|
|||||||
| Register | Members List | New Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Kasper's Automated Slave
Join Date: Nov 1997
Posts: 6,151
|
More evidence of Apple's iPhone eventually going Intel
There's some more anecdotal evidence this week to suggest that Apple Inc.'s iPhone will eventually abandon its Samsung-based roots and make the jump to Intel's freshly-coined Atom architecture.
Citing is own sources, as well as a leaked presentation slide belonging to Intel, the Inquirer is corroborating reports first published by AppleInsider last year in saying that the touch-screen handset is destine to join the ultra-mobile platform in the not too distant future. However, and more appropriately given recent disclosures by the Intel on the first-generation of the Atom architecture, the evidence suggests the transition will not take place until the second rev of the ultra-mobile Atom platform, code-named Moorestown. This would see the third-generation iPhone pick up Silverthorne's smaller, and more refined successor sometime in 2009, while the Silverthorne chip itself serves an initial role in Apple's tablet-like extension of the iPod touch platform, frequently referenced by AppleInsider as a reincarnation of the Newton MessagePad. Among other things, the move will allow Apple to better solidify the codebase of its handheld devices with that of its remaining business segments, mainly its Mac computer line and fledging media hub business (Apple TV). It will also serve as a measure that will help the electronics maker form a tighter shield around its intellectual property, given that the company's disclosures and product plans will be privy to one less partner. During Intel's Fall developer forum last year, executives for the chipmaker flaunted an unnamed Moorestown processor, describing it as the "chip the iPhone would have wanted." Like Silverthorne, the 45nm Moorestown design bundles an integrated memory controller, video encode/decode engine and graphics processor all on a single SoC, with the added option of WiFi, 3G, and WiMAX technologies. An Intel Atom roadmap slide shown off at CeBIT | Source: The Inquirer |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,008
|
Of course!
Because we know someone giving a presentation, and needing some picture to indicate smart phones, would never pull out a picture of an iPhone unless it was guaranteed to be under Intel's wing soon enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Tinton Falls, NJ
Posts: 702
|
This isn't evidence of anything... it's just the graphic Intel chose to represent "Smart Phones". It's like saying that computer desk you buy from Sears will include an iMac because it's got a cardboard cutout of an iMac on it. Or those computer ads where the companies show a Mac but Photoshop a Windows desktop onto it.
I'm sure Apple is considering Intel's products carefully-- they've got some great products in the pipeline. But this isn't evidence, anecdotal or otherwise. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 431
|
If it's freshly-coined as Atom, why reference Silverthorne? Makes for a confusing read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 460
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 463
|
(1) It's the Inquirer
(2) It's just an image they used for Smartphone, it's not making any statements Moorestown would still have to be a quarter of the size, 4x more integrated and use 1/4 of the power to compete with the ARMs that will be out at that time. Never mind that Apple is quite happy right now to use ARM, and it's clearly powerful enough for the current iPhone's software. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 157
|
No no no. It's electrical.
It just needs a thermonuclear reaction to charge the battery to run the platform. Last edited by OriginalMacRat; 03-12-2008 at 10:36 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,218
|
If true, it is interesting to note that: (1) Intel plans to get to "Premium Smartphones" before it gets to "Smartphones;" and (2) Intel does not seem to think the iPhone is a "Premium Smartphone"!
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,914
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 457
|
Call the 3G chip Eve, and I'll be happy.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 63
|
intel inside
This is likely good news, as long as atom doesn't use all that power they are talking about it might. I like my phone to keep its charge.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 402
|
Second gen iPhone should have Nvidia apx 2500. It has alot of great features that fit well into apple's multimedia focus including:
OpenGL 2.0 ES!!!! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,914
|
Don't worry. Each Atom powered device comes with a Mr. Fusion reactor that converts household waste into energy and the backlight is now lit by flux capacitors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 585
|
AppleInsdier is a joke. This is evidence? Then you go on to justify your position with points that actually argue against you.
