Not to the guy whom I was replying to who said "Pretty sad if you need to make news about symmetry in the logic board... Average Joe never sees it. Would be better if iPad ran flash even with a non symmetric mother board..."
he said it would be 'better' to have non symmetry and flash.
I'm not discussing the flash stuff but I'm pointing out weighted balance makes it better to hold.
Proof again that Apple is the Ferrari of the tech world. That is what you are paying for when you buy an Apple product. Unparalleled attention to detail.
Proof again that Apple is the Ferrari of the tech world. That is what you are paying for when you buy an Apple product. Unparalleled attention to detail.
Is Ferrari really the best example here? How about Rolls Royce or Bentley?
Is Ferrari really the best example here? How about Rolls Royce or Bentley?
Ferrari is the perfect comparison. It's said that they sell cars just so they can afford to race. Apple and Ferrari both put passion first. Lol, even the weight distribution is funny because Ferraris' V8s are known to have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution (at least for the past 10 years).
I think it's better we stop mentioning the A4 and Mac together. I don't think there has been any credible rumors much less announcements that this is a direction that Apple wants to go. In the meantime it seems to be causing many people all kinds of anxiety which is unrelated to the topic of the iPad at hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn
I agree and I'm the one who brought up the subject.
The connotations that occurred with the mention of "A4" with the iPad announcement, as well as Apple's comments on the matter, and the purchase of PA Semi, and the lack of MacBook updates, led to wild speculation that Apple was going to produce it's own processors.
The rumor monger is diverting attention away from himself/herself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
The peek inside also revealed that both the NAND flash and custom Apple A4 processor were manufactured by Samsung.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn
Question is of course, how long will it be before we see Samsung iPad knockoffs?
There is nothing in the article mentions Samsung knockoffs?is there. Samsung has been a supplier to Apple for some time and Apple just inked a $240M deal to provide screens for the iPad @ http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._displays.html
Samsung is not going to risk business with Apple with knockoffs. So why create wild speculation and rumors???
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn
What's got me horrified and a lot of other people too, is that Apple is going to drop Intel processors for these A4's and we will no longer have the ability to use other operating systems and the like with our Mac's.
Worst off if they decide to lock their machines down to the App Store, restrict our freedom with our machines and force us use the iPad UI instead of windows UI.
Apple hasn't released the MacBook Pro updates in quite some time, which leads me to believe they intend to create pent up demand in that market and force people to switch to something very radical.
Before you accuse me of spreading rumors, I think you should reconsider your assessment and look at the comments in this post. As I see from reviewing the previous thread, you provided some insights and you should have been aware of SpotOn's comments that spurred the uncertainty you question see ##11-19 & 36 @ http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...hreadid=108330
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie
???
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn
What's got me horrified and a lot of other people too, is that Apple is going to drop Intel processors for these A4's and we will no longer have the ability to use other operating systems and the like with our Mac's.
Worst off if they decide to lock their machines down to the App Store, restrict our freedom with our machines and force us use the iPad UI instead of windows UI.
Apple hasn't released the MacBook Pro updates in quite some time, which leads me to believe they intend to create pent up demand in that market and force people to switch to something very radical.
Apple has NEVER used Intel processors in their iPhone, iPod Touch, iPod, iPad only in their desktops.
There's no way Apple would use ARMs in their desktop and laptop products because they are too under powered.
That being said there's nothing to stop Apple building their own Intel based processors and showing the computing world how it should be done. Apple would simply only need to create its own drivers for their own chipsets which is does in BootCamp anyway so backwards compatibility isn't really san issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes
Presently Apple does not have the capability to manufacture their own chips. PA Semi Conductor was a design company. Apple could team with AMD to design and produce "Intel" based processor, but watch out for patents. But why would Apple want to leave Intel?
Responding to a comment I mentioned that Apple did not have the capability to manufacture its own chips. This should not preclude them from doing so in the future if their relationship with Intel is no longer workable. Apple switch chip manufacturers before and nothing prevents them from doing so in the future if it is to their advantage. Having survived that switch to Intel, it is something hard to endure, but glad that Apple made the decision.
The rumor monger is diverting attention away from himself/herself.
[...]
Responding to a comment I mentioned that Apple did not have the capability to manufacture its own chips. This should not preclude them from doing so in the future if their relationship with Intel is no longer workable. Apple switch chip manufacturers before and nothing prevents them from doing so in the future if it is to their advantage. Having survived that switch to Intel, it is something hard to endure, but glad that Apple made the decision.
