or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Steve Jobs on P.A. Semi, love for Intel; 3G Blackberry delayed
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Steve Jobs on P.A. Semi, love for Intel; 3G Blackberry delayed

post #1 of 95
Thread Starter 
Apple chief executive Steve Jobs in a new interview dispels rumors that the company's recent acquisition of chipmaker P.A. Semi was a result of some kind of discord with Intel. Meanwhile, RIM will reportedly delay the release of its 3G BlackBerry handset in a move that could play to Apple's advantage.

Jobs loves Intel

In speaking to the Wall Street Journal following Apple's second-quarter earnings report Wednesday, Jobs reaffirmed that his company's relationship with its Mac microprocessor supplier Intel Corp. was as strong as ever, adding that he hopes it remains that way indefinitely.

"We have a great partnership with Intel, he said. We expect that to continue forever."

Though some have speculated that Apple's recent acquisition of P.A. Semi would in some way detract orders for future Intel chips, Jobs explained that the purchase was mainly driven by a liking for the firm's intelligence, rather than its existing products.

Corroborating a recent report by the EETimes, Jobs said Apple has long been involved in custom designing chips for iPhones and iPods and suggested that the company would rely on P.A. Semis expertise primarily for the forward development of those handheld products which were never based on Intel designs.

Although P.A. Semi is known for chips based on IBM's Power technology, from which Macs recently defected, there's absolutely no plans to ressurect a PowerPC-based Mac offering.

"I wouldnt lose too much sleep over that, he said. Were very happy with Intel."

3G BlackBerry delayed

Meanwhile, it appears Apple will have at least a month or two head start on rival smartphone maker Research In Motion should it debut is 3G iPhone in the expected June timeframe.

Reuters reports on a story originally published over at Fortune which notes that the high-speed wireless version of the company's BlackBerry smartphone for AT&T is facing delays. The report cites unnamed sources in saying that the US wireless carrier is concerned with the quality of calls made using pre-production units of the next-generation handset, which could push its introduction back as far as August from June.

AppleInsider notes, however, that the original piece over at Fortune was authored by Scott Moritz, who during his tenure at TheStreet.com was repeatedly accused of intentionally spreading misinformation on Apple to drive the down the company's share price. As such, his claims should be treated with caution.

In yet another twist, BoyGenius appears to be backing claims that the 3G BlackBerry is facing delays, but alleges that the information for the Fortune report was sourced from his website without accreditation.
post #2 of 95
Well you can spin it any way you want but that reads as a blow to Intel IMO.

Intel make no bones about it. They see Moorestown and subsequent Atom cpus as viable for the iPhone. This certainly makes it appear that Apple don't see it that way. The fact that Apple have bought expertise in cpu design make it appear that they have no intention in adopting Atom for the iPhone/iTouch.
post #3 of 95
Steve's just being coy as usual... that sly fox.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #4 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

Well you can spin it any way you want but that reads as a blow to Intel IMO.

Intel make no bones about it. They see Moorestown and subsequent Atom cpus as viable for the iPhone. This certainly makes it appear that Apple don't see it that way. The fact that Apple have bought expertise in cpu design make it appear that they have no intention in adopting Atom for the iPhone/iTouch.

Although it seems unlikely, PA Semi IP may be used to develop next-gen iPads or whatever else Steve has up his sleeve.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #5 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Steve's just being coy as usual... that sly fox.

I don't know. That *was* a quarter of a billion dollar investment after all.

It seems to me they are moving in a different direction with respect to handhelds.

Desktop/Laptop/Server---->Intel

iPod/iPhone/iTouch/?------> In house custom ARM chips
post #6 of 95
Read Dilger's take on this... very insightful...

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/0...e-buy-pa-semi/

Apple is unlikely to give up the economies of scale that Intel gives them for the core processors, but are likely doing this to develop custom supporting chips that give them differentiation that can't be stolen by anyone with an Intel internals manual.
post #7 of 95
BlackBerry still don't have 3G?!!! LOL

Thats what how many years?! Apple iPhone is less than 8 months old and people are very upset about not releasing a 3G yet!! This is funny.
post #8 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

BlackBerry still don't have 3G?!!! LOL

Thats what how many years?! Apple iPhone is less than 8 months old and people are very upset about not releasing a 3G yet!! This is funny.

To be fair, the Blackberry's main use is push email, which you don't need 3G for.
post #9 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

BlackBerry still don't have 3G?!!! LOL

Thats what how many years?! Apple iPhone is less than 8 months old and people are very upset about not releasing a 3G yet!! This is funny.

My thought as well: it seems odd that RIM hasn't already implemented 3G given the level of iPhone-3G-whining that has gone on for the past year. Apparently, Apple's not behind the game...
post #10 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_lha View Post

To be fair, the Blackberry's main use is push email, which you don't need 3G for.

A reasonable point -- I guess as they begin incorporating better web browsing, they're beginning to wish they had more speed...
post #11 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyD007 View Post

<explicative deleted>

Kasper: uh... banned?
post #12 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

Well you can spin it any way you want but that reads as a blow to Intel IMO.

Intel make no bones about it. They see Moorestown and subsequent Atom cpus as viable for the iPhone. This certainly makes it appear that Apple don't see it that way. The fact that Apple have bought expertise in cpu design make it appear that they have no intention in adopting Atom for the iPhone/iTouch.

I don't think so. This says nothing. For all we know, Apple is doing this to make customized versions of Intel's own chips, on Intel's own process lines.

It tells us nothing useful,. we know that Apple won't go back to PPC in any form.
post #13 of 95
MOD NOTE: You just had to quote it, didn't you?
What is that supposed to mean?
post #14 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyD007 View Post

Ya Fuckin $%@@s!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uh, yeah, I think a quick explanation is in order. Are you just an idiot or what?

TechnoMinds

We are a Montreal based technology company that offers a variety of tech services such as tech support for Apple products, Drupal based website development, computer training and iCloud...

Reply

TechnoMinds

We are a Montreal based technology company that offers a variety of tech services such as tech support for Apple products, Drupal based website development, computer training and iCloud...

Reply
post #15 of 95
Fortune has picked up Scott Moritz? How unfortunate for them!!
post #16 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by techno View Post

Uh, yeah, I think a quick explanation is in order. Are you just an idiot or what?

That guy is just an idiot, nothing but an idiot.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #17 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denton View Post

My thought as well: it's seems odd that RIM hasn't already implemented 3G given the level of iPhone-3G-whining that has gone on for the past year. Apparently, Apple's not behind the game...

I believe they're talking about the specific 3G Blackberry for AT&T. I think blackberries have been 3G at least since the curve came out.

CDMA2000 EV-DO, is considered 3G right?
post #18 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_lha View Post

To be fair, the Blackberry's main use is push email, which you don't need 3G for.

Maybe. But the attitude of most people here and other sites, Europeans in particular, is this "iPhone sucks because it is not using 3G". No one said the same thing about RIM.
post #19 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denton View Post

Kasper: uh... banned?

Yeah -- He's gone. Banned for at least 10 days or unless he can explain himself, which is doubtful.

K
EIC- AppleInsider.com
Questions and comments to : kasper@appleinsider.com
Reply
EIC- AppleInsider.com
Questions and comments to : kasper@appleinsider.com
Reply
post #20 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solar View Post

I believe they're talking about the specific 3G Blackberry for AT&T. I think blackberries have been 3G at least since the curve came out.

CDMA2000 EV-DO, is considered 3G right?

Then is the point that RIM hasn't implemented 3G on a GSM network?

Well, I did say that it "seems odd," not that it actually is.
post #21 of 95
Quote:
I don't think so. This says nothing. For all we know, Apple is doing this to make customized versions of Intel's own chips, on Intel's own process lines.

I wonder how much more expensive would that be than just using Intel's general chips?

How would Apple deal with an architecture split for the iPhone after 200,000 - 300,000 developers have made apps for ARM?
post #22 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Maybe. But the attitude of most people here and other sites, Europeans in particular, is this "iPhone sucks because it is not using 3G". No one said the same thing about RIM.

Granted. But RIM is a email/business machine, not meant for consumers. Their comparing the iPhone to phones like Nokia N95. Consumer phones have a different standard than business phones.

Nevertheless, I cant argue that it isn't funny to watch RIM users complain about iphone lack of 3G.
post #23 of 95
may be we will see ...

Designed by Apple (PA Semi) Manufactured by Intel

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply
post #24 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I wonder how much more expensive would that be than just using Intel's general chips?

How would Apple deal with an architecture split for the iPhone after 200,000 - 300,000 developers have made apps for ARM?

Well, Apple could want to ad a few functions that others wouldn't have. Intel could license them to do that. If the chips are small, and the mods small, it might not cost too much.

Certainly far less then designing an entire chip.

Supposedly everything is portable. These apps are much smaller than normal OS X apps, a move would be much less wrenching, and the developers would likely prefer working on x86 anyway. Future apps would be easier.
post #25 of 95
The purchase may be insurance as well as a reminder to Intel to not take things for granted - if things continue work out with Intel, fine - if not, Apple will have been pursuing parallel internal development to protect its business interests (not unlike the secret Intel development for years while publicly remaining a PowerPC platform)
post #26 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Maybe. But the attitude of most people here and other sites, Europeans in particular, is this "iPhone sucks because it is not using 3G". No one said the same thing about RIM.

Maybe RIM isn't even on the radar in Europe? I can't tell. I really don't know. Maybe they're just devices that just don't appeal to anyone that wants a device for personal use.
post #27 of 95
I still tend to think there's a lucrative product that sits between the iPhone/iTouch and a Laptop.

I think UMPC have the right idea but wrong delivery.


Give me a mini tablet with a widescreen 6" screen and a bit more power. Give me external connectivity (USB/Video/Expresscard) and continue to work on the OS X stack and Core Touch or whateva they call it.

I'd buy one. Make it affordable. Gimme GPS options and more.

What if PA Semi begins to work on multicore SoC options tailored precisely for Apple's needs? It could be a huge hit.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #28 of 95
Quote:
Well, Apple could want to ad a few functions that others wouldn't have. Intel could license them to do that. If the chips are small, and the mods small, it might not cost too much. Certainly far less then designing an entire chip.

Also it doesn't appear PA Semi engineers have much if any experience with x86. They were very strong advocates of Power.

I think you are reaching for the less probable outcome rather than the more probable.

Quote:
Supposedly everything is portable. These apps are much smaller than normal OS X apps, a move would be much less wrenching, and the developers would likely prefer working on x86 anyway. Future apps would be easier.

It seems highly unlikely Apple would build a fresh SDK, API's, and developer community only to soon throw in an architecture change. Its more crucial to get the platform stable right now.

Possibly in a few years. But not right now.
post #29 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

Well you can spin it any way you want but that reads as a blow to Intel IMO.

Intel make no bones about it. They see Moorestown and subsequent Atom cpus as viable for the iPhone. This certainly makes it appear that Apple don't see it that way. The fact that Apple have bought expertise in cpu design make it appear that they have no intention in adopting Atom for the iPhone/iTouch.

I wholeheartedly disagree. I think a large part of the switch to Macs is because of the potential for Boot Camp and visualization of Windows. I doubt Intel is scared of this deal in relation to Apple's Mac line.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasper View Post

Yeah -- He's gone. Banned for at least 10 days or unless he can explain himself, which is doubtful.

A form of Tourret Syndrom?


Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post

The purchase may be insurance as well as a reminder to Intel to not take things for granted - if things continue work out with Intel, fine - if not, Apple will have been pursuing parallel internal development to protect its business interests (not unlike the secret Intel development for years while publicly remaining a PowerPC platform)

Cringely mentions that Apple producing it's own chips could create faster, more efficient chips that are smaller as they wouldn't need to waste precious real estate for unused hardcoding. This makes sense and the best position for this would be in PMPs, MIDs and cell phones. I think we need to look at potential new product lines for Apple, not the current ones.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #30 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Also it doesn't appear PA Semi engineers have much if any experience with x86. They were very strong advocates of Power.

I think you are reaching for the less probable outcome rather than the more probable.

I don't think so. After all, we don't know what the relationship between them an Apple was over the past few years. They could have been doing some work at the time Apple moved to Intel.

Quote:
It seems highly unlikely Apple would build a fresh SDK, API's, and developer community only to soon throw in an architecture change. Its more crucial to get the platform stable right now.

Possibly in a few years. But not right now.


This is all just speculation. No one except a very few at Apple and PA Semi know, and they ain't talking.

Again, we don't know.

Remember that all those years, Apple kept their new OS current on Intel.

They could be doing that here as well. I wouldn't be surprised. The phone SDK and all the rest is not more than a good sized add-on to Apples current work, They could be ready to move over in a month.

I suppose that Apple could be using them for more ARN related work. But Apple, doesn't, as far as I know, currently own any relevant ARM API's. I think they gave all of that up when they sold out their shares. Maybe I'm wrong about that. But, otherwise, they would need to get a license. If PA Semi had done so already, it would have been news.

As current engineering, as far as we know, in PA SEmi is involved in PPC, the question is just how much do the currently know about ARM? More than about x86?

Who knows?
post #31 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Also it doesn't appear PA Semi engineers have much if any experience with x86. They were very strong advocates of Power.

Their staff also seems to be very well versed in ARM and StrongARM, too.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #32 of 95
MY BIG-TIME PREDICTION #1 ON RECORD HENCEFORTH:

Within 5-8 years, Apple will be developing their own CPUs, and will leave intel much they way they left Motorola.

This will put them into a position to fully control every aspect of Mac design and production from Chip to Chassis, and remove their need to rely on any other company less well-run or secure than they are.

It will also remove for another 10-15 years the possibility of Apple suffering the same stability and hacker fates that Windows has suffered, as well as prevent companies like Psystar from knocking off cheap clones.

If you can't get a proprietary Apple CPU, how can you possibly build a clone?

In fact, I would not be surprised if Apple was already developing a new OS to run on their own proprietary CPU platform as we speak.
post #33 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by echosonic View Post

MY BIG-TIME PREDICTION #1 ON RECORD HENCEFORTH:

Within 5-8 years, Apple will be developing their own CPUs, and will leave intel much they way they left Motorola.

This will put them into a position to fully control every aspect of Mac design and production from Chip to Chassis, and remove their need to rely on any other company less well-run or secure than they are.

It will also remove for another 10-15 years the possibility of Apple suffering the same stability and hacker fates that Windows has suffered, as well as prevent companies like Psystar from knocking off cheap clones.

If you can't get a proprietary Apple CPU, how can you possibly build a clone?

In fact, I would not be surprised if Apple was already developing a new OS to run on their own proprietary CPU platform as we speak.

and how will apple get video cards make there own chips or use ATI or NVIDIA? also it may be hard to get apps to more to a new chip.
post #34 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Maybe. But the attitude of most people here and other sites, Europeans in particular, is this "iPhone sucks because it is not using 3G". No one said the same thing about RIM.

That's because RIM makes 3G products, this report is specifically talking about the new Blackberry 9000, for AT&T's new HSDPA 3G network, on which the iPhone will also be running. The phrasing in the AI article kind of makes it sound like it's RIM's first 3G product, when it's really their first HSDPA 3G product. (I think)

RIM have been shipping 3G models for at least the last 4 years. I think since the 7200 series..

