or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple places unusual flash memory order
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple places unusual flash memory order - Page 4

post #121 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'm not following you on the revisions part of your post. Lets say it costs $5, not $2, for an 8GB flash disc containing the Mac OS X install for Macs shipped with no optical drive.

It is kinda silky to even dis use the cost of the media. Yes I know CDROMs can be pressed for pennys but a dollar or two for a USB dongle isn't going to impact the profits on each OS sale all that much. The important thing is that a new OS distribution method frees up Apple to take fresh approaches to hardware.
Quote:
How much are they saving in HW costs alone from not including an optical drive? How much engineering time are they saving by not having to design around this biggest (to nearly biggest) component in notebooks that has to be positioned along a sidewall of all notebooks?

Some really important points here. As to the box I'm not convinced that the media is all that expensive relative to the rest of the box. Ultimately when somebody buys an OS they are really paying for the bits on the delivery media.

As to the physical size of the CD drive, I do hope that people wake up here as it is huge relative to the rest of the machine. I have an early 2008 MBP and frankly the drive doesn't get used that much. It would be far better to free up that space for other things like another Firewire 800 port and USB port. Place those along side an internal PCI Express storage slot and I'd be very happy. Even more so if the battery grew a little bit.

Frankly an additional slot for more internal storage would free up my need for more ports. One of the biggest problems with laptops is the lack of "disk" space. So yeah drop that CD drive and stuff a little storage in there.
Quote:

Apple only has two choices for the next major notebook revision, either include Blu-ray (which I still can't find in 9.5mm sizes and are still cost prohibitive) or exclude optical drives altogether.

Well that is a little bit of an ultimatum but I have to agree somewhat. The big issue is that the CD drive these days takes up a lot of room but offers little in return. It is just the wrong way to use the space.
Quote:
that doesn't mean exclude them from their desktop lines as there is still plenty of room and port real estate or to not offer an external option, like they do for the MBA, but I think it's clear that CD/DVD drives as being a requirement for notebooks is dying and I think Apple will be the first to jump head first into that movement.

Cd drives certainly don't factor heavily into how I use a laptop. In fact I think the have a negative impact as they actually reduce functionality and hijack space better suited for other things. For example imagine a MBP set up with three or more internal slots for "drives" where said drives could be raided together. Given that those drives could be SSD that would vastly change performance expectations for pro laptops.

I quoted drives above because I see flux in the industry, this we could be talking about 2.5 inch drives, 1.8 inch drives or SSD on PCI Express cards. Given the selection of the right tech laptops could move from hohum disk I/O to work station class. Dumping the Internal CD drive makes this a snap while enabling other feature possibilities.

Given all of that my interest isn't in performance out of that array but rather a massive increase in storage space. The puny laptop drives are simply not acceptable. As to RAIDing the drives, why not once you get past two you might as well leverage the arraingement in a modern way.

In a nut shell that CD drive is a massive waste of space and OS distribution on a USB dongle makes elimination of that drive possible.


Dave
post #122 of 129
At Wizard69,

You've stated it much better than I did.
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 #123 of 129
Anyone thought of maybe the return of the Newton, or perhaps (more likely) an iTunes connected (free AT&T 3G downloads) "Kindle" competitor... 1 gb would be more than enough with a flash drive (purchased separately)... would match up with the small screen purchase as well.

I'd hedge on the Newton's resurrection - with some limited functionality, but largely an iBook Reader...
post #124 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by xpc View Post

Anyone thought of maybe the return of the Newton,

All the time. Frankly one of the reasons I haven't purchased a Touch is the desire for a larger device. Not hugely larger mind you but it does need to support an HD ratio screen.
Quote:
or perhaps (more likely) an iTunes connected (free AT&T 3G downloads) "Kindle" competitor... 1 gb would be more than enough with a flash drive (purchased separately)...

Well this is where our dreams part as the last thing I'd want to see is a 1GB Newton 2. Rather this device would be expected to be the mass storage Touch device. That is a device with at least 3 to 4 times the storage capacity of an current tech Touch. That would mean something like 128GB today. The trick is that it will be the video iPod plus obviously it would run apps. Considering that Apps are easily using a lot of space these days that is important too.

As for Kindle that is a nice concept but in my mind they blew it with respect to Flash storage. The problem is this, if I start to get magazine subscriptions over the device I'm going to want to keep every copy the same thing with respect to books. Very little ever gets deleted from my physical library so I'd expect the same with the electronic form. The fear is 1GB wouldn't last long at all. It's a rough guess but a tech manuall can be anywhere from a few hundred KB to more than 50 MB each. It would take long to run out of space.
Quote:
would match up with the small screen purchase as well.

I'd hedge on the Newton's resurrection - with some limited functionality, but largely an iBook Reader...

God I hope not. The last thing Apple needs to do is to implement a limited interest device. The thing that makes the iPhone or Touch devices in general, great is their flexibility. Each owner can tailor the software suite to his needs. A one GB device just puts to many artificial limits on the device.

Dave
post #125 of 129
Speaking in generalities since I'm still under NDA regarding this deal let me clarify a few points about the NAND Flash industry.

