We should be glad Samsung is forcing Apple to innovate this good.
you are right. If it was not for Samsung there would have never been an iPod, iPhone or an iPad. Forget about asking yourself "what would Steve do"; its "what would Samsung do." /s
I am sure Apple is racing right now to copy the Samsung Gear watch as we speak. A champagne "gold" variant with an innovative bigger screen and a mini version with a smaller screen. /s
well my electrical engineering glasses were on when I read this and the referenced articles and the fact that the a7 chip has both 64bit and 32bit cores makes 'compatibility mode' somewhat spurious. Obviously you need better glasses, as you don't see the basic architecture of the a7.
Out of the box, if it was compiled in 32bit, you run in 32bit. and obtw, the next run through Xcode, create a universal binary, send to AppStore, and you're running 64 bit. Apple's been doing universal binaries for what, 21 years on 7 platforms (68K, rs6000, Sun, HP PA Risk, PowerPc, Intel x86, and ARM) … they do it better than most.
64 bit is less about the 4gb memory, and more about faster data paths. This helps graphics (sending 2X the data per clock), as well as encryption (~2x as fast). And given this is a graphically interface with every application in an encrypted sandbox… 64 bit makes for immediate benefit for a computer that is really measured in response time to display an update to the multi-megapixel screen.
And it does lay down a long term capabilities of Apple's platform (I wonder if Intel is looking at Haswell, and wondering how long MacBook Airs are running on Haswell chips).
Excellent post. iPhone response time isn't exactly lacking in it's current form so I'm not convinced that the current system will see any enormous change, but I think we both agree that the move to 64-bit adds to the long term capabilities of the iOS platform and will be beneficial down the road.
I am willing to bet my right arm that Apple isn't developing an iwatch, but will partner with other companies (such as Nike) to make wearable tech. I think iwatch trademarking is a red herring, and while some trip over themselves (Samsung) to make smartwatches, Apple will take over the living room, the car, and who knows what else.
I like that Samsung has no idea what iWatch is. But left to their own imagination, a phone on wrist straps is all they could come up with.
What if they port the OS X Parallels app to iOS7 and a new iPad running an A7X with Lots of RAM and SSD...
That way we could run Windows 8 and MS Office on an iPad...
Oops... spent too long a time visiting with my good friend Jaques Daniels -- and now I must barf!
I can beat that. Since ARMv8 can run 32 bit ARM code via hypervisor you can load up your iOS device with RAM to run all those Android, Windows Phone apps. /s
Hopefully Apple won't be sending any of their custom A7 designs to Samsung, cutting off their source of "inspiration".
Maybe they can take things further by allowing HTC limited use of a version of these chips, taking Samsung down a notch or two with a competitive product and further cementing their relationship with Taiwan.
Well no one knows the extent apple is already relying on the 64 bit chip. The fingerprint sensor and the camera features probably rely heavily on it. Yes obviously there will be a ton of applications for a 64bit smart phone - just wait to see what the devs cook up. And as this article points out - there is the usual anti-appletards spouting pablem about how wrong or unimportant apple's breakthroughs are - only to eat their words later as they use apple championed/developed technology in their future device.
I think the next company which should be afraid of their business should be Intel. I'm asking myself how long it will take for Apple to switch their processor hardware for the consumer products Mac Mini / MacBook Air to A7.
.... Another brilliant analysis and piece of investigative journalism - bravo! ...
Apple has done it again - a 32 to 64-bit transition literally overnight!
Agreed, great reading and excellent journalism.
I think you mean 'overnight' in a metaphorical not literal sense. Even with Apple's huge resources and experience it would take more than a single night to rewrite 32 bit code to 64 bit.
It would be fascinating to get insight - fat chance - into Apple's internal structure and processes in developing new technologies like the A7 for their products. You have to figure that Bob Mansfield is in the very middle of all of it, but how do they make the decisions like Samsung vs. TSMC as a supplier, etc. All kinds of parameters from cost, risk, product schedules, and much else come into play. Enormously tricky.
One thing that strikes me is that this does not seem to have the earmarks of a committee process. It looks to me more like the result of a single strong person visionary who can lead the company along his view of the future. Apple certainly has a precedent for that, now gone. But are any of the obvious candidates - Mansfield? Cook? Ive? Someone else? - that person?
Again, would be fascinating to get a glimpse into what goes on Cupertino, but of course it's not in the cards.
But maybe you are just wrong by "now gone"? Maybe Jobs is still in charge as visionary? Guy made plans and roadmaps for years ahead and even for different scenarios for different products and then put in charge another guy who is operational genius and who is clearly capable to follow them. Maybe Apple stays on such focused course because there's no new "leader" with his/her own vision that could rock the boat, alas there's already Jobs' vision that is still executed?