I'm glad I am not the only one who has rational arguments with the irrational. Might be best for both of us (and the board) not to respond to SpotOn anymore.
I'm glad I am not the only one who has rational arguments with the irrational. Might be best for both of us (and the board) not to respond to SpotOn anymore.
Yeh, another one for my IL (and that's not the USPO state code for Illinois)
The rumor monger is diverting attention away from himself/herself.
No, I was changing my theroy based upon the revelation of new information.
Before it was Apple was making their own processors and now it's Apple is designing their own processors, but using another companies fabrication facilities.
It demonstrates that Apple is still relying upon other companies economies of scale, thus still will be using Intel processors for their main computers.
Quote:
Samsung has been a supplier to Apple for some time and Apple just inked a $240M deal to provide screens for the iPad..Samsung is not going to risk business with Apple with knockoffs.
Well because in Asia nearly everything is copied, duplicated or cloned in some manner.
The Asian market is quite considerable, $240 million might seem like peanuts to Samsung if they can make Billion$ with a iPad clone of some sort.
They did make Mp3 players there for some time, thus my statement.
Quote:
So why create wild speculation and rumors???
Why do you think that what some guy says on a web site is going to change anything?
Quote:
Responding to a comment I mentioned that Apple did not have the capability to manufacture its own chips. This should not preclude them from doing so in the future if their relationship with Intel is no longer workable. Apple switch chip manufacturers before and nothing prevents them from doing so in the future if it is to their advantage. Having survived that switch to Intel, it is something hard to endure, but glad that Apple made the decision.
It's likely cheaper for Apple to use others fabs than build their own, they gain from the economy of scale, like all the local newspapers using the same press facilities in town.
Ferrari is the perfect comparison. It's said that they sell cars just so they can afford to race. Apple and Ferrari both put passion first. Lol, even the weight distribution is funny because Ferraris' V8s are known to have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution (at least for the past 10 years).
Yep. you got it.
Rolls and Bentley are perhaps the worst analogy to draw. While they are obviously high quality products, they are full of superfluous bells and whistles. Heavier than an M1 tank (yes, not all of them, but this was for analogical comparisons)
Ferrari is the perfect comparison. It's said that they sell cars just so they can afford to race. Apple and Ferrari both put passion first. Lol, even the weight distribution is funny because Ferraris' V8s are known to have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution (at least for the past 10 years).
Only exception is that the iPad doesn't come in red. Ferrari's have to be red--that's their racing color.
One is talking about the flash memory chips, which were manufactured by Samsung.
The other is talking about the A4 processor, which according to markings, appears to have been manufactured by Samsung.
Why is that so hard to understand?
Because here's the whole paragraph
"Soon after its release on Saturday, iFixit began their teardown of Apple's new iPad, and discovered a hidden symmetry inside that the solutions provider said is "there for aesthetics alone." The peek inside also revealed that both the NAND flash and custom Apple A4 processor were manufactured by Samsung."
Hmmm do I see them saying BOTH are manufactured by Samsung? Yes - yes I do - but you didn't. One refers to a PROCESSOR as fact, the other refers to a PROCESSOR as speculation.
A couple people have commented on how certain Apple designed components are likely being manufactured by competitors. Not only is this not uncommon AT ALL, it's smart business.
If something you invent is really that groundbreaking, a competitor who is also a manufacturer may bid to build it. They know they can't produce products derivative of the technology, they'd get their a$$es sued off. However, they make money on the manufacturing contracts.
Additionally, factories with the capacity to manufacture often do so for almost all companies in a market. For example, every condom made in America is produced in one of three factories in either China or Malaysia. Each company has their own mold, formulation for the latex, and formulation for the lubricant, but none own the capacity to manufacture. It's cheaper that way.
Finally, when you are a thought leader, having your opponent's "steal" from you isn't a bad thing. I'd be willing to bet that Apple waited until HTC products went on sale before filing their patent violation claim for their multi-touch technology.
Once the products are on the market, Apple has tremendous leverage when the two parties eventually settle. The rival will either suspend all sales and support of the product in question, or pay a settlement and license the technology from Apple. After that, Apple will make money on every HTC phone that uses Apple's multi-touch technology. Smart business. Intellectual property law is where it's at!
A couple people have commented on how certain Apple designed components are likely being manufactured by competitors. Not only is this not uncommon AT ALL, it's smart business.
