New technologies?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Now that Intel has Apple to test their cool new technologies that Microsoft is always slow to adopt (for example, EFI) what sort of new processor technologies/chipset features do you think we'll see from the Apple/Intel partnership? More of the same, the next generation of Viiv and Centrino? Awesome on-board features like H.264 compression/decompression? Something totally new?
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 24
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,162member
    Wimax
  • Reply 2 of 24
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Good things I hope. I like the post. It's open to be speculative, but I guess nobody wants to turn into the next ROLO. lol. That guy has taken a beating. I have not been harsh with him because some of us old schoolers know that rumors are not truths until Steve Jobs says so.

    I liked the idea's though. And I'd like to see some of it happen. Apple wont be the lone Guinea pig for some of these new technologies from intel as they used to be. Because the problem with that is now that Apple is in with the rest of the boy's they (the PC boys) will all ask how Apple is using them, and if it's working right to their satisfaction, and it's likely some will use them as well. Therefore Apple will probably never be alone in bringing some of this stuff to the forefront again. But they may ask for samples to use in house to prototype stuff, and that could still bring a few things about.
  • Reply 3 of 24
    murkmurk Posts: 935member
    onlooker is the next Rolo! String him up next!
  • Reply 4 of 24
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Wimax



    I hate you. That would have been my answer.



    I don´t think there is much in the horisont in hardware (besides new Intel chips). But I don´t think Apple has explored the possibilities with X yet. And ten years from now we get the next gen OS.
  • Reply 5 of 24
    What about Intel's "Platform 2015"?



    http://www.intel.com/technology/arch.../platform2015/ for those who haven't heard



    Dozens, even hundreds of cores on a chip, perhaps Apple will be the first to truly take advantage of this level of serial processing capability on the desktop.
  • Reply 6 of 24
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    sounds like pipe dream.
  • Reply 7 of 24
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    sounds like pipe dream.



    It's more like Intel finally realized that just raising the clock speed wasn't going to give them the performance gains they'll need so they decided to start parallelizing, I have a feeling you'll eat those word The PowerPC processors even have some 64 core cousins already, the technology is there, as is the technology to scale those cores down, just look at Transmeta's technology!
  • Reply 8 of 24
    Quote:

    Originally posted by akheron01

    What about Intel's "Platform 2015"?



    http://www.intel.com/technology/arch.../platform2015/ for those who haven't heard



    Dozens, even hundreds of cores on a chip, perhaps Apple will be the first to truly take advantage of this level of serial processing capability on the desktop.



    I think you mean "parallel"...?



    PowerPC has gone that way first -- what do you think Cell is?
  • Reply 9 of 24
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    Good things I hope. I like the post. It's open to be speculative, but I guess nobody wants to turn into the next ROLO. lol. That guy has taken a beating. I have not been harsh with him because some of us old schoolers know that rumors are not truths until Steve Jobs says so.

    I liked the idea's though. And I'd like to see some of it happen. Apple wont be the lone Guinea pig for some of these new technologies from intel as they used to be. Because the problem with that is now that Apple is in with the rest of the boy's they (the PC boys) will all ask how Apple is using them, and if it's working right to their satisfaction, and it's likely some will use them as well. Therefore Apple will probably never be alone in bringing some of this stuff to the forefront again. But they may ask for samples to use in house to prototype stuff, and that could still bring a few things about.




    I dunno. The Dell model of PC assemblers doesn't really reward getting on board with cool new tech, no matter what Apple might be doing. The stuff creeps out there eventually, grudgingly, but unless Apple's market share explodes I can't see where what they do or not do to wring enhanced functionality out of Intel's R&D making much of an impact on the PC side.



    Which is why I'm clinging to the hope that Intel sees Apple as platform to show off what they can really do, when they aren't catering to a market weighed down by half a jillion legacy boxes.
  • Reply 10 of 24
    A subnotebook without touchpad but instead featuring a built in eye tracker (iTracker! ) using the recently surfaced sensing display technology to track the reflections of pulsed face plate-embedded IR diodes from the retina of the user. And a solid state hard drive. An OLED display. Oh, and >10 h battery life with an ULV Yonah. Yumm.

    8)
  • Reply 11 of 24
    Quote:

    Originally posted by addabox

    I dunno. The Dell model of PC assemblers doesn't really reward getting on board with cool new tech, no matter what Apple might be doing. The stuff creeps out there eventually, grudgingly, but unless Apple's market share explodes I can't see where what they do or not do to wring enhanced functionality out of Intel's R&D making much of an impact on the PC side.



    Which is why I'm clinging to the hope that Intel sees Apple as platform to show off what they can really do, when they aren't catering to a market weighed down by half a jillion legacy boxes.




    I certainly hope that you realize that Dell and Apple are not the only companies in the PC market. Nor are they the most innovative or high tech. If you want state-of-the-art stuff, look at Panasonic, Fujitsu, and Sony. They were ahead of the game for the last 10 years, they're still ahead of the game in terms of build quality, technology, performance, and efficiency. So PC world doesn't need Apple to show it what the Intel platform is capable of, they already have that.

    If anything it was the Intel and the PC world that showed Apple what it can do... in fact Apple liked what it saw so much that it decided to join the party.
  • Reply 12 of 24
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Programmer

    I think in mean "parallel"...?



    PowerPC has gone that way first -- what do you think Cell is?






