Analyst: Atom-based Apple in months, Chinese iPhone in 2008

[AppleInsider]

A new research note by Lehman Brothers calls for an Apple device with an Intel Atom processor within 12 months, and expects the iPhone to reach more than one billion potential customers before the end of 2008.

Analyst Ben Reitzes makes the prediction based on Intel chief Paul Otellini's talks at a Lehman-hosted telecoms conference, where the semiconductor company head notes that he has been "positively surprised" by the take-up of the Atom by the market.

The statement contributes to an existing sentiment at Lehman that Apple may release an ultra-portable device within a year that Reitzes speculates would be oriented towards sharing media. This likelihood grows even further with statements by Otellini that future iterations of Atom will be efficient enough to fit into iPhone-sized devices as early as 2009; having this technology at the smartphone level could have significant implications for Apple, Reitzes says.

"We believe any product using Intel architecture in terms of an ultra-portable or iPhone could be met with orders in the multiple millions, making our estimates for Apple conservative," he elaborates.

The financial researcher also notes that Apple's steadily growing number of carrier deals now gives it access to a potential 650 million subscribers as of the TeliaSonera deal, or about four times as many subscribers that can be reached today. The rapid expansion is characterized as evidence that Apple is pushing for sheer volume in terms of sales and that the company may be counting on added iPhone numbers to compensate for reduced or absent carrier payments.

That number may also be poised to explode before the year is over, the analyst notes: Lehman anticipates the signing of a Chinese carrier by the end of 2008 that would push Apple's total potential customer base to one billion, or more than six times the current range. Such expansion will not only help Apple reach targets but could see any success spill over into other categories.

"We believe higher phone volumes mean that Apple will experience an enhanced halo effect that could drive millions of upside to Mac units," the researcher states.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[amac4me]

It's only a matter of time before we see SEVERAL products from Apple that rely on the Atom processor.

[zunx]

Apple, please make it small for a pocket, but capable of running a full Mac OS X 10.5.3 inside to run full native Keynote and PowerPoint presentations on wired and wireless videoprojectors. Something like this but with Mac OS X:

OQO model e2
http://www.oqo.com

We need thousands for scientific meetings and University.

[merdhead]

Originally Posted by amac4me

It's only a matter of time before we see SEVERAL products from Apple that rely on the Atom processor.

I very much doubt it, if you are talking about handheld products. AppleTV or something is a different matter.

Give me one good reason why Apple would release a handheld product with an Atom. Because Intel released it is not a good reason. Apple will use ARM processors for the foreseeable future.

Really, you have to question the level of intelligence of these analysts when they say things like releasing an Intel arch device will sell millions. Why? Its bigger and more power hungry but the masses will run out and buy it because it runs on x86? How many customers will know or care what their handheld runs? Pity the people who actually trade on this guy's pronouncements.

[FuturePastNow]

Originally Posted by amac4me

It's only a matter of time before we see SEVERAL products from Apple that rely on the Atom processor.

And I think one of the first will be the AppleTV. It runs close to the edge thermally and this would help. Give it a little more CPU power and cost less, too.

If Apple is smart, they won't even announce a change. It's just an appliance, no reason for customers to know what is inside.

[backtomac]

Originally Posted by FuturePastNow

And I think one of the first will be the AppleTV. It runs close to the edge thermally and this would help. Give it a little more CPU power and cost less, too.

If Apple is smart, they won't even announce a change. It's just an appliance, no reason for customers to know what is inside.

I think you're right. The atom would seem to be a nice fit for the ATV.

I'm thinking of getting an ATV but am waiting for a hardware revision. Every time I visit the Apple store and see one, I imidiately notice how hot those things get. I worry that will cause a HW failure given enough time.

[Virgil-TB2]

The Atom is a great processor but I would take this whole article with a huge grain of salt. The reason being that there are a lot of good low-power processors out there and whether or not it's an intel one with x86 instructions matters hardly at all to a portable OS-X device.

