Comments Locked

62 Comments

Back to Article

  • agoyal - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    Why woundn't Apple buy it for that price...that would've been chump change for them
  • WorldWithoutMadness - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    because it's more profitable to make it themselves. It could be accounted to many reasons which only Apple knows.
  • OreoCookie - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    I reckon agoyal was referring to the patents which Apple undoubtedly needs to make a GPU. Apparently, Apple’s home grown GPU also uses tile-based rendering, so it would stand to reason that some of Imagination’s patents might conceivably be infringed.
  • tipoo - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    They can also licence AMD or Nvidia patents, as Intel has done
  • Kvaern1 - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    What about a customized Mali, is that's even possible?
    On a related note NVidia did put their IP on the market in an announcement some time ago.
  • Kvaern1 - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    That without 's of course.

    wtb one of those edit buttons which gives you a 10 minutte grace to fix typos.
  • tipoo - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    Sure it's possible, but Apple already has a heavily customized graphics stack and their own graphics core, so why would they go Mali at this point.
  • Kvaern1 - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    For the same reason, patents. They wouldn't actually go Mali anymore than they are going Cortex but they might need a license.
  • renz496 - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    but did Apple actually license any graphic IP from nvidia or AMD? if they do then when Imagination asked apple about the tech/IP used in their GPU they should said that they have somekind licensing deal with AMD or nvidia that allowed them to make their own GPU.
  • Threska - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    Some may feel that tile-based rendering isn't necessary, or have a variant that get's around the patent.
  • tipoo - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    AMD and Nvidia both manage to use TBR, and have their patents open to licence.
  • ET - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    The early tiled GPU patents have expired or are expiring soon. That's probably why Apple is able to make a move now.
  • name99 - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    Repeating something a dozen times does not make it true.

    The basic idea of TBDR is too old to be patentable. What is patented are various specific details.
    IF (as is quite possible) what Apple has built is not a "GPU" but a throughput engine (think something like Cell, only with more like 16 SPE's per core and various support hardware like texture units), and all the TBDR smarts are in software, then IMG's patents are likely irrelevant.

    Assuming Apple has created a "GPU" and that that GPU must look like IMG both reflect an obsession with the now. Apple is probably (based on the way they're usually operated) skating to where the puck will be in five years, not to where it was five years ago.
  • mdriftmeyer - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    You mean like this 2003 Patent?

    http://www.google.al/patents/US6552723
  • HomeworldFound - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    Makes more sense to have Imagination out on the open market, Apple would force them into stagnation. It appears to me that Imagination had no business plans except being bought by Apple.
  • osxandwindows - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    They refused to be bought by apple in 2015.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    I don’t remember that. Apple already owns about 8.5% I wonder what will happen with that investment.
  • Yojimbo - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    Apple apparently doesn't think they need to buy Imagination. Apple may have a patent agreement we aren't aware of with someone. Or maybe they don't think any patent case against them would be that strong. Apple has enough cash that they don't need to worry about the financial burden of losing a court battle. They can make a decision based solely on expectation. Suppose they think they have a 75% chance of winning the court battle. Then if they figure the average award value would be less than 1.6 billion pounds it makes financial sense to not buy Imagination for 550 million pounds.
  • HomeworldFound - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    I was wondering if Imagination has any cross licensing going on with the other GPU manufacturers that make it better to keep them alive rather than running the company into dissolution?
  • Yojimbo - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    I don't know, but I think the cross-licensing deals between GPU designers probably serve the purpose of diffusing any potential litigation between the two companies that enter into the cross-licensing deal rather than of protecting one of the two companies against a third. I'm not really sure, though. Also, what happens to the deal if one of the companies in the deal is liquidated probably depends on the deal. The surviving company that is a party to the agreement might still be granted access to the applicable patents of the failed company.
  • name99 - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    It makes no sense to buy a company that has already said it does not want to be bought by you.
    Sure, you get the patent assets, but most of the value is in the people, and if the people don't want to work for you, you can't do anything to force them to be productive. It's not like performing a hostile takeover of a company whose assets are factories and equipment.

    IMG made the decision that it did not want to be bought by Apple. Given that fact, Apple as a buyer now is out of the equation, regardless of the financial details.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    This isn’t true. Last year, imagination pled with Apple to buy them for about $1 billion. Apple refused. This has been documented, and was in the news for some time. I don’t know where you’re getting that idea from.

    It never paid for Apple to buy them. In fact, one of the reasons why Imagination went to sell off MIPS, and other businesses was to make the company more palatable to Apple, by getting rid of businesses Apple wouldn’t want.

    Imagination’s problem was that they were never able to get significant business other than Apple’s. They apparently were very arrogant for such a tiny company.

    They refused Microsoft’s request for specific accomodation to their Hololens project. They apparently refused Apple’s request for AI and AR inclusion into the GPU as well.

    It’s something that now haunts them, as they’re making a big deal of this in their latest talks. It’s really difficult to understand.
  • name99 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    Here's what has been documented:
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/mar/22/a...

