or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Intel gets foot in mouth about ARM-twisting iPhone comments
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Intel gets foot in mouth about ARM-twisting iPhone comments

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
Damage control kicked into overdrive at the world's largest chipmaker this week in the wake of comments from two Intel executives who had a field day badmouthing the iPhone and its embedded ARM processor during a public developer forum, apparently without the company's blessing.

The gaffe prompted Intel'sÂ*senior vice president Anand Chandrasekher to publish a correction Thursday on his Chip Shots blog over the "inappropriate" comments made by its lower-level executives, who took turns whaling on the iPhone as a device incapable of providing true Internet access due to alleged limitations of its ARM-based microprocessor.

"It's hard to see this as anything other than an formal apology to Apple and ARM for comments made by Intel's Shane Wall and Pankaj Kedia at the company's Intel Developer Forum in Taipei," wrote CNet News.com's Tom Krazit.

"Among other things, the executives resurrected Intel's lame 'ARM chips can't handle the Internet' argument and singled out the iPhone as an example of a smartphone that could be really awesome if it only used one of Intel's low-power x86 architecture processors, known as Atom."

In his correction, Chandrasekher attempted to distance the firm from the executives' remarks and conceded that Atom has a long ways to go before it can attempt to rival the powerÂ*efficiencyÂ*and battery life characteristics that ARM chips provide for handheld devices, a key element of the processor architecture's dominate use in over 90 percent of mobile phones worldwide.

He added that his subordinates had no business posturing Intel technology by criticizing the designs of partners, and even went one to praise the iPhone as an "innovative product" that has spawned broad market potential:

Anand Chandrasekher issued a correction on comments made by members of his team yesterday at Intel's Developer Forum in Taiwan. As general manager of the Group responsible for Intel's ultra-mobility products, he acknowledged that Intel's low-power Atom processor does not yet match the battery life characteristics of the ARM processor in a phone form factor; and, that while Intel does have plans on the books to get us to be competitive in the ultra low power domain - we are not there as yet. Secondly, Apple's iPhone offering is an extremely innovative product that enables new and exciting market opportunities. The statements made in Taiwan were inappropriate, and Intel representatives should not have been commenting on specific customer designs.

Unlike rival electronics and PC makers who largely follow Intel's architectural lead, Apple has proven to be remarkably successful at beating to the sound of its own drum. It's resisted Intel's claims that x86 processors represent the clear architectural path to powering the future of mobile computing, and has instead acquired chip designer P.A. Semi to begin work on future generation of ARM-based SOCs for iPhones and iPods that will offer unique advantages, and further distance the company from its peers.

Apple would also like to apologize...

But as CNet's Krazit points out, Intel's apology raises the question of whether, after three years of unfettered cooperation, there's a bit of bad blood brewing between the chipmaker and Apple over differences in their mobile hardware strategies.

In the end, "they'll be fine, although Intel is sleeping on the couch tonight," he wrote. "This week's exercise, however, is an interesting example of how much power Apple wields over one of the most important and historic companies in technology."

Intel is likely to be particularly conscious of its standing with Apple given that the Mac maker has recently replaced the Intel controller chipsets it has used ever since its transition to Intel CPUs in 2006 with a new more powerful controller from NVIDIA in its latest line of top selling MacBooks.
post #2 of 26
That video puts the icing on the cake

I'm glad to see Intel kissing Apple's ass, thats a good thing for us.
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
post #3 of 26
Don't forget the previous "Snail Ad" Commercial featuring the Pentium II on top of a Snail, claiming to be the fastest processor at the time.
post #4 of 26
I'd love to find out what happened to those two "lower-level" execitives.
post #5 of 26
I would pay money to hear the phone call that went from Steve Jobs to Intel HQ that resulted in this profuse apology.
post #6 of 26
It would be awesome if Apple released a Phenom powered Mac Mini, just to remind Intel that Apple bought into the X86 platform but there happens to be two vendors for it!

Not that I think it is even remotely possible, now if Apple had turned to the ATI 780 chipsets then I would hope for a Phenom something from Apple. Even if Apple did not use AMD chips right now, if they had went with the 780 Intel would always be waiting for that shoe to drop.