The fact that this researcher thinks that millions of extra orders will hit just because Apple is using an intel processor (versus perhaps getting the same performance out of a future ARM chip or even a custom made chip of their own design) is highly suspicious in my book.

It's almost like they are thinking that simply because the Atom is the popular new processor that adding it to an Apple device will result in increased orders because of some loopy brand recognition or something.

[Joe_the_dragon]

but it's uses a very old chip set with poor on board video and the apple TV uses a nvidia chip.

[iVlad]

China's population is in BILLIONS!!!
Imagine taking just 10% of that...or even 1%. That's like total number of iPhone users in US. =)

[Texadian]

Originally Posted by iVlad

China's population is in BILLIONS!!!
Imagine taking just 10% of that...or even 1%. That's like total number of iPhone users in US. =)

Its not BILLIONS its around 1.3 Billion. Still nothing to gock at thought.

10% = 130 Million(ish)
1% = 13 Million(ish)

I think the iphone has sold what around 5.5 million worldwide so far; so your overall determination is somewhat accurate given the entire population has access or the money to buy it in the first place.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by merdhead

I very much doubt it, if you are talking about handheld products. AppleTV or something is a different matter.

Give me one good reason why Apple would release a handheld product with an Atom. Because Intel released it is not a good reason. Apple will use ARM processors for the foreseeable future.

Really, you have to question the level of intelligence of these analysts when they say things like releasing an Intel arch device will sell millions. Why? Its bigger and more power hungry but the masses will run out and buy it because it runs on x86? How many customers will know or care what their handheld runs? Pity the people who actually trade on this guy's pronouncements.

Exactly. Specs don't mean anything to anyone but techies. Everyone else relies on function and/or style.

[Texadian]

Lets not forget that Branding is on of the most powerful marketing tools a company has. Slap a known name (Intel) on something and all of a sudden you have an instant customer base willing to at least hear what you have to say. The use of "Branding" is great way to get a so so product out the door.

[Tofino]

Originally Posted by Texadian

Lets not forget that Branding is on of the most powerful marketing tools a company has. Slap a known name (Intel) on something and all of a sudden you have an instant customer base willing to at least hear what you have to say. The use of "Branding" is great way to get a so so product out the door.

even though you have a valid point, i think that the 'apple' brand outweighs the 'intel inside' for most people (one way or the other i suppose). notice that apple does not participate in the 'stickers outside' co-marketing of intel, and likely passes on promotional dollars from intel.

[Texadian]

Originally Posted by Tofino

even though you have a valid point, i think that the 'apple' brand outweighs the 'intel inside' for most people (one way or the other i suppose). notice that apple does not participate in the 'stickers outside' co-marketing of intel, and likely passes on promotional dollars from intel.

I see that as a very valid point but the truth is in the numbers. Look at sales of Apple products (the computers) before they went Intel and after. MANY people switched from PC to Apple just for the sheer fact that it now has Intel as a processor (known name and abilities) instead of a PowerPC processor (known only to Apple(ites)). People saw the potential Intel gave the Apple system and we (Appleites) are seeing a steady increase of adopters. Do you think the same thing would happen with a lesser known product name like...... Centaur Technology? They have a good product but no product name. Apple didn't choose Intel for there technology but rather there name. If they thought it was the best product out there they would do everything Intel and not just bits and pieces.

p.s. Okay you Intel lovers just so you know I think they make great products so please don't ream my post just bc I used Intel as the example.

[merdhead]

Originally Posted by Texadian

I see that as a very valid point but the truth is in the numbers. Look at sales of Apple products (the computers) before they went Intel and after. MANY people switched from PC to Apple just for the sheer fact that it now has Intel as a processor (known name and abilities) instead of a PowerPC processor (known only to Apple(ites)). People saw the potential Intel gave the Apple system and we (Appleites) are seeing a steady increase of adopters. Do you think the same thing would happen with a lesser known product name like...... Centaur Technology? They have a good product but no product name. Apple didn't choose Intel for there technology but rather there name. If they thought it was the best product out there they would do everything Intel and not just bits and pieces.

p.s. Okay you Intel lovers just so you know I think they make great products so please don't ream my post just bc I used Intel as the example.