If something you invent is really that groundbreaking, a competitor who is also a manufacturer may bid to build it. They know they can't produce products derivative of the technology, they'd get their a$$es sued off. However, they make money on the manufacturing contracts.
Additionally, factories with the capacity to manufacture often do so for almost all companies in a market. For example, every condom made in America is produced in one of three factories in either China or Malaysia. Each company has their own mold, formulation for the latex, and formulation for the lubricant, but none own the capacity to manufacture. It's cheaper that way.
Finally, when you are a thought leader, having your opponent's "steal" from you isn't a bad thing. I'd be willing to bet that Apple waited until HTC products went on sale before filing their patent violation claim for their multi-touch technology.
Once the products are on the market, Apple has tremendous leverage when the two parties eventually settle. The rival will either suspend all sales and support of the product in question, or pay a settlement and license the technology from Apple. After that, Apple will make money on every HTC phone that uses Apple's multi-touch technology. Smart business. Intellectual property law is where it's at!
Ferrari is the perfect comparison. It's said that they sell cars just so they can afford to race. Apple and Ferrari both put passion first. Lol, even the weight distribution is funny because Ferraris' V8s are known to have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution (at least for the past 10 years).
Had a Ferrari Dino 308 GT4 a long time ago, nice car, like sitting in a jet.
Everyone wanted to race me all the time though.
Certainly not a 50/50, it was *ss heavy for traction, ate a lot of rubber of the rears.
I'm glad I am not the only one who has rational arguments with the irrational. Might be best for both of us (and the board) not to respond to SpotOn anymore.
solipsism, it's you and your clique that makes AI a unwelcome place.
Comments
Not to the guy whom I was replying to who said "Pretty sad if you need to make news about symmetry in the logic board... Average Joe never sees it. Would be better if iPad ran flash even with a non symmetric mother board..."
he said it would be 'better' to have non symmetry and flash.
I'm not discussing the flash stuff but I'm pointing out weighted balance makes it better to hold.
Proof again that Apple is the Ferrari of the tech world. That is what you are paying for when you buy an Apple product. Unparalleled attention to detail.
Not to the guy whom I was replying to...
I was agreeing with you. I guess I should have started my post with "Right?!" to imply that I think their comment was baffling, not your explanation.
Proof again that Apple is the Ferrari of the tech world. That is what you are paying for when you buy an Apple product. Unparalleled attention to detail.
Is Ferrari really the best example here? How about Rolls Royce or Bentley?
Is Ferrari really the best example here? How about Rolls Royce or Bentley?
Ferrari is the perfect comparison. It's said that they sell cars just so they can afford to race. Apple and Ferrari both put passion first. Lol, even the weight distribution is funny because Ferraris' V8s are known to have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution (at least for the past 10 years).
I think it's better we stop mentioning the A4 and Mac together. I don't think there has been any credible rumors much less announcements that this is a direction that Apple wants to go. In the meantime it seems to be causing many people all kinds of anxiety which is unrelated to the topic of the iPad at hand.
I agree and I'm the one who brought up the subject.
The connotations that occurred with the mention of "A4" with the iPad announcement, as well as Apple's comments on the matter, and the purchase of PA Semi, and the lack of MacBook updates, led to wild speculation that Apple was going to produce it's own processors.
The rumor monger is diverting attention away from himself/herself.
The peek inside also revealed that both the NAND flash and custom Apple A4 processor were manufactured by Samsung.
Question is of course, how long will it be before we see Samsung iPad knockoffs?
There is nothing in the article mentions Samsung knockoffs?is there. Samsung has been a supplier to Apple for some time and Apple just inked a $240M deal to provide screens for the iPad @ http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._displays.html
Samsung is not going to risk business with Apple with knockoffs. So why create wild speculation and rumors???
What's got me horrified and a lot of other people too, is that Apple is going to drop Intel processors for these A4's and we will no longer have the ability to use other operating systems and the like with our Mac's.
Worst off if they decide to lock their machines down to the App Store, restrict our freedom with our machines and force us use the iPad UI instead of windows UI.
Apple hasn't released the MacBook Pro updates in quite some time, which leads me to believe they intend to create pent up demand in that market and force people to switch to something very radical.
@ http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...hreadid=108330 read #8, this is the post that started the rumor.
Before you accuse me of spreading rumors, I think you should reconsider your assessment and look at the comments in this post. As I see from reviewing the previous thread, you provided some insights and you should have been aware of SpotOn's comments that spurred the uncertainty you question see ##11-19 & 36 @ http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...hreadid=108330
???