Firstly, its a ARM processors are available from a wide array of suppliers. Do you think Jobs would really reduce his ability to bargain, have a secondary source to meet supply requirements and get the best possible choice of technology so that he could be a little more secret? He's obsessed with secrecy, but he's not an idiot. Why would he tie himself to one supplier? With the ARM Apple don't have to accept what Intel designs, they can have their own custom chip. Which would you go for? Again, the codebase issue is insignificant. So they have to recompile, not a big issue, but the ARM has a big advantage in that it has Thumb code, an instruction set that allows code to be 35% smaller, saving valuable storage space. Then there are the real problems with the procesors Intel ships: they are physically larger. They run much hotter and are more power hungry. Apple have gone to great lengths (eg excluding 3G) to reduce size and power requirements. So now they would throw that away so they didn't need to recompile? The Intel chip offers pretty much nothing that ARM doesn't do better. You can get 4 core ARM chips. They are so small (3 sq mm) and cheap that you can put several in your designs. They are particularly low power and are very esy to integrate into custom chip designs. You seem to want to push this line with the Intel chips but it makes no sense to anyone who knows the first thing about the issues, or is even using any sort of logic. It's laughable. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 373
|
Build an Intel Atom (Silverthorne) inside each iPhone and iPod touch and you have a full Mac OS X 10.5.2 in your pocket. We need tons for our University.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | ||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,008
|
Quote:
(BttF, awesome).
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: dit doe
Posts: 731
|
Quote:
processor supplier for its desktop and laptop computers, so this move would not be without precedent. At the time of the switch to Intel, I think Jobs said something to the effect that Intel's plans for the future aligned well with what Apple wanted to do. This could all be related to that statement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 585
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,914
|
Well, to be fair they're reporting on the Inquirer story, which they should really know better of than to give it more positive spin. It's The Inquirer - less reliable than Digitimes. It needs a barrel of salt, not just a pinch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 653
|
I've never read so much dribble on a AI thread!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 311
|
Sure, they could go to AMD... but is it worth jeopardizing the wonderful partnership they have with Intel?
“The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.”
—Samuel Johnson |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22
|
Time Travel
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 245
|
Quote:
Maybe. But will safari run faster? You haven't been here long, then. (Oh, and I think you mean 'drivel'. Well, maybe 'dribble' is accurate, too, come to think of it). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: .US
Posts: 9,127
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 157
|
Why would they want to do that?
Apple doesn't just throw random chips in their products like Dell or any other crap box company. Apple builds the platform around a chip line and optimizes for it. There's also the fact that Intel has had trouble keeping up with Apple's demand for specific lines of chips. Do you really think that AMD can keep up with that kind of supply? |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 6
|
I can be wrong, but Intel have their own ARM processors line too, right?
So even if Apple is planning on cuting one suplier, switching to Intel, they can still use ARM processors from Intel, there is no reason to switch to another processor that doesn't show any advantage over the ARM platform. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: united mexican states
Posts: 1,326
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 585
|
Quote:
Apple isn't that large compared to the rest of the market. Remember they have about 2% or 3% market share. I'm sure AMD would make a special effort to accommodate them. Last edited by merdhead; 03-13-2008 at 07:03 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 585
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 585
|
I think Intel needs Apple more than Apple needs Intel. They can use AMD, who have better designs and are catching up in the process stakes, where Intel has an advantage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,914
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: .US
Posts: 9,127
|
There might still be some dealing involved. At least for a while, Intel still made the chips for Marvell.
Last edited by JeffDM; 03-14-2008 at 08:11 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,914
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 6
|
yeah I just forgot that...
by the way, I thing it was just stupid what intel did... ARM is still the leading processor architecture in smartphones and these kind of devices, its a huge market that intel bypassed. And as it seems this Atom architecture is far away behind ARM... |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,914
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 395
|
Quote:
Intel knows this, and therefore, this ever-present threat from a high-profile PR customer hopefully keeps focused on satisfying said customer. In fact, I'd be shocked if Apple didn't have AMD-based Macs sitting in a lab somewhere right now, lying in wait just a few steps of refinement short of a sell-able product, just in case the need ever arises. The AMD card is definitely one that stacks the deck in Apple's favour. Yet another example of the benefits of open competition. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,317
|
As part of Intel's sale of the StrongArm IP to Marvell, Intel continues to fab StrongArm CPUs for Marvell. I don't know when or if Intel will stop manufacturing StrongArm CPUs.
AMD is dead and buried as far as I'm concerned. They'll never come back. The economics to get to the next fab node is pretty much beyond their reach now. They may rely on some other fab company (IBM) to fab CPUs at smaller nodes, but they'll always be a year, or years, behind. Intel Atom won't make it into an iPhone or iPod touch form factor until 2010, maybe. If Apple builds a Moorestown device, it'll be a much bigger device. Something between the iPhone and a MIDs you'll see with Menlow, er Centrino Atom, devices. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|