1) 8Gb is the most ubiquitous density for a monolithic chip shipped in Flash industry. Therefore large orders and production capacities of companies are expressed in 8Gb equivalents. This provides common unit of measurement that everyone in the industry can understand.

2) There is no such thing as a 128Gb and 64Gb NAND flash chip like the AI article mentioned except in R&D labs. Production is primarily at 8GB, 16Gb, and now some 32Gb. All of these chips can be packaged in single, dual, quad, and octo packages. Packages can be stacked to achieve even higher density.

3) The spot and contract price for 8Gb MLC is nearly as high as 16Gb MLC making the 16Gb variety actually a better buy for most applications.

Those points should therefore illustrate that while I cannot comment on the validity of the Digitimes article it should probably be interpreted that Apple has purchased contracts to obtain 100 million 8Gb 'equivalents' in NAND Flash memory for purposes yet to be announced.
post #126 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post

Speaking in generalities since I'm still under NDA regarding this deal let me clarify a few points about the NAND Flash industry.

1) 8Gb is the most ubiquitous density for a monolithic chip shipped in Flash industry. Therefore large orders and production capacities of companies are expressed in 8Gb equivalents. This provides common unit of measurement that everyone in the industry can understand.

2) There is no such thing as a 128Gb and 64Gb NAND flash chip like the AI article mentioned except in R&D labs. Production is primarily at 8GB, 16Gb, and now some 32Gb. All of these chips can be packaged in single, dual, quad, and octo packages. Packages can be stacked to achieve even higher density.

3) The spot and contract price for 8Gb MLC is nearly as high as 16Gb MLC making the 16Gb variety actually a better buy for most applications.

Those points should therefore illustrate that while I cannot comment on the validity of the Digitimes article it should probably be interpreted that Apple has purchased contracts to obtain 100 million 8Gb 'equivalents' in NAND Flash memory for purposes yet to be announced.

Very informative post. Appreciate it.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #127 of 129
I know this stacking of dies has been very popular with some of the Flash producers but realitically you don't get 64 or 128 Gb modules out of 8 Gb devices. As to 64 and 128 Gb devices I have to suggest looking at Microns web site. 64 Gb devices are readily available and to a lesser extent 128 Gb devices. I just don't see Micron stacking 8 or 16, 8Gb devices to get to those densities.

If I remember correctly several Flash manufactures announced last year that they had single chip 128Gb devices ready for production. It is one of the techs that make those 8 & 16 GB USB dongles possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post

Speaking in generalities since I'm still under NDA regarding this deal let me clarify a few points about the NAND Flash industry.

1) 8Gb is the most ubiquitous density for a monolithic chip shipped in Flash industry. Therefore large orders and production capacities of companies are expressed in 8Gb equivalents. This provides common unit of measurement that everyone in the industry can understand.

I just believe that is a bit dated.
Quote:

2) There is no such thing as a 128Gb and 64Gb NAND flash chip like the AI article mentioned except in R&D labs. Production is primarily at 8GB, 16Gb, and now some 32Gb. All of these chips can be packaged in single, dual, quad, and octo packages. Packages can be stacked to achieve even higher density.

Again I believe this to be slightly dated but that might be because I'm following what is the wishful thinking of marketing departments.
Quote:
3) The spot and contract price for 8Gb MLC is nearly as high as 16Gb MLC making the 16Gb variety actually a better buy for most applications.

The drop in pricing has been amazing. This whole rumor about 8Gb devices though has the question of why Apple would buy at that density. It could very well be that Apple isn't and as you suggest the data we see in this report is simply an equivalent value. I can't imagine any handheld device using anything less than newest tech.
Quote:

Those points should therefore illustrate that while I cannot comment on the validity of the Digitimes article it should probably be interpreted that Apple has purchased contracts to obtain 100 million 8Gb 'equivalents' in NAND Flash memory for purposes yet to be announced.

The thought of equivalents is interesting and throws open a number of possibilities. No matter how you look at it we are still talking a lot of Flash. Curiosity is really going to kill the cat here.

Dave
post #128 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I know this stacking of dies has been very popular with some of the Flash producers but realitically you don't get 64 or 128 Gb modules out of 8 Gb devices. As to 64 and 128 Gb devices I have to suggest looking at Microns web site.

If you look at Micron's website you will see that the 128Gb module they are shipping is 16Gb x8. The 64Gb module is 8Gb x8

Quote:
I just believe that is a bit dated.

Up until a few weeks ago I was working on fulfilling this and other orders at Samsung in their newest Flash fab. So I don't feel that it's too terribly outdated.
post #129 of 129
Maybe, going along w/ someone's video camera comment and the rumblings about iPhone video capture, they'll be one 16Gb chip in each iPhone.

If the iPhone's NAND flash really is 128Gb on one chip, I'm thinking that if these 8Gb chips are SLC chips, they'll last longer and the video-capture wear-and-tear would be moved away from the main iPhone storage.

It seems like a nice solution and large enough for a decent video capture and long-lasting memory.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple places unusual flash memory order