or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by bsimpsen

Apple stated, at the introduction of the iPhone five years ago, that iOS is a slimmed down OS-X. A So OS X ALREADY runs directly on ARM, in more than 400 million devices. Applications written in Objective C under X-Code (which is used for both iOS and OS X development, already supporting both instruction sets) could be recompiled into ARM with the flick of a switch (once 64-bit arrives), so that takes care of the bulk of existing native OS X applications.   When Apple...
I forgot to add that Microsoft's forking of Windows into both ARM (RT) and X86 variants may open the door for Apple ARM hardware to virtualize Win RT. That brings Office to iOS, which is a pretty big deal.
  ARM runs OS X natively already, so emulation is pointless. I believe you meant that ARM would have difficulty emulating the X86 instruction set. As Apple is designing the processor, emulation of the X86 instruction set is probably more a legal problem than a technological one. The PA Semi folks have already implemented two different instruction sets, PowerPC and ARM. X86 would not be beyond their grasp. However, they can't get a license to run X86 by purchasing AMD...
Given that iOS is OS X, it's fair to say that Apple ported to ARM quite some time ago.   If you plot the increase in performance of the A-Series over time, it's growing faster than X86. Intel's expertise may be more in process than in architecture. I think there is some room for architecture, particularly one optimized by the same company that fields the OS and rest of the hardware, to match Intel's advantage in process. Remember that Apple's elimination of Intel also...
Thanks for explaining why this line of reasoning doesn't work for you.
Some of Apple's magic is very old stuff, particularly the reasonably seamless integration of hardware and software and the drive for simplicity. They've had that since 1984 but it's only in the last decade that it's been seen as something worth copying, perhaps because Apple moved out of the computing world into the appliance world. Because they moved their magic to a realm where it's better appreciated, and kept integration with the computers, they were able to grow...
The iPhone is not years ahead of the competition technologically. What puts Apple ahead of the competition (in profits) is everything Apple does, and it is still not 3-5 years ahead of the competition. The analyst claimed that the iPad Mini will contain technology that puts that far ahead. Name one technology you expect the iPad Mini to possess which is 3-5 years ahead of the rest of the world. A6? Nope. DIsplay? Nope. Camera? Nope. iOS? Nope (and it's the same iOS that's...
The KGI analyst's claims that Apple's iPad Mini technology will give it a 3-5 year lead on the competition seems to show a stunning ignorance of technology. When Steve Jobs made such claims, you could chalk it up to spin, but when an analyst makes such claims, you've got to wonder what he's been analyzing.
This datasheet for a readily available ambient sensor suggests that if one wanted to fit it in an iPod Touch, one could.   http://www.vishay.com/docs/81317/temt6200.pdf   And there's no reason to think that Apple is limited to using off-the-shelf components. A thinner sensor is possible.
It's not helpful to put so much effort into being wrong. The purple fringing on high contrast detail (the leaves) is indeed chromatic aberration. The close proximity of the fringe to the leaf edge is the result of the very small displacement of the focal length for various wavelengths of light passing through the optical train. You'll notice that the purple fringe around the sun is quite displaced from it, so the same mechanism is clearly not at work. That purple fringe...
New Posts  All Forums: