram, a good while ago, which was weird as hell back then, but now it could make sense if amd and samsung are apparently more tight than previously thought. and yeah, i have a feeling intel might be lenient with the amd x86 license, as long as amd still uses its own fabs.
Hypothetically, what would happen to AMD shareholders? Does this mean buy AMD stock?
except inq has more credible sources than anyone of us on the forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by xenolith
Not true at all, there is many members of these forums, with as credible and even more credible sources then the inq.Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
Some members of these forums are more important then many of us even know.
there are milions ways to get that license despite Samsung not being US based. If you buy a company it doesn't necessary mean that company cease to exist. it changes owners but still operates in US. i don't think company has to be US based to make US anti-monopoly agency react to market deformations.Quote:
Originally Posted by ted3
It is also well known for making up random crap when the editors feel bored.
I guess I could be wrong then, judging from the WSJ article last week about whole food's CEO posting on Yahoo Finance forums. Hi Mr. Otellini.Quote:
Originally Posted by gdogg
Inq has been in business for long and got bought out by private equity group, so it must be really good at something. Rumors alone won't cut it.
It is perfectly legal to achieve a monopoly in an area of business.Quote:
Originally Posted by gdogg
What is not legal is using a monopoly you (legally) acquired in one area to blackmail other companies in the intend to achieve another monopoly in a second area.
That means in the first area you got the monopoly because your products in area 1 are better and/or cheaper. But in area 2 you just say "buy my area2 product or you won't get any area1 products either". The latter is what is forbidden.
INQ credible? Entertaining sure, reliable, no.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39110
:rolleyes:
Number of clicks and tabloid sensations have nothing as such in comon with truth and reality. They didnīt buy them for being good at finding true stories. But being good at getting focus and hits over tabloid articles.Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
Sometimes, but we were talking about some of there sources, sometimes they get it right, I have seen it, but when the inq gets it right, its normally not exclusively them talking aboutQuote:
Originally Posted by red
Its easy to get something right if you try enough times.Quote:
Originally Posted by gdogg
True, thats why my parents always say, if at first you fail, try try again :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
The INQ follows this rule perfectly.
uh, they clearly stated that its a RUMOR, unlike the tabloid news you read on the supermarket check out line.Quote:
Originally Posted by red
crying wolves only works for so long.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
I dont know, people still link fudzilla, tg and theinq.Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
Rumors are fun though and sometimes lead to the truth of the matter getting found.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
the inq might have a bad reputation but sometimes there spot on.
remember the first note on the inq that AMD would be buying ATi. many ppl here thought that was just another made up inq tale. and look what happened...
Samsung + amd it makes sense, + it would make Samsung the biggest it firm in the world.
they have the motive and the money.
Ye, and AMD buying nVidia, Intel buying ATI, Intel buying nVidia. AMD might buy ATI, AMD wont buy ATI. They had to get something right.Quote:
Originally Posted by zert
Samsung+AMD would still be over 10billion$ revenue behind Siemens.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...hots/6619.html
Next 10 years are going to be the "acquisition years". Expect to see the 1200 semiconductor companies go down to 200.
No idea if this is rumor holds much water though.
ummm interesting story but that is all it'll ever be
Exactly, they live on rumors get with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
The cases of AMD buying nVidia and nVidia buying ATI has actually been talked and discussed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Multi-way bidding/negotiating war like the current ABN Amro drama is pretty common in the M&A field. But of course only 1 deal will be marked on history, that is the AMD + ATi deal.
uh, rumor is for something that is happening or has happened. predicting things over the next 10 years is, fortune telling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Verisimilitude
but judging from the design cost at 65nm/45nm, I don't think that 'rumor' of yours is false. semiconductor industry will be M shaped, where only very large companies (intel, samsung, ti, qualcomm) and very small start-ups could exist.
You got to be kidding, those items are easily and cheaply sourced. Samsung already makes their own cases anyways and should have plastic fab labs to whip up such a thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by trans am
Many aren't aware(at least if you live in the US) but Samsung makes laptops as well, and I do believe for the most part they make them themselves, not outsourced ODM like Dell, HP, and most of the industry.
Anyways, this is very interesting I wouldn't brush it off. I agree it would be somewhat logical to imagine Samsung having an interest in AMD, and according to different rating scales, generally Samsung is considered the world's largest semiconductor producer. They have the money, and they could have the motives. Similar situation back when rumours flooded about AMD purchasing ATi, but I didn't even believe it back then.
