this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2026
148 points (94.6% liked)
Technology
86512 readers
3049 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wait, don't new iPhones and Macs have that unified memory? Maybe I'm missing something, but shouldn't Apple be in the best position with regards to memory prices in their products?
Yes, you are missing something. You are assuming they get their memory from a different supplier than the rest of the industry.
For some reason lots of people assume this.
My understanding, though, is they have their own chip specs, for custom die nobody else uses , and they integrate that into their chiplets or whatever it is they are using. So it's not like those vendors can just sell those die to other customers. Whoever is making Apple's RAM is making it specifically for them.
Unless their contracts with Apple have some sort of escalation clause, I would figure Apple would be pretty insulated from all this price nonsense. Heck, they have enough cash on hand that I bet they can buy a smaller RAM vendor if they had to. It mainly depends on how much of that custom RAM tech they own vs. licensing from any particular vendor. If they are using patents from their vendor, then that makes it harder to just switch.
I see. Yeah, I think the problem is that they can’t insulate themselves from the overall production timeline constraints. Because even if their chips are unique, they don’t have their own private production lines. They only get a share of available production capacity.
And as I understand it. Buying out a memory production facility is something they are not interested in. They don’t want to be in that part of the supply chain. And getting in now, only for memory supply chain constraints to go back to “normal” in 2 years isn’t a strategy they want to take.
Apple would rather have a diverse supply chain, and have the ability to pit different vendors against each other.
Some of this is similar to why just building a new facility isn’t a solution in the near term either. Because by the time it’s online, the situation is likely to have passed. And then you are back in a commodity market that’s historically difficult to compete in.