This statement by the two lower level executives is not the only Intel slap aimed Apple's way. Remember the specially packaged chip for the MacBook Air that Intel did at Apple's request? I am sure it made Apple mad when Intel shopped it to other companies.


Edit: Don't get me wrong. I realize that Nvidia (CUDA) is the best choice by far since Apple will be leaning on OpenCL and Grand Central.
post #7 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

I would pay money to hear the phone call that went from Steve Jobs to Intel HQ that resulted in this profuse apology.

How much? just out of interest

I would pay $30

any advances?
post #8 of 26
Quote:
Apple has proven to be remarkably successful at beating to the sound of its own drum.

Please --

Marching to the beat of its own drum.

It's like the Intertubes have spawned a thousand Biff Tannens.
post #9 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

How much? just out of interest

I would pay $30

any advances?

I'm in, too. I'd at least pay another $15.
post #10 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

I would pay money to hear the phone call that went from Steve Jobs to Intel HQ that resulted in this profuse apology.

That phone call probably went the other way... with plenty of chocolates and roses.
OMG here we go again...
Reply
OMG here we go again...
Reply
post #11 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prufrock View Post

Please --

Marching to the beat of its own drum.

It's like the Intertubes have spawned a thousand Biff Tannens.

+10 Cultural Reference Points
post #12 of 26
At the time, 1) Apple and Intel where not partners, and 2) the PowerPC was the overall faster of the two processors. In some ways, the Power PC is still the superior, which can be seen by Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo using it in their gaming devices.

Apple was right to jump ship though, as Motorola and IBM were jerking Apple around and there are huge benefits to running on the same processor as Windows.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones View Post

Don't forget the previous "Snail Ad" Commercial featuring the Pentium II on top of a Snail, claiming to be the fastest processor at the time.
post #13 of 26
People forget that Jobs and Intel's CEO are good friends.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

I would pay money to hear the phone call that went from Steve Jobs to Intel HQ that resulted in this profuse apology.
post #14 of 26
I doubt Apple is mad at Intel for any particular reason. With the Macbook Air chip, Intel was only giving it a limited time exclusive agreement. Apple would have known that. Moreover, as I said AMD used to be on top of the world. However, it dropped the ball and allowed Intel to reclaim the crown. Since Jobs and Intel CEO Paul Otellini are friends, I suspect Apple and Intel are trying to have a good relationship.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kresh View Post

It would be awesome if Apple released a Phenom powered Mac Mini, just to remind Intel that Apple bought into the X86 platform but there happens to be two vendors for it!

Not that I think it is even remotely possible, now if Apple had turned to the ATI 780 chipsets then I would hope for a Phenom something from Apple. Even if Apple did not use AMD chips right now, if they had went with the 780 Intel would always be waiting for that shoe to drop.

This statement by the two lower level executives is not the only Intel slap aimed Apple's way. Remember the specially packaged chip for the MacBook Air that Intel did at Apple's request? I am sure it made Apple mad when Intel shopped it to other companies.


Edit: Don't get me wrong. I realize that Nvidia (CUDA) is the best choice by far since Apple will be leaning on OpenCL and Grand Central.
post #15 of 26
Shane and Pankaj will now have to perform 'the Act of Supplication' in the special room that Steve reserves for these occasions. Their families have been informed.
post #16 of 26
I guess the guy found his copy of the "don't talk bad about a customer's products" memo too late for the presentation.
post #17 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

How much? just out of interest

I would pay $30

any advances?

No phone call was necessary. Senior Intel execs are smart enough to remember ATi's gaffe and went into overdrive to prevent themselves from getting Steved all on their own initiative.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #18 of 26
I can't wait to see what Apple's purchase of P.A. Semi yields. Differentiation is so important and is capable of commanding nice premiums for Apple's products.

Apple smartly tries to keep multiple vendors in its pocket at all times. It seems to encourage rabid competition and innovation. Now Intel will work their butts off and throw tons of R&D at more powerful solutions tailor made for Apple. This is all good. It's also good for prices. With the iPhone, we don't want Apple paying for Arm AND a Leg.