I have a 3G 8830, because it's what I could get on my corporate account. Compared to an iPhone, I'd say the only thing that's really better, is the email (debatable), and the 3G speed. The browser sucks, but I do have unlimited phone as modem, so it connects via bluetooth to my macbook. As a media player it's a complete joke. RIM shouldn't even bother trying, it's just embarrassing. I was shocked when I realized it only had a usb 1 port on it. I think if the iPhone wasn't exclusivly on AT&T, RIM would be totally shitting their pants right now. They probably should be anyways..
post #35 of 95
Quote:
There staff also seems to be very well versed in ARM and StrongARM, too.

Yeah I've mention that before. I only stated Power in that sentence because it and x86 are more direct competitors.
post #36 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by echosonic View Post

In fact, I would not be surprised if Apple was already developing a new OS to run on their own proprietary CPU platform as we speak.

I would be shocked if Apple did not already have Macs running on PWRficient chips at Cupertino. If they DIDN'T, that would be a story all by itself.

I'm inclined to think your take is a pretty accurate indication of what Apple is doing; gearing for an eventual move to their own chips. Any questions about "how will they do this" are irrelevant since we don't know what Apple's plans for those chips might be. For all we know, Apple might get PA Semi design a chip that operates in ways we have no frame of reference for at this time.
post #37 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

I'm inclined to think your take is a pretty accurate indication of what Apple is doing; gearing for an eventual move to their own chips. Any questions about "how will they do this" are irrelevant since we don't know what Apple's plans for those chips might be. For all we know, Apple might get PA Semi design a chip that operates in ways we have no frame of reference for at this time.

I disagree. There is too much benefit to Macs on x86. But personal computers are not the future of technology, embedded devices are. I foresee a version of OS X running on a slew devices in markets we have never seen from Apple.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #38 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

I would be shocked if Apple did not already have Macs running on PWRficient chips at Cupertino. If they DIDN'T, that would be a story all by itself.

I'm inclined to think your take is a pretty accurate indication of what Apple is doing; gearing for an eventual move to their own chips. .

That just sent a shiver down my spine, I can't help but think of the whole SGI/MIPS debacle. Though really it wasn't a debacle until intel entered the picture.
post #39 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Although it seems unlikely, PA Semi IP may be used to develop next-gen iPads or whatever else Steve has up his sleeve.

Absolutely.
That doesn't mean it'd be PWRficient either - they have enough ARM expertise, apparently.

In fact, everything Steve said could be said while simultaneously demonstrating a next-gen iPad (or whatever). Look at this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Jobs loves Intel...

"We have a great partnership with Intel,” he said. “We expect that to continue forever."

... there's absolutely no plans to ressurect a PowerPC-based Mac offering.
"I wouldn’t lose too much sleep over that,” he said. “We’re very happy with Intel."

All could be said while releasing anything slightly smaller than a MBA.

edit: Actually, trying to read into what Steve didn't say (as he is often quite precise in his choice of words)...
The paraphrase didn't say "there's absolutely no plans to resurrect a PowerPC-based offering"
the paraphrase said "there's absolutely no plans to resurrect a PowerPC-based Mac offering".
... I wonder what Steve himself said.
(remember though that eeTimes says that PA Semi is getting rid of the PWR chip entirely!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

Intel make no bones about it. They see Moorestown and subsequent Atom cpus as viable for the iPhone. This certainly makes it appear that Apple don't see it that way. The fact that Apple have bought expertise in cpu design make it appear that they have no intention in adopting Atom for the iPhone/iTouch.

Yeah it does doesn't it. At least at this surface level, and I don't know enough about PA-semi to know what it is that's worth so much to Apple.

It could really be that $300million is small change for Apple to get some great designers to push future iPod/iPhone design in amazing directions - quite independent of whether it's Intel or Arm (or PWR)... and simply planning for the future.

Or Apple could be hedging their bets.
post #40 of 95
I think this is more about embedded devices, think apple tv or time capsule. Things that just plug in and work.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Steve Jobs on P.A. Semi, love for Intel; 3G Blackberry delayed