There is no doubt in my mind that someone will buy AMD, this does make scence for Samsung. Just imagine the powerhouse
A powerhouse that can't make x86 CPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinnacle
Kiss up to IntelQuote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Lead Head
Samsung has a lot of production capability & money to put into R&D. It might also speed up the adoption of newer memory tech. They'd have mainboard, well chipsets at least, shouldn't be too hard for them to make some PCB's too.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Samsung buying AMD would get them everything but the Case, PSU, Soundcard & Cooling, which they could easily either buy a company or 2 or develop their own.
As for the x86 question, they might well get kicked out of the EU if they hold the monopoly on x86 CPU's. Considering how the EU is going for Microsoft, Intel being the only x86 supplier would be easy pickings for fines & sales bans. It would be in Intels best interests to either open up x86 or give Samsung/IBM/nVidia the same licene deal AMD gets.
However I doubt it will happen for a long while, if at all.
I live in South Korea and Samsung is a giant. Its nice for samsung they use slave labour to cut costs and have a huge r&d department. If samsung swallowed up and AMD it would be a small hickup. South Korea will be eventually renamed to South Samsung LG Hyundai Lotte Korea. These companies virtually run the country there is nothing out of their reach.
They make everything.
Cars
Trucks
Ships
Heavy Equipment
Electronics of all Kinds
Elevators
Escelators
Furniture
Chemicals
Consumer goods.
ETC.. There is more.
Thats what Im seeing, ANYTHING is possible if you have the money, this minor x86 licence thing could be easily solved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrench
The only way they would get a license is to buy Intel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinnacle
or pay off about 52 more members of Congress and have the US government bend patent law again :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
And how would that work in all the other countries?Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Which country has the single biggest impact on International Patent law :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
not to mention the native home of the x86 patent
You're able to start a "flame war" on science fiction. :ROTF:
Try and tell the EU that.Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
The only real option for x86 CPUs for Samsung if they buy AMD is an emulated approach like Transmeta.
Samsung is so big that it can abandon x86. To be honest it should be done looong time ago!
Besides, you don't need x86 license to emulate ISA :) . The only problem is efficient emulation in real time, but with 8 cores I think this will be non issue.
Real problem lies in lazy programmers, but if Samsung would go with PPC compatible design then we already have nice tools for devs and quite a number of applications for every possible new gen. consoles. Just recompile that engines...
All this I wrote above is unlikely to happen anytime soon, but Intel will not risk pushing us into that possible future and for that reason alone it would give a license to another big company interested in one....
You make it sound like its some huge number. AMD owns 6.7% of Transmeta.Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekFSE
source
umm I hate to tell you this but ever since the Pentium Pro, all x86 processors have not been natively x86. Rather they use hardware decode to convert to internal Risc ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
the EU shouldnt be a problem, the EU doesnt like monopolys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
IF AMD loses its x86 license Intel would have the monopoly on x86 CPUs and they make up a to big chunk of the CPu busines so the EU would in 1 way or another force them to give the license to other companies.
So the EU takes care of itself, Samsung only needs pictures of some 52 members of congres with prostitutes.
edit:
owning 6.7% of the shares of a company IS a huge number.
if with 6.7% they are the biggest shareholder i dunno, its possible but unlikely.
Heh..no, you cant abandon x86. Thats basicly the whole industy issue. x86 is close, if not the fastest generel purpose CPUs on earth. For emulated you need something alot faster. And you would need the first 5-10years development time. Just look how far Itanium have gotten now, after 10-20billion$ development cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
And without very fast emulation, people aint moving nowhere to a new platform. The first Itaniums had x86 support/emulation. But it was too slow and people abandoned it. Its a roughless crowd.
Another problem is emulation as such dont scale well either in terms of cores.
If we could abandon x86, we would have done it. Only a 100% monopoly would have any chance at doing so.
wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
wrong again. What are you trying to say with EU and other countries talk? I think you lack basic principles of how patents work so please stop the FUD about this license.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
If some company holds patent over something that doesn't mean the rest of world will watch unable to use it.
