On 2022-03-16 10:24 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> Please don't say Apple Silicon like it means something because it
>>> doesn't. It's *TSMC Silicon* based on ARM licenses if you _must_
>>> use any term.
>>
>> It's Apple Silicon...
>
> No it's not. It's TSMC Silicon.
>
> At least Intel makes the CPUs when it puts the "Intel Inside" sticker
> on.

Fact: Intel has some of its CPUs built by TSMC

<https://wccftech.com/tsmc-wins-intel-order-for-two-3nm-cpus-to-regain-market-share-lost-to-amd/>
>
> And yet nobody acts like a moron and joyfully claims "Intel Inside"
> like you iKooks do (which is how I know you all have phenomenally low
> self esteem).
>
> If you even use those words, it's a clear indication of either a low
> IQ or a low self esteem (most likely both in your case and that of
> Alan Baker).
>
>> just like AMD, nVidia, Broadcom, etc products manufactured by TSMC
>> are theirs. To suggest that TSMC has any ownership over the
>> products is factually incorrect.
>
> You don't understand how marketing works. You think Apple marketing
> called it that by accident?

How does that address the point he made?

Do you call AMD chips manufactured by TSMC, "TSMC Silicon"?

Same question for nVidia, Broadcom...

....and also Qualcomm (you remember Qualcomm, right?)...

....and Intel.

'TSMC, is the world’s largest contract manufacturer of the semiconductor
chips—otherwise known as integrated circuits, or just chips—that power
our phones, laptops, cars, watches, refrigerators and more. Its clients
include Apple, Intel, Qualcomm, AMD and Nvidia.'

<https://time.com/6102879/semiconductor-chip-shortage-tsmc/>

>
> Apple Silicon is all marketing and almost no R&D.

Yet you cannot find a single source in the tech reporting business that
agrees with you.

>
>> If you hired and paid a carpenter to make you a kitchen unit to
>> your design, does it belong to the carpenter?
>
> Apple is all MARKETING and almost no R&D to speak of. Apple MARKETING
> is trying to fool people with rather low IQs like you have.

Apple spends more on R&D that all but a handful of companies.

In article <t0t6g7$udv$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> >> Please don't say Apple Silicon like it means something because it doesn't.
> >> It's *TSMC Silicon* based on ARM licenses if you _must_ use any term.
> >
> > It's Apple Silicon...
>
> No it's not.
> It's TSMC Silicon.

it's apple silicon. full stop.

> At least Intel makes the CPUs when it puts the "Intel Inside" sticker on.

intel will be using tsmc to fab chips, largely because their own fabs
are very much behind the curve.

<https://www.eetimes.com/intel-will-rely-on-tsmc-for-its-rebound/>
California-based Intel will join Apple to order the world¹s first
3-nm chips from TSMC as the Taiwan chip foundry ramps up its
newest process this year, according to three analysts surveyed. Intel
and Apple are likely to be the only two TSMC customers at that
most-advanced node during the ramp-up, according to the analysts.

<https://www.tweaktown.com/news/83986/tsmc-to-build-intels-new-3nm-cpus-
at-site-in-northern-taiwan/index.html>
TSMC will be making Intel's next-gen processors in the coming years,
with new reports suggesting TSMC will be building the bleeding edge
chips at its latest facility in Baoshan, north of Hsinchu.

nospam wrote:

> it's apple silicon. full stop.

It TSMC Silicon.
It's Apple marketing bullshit.

If Apple said the iPhone was made out of pure gold, you'd believe them.
It's a marketing gimmick.

It works on you low IQ low self esteem iKooks.
Apple can't make any high quality chips.

Apple never has.
Apple never will.

Apple can't.
Nobody in high tech has _lower_ R&D expenses than does Apple.

Nor higher marketing.

Hell, Apple can't even integrate an _existing_ modem IC for Christs sake.
Everyone but Apple did that long ago.

Full stop.

On 2022-03-16 11:45 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>> it's apple silicon. full stop.
>
> It TSMC Silicon.
> It's Apple marketing bullshit.

It's Apple Silicon.

Apple designs it

TSMC just builds it under contract...

....just like they do for AMD, nVidia, Broadcom, Qualcomm...

....and Intel.

>
> If Apple said the iPhone was made out of pure gold, you'd believe them.
> It's a marketing gimmick.
>
> It works on you low IQ low self esteem iKooks.
> Apple can't make any high quality chips.

