or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ksec

If Apple wanted iPhone 6S to have 2GB Memory without any increase in power consumption, they will need to use LPDDR4. And Samsung is having the best yield for LPDDR4 at the moment.
Objective C with GC didn't work out well. It was buggy, and never quite intend to do what it was suppose to do.   Most App tried using it abandoned it, and those who had luck with it should have moved on to ARC long long time ago.   So this is merely a notice to the very very small percentage of App Dev. Its time to move on.
 But Samsung is now a major shareholder of Sharp. And we have all heard Sharp wasn't too happy with Foxconn and working with Apple. I guess this 1.7B with Japan Display and 2.8B in Innolux were to secure enough panels for the future and a indication that the deal with Sharp hasn't worked out. Last week we also heard the news Apple Watch's display will be using LG OLED exclusively.
 Samsung 14nm is doing well, at least it is ahead of TSMC. Samsung skipped mass production of 20nm and concentrated on 14nm ( which is basically 20nm + FinFET ) Samsung's 14nm also performed better then TSMC 16nm, that is why TSMC came out with 16nm+, hoping to win back some market shares. However it is likely Apple will be using both TSMC and Samsung as foundry, as they are more iPhones then ever, unlike 20nm which has its time to matured quite a bit before mass producing...
Yes I forgot about their Atom Line Lol. And you can tell from history software/drivers for GPU matter much much more then the hardware. Intel never paid IMG for its driver support. Hence why earlier Atom GPU performance sucks.
No, Intel hasn't used the PowerVR IP in their iGPU for 3 generation now. As for the article. This isn't something new. As i have stated before it is much more likely Apple make their own GPU rather then switching OSX to ARM. The reason is simply because making a GPU with PowerVR IP is easy ( relatively ), coding its drivers is freaking hard work and takes long time. Since Apple handles its own drivers, it may be of Apple's best interest to only code/optimize for one...
As far as I am concern, Fab, or SoC has never been iPhone's production problem. It is actually TSMC 16nm that Apple will be using. Samsung will likely be the source of A9X, or even A8X.
I got my new MBA today, and as far as i can tell it was manufactured in week 43, two week passed the lunch of Yosemite. Yet it still had Maverick on it, why is that?  
Is that really the case? Or US just trying to destroy the Ruble via the Oil price? Shipping cost per unit in the whole BOM is the lowest of all. Not only does it not make a slight difference in the Apple's margin ( compared to the drop of exchange rate ). Apple dont paid for Oil price, and like someone said it is those transportation company who are benefiting. ( Which is unlikely either because these company sigh long term contract on oil prices ) Share price is never...
I think it would be short sighted for Apple to release a Mac Pro based on Intel X86 and then decide to dump x86 on the MBA , MBP , iMac Range.  Yes, it is much more likely for Apple move to AMD then jumping to its own SoC. At least in the next few years as stop gap.You cant just scale the A8X SoC, rank up clock speed and call it a day thinking giving it a 25W TDP everything will immediately work fine. No.That is like saying Intel Atom is great why dont you just overclock...
New Posts  All Forums: