or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › More evidence of Apple's iPhone eventually going Intel
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

More evidence of Apple's iPhone eventually going Intel

post #1 of 41
Thread Starter 
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
post #2 of 41
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.
post #3 of 41
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.
post #4 of 41
If it's freshly-coined as Atom, why reference Silverthorne? Makes for a confusing read.
post #5 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by crees! View Post

If it's freshly-coined as Atom, why reference Silverthorne? Makes for a confusing read.

Atom isn't just Silverthorne you know.

/Adrian
post #6 of 41
(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.
post #7 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Atom architecture.

Are you saying this thing is NUCLEAR??
post #8 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

Are you saying this thing is NUCLEAR??

No no no. It's electrical.

It just needs a thermonuclear reaction to charge the battery to run the platform.
post #9 of 41
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"!
post #10 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

No no no. It's electrical.

It just needs a thermonuclear reaction to charge the batter to run the platform.

Are you saying it's fish and chips?
post #11 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

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"!

It's more like a Smartphone with a Premium.
post #12 of 41
Call the 3G chip Eve, and I'll be happy.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #13 of 41
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.

post #14 of 41
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!!!!




post #15 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunkDifferent.com View Post

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.


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.
post #16 of 41
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.
post #17 of 41
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.
post #18 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

Quote:
Are you saying this thing is NUCLEAR??

No no no. It's electrical.

It just needs a thermonuclear reaction to charge the batter[y] to run the platform.

Flux Capacitor comes as a 3rd party accessory from Griffin Technology.

(BttF, awesome).
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
post #19 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

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?

Well it should be noted that Apple only has one
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.
post #20 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

Well it should be noted that Apple only has one
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.

No, Apple can go to AMD for laptop chips. Jobs make all sorts of statements, all marketingspeak. The only interest he's aligned to is his shareholders. But if you believe the drivel dolled out by AppleInsider, I guess you'd believe anything.
post #21 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

No, Apple can go to AMD for laptop chips. Jobs make all sorts of statements, all marketingspeak. The only interest he's aligned to is his shareholders. But if you believe the drivel dolled out by AppleInsider, I guess you'd believe anything.

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.
post #22 of 41
I've never read so much dribble on a AI thread!
post #23 of 41
Everything that happens happens for the good.


Sachin
post #24 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

No, Apple can go to AMD for laptop chips. Jobs make all sorts of statements, all marketingspeak. The only interest he's aligned to is his shareholders. But if you believe the drivel dolled out by AppleInsider, I guess you'd believe anything.

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
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #25 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by sCreeD View Post

Flux Capacitor comes as a 3rd party accessory from Griffin Technology.

(BttF, awesome).

If I shake my iPhone 88 times can I travel through time?
post #26 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

Second gen iPhone should have Nvidia apx 2500. It has alot of great features that fit well into apple's multimedia focus including:


Maybe. But will safari run faster?


Quote:
Originally Posted by SpinDrift View Post

I've never read so much dribble on a AI thread!

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).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #27 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

Are you saying this thing is NUCLEAR??

I can't wait for it to split.

Seriously, I don't think a slide from an Intel presentation means much. It could, but it's easy to just copy and paste an image of a very recognized device to make the point.
post #28 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

No, Apple can go to AMD for laptop chips.

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?
post #29 of 41
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.
post #30 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

No no no. It's electrical.

It just needs a thermonuclear reaction to charge the battery to run the platform.

ahhh these bttf refs never get old
post #31 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

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?

You spout marketing drivel like a pro. Apple take standard Intel processors and use the standard chipset with a few of their own features thrown in (camera, FireWire, etc). It's the least important part of Apple's design, the most important being the industrial design and the software. And the marketing. They could switch processors and chipsets to AMD with little effort. It's all packaged and integrated by the processor vendors these days. OEM's do little in terms of hard chip design.

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.
post #32 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by fabianoarruda View Post

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.

Nope, they sold them off a little while ago.
post #33 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande View Post

Sure, they could go to AMD... but is it worth jeopardizing the wonderful partnership they have with Intel?

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.
post #34 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by fabianoarruda View Post

I can be wrong, but Intel have their own ARM processors line too, right?

Sold to Marvell for $600M
post #35 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

Sold to Marvell for $600M

There might still be some dealing involved. At least for a while, Intel still made the chips for Marvell.
post #36 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

There might still be some dealing involved. At least for a while, Intel still made the chips for Marvell.

IIRC Marvell are fabless so they'd have to get them made somewhere.
post #37 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign View Post

Sold to Marvell for $600M

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...
post #38 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by fabianoarruda View Post

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...

I presume they're betting that $600M fills the gap between their existing ARM sales and the introduction of Atom although it seems to me that Atom doesn't quite go low-end/low-power enough to be in quite the same market.
post #39 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande View Post

Sure, they could go to AMD... but is it worth jeopardizing the wonderful partnership they have with Intel?

I think the point is, if Apple ever found itself in a position where Intel was unable to meet Apple's requirements (that is, Intel was the one jeopardizing the relationship, and Apple was simply in a position of retaliating), there is a second source (AMD) which would require a minimal (if any) software re-spin in order to incorporate into their products.

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.
post #40 of 41
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.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › More evidence of Apple's iPhone eventually going Intel