More evidence of Apple's iPhone eventually going Intel
There's some more anecdotal evidence this week to suggest that Apple Inc.'s iPhone will eventually abandon its Samsung-based roots and make the jump to Intel's freshly-coined Atom architecture.
Citing is own sources, as well as a leaked presentation slide belonging to Intel, the Inquirer is corroborating reports first published by AppleInsider last year in saying that the touch-screen handset is destine to join the ultra-mobile platform in the not too distant future.
However, and more appropriately given recent disclosures by the Intel on the first-generation of the Atom architecture, the evidence suggests the transition will not take place until the second rev of the ultra-mobile Atom platform, code-named Moorestown.
This would see the third-generation iPhone pick up Silverthorne's smaller, and more refined successor sometime in 2009, while the Silverthorne chip itself serves an initial role in Apple's tablet-like extension of the iPod touch platform, frequently referenced by AppleInsider as a reincarnation of the Newton MessagePad.
Among other things, the move will allow Apple to better solidify the codebase of its handheld devices with that of its remaining business segments, mainly its Mac computer line and fledging media hub business (Apple TV). It will also serve as a measure that will help the electronics maker form a tighter shield around its intellectual property, given that the company's disclosures and product plans will be privy to one less partner.
During Intel's Fall developer forum last year, executives for the chipmaker flaunted an unnamed Moorestown processor, describing it as the "chip the iPhone would have wanted." Like Silverthorne, the 45nm Moorestown design bundles an integrated memory controller, video encode/decode engine and graphics processor all on a single SoC, with the added option of WiFi, 3G, and WiMAX technologies.
An Intel Atom roadmap slide shown off at CeBIT | Source: The Inquirer
Citing is own sources, as well as a leaked presentation slide belonging to Intel, the Inquirer is corroborating reports first published by AppleInsider last year in saying that the touch-screen handset is destine to join the ultra-mobile platform in the not too distant future.
However, and more appropriately given recent disclosures by the Intel on the first-generation of the Atom architecture, the evidence suggests the transition will not take place until the second rev of the ultra-mobile Atom platform, code-named Moorestown.
This would see the third-generation iPhone pick up Silverthorne's smaller, and more refined successor sometime in 2009, while the Silverthorne chip itself serves an initial role in Apple's tablet-like extension of the iPod touch platform, frequently referenced by AppleInsider as a reincarnation of the Newton MessagePad.
Among other things, the move will allow Apple to better solidify the codebase of its handheld devices with that of its remaining business segments, mainly its Mac computer line and fledging media hub business (Apple TV). It will also serve as a measure that will help the electronics maker form a tighter shield around its intellectual property, given that the company's disclosures and product plans will be privy to one less partner.
During Intel's Fall developer forum last year, executives for the chipmaker flaunted an unnamed Moorestown processor, describing it as the "chip the iPhone would have wanted." Like Silverthorne, the 45nm Moorestown design bundles an integrated memory controller, video encode/decode engine and graphics processor all on a single SoC, with the added option of WiFi, 3G, and WiMAX technologies.
An Intel Atom roadmap slide shown off at CeBIT | Source: The Inquirer
Comments
I'm sure Apple is considering Intel's products carefully-- they've got some great products in the pipeline. But this isn't evidence, anecdotal or otherwise.
If it's freshly-coined as Atom, why reference Silverthorne? Makes for a confusing read.
Atom isn't just Silverthorne you know.
/Adrian
(2) It's just an image they used for Smartphone, it's not making any statements
Moorestown would still have to be a quarter of the size, 4x more integrated and use 1/4 of the power to compete with the ARMs that will be out at that time. Never mind that Apple is quite happy right now to use ARM, and it's clearly powerful enough for the current iPhone's software.
Atom architecture.
Are you saying this thing is NUCLEAR??
Are you saying this thing is NUCLEAR??
No no no. It's electrical.
It just needs a thermonuclear reaction to charge the battery to run the platform.
No no no. It's electrical.
It just needs a thermonuclear reaction to charge the batter to run the platform.
Are you saying it's fish and chips?
If true, it is interesting to note that: (1) Intel plans to get to "Premium Smartphones" before it gets to "Smartphones;" and (2) Intel does not seem to think the iPhone is a "Premium Smartphone"!
It's more like a Smartphone with a Premium.
OpenGL 2.0 ES!!!!
This is likely good news, as long as atom doesn't use all that power they are talking about it might. I like my phone to keep its charge.
Don't worry. Each Atom powered device comes with a Mr. Fusion reactor that converts household waste into energy and the backlight is now lit by flux capacitors.
Firstly, its a ARM processors are available from a wide array of suppliers. Do you think Jobs would really reduce his ability to bargain, have a secondary source to meet supply requirements and get the best possible choice of technology so that he could be a little more secret? He's obsessed with secrecy, but he's not an idiot. Why would he tie himself to one supplier? With the ARM Apple don't have to accept what Intel designs, they can have their own custom chip. Which would you go for?
Again, the codebase issue is insignificant. So they have to recompile, not a big issue, but the ARM has a big advantage in that it has Thumb code, an instruction set that allows code to be 35% smaller, saving valuable storage space.
Then there are the real problems with the procesors Intel ships: they are physically larger. They run much hotter and are more power hungry. Apple have gone to great lengths (eg excluding 3G) to reduce size and power requirements. So now they would throw that away so they didn't need to recompile?
The Intel chip offers pretty much nothing that ARM doesn't do better. You can get 4 core ARM chips. They are so small (3 sq mm) and cheap that you can put several in your designs. They are particularly low power and are very esy to integrate into custom chip designs.
You seem to want to push this line with the Intel chips but it makes no sense to anyone who knows the first thing about the issues, or is even using any sort of logic. It's laughable.
Are you saying this thing is NUCLEAR??
No no no. It's electrical.
It just needs a thermonuclear reaction to charge the batter[y] to run the platform.
Flux Capacitor comes as a 3rd party accessory from Griffin Technology.
(BttF, awesome).
Firstly, its a ARM processors are available from a wide array of suppliers. Do you think Jobs would really reduce his ability to bargain, have a secondary source to meet supply requirements and get the best possible choice of technology so that he could be a little more secret? He's obsessed with secrecy, but he's not an idiot. Why would he tie himself to one supplier? With the ARM Apple don't have to accept what Intel designs, they can have their own custom chip. Which would you go for?
Well it should be noted that Apple only has one
processor supplier for its desktop and laptop computers,
so this move would not be without precedent. At the
time of the switch to Intel, I think Jobs said something
to the effect that Intel's plans for the future aligned
well with what Apple wanted to do. This could all
be related to that statement.
Well it should be noted that Apple only has one
processor supplier for its desktop and laptop computers,
so this move would not be without precedent. At the
time of the switch to Intel, I think Jobs said something
to the effect that Intel's plans for the future aligned
well with what Apple wanted to do. This could all
be related to that statement.
No, Apple can go to AMD for laptop chips. Jobs make all sorts of statements, all marketingspeak. The only interest he's aligned to is his shareholders. But if you believe the drivel dolled out by AppleInsider, I guess you'd believe anything.
No, Apple can go to AMD for laptop chips. Jobs make all sorts of statements, all marketingspeak. The only interest he's aligned to is his shareholders. But if you believe the drivel dolled out by AppleInsider, I guess you'd believe anything.
Well, to be fair they're reporting on the Inquirer story, which they should really know better of than to give it more positive spin. It's The Inquirer - less reliable than Digitimes. It needs a barrel of salt, not just a pinch.