[AlbertCory]

It's not a "counterexample" because I didn't give an example.

In any case, it's never a simple answer: vertical integration has advantages and disadvantages.

[apetresc]

> It's not a "counterexample" because I didn't give an example.

A counterexample is not a counter to an example. It is an example that counters a point, which you did give.

(That said, Apple is still not really a counterexample because clearly vertical integration can weigh you down even if others have pulled it off successfully)

[tokai]

A counterexample is not a counter to an example given, but an example that counters or refutes what has been stated.

[bee_rider]

It seems impossible that a single example could counter a statement that is basically "it is good but also has some downsides."

[tokai]

I'm just correcting AlbertCory's wrong understanding of the word counterexample. I don't care for their discussion.

[AlbertCory]

One pedantipoint for you.

[tejohnso]

> vertical integration has advantages and disadvantages.

Which Jobs acknowledged in his 1997 WWDC talk before becoming CEO (again).

There's an execution burden with integration and it has to be overcome with solid execution.

[AlbertCory]

It isn't just "execution" -- it's choosing what you ought to build in house now, and what's better to just buy.

Building the processor in house probably IS a good call. In Jobs' day, even he didn't build the processor. But nowadays, things are different.

[scarface74]

Apple started acquiring companies with chip design expertise while Jobs was the CTO. The first processor that had some custom design by Apple was the A4 which was used in the 2010 first generation iPad and iPhone 4.

I can’t believe that Apple wasn’t working on the first 64 bit in house ARM chip by the time SJ resigned in 2011 that was introduced with the 5s in 2013.