<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/05/apples-m1-is-a-fast-cpu-but-m1-macs-feel-even-faster-due-to-qos/>

>
> Apple never has.
> Apple never will.
>
> Apple can't.
> Nobody in high tech has _lower_ R&D expenses than does Apple.

Apple spends more on R&D than all but a handful of companies.

>
> Nor higher marketing.
>
> Hell, Apple can't even integrate an _existing_ modem IC for Christs sake.
> Everyone but Apple did that long ago.
>
> Full stop.

In message <160320221344112725%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <t0t6g7$udv$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
> <spam@nospam.com> wrote:

>> >> Please don't say Apple Silicon like it means something because it doesn't.
>> >> It's *TSMC Silicon* based on ARM licenses if you _must_ use any term.
>> >
>> > It's Apple Silicon...
>>
>> No it's not.
>> It's TSMC Silicon.

> it's apple silicon. full stop.

We've already established the dipshit troll does not understand how
manufacturing works. Apple designs the chips, they pay TSMC to
manufacture them. Apple owns the designs and TSMC doesn't own the chips
they make, they belong to Apple.

I suppose Arlen is so dumb he thinks publishers write the books they
publish. Dumbasses will be Dumbasses.

--
'Are you Death?' IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE
SCYTHE.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>> it's apple silicon. full stop.
>
> It TSMC Silicon.
> It's Apple marketing bullshit.
>
> If Apple said the iPhone was made out of pure gold, you'd believe them.
> It's a marketing gimmick.

Only if it's iGold.

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 2:45:54 PM UTC-4, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
> > it's apple silicon. full stop.
>
> It TSMC Silicon.
> It's Apple marketi

Oh, look: "Andy" doesn't know what a Trusted Foundry is.

-hh

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> fool people with rather low IQs like you have.

You always attack the messenger when you are incapable of an answer, don't
you? It's a giveaway.

Lewis wrote:

> We've already established the dipshit troll does not understand how
> manufacturing works.

"Dipshit Troll Lewis" doesn't realize I worked in Silicon Valley startups
for decades so I'm well aware of how chips are designed and manufactured.

It's Lewis who doesn't understand why Apple trademarked "Apple Silicon".
Anyone who says "Apple Silicon" is an idiot because they fell for a gimmick.

It's _not_ Apple Silicon.
It's MARKETING attempting to make TSMC Silicon "sound" special (to idiots).

*Apple wants you to "think" it's something special and yet it's not.*
That "Apple Silicon" crap is no different than anyone else's TSMC Silicon.

Apple MARKETING wants you to "think" it's special. Super Duper. Oh so Apple.
And yet, it's not.

It's no different than anyone else's TSMS Silicon.
The fact you can't comprehend that means you don't understand what it is.

It's like Chevron calls plain old polyetheramines "Techron" as if "Techron"
is something special when it's not. It's just plain old "soap for gas".

Likewise, Apple Silicon is just plain old TSMC Silicon.
Just as Techron is plain old polyetheramines.

The fact you don't know this means you don't own adult cognitive skills.
Full stop.

On 2022-03-16 1:22 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Lewis wrote:
>
>> We've already established the dipshit troll does not understand how
>> manufacturing works.
>
> "Dipshit Troll Lewis" doesn't realize I worked in Silicon Valley startups
> for decades so I'm well aware of how chips are designed and manufactured.

There is no proof of this.

>
> It's Lewis who doesn't understand why Apple trademarked "Apple Silicon".
> Anyone who says "Apple Silicon" is an idiot because they fell for a
> gimmick.
>
> It's _not_ Apple Silicon.
> It's MARKETING attempting to make TSMC Silicon "sound" special (to idiots).

Apple designs the chips and then just pays TSMC to build them...

....as do half a dozen other companies.

>
> *Apple wants you to "think" it's something special and yet it's not.*
> That "Apple Silicon" crap is no different than anyone else's TSMC Silicon.

It's faster... ...and uses less power.

Chris wrote:

>> If Apple said the iPhone was made out of pure gold, you'd believe them.
>> It's a marketing gimmick.
>
> Only if it's iGold.

From that joke I hope you're indicating that you understand the gimmick.
If Apple used "iGold" to imply it was gold, it would be an Apple lie.