Correlation doesn't mean causation. Intel chips just happen to be compatible with a huge portion of the installed base of computers and software on the planet. That's the point. It's hardly because Intel made them. Most non-technical people I spoke to before the transition thought that Macs already ran the same processors as PCs because their chip was called PowerPC.

There's also the iPod thing and Apple's improved brand. Apple's Mac sales started growing in earnest much earlier, the Intel switch just gave them a kick along.

[Tofino]

Originally Posted by Texadian

I see that as a very valid point but the truth is in the numbers. Look at sales of Apple products (the computers) before they went Intel and after. MANY people switched from PC to Apple just for the sheer fact that it now has Intel as a processor (known name and abilities) instead of a PowerPC processor (known only to Apple(ites)). People saw the potential Intel gave the Apple system and we (Appleites) are seeing a steady increase of adopters. Do you think the same thing would happen with a lesser known product name like...... Centaur Technology? They have a good product but no product name. Apple didn't choose Intel for there technology but rather there name. If they thought it was the best product out there they would do everything Intel and not just bits and pieces.

p.s. Okay you Intel lovers just so you know I think they make great products so please don't ream my post just bc I used Intel as the example.

Hmm... you might be right, but i still think apples growth has more to do with the well publicised ability to run windows, than the fact it's got an intel chip in it. it's likely a combination of both.

of course i don't know what would have happened if apple had gone with AMD instead. i'm not saying that going intel had nothing to do with apple's numbers, i'm just wondering if it really is a branding issue, or rather a functionality issue (running windows). does the general public say 'it has an intel chip inside!' or do they say 'it can run windows as well'?

i don't think that apple went with intel solely for their name, i think they went for the supplier that could deliver what they wanted and wasn't going to pull a motorala/ibm on them. intel's roadmap was likely more important to steve jobs than their brand. it would make no sense NOT to put 'intel inside' stickers all over it if branding was the main motivation for the move.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon

but it's uses a very old chip set with poor on board video and the apple TV uses a nvidia chip.

I really don't think you're capable of understanding what "the right tool for the right job" means.

The Intel GPU is built into a lot of chipsets, but there are a lot of devices that don't use it and just add one. All iMacs have an Intel GPU, but the non-edu iMacs use a discrete GPU chip instead. The AppleTV would probably be just like that, assuming the Intel GPU still doesn't do what Apple needs AppleTV to do.

[mdriftmeyer]

Originally Posted by merdhead

I very much doubt it, if you are talking about handheld products. AppleTV or something is a different matter.

Give me one good reason why Apple would release a handheld product with an Atom. Because Intel released it is not a good reason. Apple will use ARM processors for the foreseeable future.

Really, you have to question the level of intelligence of these analysts when they say things like releasing an Intel arch device will sell millions. Why? Its bigger and more power hungry but the masses will run out and buy it because it runs on x86? How many customers will know or care what their handheld runs? Pity the people who actually trade on this guy's pronouncements.

The XScale would have been the logical choice but the Atom is DOA for the iPhone. These people truly are dense if they think Apple is going to solely rely on Intel for all their hardware products.

[rosstheboss]

it's more usual to call "twelve months" "one year"...

[FuturePastNow]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

I really don't think you're capable of understanding what "the right tool for the right job" means.

The Intel GPU is built into a lot of chipsets, but there are a lot of devices that don't use it and just add one. All iMacs have an Intel GPU, but the non-edu iMacs use a discrete GPU chip instead. The AppleTV would probably be just like that, assuming the Intel GPU still doesn't do what Apple needs AppleTV to do.

Sadly, the edu-iMac with no discrete GPU is gone now. It died along with the 17" screen. That was a very good value for anyone who doesn't play games.

