Samsung to supply chips for next-gen iPods

Well, the other shoe has dropped. A week after PortalPlayer revealed the crushing news that the company wouldn't be providing chips for the next version of the iPod nano, Samsung has announced that it has won the business from Apple. Jon Kang, a Samsung exec, gloated that “I knew PortalPlayer would take a dive," adding, modestly, “I knew that we would win this design." According to Samsung -- which already provides flash memory for the nano -- the deal represents the company's largest LSI chip deal so far. “It’s a huge win for us," said Kang. Meanwhile, Apple has yet to comment on plans for the next-gen nanos, which are expected to offer increased capacity, and may be less prone to at-home engraving than current models.

[WGIII @ Apr 26th 2006 5:28PM]

Smart move on Samsung's part. First you supply Apple with all the part's to make the ipod, then you take over california.

[Jeff @ Apr 26th 2006 5:30PM]

'�It�s a huge win for us," said Kang.'

We must move forward, not backward; upward, not forward; and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!

[JAcob Varghese @ Apr 26th 2006 5:34PM]

I wonder what improvements we'll see.

[Rich @ Apr 26th 2006 5:37PM]

damn, Samsung is a OTC stock - why can't they be listed here in USA?

[J @ Apr 26th 2006 5:42PM]

"Holy flurking schnit"

gotta love kang and kodos

[Asian Voice @ Apr 26th 2006 5:51PM]

You can not buy Samsung or LG stock unless you are Korean.

[idude135 @ Apr 26th 2006 6:04PM]

I guess it's payback time for Samsung, who gave Apple a big break with cheap flash memory modules.

So long as Samsung doesn't buy out Apple...

[Tonicboy @ Apr 26th 2006 6:08PM]

Apple probably gave the contract to Samsung in return for even better discounts for flash memory. Or they should have if they were smart. That would be a win-win for both Apple and Samsung.

[dirtyman @ Apr 26th 2006 7:02PM]

"You can not buy Samsung or LG stock unless you are Korean."

It is not true. I know more than 50% of samsung stock are owned by Non korean. If you want to buy samsung stock simply go to its market.

[Jason @ Apr 26th 2006 7:17PM]

Uhm, are we forgetting that Samsung illegally fixed memory prices a couple of years ago?

[spud boy @ Apr 26th 2006 7:18PM]

.
More capacity? Really? What insight! Must have come from an Apple insider...
.
.

[Liam Billington @ Apr 26th 2006 7:20PM]

Ah... Introducing the new iPod nano from Samsung.

[Matt W. @ Apr 26th 2006 7:27PM]

typo:

on the business from Apple. said Jon Kang,

Either the period should be a comma, or said should be capitalized. I don't know which one Marc intended.

[TZK @ Apr 26th 2006 7:32PM]

Smart move for apple going with chip and memory from the same company. this will most likely guarenty the nano will be WAY cheap when the new ones come out.

[Chris Robinson @ Apr 26th 2006 7:40PM]

#12, that isn't the only mistake in the article, those speech marks are all over the place. No offence there Marc, but were you drunk when you made this post?

[DRMPro @ Apr 26th 2006 7:51PM]

Well, there goes the Apple stock.
-----------------
DRMPro.net: http://www.drmpro.net
-----------------

[idude135 @ Apr 26th 2006 8:09PM]

When in Seoul... write [in English]like the Koreans.

Anyways, Apple should definitely make the new iPod video as thin as the nano, by contracting a company to manufacture memory like those flashy cards we've seen today.

As far as the nano goes, Apple has to keep it pretty much the same size from now on, unless he's willing to deal with iPod Micro or iPod Peque?like that one SNL sketch)civil lawsuits.

[Secret Asian Man @ Apr 26th 2006 8:34PM]

I guess Samsung didn't learn from ATI and other companies that blab about their deals with Apple.

You wanna keep working with Apple, you need to learn to shut your mouth. "Loose lips sinks ships."

[Mike @ Apr 26th 2006 10:32PM]

I wonder if the chip is designed by Samsung or if Apple designed it themselves. I'm surprised that they didn't cook up something with Intel.

[Geir E @ Apr 27th 2006 12:08AM]

if this gives better sound quality, I'm buying.

[Brendan @ Apr 27th 2006 12:57AM]

I listened to the Engadget podcast a few times and it seems to me you guys are both getting either MacBooks or MacBook Pros. Yet still every article i've ever read on this site never reads without twisting the knife a little into apple's side. Why no abuse Microsoft for a change. Oh I forgot, Bill gates actually listens to the podcast, and visits your site. He may be the richest man in the world, but you guys still kiss his ass for free!

[AutoDas @ Apr 27th 2006 1:31AM]

Brendan what the heck are you talking about? Paranoid Apple fan...^

[seamus @ Apr 27th 2006 2:01AM]

#18---
If they made the iPod video as thin as the nano, it would probably snap in half. Can you imagine how flimsy that would feel? Basically, it'd be gram-cracker form factor. I almost want it to be a little thicker---maybe they'd at least get some decent battery life out of it then.

[Aaron @ Apr 27th 2006 10:07AM]

If the iPod video was as thin as the nano, it wouldn't have nearly the same capacity, since they would have to use flash memory instead. I'm not sure that they can make the hard drives any smaller without sacrificing some of the capacity, and I know I'd rather have an extra 30 gigs of space than save 1/8 of an inch. Even the 60 gig version is pretty thin. I wouldn't mind it being a bit thicker in exchange for more storage space and a bigger battery.

And on that note... why does everyone complain about the damn battery life? I don't understand this. I can watch a full length movie (around 2 hours), probably a couple TV shows, and then listen to lots of music before the battery dies. I'd say that's more than decent considering the small size of the device and everything it has to do (power the hard drive, power the backlight and screen, decode the audio/video, and whatever else).

[proee @ Apr 27th 2006 10:26AM]

Engadet you're becoming super lame. This was posted on a bunch of blogs/websites days ago. I've been a loyal followist from the beginning and now it's come down to the unbearable reality that you no longer have original content. Don't get me wrong, there is an occasional unique post that is interesting - but it seems that the majority of Engadget content is merely ripping of other sites. I'm beginning to think that your site is being updated by a RSS fishing robot. Please, if you're going to post on news like this - then post it on the day it's relevant. This is old news people... Enough said.

[pico @ Apr 27th 2006 12:20PM]

George Bush invented RSS feeds.

[Ben Hobbs @ Apr 27th 2006 12:21PM]

Why would you feel the need to post a whinge that this has been covered by another website 86 seconds ago
. I don't have time to browse 100+ geeky websites and enjoy the round-up of news items that engadget provides.

Do you sit there shouting at the daily newspaper that the news items inside actually happened yesterday? rather than in real-time as you were reading.

[coptue @ Apr 28th 2006 5:07AM]

I can't belevie that!! Why sansung havs intrest on the low price IC?