Counter argument is that is NVIDIA friendly to their supply chain? I have to think that maybe they are with their massive margins because they can be - their end buyer is currently willing to absorb costs at no expense. But I don't know, and that will change as their business changes.

Your underlying statement implies that whoever is replacing apple is a better buyer which I don't think is necessarily true.

▲

philistine 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Nvidia is famously a pain to work with. Apple vowed never to use their chips, Microsoft and Sony can't get them to make any GPU for their consoles.

The only complete package integrator that manages to make a relationship work with Nvidia is Nintendo.

▲

7speter 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> The only complete package integrator that manages to make a relationship work with Nvidia is Nintendo.

And thats probably because Nintendo isn’t adding any pressure to neither TSMC nor Nvidia capacity wise; iirc Nintendo uses something like Maxwell or Pascal on really mature processes for Switch chips/socs.

	▲	Macha 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		And also the Switch 1 was just the hardware for a nvidia shield tablet from nVidia’s perspective, without the downside of managing the customer facing side and with the greater volume from Nintendo’s market reach. (Not that it wasn’t more than that for consumers or Nintendo, just talking nvidia here)

▲

randall 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think that works out tremendously well for Nintendo, especially when you look at the Wii-U vs the Switch.

I shot a video at CNET in probably 2011 which was a single touchscreen display (i think it was the APX 2500 prototype iirc?) and it has the precise dimensions to the switch 1.

Nintendo was reluctantly a hardware company... they're a game company who can make hardware, but they know they're best when they own the stack.

▲

Y-bar 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> EVGA Terminates Relationship With Nvidia, Leaves GPU Business

> According to Han, Nvidia has been difficult to work with for some time now. Like all other GPU board partners, EVGA is only told the price of new products when they're revealed to everyone on stage, making planning difficult when launches occur soon after. Nvidia also has tight control over the pricing of GPUs, limiting what partners can do to differentiate themselves in a competitive market.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/evga-terminates-relationsh...

▲

boringg 5 hours ago | parent [-]

So not favorable to apple as a buyer.

	▲	Y-bar 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Funnily enough Apple and Nvidia has old beef with one another, this especially led them to sever ties: https://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/07/11/investigation-confir...

▲

marcosdumay 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If your customers are known to be antagonistic to business partners, the correct answer is to diversify them as much as you can, even at reasonable costs from anything else.

That means deprioritizing your largest customer.

▲

boringg 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Fair I feel like that also speaks to nation+states trade policy.

Also theres the devil you know and the devil you dont know.

	▲	simonh 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yep, you can be close allies with a nation and have many shared interests, and even a trade deficit with them as we in Britain did, and then they stab you in the back with tariffs.