[winterspan]

Atom seems like a whole lot of hype with little substance. The performance numbers are certainly not there with the first generation, although the coming Menlow platform, which will see Atom as a system-on-a-chip should change that somewhat.
What everyone forgets about is that ARM is by no means standing still. The current iPhone uses an old ARM processor. Their current generation, the Cortex-A9, scales up to over 1.0 Ghz and dual-core, while using a fraction of the power the Atom will. Who knows what will come out next year. I just don't know if there are enough advantages of using x86 in the embedded market for it to make any dent. Certainly with apple, they have already ported and optimized the OSX kernel and supporting libraries over to ARM. Why would they want to throw all that work away and go to a potentially bigger, slower, and more power-hungry x86 chip in a future iPhone?
If there are systems engineers here that know stuff I dont, please by all means let us know!

[elliots11]

Originally Posted by winterspan

Atom seems like a whole lot of hype with little substance. The performance numbers are certainly not there with the first generation, although the coming Menlow platform, which will see Atom as a system-on-a-chip should change that somewhat.
What everyone forgets about is that ARM is by no means standing still. The current iPhone uses an old ARM processor. Their current generation, the Cortex-A9, scales up to over 1.0 Ghz and dual-core, while using a fraction of the power the Atom will. Who knows what will come out next year. I just don't know if there are enough advantages of using x86 in the embedded market for it to make any dent. Certainly with apple, they have already ported and optimized the OSX kernel and supporting libraries over to ARM. Why would they want to throw all that work away and go to a potentially bigger, slower, and more power-hungry x86 chip in a future iPhone?
If there are systems engineers here that know stuff I dont, please by all means let us know!

How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air. I'd heard that it is capable of dual core 1.6 ghz, and wikipedia says it's 1.87.

The reason this would be a big deal is that the iphone would literally become a computer in your hand or pocket. You'd have to interact differently with it based on its size, but a handheld computer would be a huge deal. The Intel Atom processor would lend that legitimacy (or harm the macbook air's), though it'd probably have it with arm anyway.

I need a decent speed handheld computer, I don't think the current iphone has the power.

What would I do with it? What wouldn't I do with it!

[synp]

Originally Posted by elliots11

How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air.

In the MacBook Air?

Where did you get that?

[monstrosity]

Originally Posted by Texadian

I see that as a very valid point but the truth is in the numbers. Look at sales of Apple products (the computers) before they went Intel and after. MANY people switched from PC to Apple just for the sheer fact that it now has Intel as a processor (known name and abilities) instead of a PowerPC processor (known only to Apple(ites)). People saw the potential Intel gave the Apple system and we (Appleites) are seeing a steady increase of adopters. Do you think the same thing would happen with a lesser known product name like...... Centaur Technology? They have a good product but no product name. Apple didn't choose Intel for there technology but rather there name. If they thought it was the best product out there they would do everything Intel and not just bits and pieces.

p.s. Okay you Intel lovers just so you know I think they make great products so please don't ream my post just bc I used Intel as the example.

The intel brand has made very insignificant difference, infact if apple were to start slapping intel inside stickers everywhere it would eventually have the reverse effect and sell less computers. why? because apples marketing does not follow the rest of the industry, they are selling (along with 'it just works') a certain cool factor. Apples products have style through simplicity, overemphasis of the intel brand would erode this.

If you were selling Max Factor lipstick, you wouldn't market it as 'colored castor oil stick', (this may be reassuring for those who heard the rumor about cows brains). You would likely skip past the details and market a way of life, a way of thinking instead.

And dont get me wrong, Apple are not just selling style here, they also have substance to back it up. Being intel compatible obviously removed the worry of migration for many, but also remember that apple were on a serious roll anyway, OSX was looking very sexy, vista was screwing up royally etc etc..

What I'm trying to say is... An Apple computer is greater than the sum of it's parts (in terms of marketing anyway).

[FuturePastNow]

Originally Posted by synp

In the MacBook Air?

Where did you get that?

From nowhere. The Macbook Air does not use an Atom processor, and never will.