What's got me horrified and a lot of other people too, is that Apple is going to drop Intel processors for these A4's and we will no longer have the ability to use other operating systems and the like with our Mac's.
Worst off if they decide to lock their machines down to the App Store, restrict our freedom with our machines and force us use the iPad UI instead of windows UI.
Apple hasn't released the MacBook Pro updates in quite some time, which leads me to believe they intend to create pent up demand in that market and force people to switch to something very radical.
Apple has NEVER used Intel processors in their iPhone, iPod Touch, iPod, iPad only in their desktops.
There's no way Apple would use ARMs in their desktop and laptop products because they are too under powered.
That being said there's nothing to stop Apple building their own Intel based processors and showing the computing world how it should be done. Apple would simply only need to create its own drivers for their own chipsets which is does in BootCamp anyway so backwards compatibility isn't really san issue.
Presently Apple does not have the capability to manufacture their own chips. PA Semi Conductor was a design company. Apple could team with AMD to design and produce "Intel" based processor, but watch out for patents. But why would Apple want to leave Intel?
Responding to a comment I mentioned that Apple did not have the capability to manufacture its own chips. This should not preclude them from doing so in the future if their relationship with Intel is no longer workable. Apple switch chip manufacturers before and nothing prevents them from doing so in the future if it is to their advantage. Having survived that switch to Intel, it is something hard to endure, but glad that Apple made the decision.
Gotta love the posters that jump to the most absurd answer. Occam's Razor, anyone?
He/She's such a Rumor Monger
The rumor monger is diverting attention away from himself/herself.
[...]
Responding to a comment I mentioned that Apple did not have the capability to manufacture its own chips. This should not preclude them from doing so in the future if their relationship with Intel is no longer workable. Apple switch chip manufacturers before and nothing prevents them from doing so in the future if it is to their advantage. Having survived that switch to Intel, it is something hard to endure, but glad that Apple made the decision.
I'm glad I am not the only one who has rational arguments with the irrational. Might be best for both of us (and the board) not to respond to SpotOn anymore.
I'm glad I am not the only one who has rational arguments with the irrational. Might be best for both of us (and the board) not to respond to SpotOn anymore.
Yeh, another one for my IL (and that's not the USPO state code for Illinois)
Gotta love the posters that jump to the most absurd answer. Occam's Razor, anyone?
I hear Schrödinger is looking for a new, cool cat.
and
"which reveals that Apple's A4 processor is likely being manufactured by Samsung"
Which is it? One is a statement of fact - the other speculation.
re: "were manufactured by Samsung"
and
"which reveals that Apple's A4 processor is likely being manufactured by Samsung"
Which is it? One is a statement of fact - the other speculation.
One is talking about the flash memory chips, which were manufactured by Samsung.
The other is talking about the A4 processor, which according to markings, appears to have been manufactured by Samsung.
Why is that so hard to understand?
The rumor monger is diverting attention away from himself/herself.
No, I was changing my theroy based upon the revelation of new information.
Before it was Apple was making their own processors and now it's Apple is designing their own processors, but using another companies fabrication facilities.
It demonstrates that Apple is still relying upon other companies economies of scale, thus still will be using Intel processors for their main computers.
Samsung has been a supplier to Apple for some time and Apple just inked a $240M deal to provide screens for the iPad..Samsung is not going to risk business with Apple with knockoffs.
Well because in Asia nearly everything is copied, duplicated or cloned in some manner.
The Asian market is quite considerable, $240 million might seem like peanuts to Samsung if they can make Billion$ with a iPad clone of some sort.
They did make Mp3 players there for some time, thus my statement.
So why create wild speculation and rumors???
Why do you think that what some guy says on a web site is going to change anything?
Responding to a comment I mentioned that Apple did not have the capability to manufacture its own chips. This should not preclude them from doing so in the future if their relationship with Intel is no longer workable. Apple switch chip manufacturers before and nothing prevents them from doing so in the future if it is to their advantage. Having survived that switch to Intel, it is something hard to endure, but glad that Apple made the decision.
It's likely cheaper for Apple to use others fabs than build their own, they gain from the economy of scale, like all the local newspapers using the same press facilities in town.
Ferrari is the perfect comparison. It's said that they sell cars just so they can afford to race. Apple and Ferrari both put passion first. Lol, even the weight distribution is funny because Ferraris' V8s are known to have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution (at least for the past 10 years).