Just as "Apple Silicon" is an Apple lie.

Apple is _desperate_ to differentiate their IP from everyone else.
Apple can't do that on performance or functionality alone.

So Apple resorts to an _expensive_ marketing campaign.
Instead of spending money on R&D, Apple spends it on marketing bullshit.

"Apple Silicon" is a classic example of Apple wasting money on bullshit.
Every dollar Apple wastes touting that their chips are not what they are is
a dollar _not_ spent in R&D (which is why Apple sucks at SOC design).

The fact remains Apple can't even _integrate_ an _existing_ modem for Gods
sake, and yet, Apple lies to people like you that they make the silicon.

It's TSMC Silicon.
Anyone who believes otherwise has drunk the koolaid from Marketing.

On 2022-03-16 1:26 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> If Apple said the iPhone was made out of pure gold, you'd believe them.
>>> It's a marketing gimmick.
>>
>> Only if it's iGold.
>
> From that joke I hope you're indicating that you understand the gimmick.
> If Apple used "iGold" to imply it was gold, it would be an Apple lie.
>
> Just as "Apple Silicon" is an Apple lie.
>
> Apple is _desperate_ to differentiate their IP from everyone else.
> Apple can't do that on performance or functionality alone.
>
> So Apple resorts to an _expensive_ marketing campaign.
> Instead of spending money on R&D, Apple spends it on marketing bullshit.
>
> "Apple Silicon" is a classic example of Apple wasting money on bullshit.
> Every dollar Apple wastes touting that their chips are not what they are is
> a dollar _not_ spent in R&D (which is why Apple sucks at SOC design).
>
> The fact remains Apple can't even _integrate_ an _existing_ modem for Gods
> sake, and yet, Apple lies to people like you that they make the silicon.
>
> It's TSMC Silicon.
> Anyone who believes otherwise has drunk the koolaid from Marketing.

Everyone in the industry and everyone who is reporting on the industry
agrees that Apple's silicon chips have been design by Apple since the A4:

'The Apple A4 is a PoP SoC manufactured by Samsung, the first SoC Apple
designed in-house.'

<https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303912104575164112770784290?mod=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular>

Which forces me to ask the question:

Are you ignorant...

....or lying?

Chris wrote:

> You always attack the messenger when you are incapable of an answer, don't
> you? It's a giveaway.

The _reason_ you fall for all the marketing tricks is that you have the
confluence of three fundamental traits that _makes_ you the iKook you are:
a. Low IQ
b. No education
c. Low self esteem

You need all three to be an iKook (e.g., Steve isn't an iKook).

If you only had one or two of those traits you wouldn't be an iKook.
You _need_ the low self esteem, for example, to gloat over Apple profits.

And you need the lack of education to fall for all the marketing tricks.
The low IQ also means you can't separate marketing from facts.

It's why you fall for Apple Silicon marketing tricks.
It's not Apple Silicon.
That's a lie

It's plain old TSMC Silicon.
Just like everyone else's TSMC Silicon is.

Apple is _desperate_ to lie to you.
And you fall for it.

Why?
See above why.

On 2022-03-16 1:53 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> You always attack the messenger when you are incapable of an answer,
>> don't
>> you? It's a giveaway.
>
> The _reason_ you fall for all the marketing tricks is that you have the
> confluence of three fundamental traits that _makes_ you the iKook you are:
> a. Low IQ b. No education
> c. Low self esteem
>
> You need all three to be an iKook (e.g., Steve isn't an iKook).
>
> If you only had one or two of those traits you wouldn't be an iKook.
> You _need_ the low self esteem, for example, to gloat over Apple profits.
>
> And you need the lack of education to fall for all the marketing tricks.
> The low IQ also means you can't separate marketing from facts.
>
> It's why you fall for Apple Silicon marketing tricks.
> It's not Apple Silicon.
> That's a lie
>
> It's plain old TSMC Silicon.
> Just like everyone else's TSMC Silicon is.

Really?

You're claiming that TSMC is responsible for the design of all the chips
it makes for AMD, Broadcom, Intel, nVidia...

....and Qualcomm?

In message <t0th46$g10$2@dont-email.me> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2022-03-16 1:22 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
>> Lewis wrote:
>>
>>> We've already established the dipshit troll does not understand how
>>> manufacturing works.
>>
>> "Dipshit Troll Lewis" doesn't realize I worked in Silicon Valley startups
>> for decades so I'm well aware of how chips are designed and manufactured.

