Zibb

Ed SperlingOffering news and business analysis for the design engineer, Managing News Editor Suzanne Deffree filters the electronics industry's developments and trends to explain how what's happening in the board room today can impact the tech innovation of tomorrow.



   Advertisement

Profile

RSS Feed

  • Add this blog to your RSS newsreader!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Most Commented On

Archives

By Category

News Center Articles

Blog

Friday, May 1, 2009

Apple looks 'chipper': Recent hires, company buys suggest Apple may be readying chip design unit

May 1 2009 11:52AM | Permalink |Comments (11) |


Apple is hiring chip gurus and the big question industry watchers are asking is why. I, as many others do, suspect the company is readying a chip design group and is rightfully doing so by recruiting some of the semiconductor industry's best and brightest for its team.

Let's review: According to reports, Apple recently hired Raja Koduri, a former CTO of AMD's graphics products group. Koduri follows Apple's hire of Bob Drebin, who had held the same position at AMD. The two engineers also both came from ATI's former Imageon handheld graphics division, which AMD sold off to Qualcomm at the beginning of the year.

And in January, Mark Papermaster was clear to work at Apple after the ex-IBM engineer fought a non-compete agreement. Papermaster has extensive experience in PowerPC architecture and just began work at Apple last week, leading the company's iPod and iPhone hardware engineering teams as senior VP of devices hardware engineering.

Prior to Papermaster's initial hiring at Apple, back in the fall of 2008, the company bought PA Semiconductor, a fabless chip designer that specialized in low-power PowerPC microprocessors. (IBM's major objection to the employment change was that post its PA Semi buy Apple was considered an IBM competitor given the company's PowerPC background and that Papermaster's extensive knowledge of IBM's work could lead to the inappropriate disclosure or use of confidential IBM information.)

The buy is now approximately a year old and Apple has done little with the acquisition. At the time of purchase, industry analysts were not surprised and noted PA Semi's power efficiency focus, a boon for Apple, which itself is in a position to sell tens of millions of iPhones and Wi-Fi enabled iPod devices.

According to a recent Wall Street Journal report, Papermaster, Koduri, and Drebin are hardly lone semiconductor soldiers at Apple. Apple currently employees more than 100 people with chip design expertise on their resumes, the WSJ reports.

Apple has also been recruiting design engineers via its Web site's job listings for sometime now. Current posted positions include a senior ASIC design engineer and a senior design verification engineer.

To be true, I have not spoken to Apple nor do I expect the super secretive company to return my calls, but all signs point to such a design expansion of Apple's focus. Having such a chip design team in-house provides Apple with further exclusivity in its technologies, better ability to test, less royalties and markups to pay, and, perhaps most important to a trend-setting company like Apple, more overall control of its end product.

Looking at the situation today, I would agree with industry speculation at the time of the PA Semi buy that any Apple chip design activity would focus on its iPhone and iPod lines, at least at first. Not only are sales of its Mac computers down slightly (although nowhere near the declines in the traditional PC market), but all reports say that Apple is happy with its relationship with Intel as a Mac chip supplier. 

Still, the company could take on Nvidia in its computers. Its recent hires of the former AMD execs put a focus on graphics chip experience and Apple did take some heat when Nvidia chips failed in its Macs last July.  Further, Apple has enough cash on hand to drive its own graphics development. Such work could also be extremely valuable in its portables, especially if Apple moves into gaming on its iPhone and iPods as some industry watchers (including EDN's Brian Dipert) suspect it will. Apple's reported recent hire of Richard Teversham, the former Xbox Europe senior director of business, insights and strategy, also lends credence to this theory. And Drebin's credit as creator of the GameCube's graphics card should be noted here, too. 

Perhaps Apple-branded chips will turn up in iPhones, rumored tablets/netbooks, and MacBooks over the next year or so, but we'll just have to wait and see because, as I state above, the company is super secretive.

It should be noted that while Apple may look more "chipper" by the week, such a move could send some current Apple semiconductor suppliers into a chipper, shredding their sales. Remember PortalPlayer? Soon after Apple dumped it as a partner in 2006, the company's profits went under and it was acquired by Nvidia

If Apple were to go ahead with such a plan, it would face many hurdles, but the move would also represent a shift in industry trends. Such a move would be counter to general practices that have seen more and more OEMs go outside their own walls for chips, especially as the economy squeezes resources. And such an expansion, if it were to occur, offers further proof that even in the worst economies, companies that have proven records of innovation and marketing success grow. Apple's recent blockbuster quarterly results illustrate that nicely, with sales and profit up as its portables continue to attract consumers.