We need longer lasting batteries.... Intel, somebody?
post #19 of 26
I just saw it as more of Intel bashing something they used to own, than anything really wrong with the iPhone or Apple. And the Arm CPU is pretty slow though, it's lagging with displaying the KB animations right now on my Touch.
post #20 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness View Post

I just saw it as more of Intel bashing something they used to own, than anything really wrong with the iPhone or Apple. And the Arm CPU is pretty slow though, it's lagging with displaying the KB animations right now on my Touch.

Intel owned one implementation of ARM, but they never owned ARM itself. Apple is using a different implementation.
post #21 of 26
It's time IT companies started to put up or shut up with their own products, instead of bad-mouthing each other (Apple and Microsoft, I'm talking to you, too). No-one wants to hear this kind of crap, and you can be sure no-one is more likely to go out and buy an Intel-powered mobile device because of these two jackasses running their mouths off.

Don't like the iPhone and ARM? Then show us something better. Oh, right, you can't.
My Android phone is the worst phone I've ever owned.
Reply
My Android phone is the worst phone I've ever owned.
Reply
post #22 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

People forget that Jobs and Intel's CEO are good friends.

Mmmmmmmm...no. I'm not so sure. Just appearing on stage together (and Otellini giving an awkward hug one time) does not a friendship make. Jobs is a serial user.

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 #23 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinney57 View Post

Shane and Pankaj will now have to perform 'the Act of Supplication' in the special room that Steve reserves for these occasions. Their families have been informed.

Yeah... while Steve kicks back on his chair, throws his feet on the desk and asks "Are you a virgin?"

"Excuse me?!"

"Are you a virgin?"
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #24 of 26
First off, Apple & Intel were marketed by Valentine as a "Lifestyle Brand", instead of speaking in MIPs, kb, geek speak. It said, "This can improve your life". Apple, Intel, Andy Grove & Steve were close.... Steve has too much taste to take a P3 from 14 stage pipeline to 20+ P4 - messy.... It was Steve who told Intel portable is the future, and low power even in servers.... Which is all true.

The iPhone roadmap calls for an eventual low power x86 cpu. In fact the multimedia chips for Quicktime are all being rewritten as software ( instead of Wolfson MP3, Thompson Mpeg4 h.264 & AAC -removing these chipsets lowers costs, like Macbook design ) So the degree, and quantity of stapler throwing must have been huge!

As you all mention, no cell phone OS is even written to run on x86, but a darwin based OS X has been optimized for x86 for a while... While retaining PPC 32/64,MIPS, ARM, x86-32/64.

Obviously, Apple needs to keep this quiet. No one would even consider x86 in a cell phone, Mac OS X happens to run on all ISA (instruction set architecture) Imagine a full OS X ( OK, no DVD player! ) from server, desktop, TV, Macbook, to iPhone on ONE chip with ONE (mostly) stock OS. All advances like multitouch from iPhone can be thrown into all platforms seemlessly.... It's like Lord of the Rings One Platform.

Oh, AMD never had Apple's interest. They had a fast chip, but they were completely ignoring how laptops, low power, was the future. Apple beat the entire industry to 50% portable.... and you can't build a cheap box copy of a fine notebook.

PA Semi is not an ARM company. They had a G4 based router SOC with a faster memory bus... but they wont be using G4's in iPod/phone. They just are one of hundreds of ARM licensees ( a business Intel sold because it never made any money - but Marvel still sells Apple chips. PA Semi design team was a simple, and logical, in-house group to help make smaller, thinner, portable macbooks/iPod/Phone. They have zero allegiance to ARM. Intel still owns a license to ARM! Other ARM licensees:
\t
NEC Electronics, nVIDIA , STMicroelectronics, Texas Instruments , Toshiba, Intel Corporation, Accent, Broadcom Corporation, Ceroma, eSilicon Corporation, Freescale Semiconductor, LSI Logic, Matsushita, Mindspeed, NEC Electronics, Qualcomm, Renesas, STMicroelectronics, Samsung, Texas Instruments , Toshiba, Oxford Semiconductor (+100's)
(ARM is a company which licenses it's design, everyone has a license )

Intel could STILL use a simplified marketing/naming scheme! The transition involved Intel planning a chip using only 5 watts ( but wait, not that one ) followed by another 10 x's more efficient using just .05 watts. I believe it was @ the 45nm size being ramped up now, but could be one after this new one.