> There is no proof of this.

All evidence point to the contrary.
>
>> It's Lewis who doesn't understand why Apple trademarked "Apple Silicon".
>> Anyone who says "Apple Silicon" is an idiot because they fell for a
>> gimmick.
>>
>> It's _not_ Apple Silicon.
>> It's MARKETING attempting to make TSMC Silicon "sound" special (to idiots).

> Apple designs the chips and then just pays TSMC to build them...

> ...as do half a dozen other companies.

And no one else can buy Apple' chips because they are APPLE'S CHIPS. If
dipshit troll was right, then anyone could buy an M1 Ultra, but the fact
is that no one can buy that chip and no other chips on the market come
close to the capabilities of the M1 any of the M1s).

>> *Apple wants you to "think" it's something special and yet it's not.*
>> That "Apple Silicon" crap is no different than anyone else's TSMC Silicon.

> It's faster... ...and uses less power.

Far beyond that, even. the way the SoC is designed is far beyond what
anyone else is doing. Not only can you not get a chip like the M1 you
cannot get a chip anything like the M1.

--
Lead me not into temptation, I can find the way.

In message <t0thbd$g10$4@dont-email.me> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> Are you ignorant...

> ...or lying?

Why not both?

<insert appropriate gif>

--
You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought!

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> You always attack the messenger when you are incapable of an answer, don't
>> you? It's a giveaway.
>
> The _reason_ you fall for all the marketing tricks is that you have the
> confluence of three fundamental traits that _makes_ you the iKook you are:
> a. Low IQ
> b. No education
> c. Low self esteem

You're doing it again. You're literally a waste of bandwidth.

In article <t0tinl$s05$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli wrote:

> > Chris:
> > You always attack the messenger when you are incapable of an
> > answer, don't you? It's a giveaway.
>
> The _reason_ you fall for all the marketing tricks is that you have
> the confluence of three fundamental traits that _makes_ you the
> iKook you are: a. Low IQ b. No education c. Low self esteem

A simple "yes" would have sufficed.

--
Sandman

Chris wrote:

> You're doing it again.

Don't fall for the bullshit and I won't tell you that you fell for it.
Or, at least if you do fall for the bullshit, don't post it here.

Apple has _never_ made a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
Apple can't.

All Apple can do is propaganda.
Never forget Apple's R&D is the _lowest_ in all of high tech.

Not a single similar company spends _less_ than does Apple in R&D.
Nor more in marketing propaganda.

TSMC SILICON! *TSMC SILICON!* TSMC SILICON! (big deal, everyone uses TSMC).
ARM TECHNOLOGY! *ARM TECHNOLOGY!* ARM TECHNOLOGY! (wow, big deal there too).

Apple spent more to buy Qualcomm's modem than my entire phone cost.
And even then, Apple can't figure out how to _integrate_ that bought modem.
Meanwhile, almost every smartphone manufacture figured it out long ago.

And don't get me started on Apple CPUs that are so unstable that Apple
becomes _desperate_ to secretly throttle them (and backdate release notes).

Apple has never designed a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
Hell, Apple can't even design their own GPU for Christ's sake.

Sandman wrote:

> A simple "yes" would have sufficed.

The details are that iKooks fall for the Apple bullshit propaganda.
The details are that Apple CPUs are all bullshit propaganda and no R&D.

Apple spends _more_ on touting that it's "*TSMC SILICON*!!!!*
than in actual design (considering it's all ARM technology).

Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups falls for mothership propaganda.
Only those on the child-like Apple newsgroups fall for the propaganda.

Apple spends _less_ in R&D than any high tech company on this planet.
And more in advertising their propaganda than any other company on earth.

You fall for it.
Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups touts *INTEL INSIDE!* like you do.

Lewis wrote:

> And no one else can buy Apple' chips because they are APPLE'S CHIPS.

That's like saying the 5G modem that Apple can't integrate is Apple's modem.

Sure, Apple spends more per phone on just the Qualcomm modem than my entire
Android phone costs, and yet my Android phone does more than the most
expensive iPhone ever designed can do.

> then anyone could buy an M1 Ultra, but the fact
> is that no one can buy that chip and no other chips on the market come
> close to the capabilities of the M1 any of the M1s).