[FuturePastNow]

Originally Posted by elliots11

How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air. I'd heard that it is capable of dual core 1.6 ghz, and wikipedia says it's 1.87.

The reason this would be a big deal is that the iphone would literally become a computer in your hand or pocket. You'd have to interact differently with it based on its size, but a handheld computer would be a huge deal. The Intel Atom processor would lend that legitimacy (or harm the macbook air's), though it'd probably have it with arm anyway.

I need a decent speed handheld computer, I don't think the current iphone has the power.

What would I do with it? What wouldn't I do with it!

And just because you don't know anything about Atom, don't assume that its specs and abilities aren't very well known. It is an in-order x86 processor with a TDP of 2-4W for single-core and 8W for dual-core. Single core speeds range from 800MHz to 1.86GHz, dual-core is not yet released but will probably be 1.6 and 1.86GHz.

As an in-order processor, it's pretty crappy for general-purpose computing and benchmarks reflect that: the 1.6GHz Atom is roughly equivalent to a 1.0GHz Pentium M. At 2-4W it's also way too power hungry for a cell phone or iPod-type device.

What it is good for, and designed for, is ultra-mobile PCs (like the EEE PC) and computing appliances.

The Macbook Air, by the way, uses a low-voltage, small-package version of the Penryn core processor. A highly capable out-of-order CPU with a TDP of something like 25W.

[Neil Anderson]

Apple is going to use the processor in a wireless range extender product called the Atom Ant.

[merdhead]

Originally Posted by elliots11

How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air. I'd heard that it is capable of dual core 1.6 ghz, and wikipedia says it's 1.87.

The reason this would be a big deal is that the iphone would literally become a computer in your hand or pocket. You'd have to interact differently with it based on its size, but a handheld computer would be a huge deal. The Intel Atom processor would lend that legitimacy (or harm the macbook air's), though it'd probably have it with arm anyway.

I need a decent speed handheld computer, I don't think the current iphone has the power.

What would I do with it? What wouldn't I do with it!

You obviously don't know much about processors or computers. You don't seem to know the first think about the MAcBook Air either. The iPhone is a handheld computer. It has a processor, memory, storage, screen, input devices just like any other computer. Just because it's sold as a phone is neither here nor there.

I don't know why you think the ARM processor is not powerful enough. You can get them in a 4-core version and you can clock them past 1GHz. You could put any processor you like in a handheld machine, but if you put in anything other than an an ARM it will probably be too big, too power hungry and lacking features. The Atom just doesn't compete with the ARM, it seems to be targeted at small laptops.

[elliots11]

I heard that the Air using the Atom processor from speculation that I'd read prior to its release on sites like this. Never was that interested in the Air so I never researched it and read otherwise. Obviously I should have before commenting.

My concern with iPhone's current state is that it's a single core and only doing 412mhz according to Wikipedia (not a fantastic source, but I'm not in the industry). If accurate, that's not very impressive as a computer today, though probably great compared to the competition. Nothing against ARM at all, I'd just like something in the dual core, 1.6 ghz territory and I don't care who makes. It would be overpowered for what's available for the iphone today, opening a lot of doors for projects in the future with third party apps.

Maybe they could write an app for me that reads forum posts and warns of factual errors, or even one that monitors for excessive condescension. Might come in handy.

[FuturePastNow]

Originally Posted by elliots11

My concern with iPhone's current state is that it's a single core and only doing 412mhz according to Wikipedia (not a fantastic source, but I'm not in the industry). If accurate, that's not very impressive as a computer today, though probably great compared to the competition. Nothing against ARM at all, I'd just like something in the dual core, 1.6 ghz territory and I don't care who makes. It would be overpowered for what's available for the iphone today, opening a lot of doors for projects in the future with third party apps.

It's a PHONE.