In closing, Apple just showed how to remove 40-50% of notebook parts, saving work/parts/room for errors. It is a no brainer to remove the chipsets everyone uses Portal player, Thompson multimedia, Wolfson, etc. Instead an intel CPU ( graphics acceleration), Wireless/cell, and not use ANY multimedia specialized DSP's.

( Again, PA semi as SOC design are always helping cram more into smaller packages, Samsung made the last Arm11 SOC but stamped Apple on it < at least before it was announced> )

So, I feel you kids missed the real drama. Top Intel suits know it's secret, lower ranks do not know. Apple is already developing an Intel OS X platform!!! Then taunting them? ( Flash does suck CPU cycles & h.264 needs a LOT of CPU even to play.... Wonder if a core duo would fit...hmm )

Intel is on schedule, so has nothing to "worry" about... Steve already took over Intel, & Disney animation, Apple, without "doing" more than offer to help. Also, Intel gives Apple chips first, in part because they make up a very small number. If this growth keeps up, we may have a smaller window for first silicon.
post #25 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickolas View Post

Intel could STILL use a simplified marketing/naming scheme! The transition involved Intel planning a chip using only 5 watts ( but wait, not that one ) followed by another 10 x's more efficient using just .05 watts. I believe it was @ the 45nm size being ramped up now, but could be one after this new one.

First, your post is all speculation and looks like quite a string of buzzword-compliant cheerleading to boot.

Also, Intel was making low power notebook CPUs well before Apple announced their transition.

And your numbers in the quoted part don't stack up. A tenth of 5W is 0.5W, which is still twice the power limit that ARM chips use right now. If you really do mean 0.05W, that is a hundredth, but if true, that's quite a bold claim that Intel hasn't backed up.
post #26 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

First, your post is all speculation and looks like quite a string of buzzword-compliant cheerleading to boot.

I am completely buzzword compliant I know a lot of system software engineers @ Apple.
Quote:
Also, Intel was making low power notebook CPUs well before Apple announced their transition.

Apple spent 5 years keeping secret x86 OS X at exactly the same level as PPC. They even had Apple staff @ Intel for all those years.

Quote:

And your numbers in the quoted part don't stack up. A tenth of 5W is 0.5W, which is still twice the power limit that ARM chips use right now. If you really do mean 0.05W, that is a hundredth, but if true, that's quite a bold claim that Intel hasn't backed up.

The ARM1176JZF currently used in iPhone 3G uses 500 milliwatts @ 750MHz at 45nm process. Intel Atom z500 shipped April 2nd uses .65 watts Max TDP w/ Average Power of 160 mWatts. Which is very very competitive. or z510 1100 Mhz average Power 220mW.
So far, it has been the other chips besides CPU which suck too much power. Atom n270 + 945GSE graphics has max TDP 11.8 watts. Max 2.5 W N270 @1600MHz, 6W for 945GSE, 3.3W 82801GBM I/O controller. <-- these are Max, not average,

In 2h 2009 Intel will release an SOC with 10x lower power requirements. ( samples are already out. Graphics & memory controller will also be manufactured @ 45nm. This one is 64 bit. 1-2GHZ .5 -2W Max TDP Average should easily equal ARM especially at a lower clock speed like the underclocked iPhone @ ~ 400MHz. What's 1/2 of avg 160 mW?

Why is Apple planning on going to Intel? Same as Macbook, less parts, less cost, better quality. Replacing QT hardware decoding with quicktime software x86-64, SSE1-4 + integrated graphics +DDR2

The best part is how much optimization the x86 IA has, Intel makes a compiler for them, no other ISA has been optimized by so many over 3 decades. Now do you see it's possible now, and very reasonable for the next iPhone?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Intel gets foot in mouth about ARM-twisting iPhone comments