• dhork
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    My understanding, though, is they have their own chip specs, for custom die nobody else uses , and they integrate that into their chiplets or whatever it is they are using. So it’s not like those vendors can just sell those die to other customers. Whoever is making Apple’s RAM is making it specifically for them.

    Unless their contracts with Apple have some sort of escalation clause, I would figure Apple would be pretty insulated from all this price nonsense. Heck, they have enough cash on hand that I bet they can buy a smaller RAM vendor if they had to. It mainly depends on how much of that custom RAM tech they own vs. licensing from any particular vendor. If they are using patents from their vendor, then that makes it harder to just switch.

    • paraphrand
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I see. Yeah, I think the problem is that they can’t insulate themselves from the overall production timeline constraints. Because even if their chips are unique, they don’t have their own private production lines. They only get a share of available production capacity.

      And as I understand it. Buying out a memory production facility is something they are not interested in. They don’t want to be in that part of the supply chain. And getting in now, only for memory supply chain constraints to go back to “normal” in 2 years isn’t a strategy they want to take.

      Apple would rather have a diverse supply chain, and have the ability to pit different vendors against each other.

      Some of this is similar to why just building a new facility isn’t a solution in the near term either. Because by the time it’s online, the situation is likely to have passed. And then you are back in a commodity market that’s historically difficult to compete in.