Apple brands their "TSMC Silicon" chip as if that's a big deal.
Apple touts that they use "ARM technology" as if that's a big deal.

Earth to iKooks: Everyone uses TSMC fabs and ARM technology. Not just Apple.

>> It's faster... ...and uses less power.
>
> Far beyond that, even. the way the SoC is designed is far beyond what
> anyone else is doing. Not only can you not get a chip like the M1 you
> cannot get a chip anything like the M1.

Apple has never designed a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
The reason is that Apple is all MARKETING and almost no R&D to speak of.

Even Apple's vaunted CPUs are so unstable that Apple felt _desperate_ to
secretly throttle them (and to secretly change the release notes).

The fact is that Apple can't even integrate an existing modem that they
bought from someone else, let alone design a CPU using 100% other people's
technology that, even then, doesn't need throttling to remain stable.

Lewis wrote:

> <insert appropriate gif>

Adults notice iKooks can never respond to facts without turning into what
they are, which is childish low-IQ uneducated ignorant kindergarten kids.

The facts remain Apple's R&D is the _lowest_ in all of high tech bar none.
And Apple's propaganda machine is the highest.

Apple likely spends ten times more in touting their crappy CPUs than in
actually doing the design work even as almost everything they bought.

It's TSMC Silicon (which Apple tries to rebrand as their own)
It's ARM technology (which Apple tries to rebrand as their own)

Apple has _never_ made a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
And Apple never will.

Why?
Because Apple is all marketing and almost zero R&D, that's why.

And you iKooks fall for it.
Ask me why and you'll find three reasons for why:
a. You're uneducated
b. You're of low IQ
c. You have low self esteem

You gain all your self esteem off of what Apple feeds you to feel.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> You're doing it again.

[ snip arlen arguing with himself ]

On 2022-03-17 9:34 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Lewis wrote:
>
>> <insert appropriate gif>
>
> Adults notice iKooks can never respond to facts without turning into what
> they are, which is childish low-IQ uneducated ignorant kindergarten kids.
>
> The facts remain Apple's R&D is the _lowest_ in all of high tech bar none.
> And Apple's propaganda machine is the highest.
>
> Apple likely spends ten times more in touting their crappy CPUs than in
> actually doing the design work even as almost everything they bought.
>
> It's TSMC Silicon (which Apple tries to rebrand as their own)

It's Apple-designed chips being manufactured by TSMC...

....just as they do for lots of other companies.

> It's ARM technology (which Apple tries to rebrand as their own)

It's the ARM instruction set implemented by Apple using it's own designs.

>
> Apple has _never_ made a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
> And Apple never will.
>
> Why?
> Because Apple is all marketing and almost zero R&D, that's why.
>
> And you iKooks fall for it.
> Ask me why and you'll find three reasons for why:
> a. You're uneducated
> b. You're of low IQ
> c. You have low self esteem
>
> You gain all your self esteem off of what Apple feeds you to feel.

On 2022-03-17 9:30 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Lewis wrote:
>
>> And no one else can buy Apple' chips because they are APPLE'S CHIPS.
>
> That's like saying the 5G modem that Apple can't integrate is Apple's
> modem.
>
> Sure, Apple spends more per phone on just the Qualcomm modem than my entire
> Android phone costs, and yet my Android phone does more than the most
> expensive iPhone ever designed can do.
>
>> then anyone could buy an M1 Ultra, but the fact
>> is that no one can buy that chip and no other chips on the market come
>> close to the capabilities of the M1 any of the M1s).
>
> Apple brands their "TSMC Silicon" chip as if that's a big deal.
> Apple touts that they use "ARM technology" as if that's a big deal.
>
> Earth to iKooks: Everyone uses TSMC fabs and ARM technology. Not just
> Apple.
>
>>> It's faster... ...and uses less power.
>>
>> Far beyond that, even. the way the SoC is designed is far beyond what
>> anyone else is doing. Not only can you not get a chip like the M1 you
>> cannot get a chip anything like the M1.
>
> Apple has never designed a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
> The reason is that Apple is all MARKETING and almost no R&D to speak of.
>
> Even Apple's vaunted CPUs are so unstable that Apple felt _desperate_ to
> secretly throttle them (and to secretly change the release notes).

Suddenly they're Apple's CPUs?

Weren't you just telling us that they are actually TSMC's CPUs?