[winterspan]

Originally Posted by Texadian

I see that as a very valid point but the truth is in the numbers. Look at sales of Apple products (the computers) before they went Intel and after. MANY people switched from PC to Apple just for the sheer fact that it now has Intel as a processor (known name and abilities) instead of a PowerPC processor (known only to Apple(ites)). People saw the potential Intel gave the Apple system and we (Appleites) are seeing a steady increase of adopters. Do you think the same thing would happen with a lesser known product name like...... Centaur Technology? They have a good product but no product name. Apple didn't choose Intel for there technology but rather there name. If they thought it was the best product out there they would do everything Intel and not just bits and pieces.
p.s. Okay you Intel lovers just so you know I think they make great products so please don't ream my post just bc I used Intel as the example.

Sorry, but that is rubbish. It's actually very easy to reason why Apple choose Intel and why their computers are selling so well after the transition. Apple probably choose Intel for a few reasons, not least because their x86 processors could natively run windows (and thus windows software). Of similar importance would be Intels' ability to provide an entire cost-effective line-up of processors to suit all of Apple's different computer segments, and to update them at regular intervals.

Similarly, the consumer market success of the move is most likely due to these factors as well. I would assume the primary driver is the ability to run windows in parallel with OSX (pun not intended). This is not only highly re-assuring for "new switchers", but allows them to still make use of software that is only available for windows. Secondary to that would be the more economical retail prices afforded by using such mass-produced processors, in addition to the highly-publicized market failure of Windows Vista and the increased consumer familiarity with Apple products created by the iPod's success. It's sort of become a "perfect storm" if you will.

Originally Posted by elliots11

How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air. I'd heard that it is capable of dual core 1.6 ghz, and wikipedia says it's 1.87.

The reason this would be a big deal is that the iphone would literally become a computer in your hand or pocket. You'd have to interact differently with it based on its size, but a handheld computer would be a huge deal. The Intel Atom processor would lend that legitimacy (or harm the macbook air's), though it'd probably have it with arm anyway.

I need a decent speed handheld computer, I don't think the current iphone has the power.
______________

My concern with iPhone's current state is that it's a single core and only doing 412mhz according to Wikipedia (not a fantastic source, but I'm not in the industry). If accurate, that's not very impressive as a computer today, though probably great compared to the competition. Nothing against ARM at all, I'd just like something in the dual core, 1.6 ghz territory and I don't care who makes. It would be overpowered for what's available for the iphone today, opening a lot of doors for projects in the future with third party apps.

I think you are on a different wavelength than everyone else. I mean you are not really describing a phone anymore, right? Without even talking about the miserable battery life that such a device would have, how in the world would a 3.5" touchscreen device even take advantage of a (roughly) dual-core 1600mhz CPU? Without a much larger and higher-resolution screen, not to mention a different use profile, what were you think of doing exactly that would require so much horsepower? I mean you are really describing an entirely different form factor with entirely different uses --- most likely a so-called Ultra-mobile PC (UMPC) or tablet-type device, and one that would run a standard desktop operating system.

[Rockon52]

Rumors are flying that the 3G Iphone though being introduced on the 9th of June wont be hitting the shelves until late August or early September. The problems seem to be mostly component rleated. Unfortunately this puts them behind the release of the 3G phone by Blackberry...BUMMER

[elliots11]

I think you are on a different wavelength than everyone else. I mean you are not really describing a phone anymore, right? Without even talking about the miserable battery life that such a device would have, how in the world would a 3.5" touchscreen device even take advantage of a (roughly) dual-core 1600mhz CPU? Without a much larger and higher-resolution screen, not to mention a different use profile, what were you think of doing exactly that would require so much horsepower? I mean you are really describing an entirely different form factor with entirely different uses --- most likely a so-called Ultra-mobile PC (UMPC) or tablet-type device, and one that would run a standard desktop operating system.[/QUOTE]

Honestly I probably don't need that much power. All I really want is a sort of a remote desktop control program on the iPhone.

[wizard69]

Originally Posted by FuturePastNow

It's a PHONE.

That might be the biggest misconception/mistake I've ever seen in these forums!

Dave