Yep. you got it.
Rolls and Bentley are perhaps the worst analogy to draw. While they are obviously high quality products, they are full of superfluous bells and whistles. Heavier than an M1 tank (yes, not all of them, but this was for analogical comparisons)
Ferrari is the perfect comparison. It's said that they sell cars just so they can afford to race. Apple and Ferrari both put passion first. Lol, even the weight distribution is funny because Ferraris' V8s are known to have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution (at least for the past 10 years).
Only exception is that the iPad doesn't come in red. Ferrari's have to be red--that's their racing color.
One is talking about the flash memory chips, which were manufactured by Samsung.
The other is talking about the A4 processor, which according to markings, appears to have been manufactured by Samsung.
Why is that so hard to understand?
Because here's the whole paragraph
"Soon after its release on Saturday, iFixit began their teardown of Apple's new iPad, and discovered a hidden symmetry inside that the solutions provider said is "there for aesthetics alone." The peek inside also revealed that both the NAND flash and custom Apple A4 processor were manufactured by Samsung."
Hmmm do I see them saying BOTH are manufactured by Samsung? Yes - yes I do - but you didn't. One refers to a PROCESSOR as fact, the other refers to a PROCESSOR as speculation.
Why is that so hard to understand?
If something you invent is really that groundbreaking, a competitor who is also a manufacturer may bid to build it. They know they can't produce products derivative of the technology, they'd get their a$$es sued off. However, they make money on the manufacturing contracts.
Additionally, factories with the capacity to manufacture often do so for almost all companies in a market. For example, every condom made in America is produced in one of three factories in either China or Malaysia. Each company has their own mold, formulation for the latex, and formulation for the lubricant, but none own the capacity to manufacture. It's cheaper that way.
Finally, when you are a thought leader, having your opponent's "steal" from you isn't a bad thing. I'd be willing to bet that Apple waited until HTC products went on sale before filing their patent violation claim for their multi-touch technology.
Once the products are on the market, Apple has tremendous leverage when the two parties eventually settle. The rival will either suspend all sales and support of the product in question, or pay a settlement and license the technology from Apple. After that, Apple will make money on every HTC phone that uses Apple's multi-touch technology. Smart business. Intellectual property law is where it's at!
A couple people have commented on how certain Apple designed components are likely being manufactured by competitors. Not only is this not uncommon AT ALL, it's smart business.
If something you invent is really that groundbreaking, a competitor who is also a manufacturer may bid to build it. They know they can't produce products derivative of the technology, they'd get their a$$es sued off. However, they make money on the manufacturing contracts.
Additionally, factories with the capacity to manufacture often do so for almost all companies in a market. For example, every condom made in America is produced in one of three factories in either China or Malaysia. Each company has their own mold, formulation for the latex, and formulation for the lubricant, but none own the capacity to manufacture. It's cheaper that way.
Finally, when you are a thought leader, having your opponent's "steal" from you isn't a bad thing. I'd be willing to bet that Apple waited until HTC products went on sale before filing their patent violation claim for their multi-touch technology.
Once the products are on the market, Apple has tremendous leverage when the two parties eventually settle. The rival will either suspend all sales and support of the product in question, or pay a settlement and license the technology from Apple. After that, Apple will make money on every HTC phone that uses Apple's multi-touch technology. Smart business. Intellectual property law is where it's at!
thanks, that explains alot
Ferrari is the perfect comparison. It's said that they sell cars just so they can afford to race. Apple and Ferrari both put passion first. Lol, even the weight distribution is funny because Ferraris' V8s are known to have a perfect 50/50 weight distribution (at least for the past 10 years).
Had a Ferrari Dino 308 GT4 a long time ago, nice car, like sitting in a jet.
Everyone wanted to race me all the time though.
Certainly not a 50/50, it was *ss heavy for traction, ate a lot of rubber of the rears.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2293/...c0d7d46de5.jpg
Had a Ferrari Dino 308 GT4 a long time ago, nice car, like sitting in a jet.
Everyone wanted to race me all the time though.
Certainly not a 50/50, it was *ss heavy for traction, ate a lot of rubber of the rears.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2293/...c0d7d46de5.jpg
Beautiful car. Great thing about Ferraris is that they age like fine wine.
I'm glad I am not the only one who has rational arguments with the irrational. Might be best for both of us (and the board) not to respond to SpotOn anymore.
solipsism, it's you and your clique that makes AI a unwelcome place.