[ajross]

FTA:

> From a benchmarking point of view, the smaller die size shows a leadership in technology scaling for Samsung.

Almost certainly true.

> On the other hand, for Apple to go through all the trouble of dual-sourcing a custom designed part and launching on day one with both parts, suggests major sourcing problems.

Well... maybe. Or alternatively this is Apple throwing their cash around for long term leverage. They certainly can pay to have the initial design done on two different processes. And having done so, it puts TSMC and Samsung (and GF, who shares Samsung's process and would be an obvious third source) into a terrible bind: Apple can squeeze them with the constant (and credible!) threat of flight to a competitor.

See previous coverage of NVIDIA's rocky relationship with TSMC for an example of something Apple is probably trying to avoid.

[dvogel]

Another way to look at it is that using multiple suppliers and multiple designs allows them to shorten the production time window before launch. That allows them to use more time for design while curtailing their suppliers' ability to leak info about the parts.

[hga]

Another alternative is that Apple wants both foundries to stay reasonably healthy.