    Ahh... CELL ala intel.. OMG!!!!!!!!!! NOT - INCELL!
  • Reply 13 of 24
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by skatman

    I certainly hope that you realize that Dell and Apple are not the only companies in the PC market. Nor are they the most innovative or high tech. If you want state-of-the-art stuff, look at Panasonic, Fujitsu, and Sony. They were ahead of the game for the last 10 years, they're still ahead of the game in terms of build quality, technology, performance, and efficiency. So PC world doesn't need Apple to show it what the Intel platform is capable of, they already have that.

    If anything it was the Intel and the PC world that showed Apple what it can do... in fact Apple liked what it saw so much that it decided to join the party.




    But building an ecology that favors uptake of new tech requires widespread adoption, coherently deployed across a large percentage of the platform. In the PC world, that means Dell and HP, then IBM and Acer, accounting for about half the market.



    While Panasonic and Sony obviously make sexier kit than Dell, they are not in a position to drag the entire industry behind them. In Sony's case, at least, they have penchant for proprietary solutions that never stray beyond the brand.



    Intel had been offering USB for a while and it was all but invisible until Apple started including it on all their machines. Sure, Apple has a small market share, but it's unified across the platform, so manufactures know what kind of uptake they can expect within that market and respond accordingly. Hence, the rapid appearance of USB ports on printers, scanners, etc.



    If a few PC makers with 5 or 6 percent of the market implement some neat new Intel functionality, there is no real incentive for peripheral makers to tag along, and the PC industry as a whole, and as an economy, is overwhelmingly a race to the bottom of commodity hell, where any "innovation" that doesn't drive an upgrade cycle just cuts into margins.
  • Reply 14 of 24
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by akheron01

    It's more like Intel finally realized that just raising the clock speed wasn't going to give them the performance gains they'll need so they decided to start parallelizing, I have a feeling you'll eat those word The PowerPC processors even have some 64 core cousins already, the technology is there, as is the technology to scale those cores down, just look at Transmeta's technology!



    Adding more cores won't give them the performance boost they need either. Two cores are better than one. Add more to a personal computer (as opposed to a server) and the law of diminishing returns hits. There's the GUI, and there's some background processes. Maybe the foreground application is well-written and the processing is separate from the GUI. Four cores will have some advantage over two. Beyond that is probably a waste for a desktop. A server might use some more, but hundreds? Don't think so.
  • Reply 15 of 24
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Programmer

    I think you mean "parallel"...?



    PowerPC has gone that way first -- what do you think Cell is?




    Yes, thank you, I did in fact mean parallel, as you can see in the next post by me. Furthermore, despite the multiple cores in cell, it doesn't do parallelization very well and the concepts are VERY different. Did you realize you can fit as much as 8 whole Transmeta Efficeon processors running at 1.7 GHz in the space your average AMD processor takes up? The idea is to scale down serial ability and scale up parallel ability and hope software can keep the heck up.
  • Reply 16 of 24
    Quote:

    Originally posted by synp

    Adding more cores won't give them the performance boost they need either. Two cores are better than one. Add more to a personal computer (as opposed to a server) and the law of diminishing returns hits. There's the GUI, and there's some background processes. Maybe the foreground application is well-written and the processing is separate from the GUI. Four cores will have some advantage over two. Beyond that is probably a waste for a desktop. A server might use some more, but hundreds? Don't think so.



    And this is why the software needs to be in place to take advantage of such hardware. With the proper development environment and compiler I can see some incredibly improvements. Also, I'm sure you multi-task, run more than one program at once, if every single running thread were running on a different core then there would be absolutely no need for timeslicing and for the most part most serial code could run in realtime.
  • Reply 17 of 24
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Wimax



    No. At least not in the immediate future. Wimax base stations cost around 100k to build, so it is only something ISP's will roll out to compete with 3G. You won't be setting up your own Wimax base station.



    That being said, Apple including Wimax in their portables may happen, just not in the immediate future.
  • Reply 18 of 24
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Robin Hood

    No. At least not in the immediate future. Wimax base stations cost around 100k to build, so it is only something ISP's will roll out to compete with 3G. You won't be setting up your own Wimax base station.



    That being said, Apple including Wimax in their portables may happen, just not in the immediate future.




    I don´t think hmurchison ever suggested a WiMax "Base station" but a build in reciever.



    And it is not that far away. I can get WIMax here in Copenhagen and in other cities in Denmark at the same price as ADSL. It gives a lot more flexibility than ADSL, especially if was build into laptops. And recievers at the size of cardbus cards are just around the corner.
  • Reply 19 of 24
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Programmer

    I think you mean "parallel"...?



    PowerPC has gone that way first -- what do you think Cell is?




    But you know, Intel is not a big idea powerhouse. They've always been more of a cloner, like Microsoft. Sure, they came out with the 4004 and the 4040 and the 8080. But since then, it's been mostly cloning. The 8086 copied segments from the PDP-11; the 386's memory manager is a clone of the VAX's.



    As a cloner, they bring process improvements to other people's ideas. I don't think WiMax will be all that expensive, and I expect it to trounce UWB in the marketplace. Perhaps a simple, cheap RAID chipset for the minitower Mac; continued improvements in shared-memory video.
  • Reply 20 of 24
    murkmurk Posts: 935member
    I'm still thinking Apple will use a DSP coprocessor? maybe TI's DaVinci. The software groundwork is already there. It will take Altivec's place. Its also a way of differentiating itself from other Intel computer makers and may even help to compete against Cell.
Sign In or Register to comment.