    Apple spoke to IMG about a takeover. It did not happen.
    Beyond that we have no idea about who refused whom or why.

    Personally I'd say the balance of evidence, given how Apple has behaved in other company acquisitions, and how IMG seems unable to hold onto partners despite having impressive technology, suggests that one of the two was rather too demanding in the negotiations (and it wasn't Apple).
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    Yes, we know that. We also know that it wasn’t Apple that started those talks. If Apple had started them, they would have made an offer.
  • osxandwindows - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    Apple didn't want MIPS.

    Besides, they already have most of the talent that worked at imagination.
  • schmendrik - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    osxandwindows is full of IT! Keep the BS to yourself because it stinks!
  • osxandwindows - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    Such a low effort comment.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    Except that with this, he’s right. It’s known that Apple hired away at least a couple dozen top engineers from them to work in Apple’s U.K. research lab.

    In fact, that they did that is a reason why it’s been difficult to understand why Imaginations management didn’t realize that something was up. That, and the fact that the lates Imagination GPU technology that Apple has liceenced is from 2015, with apple placing more of their own tech in since then. That’s been reported right here!

    Imagination’s management has been oblivious to what’s been happening for possibly two years.
  • flgt - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    I imagine they would also pick up the responsibility for existing support of current customers, which probably include Apple’s competitors.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    Well, you see, Imagination’s problem is that they have few licensed customers of any note other than Apple.
  • peevee - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link

    Apple does not need them anymore as they have already made their own GPU and ditched Imagination.
    And before they did it and Imagination was licensing them its GPU, it was worth more than that (too much).
  • osxandwindows - Friday, September 22, 2017 - link

    So when is the review of the GPU and the a11 coming?
  • schmendrik - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    Reverse engineering has probably already started, and if Cook has left some Imagination IP there, it will be the easiest way for Canyon Bridge to maximize their ROI on this investment.
  • Santoval - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    Even if Imagination IP is discovered Canyon Bridge would most likely sue after iPhone8/X have completed most of their sales cycle. You can sue for much more money over devices that have already been sold, instead of suing for less money and trying to block iPhone sales.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    I highly doubt that anyone is going to sue. Imagination has been guessing that Apple is going to use their IP. They have no idea as to what Apple is doing. That’s why they tried to demand to see Apple’s work. It’s a fishing expedition.
  • Lord-Bryan - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    The way Imagination ended up is just sad. This is most likely the potential future for any apple customer.
  • Santoval - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    Even Intel?
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    Um, Apple was their customer, not the other way around.

    Every small company is on an edge when a very large company uses their tech. Sometimes, if the large company thinks their tech is so important to their own future, they will make an offer for the company. Apple buys small tech companies all the time. As many as 24 a year! That’s both software and hardware companies.

    Microsoft, for example, used to steal the software of their “partners” all the time.
  • jabber - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    My other half bought about 200 IMG shares at around £2.35 a few months before Apple dropped them. Little bit of a hit there. Did better on the ARM shares that she bought for £5 and sold for £17!
  • ianmills - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

    I see Canyon Bridge over Canyon Lake when I close my eyes and use my Imagination
  • toyotabedzrock - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    There is no way Apple created a GPU and production ready driver in 2 years without wholesale copying most of the GPU circuits directly from Imagination.
  • Yojimbo - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    I don't think we know how long Apple has been developing its own GPU. Apple informed Imagination it would be ending the relationship, and stopped accepting new IP, in 2015, but Apple may have been developing their own GPU for years by then.
  • HStewart - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    Agree - Apple would be stupid to tell Imagination ending contract before researching feasible of possibly replacing GPU with there own.
  • StrangerGuy - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    Yeah the fruit company with an inhouse ARM CPU design team that beats the living daylights out of everybody else for 5 years surely can't have a good inhouse GPU design team in the works, amirite?
  • Tangey - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    They still pay ARM for the use of their IP.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    Yes, they have an architectural license with ARM. That basically covers the instruction set and some other things. Most of the rest is Apple’s.

    And let’s not forget, because most people have, or never knew it, but ARM was Apple’s idea from the beginning. When developing the Newton, they went looking for a useful mobile chip, but there wasn’t any. They went to Acirn in the U.K., and looked that their RISC chip. They persuaded them to work with Apple to design a mobile version. Along with VSLI, they formed the ARM company. Acorn did the hardware, Apple contributed most of the firmware and microcode, and VSLI built them.

    Apple sold off their part of the ownership in the early 2000’s when the needed the money.
  • nijimoto - Saturday, November 4, 2017 - link

    I think you overstate Apple's contribution to the architecture, there's a reason ARM originally stood for 'Acorn RISC Machine.' I agree that commercially had they not been scouting around for a mobile chip and the JV between them Acorn and VLSI not been formed, the mobile chip business might look quite different.
  • HStewart - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    You really believe that Apple with all it's resource can't developed a GPU - As a smart developer - they would have graphics library isolated - and totally switching it GPU out to match there library is a logical step. Especially since they only have to deal with Apple devices. And of course they research the possibility on creating GPU way before they told it to Imagination.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    You don’t know much of anything. You don’t know what Apple has been doing. Apple bought two small GPU companies years ago, when they first started to design their own SoCs. They have also gotten several dozen GPU based patents since then, in addition to the ones those companies brought over.

