<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When the Chips are Down, Ditch Those Assets</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2008/09/17/when-the-chips-are-down-ditch-those-assets/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/09/17/when-the-chips-are-down-ditch-those-assets/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:35:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tightwad Technica &#187; New IBM fab service could foster open source chips</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/09/17/when-the-chips-are-down-ditch-those-assets/#comment-147329</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tightwad Technica &#187; New IBM fab service could foster open source chips]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:40:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=21513#comment-147329</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] it becomes ever more expensive for semiconductor companies to build manufacturing plants to make their own chips, there are plenty of foundry services out there. However, IBM has combined [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] it becomes ever more expensive for semiconductor companies to build manufacturing plants to make their own chips, there are plenty of foundry services out there. However, IBM has combined [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: IBM&#8217;s New Foundry Service Takes on Intel - GigaOM</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/09/17/when-the-chips-are-down-ditch-those-assets/#comment-147328</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[IBM&#8217;s New Foundry Service Takes on Intel - GigaOM]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 11:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=21513#comment-147328</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] it becomes ever more expensive for semiconductor companies to build manufacturing plants to make their own chips, there are plenty of foundry services out there. However, IBM has combined [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] it becomes ever more expensive for semiconductor companies to build manufacturing plants to make their own chips, there are plenty of foundry services out there. However, IBM has combined [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2008/09/17/when-the-chips-are-down-ditch-those-assets/#comment-147327</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:25:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=21513#comment-147327</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Actually, for Intel, the value traditionally has been in the marketing and manufacturing (Intel typically having the most advanced process in mass production first has given them a speed and price advantage), not design.

And for analog, which is an increasingly large part of the semi business, it&#039;s still very advantageous to have your own fabs - but they can be 200mm fabs.  Nobody is running analog parts on 300mm wafers, and it&#039;s very possible nobody ever will.  You should spend some time investigating Maxim Integrated Products(which even during the darkest days of the dot-bomb crash had 25% margins), Linear Technology, TI&#039;s analog business, etc -- it&#039;s interesting stuff.

And, yes, I think companies such as ST and NXP will (and should) start concentrating on a systems-design approach.

The fabless model also has its risks -- see here http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=210601146 for example]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, for Intel, the value traditionally has been in the marketing and manufacturing (Intel typically having the most advanced process in mass production first has given them a speed and price advantage), not design.</p>
<p>And for analog, which is an increasingly large part of the semi business, it&#8217;s still very advantageous to have your own fabs &#8211; but they can be 200mm fabs.  Nobody is running analog parts on 300mm wafers, and it&#8217;s very possible nobody ever will.  You should spend some time investigating Maxim Integrated Products(which even during the darkest days of the dot-bomb crash had 25% margins), Linear Technology, TI&#8217;s analog business, etc &#8212; it&#8217;s interesting stuff.</p>
<p>And, yes, I think companies such as ST and NXP will (and should) start concentrating on a systems-design approach.</p>
<p>The fabless model also has its risks &#8212; see here <a href="http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=210601146" rel="nofollow">http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=210601146</a> for example</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