Comments
We should be glad Samsung is forcing Apple to innovate this good.
you are right. If it was not for Samsung there would have never been an iPod, iPhone or an iPad. Forget about asking yourself "what would Steve do"; its "what would Samsung do." /s
I am sure Apple is racing right now to copy the Samsung Gear watch as we speak. A champagne "gold" variant with an innovative bigger screen and a mini version with a smaller screen. /s
well my electrical engineering glasses were on when I read this and the referenced articles and the fact that the a7 chip has both 64bit and 32bit cores makes 'compatibility mode' somewhat spurious. Obviously you need better glasses, as you don't see the basic architecture of the a7.
Out of the box, if it was compiled in 32bit, you run in 32bit. and obtw, the next run through Xcode, create a universal binary, send to AppStore, and you're running 64 bit. Apple's been doing universal binaries for what, 21 years on 7 platforms (68K, rs6000, Sun, HP PA Risk, PowerPc, Intel x86, and ARM) … they do it better than most.
64 bit is less about the 4gb memory, and more about faster data paths. This helps graphics (sending 2X the data per clock), as well as encryption (~2x as fast). And given this is a graphically interface with every application in an encrypted sandbox… 64 bit makes for immediate benefit for a computer that is really measured in response time to display an update to the multi-megapixel screen.
And it does lay down a long term capabilities of Apple's platform (I wonder if Intel is looking at Haswell, and wondering how long MacBook Airs are running on Haswell chips).
Excellent post. iPhone response time isn't exactly lacking in it's current form so I'm not convinced that the current system will see any enormous change, but I think we both agree that the move to 64-bit adds to the long term capabilities of the iOS platform and will be beneficial down the road.
What if they port the OS X Parallels app to iOS7 and a new iPad running an A7X with Lots of RAM and SSD...
That way we could run Windows 8 and MS Office on an iPad...
Oops... spent too long a time visiting with my good friend Jaques Daniels -- and now I must barf!
I like that Samsung has no idea what iWatch is. But left to their own imagination, a phone on wrist straps is all they could come up with.
If you think Apple isn't developing an iWatch then you don't follow Engineering hires.
I like that Samsung has no idea what iWatch is. But left to their own imagination, a phone on wrist straps is all they could come up with.
And it's not even a phone: it's a Bluetooth headset with a screen, that only works with a couple phone models and costs $300.
Here's a thought...
What if they port the OS X Parallels app to iOS7 and a new iPad running an A7X with Lots of RAM and SSD...
That way we could run Windows 8 and MS Office on an iPad...
Oops... spent too long a time visiting with my good friend Jaques Daniels -- and now I must barf!
I can beat that. Since ARMv8 can run 32 bit ARM code via hypervisor you can load up your iOS device with RAM to run all those Android, Windows Phone apps. /s
cheers!
Maybe they can take things further by allowing HTC limited use of a version of these chips, taking Samsung down a notch or two with a competitive product and further cementing their relationship with Taiwan.
Woz tenderly puts all his Samsung products to bed every night.
About time Apple gave their business to somebody else rather than their competition
Well no one knows the extent apple is already relying on the 64 bit chip. The fingerprint sensor and the camera features probably rely heavily on it. Yes obviously there will be a ton of applications for a 64bit smart phone - just wait to see what the devs cook up. And as this article points out - there is the usual anti-appletards spouting pablem about how wrong or unimportant apple's breakthroughs are - only to eat their words later as they use apple championed/developed technology in their future device.
[URL]http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1634100[/URL]
[URL]http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1630400[/URL]
I think the next company which should be afraid of their business should be Intel. I'm asking myself how long it will take for Apple to switch their processor hardware for the consumer products Mac Mini / MacBook Air to A7.
Golden.
.... Another brilliant analysis and piece of investigative journalism - bravo! ...
Apple has done it again - a 32 to 64-bit transition literally overnight!
Agreed, great reading and excellent journalism.
I think you mean 'overnight' in a metaphorical not literal sense. Even with Apple's huge resources and experience it would take more than a single night to rewrite 32 bit code to 64 bit.
It would be fascinating to get insight - fat chance - into Apple's internal structure and processes in developing new technologies like the A7 for their products. You have to figure that Bob Mansfield is in the very middle of all of it, but how do they make the decisions like Samsung vs. TSMC as a supplier, etc. All kinds of parameters from cost, risk, product schedules, and much else come into play. Enormously tricky.
One thing that strikes me is that this does not seem to have the earmarks of a committee process. It looks to me more like the result of a single strong person visionary who can lead the company along his view of the future. Apple certainly has a precedent for that, now gone. But are any of the obvious candidates - Mansfield? Cook? Ive? Someone else? - that person?
Again, would be fascinating to get a glimpse into what goes on Cupertino, but of course it's not in the cards.
But maybe you are just wrong by "now gone"? Maybe Jobs is still in charge as visionary? Guy made plans and roadmaps for years ahead and even for different scenarios for different products and then put in charge another guy who is operational genius and who is clearly capable to follow them. Maybe Apple stays on such focused course because there's no new "leader" with his/her own vision that could rock the boat, alas there's already Jobs' vision that is still executed?
Hell yes, couldn't agree more.