I’ve been hearing the analogy between $NVDA and $AAPL — the argument effectively is that Apple reshaped the supply chain in its own image and this served as a sustainable competitive advantage. And that $NVDA is currently doing the same. I think it’s an interesting concept. However, the core of Apple’s moat is/was that switching costs are high for the users. iOS, Photos, App Store, iMessages, Settings, etc. The lock in is at the software layer, not the device layer. The supply chain is additive, but it isn’t the core of the moat. Right now the largest consumers of compute are frontier labs and hyperscalers, who all have the resources to develop custom ASICs and build towards a future of heterogeneous compute. $NVDA’s “extreme co-design” is effectively an argument that “we will persistently outrun everyone.” Higher fungibility and financiability are also nice to have — but neither of these provide the same degree of ecosystem lock-in as CUDA or iOS. Especially not in a world where your primary “users” are willing to throw inordinate amounts of capital and resources at eroding your economics. And particularly not in a world where the “shape” of future workloads is constantly changing to a degree that advantages experimentation in chip design.