    Besides, that’s just a ridiculous statement to make. You really think that Apple would just copy the circuits? Seriously? They went to 3 cores from 6, and got 30% better performance. No way they could do that by copying the circuits.
  • darkich - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    Most undervalued purchase ever
  • StrangerGuy - Sunday, September 24, 2017 - link

    Over half a billion bucks for a GPU company that has zero competitive advantage against their ARM/QC/Apple competitors and a CPU ISA nobody gives a crap about is the opposite of being "undervalued".
  • darkich - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    ..actually, for a company that has been at the very top of the game for the past ten years (iPhone and iPad, ringin the bell?) and at the forefront of innovation in the GPU space (ray tracing, tile based rendering etc..)
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    Sales and profits are what matter in business. I think this very high price was offered just so that there wouldn’t be competing offers, as it’s way too high to be a value. It’s similar to what Google did years ago, when buying Motorola for $12.5 billion, on the day when the company was valued, in the market, at $6.5 billion. They offered that much because they knew no one else would be that stupid and offer more. Look what happened there.

    Now, Google is giving HTC $1.1 billion for 2,000 engineers that supposedly worked on the Pixel. Another overpriced acquisition.
  • name99 - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    However darkich is correct. IMG DOES have great technology. The fact that they've not been able to sell it to very few people suggests to me something very wrong at the management level, not at the engineering level.
    Meaning that it is certainly POSSIBLE, IMHO, for new management to come in, sweep out the current sales team, and ink some deals with Huawei, Mediatek, maybe revive the deal with MS, start talking to auto manufacturers, etc etc.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    Oh, I don’t know. Using whatever comes in the SoCs being offered by the vendors is always going to be much cheaper. Who would integrate it? Qualcomm certainly isn’t going to do it for their chips. I doubt Samsung would. The rest? Well, if they really wanted this IP, they would have done a deal. The fact is that other licensees have been leaving them even before Apple did.

    I think that they’re in a bind. The price for this deal is much too high. If you look at the financials, they’re deadful.
  • phoenix_rizzen - Monday, October 2, 2017 - link

    Heawei and MediaTek make their own SoCs, currently using Mali GPUs. A good sales team might be able to make a deal to replace them with PowerVR GPUs. Maybe. Doubtful, but not impossible.
  • levizx - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link

    HiSilicon did sign a licensing deal with IMG back in 2012, but they never used it.
    MediaTek are currently using PowerVR in their product line, so the point is moot. They are simply not that competitive against ARM's Mali offerings.
  • melgross - Monday, September 25, 2017 - link

    This is a very overvalued purchase. Imagination has been losing sales for years, and has also been losing money. Over half of their sales were to Apple, and over 75% of their profits, income actually, since they have losses.

    Since they haven’t beeen able to generate much sales outside of Apple, it’s hard to see what will change now. It’s cheaper, and easier, for most companies to just use Mali, or whatever Qualcomm offers on their chips. After all, Android devices aren’t really competing on performance.
  • levizx - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link

    What are you on? Qualcomm GPU has been on par with Apple since the beginning.
  • peevee - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link

    " £550M for the entire company"
    Or in other words NOTHING compared to leaders of the industry.

    Interesting, these British companies (ARM and Imagination) just cannot become big businesses, just staying medium size at best. Compare to all the American, Japanese and Korean monsters.
  • lucam - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link

    Just for the benefit of Ryan and all comments to date: Apple A11 still uses design of IMG GPU, TBDR design and PWRTC and IMG extensions on their driver.
    Now I am not sure what sort of agreement Apple has with IMG to date, but this GPU even though don't match any official PowerVR latest solution products, it has PowerVR soul.
    Apple can claim to have designed their GPU as much they want it, but they ain't discover any wheels.
  • narmermenes - Thursday, September 28, 2017 - link

    The MIPS business will be much better off in the hands of the Chinese who will greatly expand and improve the architecture as they have with the MIPS licenses they currently have. After all, the successfully used MIPS IP to design and develop the world's fastest and lowest power Supercomputer whereas Imagination basically did nothing worthy with it.
    China also licensed AMD's Hypertransport and incorporated it into the MIPS CPU. Why Imagination decided not to design around MIPS 64-bit and also use HT is a sign of very incompetent management.
    As Imagination has clearly shown US/UK businesses don't have a clue on how to leverage the very scalable and versatile MIPS IP in the way China does.
    As for Mali GPU, I really don't believe China was interested in it at all and their real target was the MIPS IP all along.
    Not only do I hope they get it, but I also hope their future implementations of MIPS is available in the US market.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now