There are many many ARM-based processor vendors, and only ARM-based chips have the power consumption to make this device possible. A Transmeta, Geode or VIA chip is an order of magnitude greater in power consumption.
TI, Samsung, Marvell and others are options.
This one looks quite good, here but I seem to think that it may use a discrete ATI Imageon or NVIDIA GoForce instead of an integrated accelerator.
I think Apple could easily make a platform based on an embedded OS, running Cocoa, Quartz, CoreVideo/Audio/Animation. I'm not sure how easy they could make it for developers to write an app that runs on both, but they've got experience with doing that.
Exactly!
Those technologies are libraries which could theoretically be ported to any underlying hardware and kernel.
If that is the case, then it's entirely conceivable that the source code for a simple "real Mac OS X" Cocoa application might be massaged to the point that it can be re-compiled, unmodified, to run under an "embedded OS with select OS X-related technologies" under such a scheme.
True binary compatibility (in the Universal Binary sense of the word), however, really depends on the continued presence of the BSD/Mach underpinnings of the OS.
But since the common perception is that it's the bells-and-whistles that make up an operating system, (as opposed to the kernel, threading model, file systems, loadable binary formats, etc), even if there's a fundamentally different back-end, the public perception will be that it's actually the same OS.
First of all, I would be fantastically surprised if the chip were not ARM-based. If it's x86, then it's a Geode, but even at 0.5W, these are way too power-hungry. In the world of embedded electronics at the 65nm size, you can expect that they are driving for NO LESS THAN 2MIPS/1mW. There are a handful of ARM SoCs that can deliver this.
As far as I can tell, it's either a TI OMAP 3000-series, perhaps a custom model, or a custom Nvidia GoForce. The GoForce has everything except the CPU core, which is inelegant because these days you don't just buy ARM CPUs -- they pretty much always come as SoCs. It's possible that an ARM core CPU has been stacked inside the GoForce package. Apple has been known to do this with iPods, yielding Apple-branded chip packages.
Actually, Steve listed all the things that OSX gave them, in the keynote.
He mentioned video, audio, multitasking (etc etc), core animation, cocoa. (It was all listed on a slide. I can't watch it again from here sorry.)
Some things he did not mention were Carbon, or Finder (or BSD, or POSIX).
He also said something like "Desktop Class Applications", in contrast to "Desktop Applications", which I thought was an interesting distinction.
He listed many features. What makes you think that this was an exhaustive list? MacWorld is not a technical/developer conference. Jobs isn't going to list every dinky feature of the embedded OS - it would bore much of the audience, and is useless information in the absence of any developer tools.
I don't think you can point to that list and say "anything not mentioned must have been deleted".
Are you saying Apple would change processors if Intel doesn't accept a low price for their chip?
Personally, if you were right, I think Intel could easily refuse to undercut themselves - they'd be in a far stronger position than Apple if Apple's already done all that R&D.
However... Apple didn't announce that it was an Intel chip. An Apple guy in Germany said it was an Intel chip, he was probably confusing the AppleTV with the iPhone.
Not at all. If Apple makes a bid, and intel rejects it, then Apple still has to make a higher bid. By using that type of leverage though, they can pressure intel to accept their first. If Intel rejects it, no biggie. They just make a higher bid.
Didn't notice that it was a Germany rep. Yeah, I wouldn't expect him to be well in the loop.
Comments
TI, Samsung, Marvell and others are options.
This one looks quite good, here but I seem to think that it may use a discrete ATI Imageon or NVIDIA GoForce instead of an integrated accelerator.
I think Apple could easily make a platform based on an embedded OS, running Cocoa, Quartz, CoreVideo/Audio/Animation. I'm not sure how easy they could make it for developers to write an app that runs on both, but they've got experience with doing that.
Exactly!
Those technologies are libraries which could theoretically be ported to any underlying hardware and kernel.
If that is the case, then it's entirely conceivable that the source code for a simple "real Mac OS X" Cocoa application might be massaged to the point that it can be re-compiled, unmodified, to run under an "embedded OS with select OS X-related technologies" under such a scheme.
True binary compatibility (in the Universal Binary sense of the word), however, really depends on the continued presence of the BSD/Mach underpinnings of the OS.
But since the common perception is that it's the bells-and-whistles that make up an operating system, (as opposed to the kernel, threading model, file systems, loadable binary formats, etc), even if there's a fundamentally different back-end, the public perception will be that it's actually the same OS.
As far as I can tell, it's either a TI OMAP 3000-series, perhaps a custom model, or a custom Nvidia GoForce. The GoForce has everything except the CPU core, which is inelegant because these days you don't just buy ARM CPUs -- they pretty much always come as SoCs. It's possible that an ARM core CPU has been stacked inside the GoForce package. Apple has been known to do this with iPods, yielding Apple-branded chip packages.
Actually, Steve listed all the things that OSX gave them, in the keynote.
He mentioned video, audio, multitasking (etc etc), core animation, cocoa. (It was all listed on a slide. I can't watch it again from here sorry.)
Some things he did not mention were Carbon, or Finder (or BSD, or POSIX).
He also said something like "Desktop Class Applications", in contrast to "Desktop Applications", which I thought was an interesting distinction.
He listed many features. What makes you think that this was an exhaustive list? MacWorld is not a technical/developer conference. Jobs isn't going to list every dinky feature of the embedded OS - it would bore much of the audience, and is useless information in the absence of any developer tools.
I don't think you can point to that list and say "anything not mentioned must have been deleted".
Are you saying Apple would change processors if Intel doesn't accept a low price for their chip?
Personally, if you were right, I think Intel could easily refuse to undercut themselves - they'd be in a far stronger position than Apple if Apple's already done all that R&D.
However... Apple didn't announce that it was an Intel chip. An Apple guy in Germany said it was an Intel chip, he was probably confusing the AppleTV with the iPhone.
Not at all. If Apple makes a bid, and intel rejects it, then Apple still has to make a higher bid. By using that type of leverage though, they can pressure intel to accept their first. If Intel rejects it, no biggie. They just make a higher bid.
Didn't notice that it was a Germany rep. Yeah, I wouldn't expect him to be well in the loop.