News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Discussions with Apple regarding license agreement. Parent comment

Re:Discussions with Apple regarding license agreement by coldtea on Monday April 03, 2017 @05:42AM (#14021622)
>AMD does not license to third parties, neither does Intel.

If the money was right, they would. Apple is not a random third party. Heck, it could buy AMD with a year's spare change.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Discussions with Apple regarding license agreement by wycx on Monday April 03, 2017 @06:37AM (#14021798)
AMD did, however, sell Adreno to Qualcomm when money was tight after the ATI purchase.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Discussions with Apple regarding license agreement by samfisher83 on Monday April 03, 2017 @08:49AM (#14022355)
And looking back it wasn't a smart decision. Adreno=Radeon
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Discussions with Apple regarding license agreement by wycx on Monday April 03, 2017 @11:52AM (#14023752)
Along with the other things they sold that don't seem so smart now. Like abandoning the low power x86 Geode processor in 2009. Interestingly, according to this article [1] they sold Adreno for only $65 million, less than IT is making from Apple each year in royalties.

https://www.xda-developers.com/a-look-back-at-amds-history-a...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Discussions with Apple regarding license agreement by mikhailt on Monday April 03, 2017 @11:09AM (#14023275)
That may be true but unlike Adreno, you know Apple does not resell any of the patents to anyone else, so it always stay contained to Apple's products. Given how much revenue they can take, it's a very tempting business agreement.
[ Parent | on HN ]