What do you think? Is Apple getting ready to take a big bite into the chip market? What would that mean for its suppliers and the chip industry overall? Share your thoughts below.


Reader Comments



at 5/1/2009 1:52:46 PM, sean said:
I believe the idea presented has merit. The underlying technologies used determine so much of the end products value propostion that being able to own and drive this could offer a compelling advantage.



at 5/1/2009 4:27:34 PM, Norbert from the Ozarks said:
Chip design today is equivalent to PCB design years ago. Could Apple have become the company they are today without controlling their board level design? Probably not. Can Apple continue to innovate without controlling their chip design, probably not.



at 5/2/2009 8:04:29 AM, ckaspereli said:
Toshiba and Sandisk will be coming out with a 64GB chip by next year. The latent capabilities of small form-factors will contine to make the business model driving ipods/iphones/iwhatevers unavoidably compelling.



at 5/2/2009 12:43:45 PM, Todd Bezenek said:
In preparing for a job interview at Apple a couple months ago, I did some research concerning iPhone applications and hardware. The ARM processor being used in the iPhone is not designed to run a full-blown OS (OS X) with the complex software stack needed for TCP/IP and the graphics-rich API provided. ARM is likely to continue designing their processors based on the EEMBC benchmarks. An Apple team will be able to build a processor that runs iPhone applications much faster--my quick guess is about twice the speed--for the same amount of energy.



at 5/5/2009 10:23:56 PM, ANDY G said:
Creating a company like Apple which is focused on the marketing cliche of attracting a new niche of customers is legendary. As far as chip design, that's a complete 180 spin from their business model. Predict their stock will get cheaper after a couple of years due to the money bruising which semiconductor brings to the table. Let's see if Apple has beef for that.





at 5/7/2009 12:10:25 PM, trm1945 said:
So far, and I am perfectly serious about this, Apple doesn''''t seem to be run by accountants but technicians and engineers. And yet the lessons remain lost.



at 5/10/2009 7:41:48 PM, SteveU said:
trm1945 brings up an interesting point. I think that in the future it will become understood that company culture is very important. Engineering is a creative occupation and not just a service. Successful companies will manage their talent the same way artists are managed. Hiring practice will need to look at creativity, and perhaps less at academic credentials. It should also be understood that MBAs only care about short-term gains and they will trash a company to maximize stock market gains so they can take the money and run.



at 6/4/2009 11:24:41 PM, RK said:
well. surprised, but not an ace news from planet Mars. There have been records of such venturings in the past from Apple itself and other industry giants. My guess is that, Apple is jus preparing the ground for a proper acquisition. We have to see which lucky company its going to buy now!




at 7/9/2009 6:14:06 PM, JG said:
I'm on the outside though I'm an Apple fan-boy (typing this on my brand new Air), but It's completely logical from my point of view and given I what I understand about Apple strategy and products. It doesn't much matter if anyone outside Apple gets it. The simple answer is that off-the-shelf products can only go so far when you are pushing the edge of the envelope in your high tech product space - eventually you have to change the paradigm by including hardware changes in addition to software innovation. As Xerox and Apple alum Alan Kaye has said: those who really care about software also do hardware.



at 9/15/2009 2:16:10 PM, dick_freebird said:
There is a lot of leverage in designing your own, provided you know what you really want to do. Only
by working in-house can you avoid the inevitable push-back on specs, schedule and cost from a hired design / ASIC house. You also can maintain a tighter hold on the IP and not see it seep into other designs for other customers (agreements are swell, but none are more reliable than their signers).



at 11/3/2009 1:40:54 PM, Brad said:
Andy G: They have been designing chips for years, albeit not CPUs, so it is not really 180 degrees. Also, it's not like they are entering the semiconductor industry - they will be producing chips for themselves, so they don't need to worry a lot about the inventories and sales of their processors - they will know exactly what they need. Note that they are not taking on the expense of building a fab; their investment is nearly all in intellectual capital. With over $30,000,000,000 in cash (zeros for emphasis), they can afford the risk.

Post a comment



Display Name

Change Image
Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above.
Note the letters are NOT case sensitive.


ADVERTISEMENT

©1997-2009 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Please visit these other Reed Business sites