There are still other x86 makers btw. The EU dont care about monopolies, but how its used. Its about business ethics so to say. Else MS would have lost all it patents by now and everyone would make Windows compatible code.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starscream
You do know how international patent laws work? And how do you think the rest of the world would react if the rules and ways of patents was just instantly bypassed for one company vs another?Quote:
Originally Posted by dexman
Thats right, the world dont work that way. If it did, welcome to the biggest patent mess in history ever. All patents would lose all value if they did.
exactly, which makes me wonder what the x86 license is all about anyways...Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
is it about having the hardware decode from x86 to xxx?
or is it for having some chip that can, among others, process x86 code?
it cant be the latter because every processor can process x86 code if you translate it to the native instructions.
so is it all about having the hardware decode instead of a software decode?
that would be ridiculous...
so in the end, imo, the x86 license has lost all its value a looong time ago.
its completely worthless and only exists as a materialization of big players like amd and intel trying to keep others out of the x86 game.
ever heard of royalties? it's not like the patent holder is left empty handed. and again, intel would be forced to grant that license because of the nature of this market.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Yes, AMD pays royalties today. You cant force a company to do what you like in a free market. You can regulate prices. But thats about the only thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by dexman
not to mention the fact that you can just add Microcode and do hardware supported software decode, which would technically be software decoding.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Or did everyone here forget Cyrix? Cyrix NEVER Bought or rented the rights to x86, but they clean room reversed engineered first the x87 Coprocessor and later the whole processor. Got sued by Intel and Intel LOST to them, if it wasn't for their lack of ties with Oems, they would still be here today.
To put it roughly, it covers all HW x86 abilities. Thats why Transmeta had to do it in software.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
It's not so easy. Cyrix was using foundries which had had x86 licence from Intel in the past. (IBM, SGS-thomson...)Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
right, then intel gave its license to AMD absolutely willingly? this is getting tiresome. read some economics and what anti-monopoly agency can and can't do. it's much more than just price regulation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
The x86 license to AMD was part of the settlement after the 486 cloning. So yes, they gave it willingly away back then.Quote:
Originally Posted by dexman
Correction they cut a deal with AMD after losing a lawsuit that could have cost them billions ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Normally I'd say it is fortune telling, but since I've heard it straight from the mouth of some TSO execs... I'm telling you that the bigger companies will rely heavier on outsourcing and acquisations in the next 10 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
Samsung buying AMD will be a good thing. It will give AMD something they never had or never seem to achieve: Competent executives. Currently the company is run by infantile monkies with overbloated paychecks.
actualy in a way you can force a company to do what you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
You do what we want or else we will forbid you to sell ur product in our country/region
there is no really free market on this planet.
right, and that's why there will be no medium sized companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Verisimilitude
bigger companies will use Cisco's R&D model and buying up all those start ups thats about to turn into net profit, and outsource manufacturing to taiwan. even intel/samsung outsource part of their manufacturing to taiwan.
ummm... samsung is from taiwan..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_ElectronicsQuote:
Originally Posted by cky2k6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung
All South Korea.
What are you talking about? Pay Intel RoyaltiesQuote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Bahaha... not likely...Quote:
Originally Posted by cky2k6
With the Family who owns it being Korean and all;
oh and the fact that their name is Korean too;
or how about the fact that their main HQ is in SK?
If Samsung swallows AMD and it does it efficiently/smoothly,
there really won't be any corporation in the world that would be
comparable to it...
That would mean more l33t Samsung computers to advance
into the world (from what I know, Samsung brand computers and
laptops are only available in South Korea. Where I gotz my custom
Q10 :D )
I think this Samsungs wealth is blown out of proportion here. Samsung posted a profit of $1.5, not much more than the 1.3B Intel posted, Samsung is not the giant many of you think (edit: in semiconductors), this is just part 2 of the "IBM Pwns and can crush Intel anytime" fantasy IMHO.
Been happening for the past decade or more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Verisimilitude
It's very true. Companies spending less and less on R&D, just going on acquiring "raids" lol. (best example I knew about closely was EMC)
New ones start up, develop a small breakthrough or concept and again they're bought out.
Yea, really good at getting high crowd/traffic.:yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
General rule of thumb I learnt in finance: predicting even over the next 3 years is pointless. Every analyst knows they're talking bull**** when talking years lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
You said it spot on:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
gahh, bring me some REAL news. All this rumour lately is so boring.
Ha so true...so, so, so true!Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekFSE
we got samsung laptops everywhere and they got a very good price/performance, just as the acer ones, but if you're searching for a certain one it can take ages until you get it, just pick the ones in stock :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by topaimz
Why Samsung won't and primarily can't buy AMD was shown in this comment by scientia(quote):
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scientia from AMDZone
IBM should have swooped in and helped by now if they really are working together. I've heard they are going to collaborate on 45nm, but that might be too late.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal