Analyst: Atom-based Apple in months, Chinese iPhone in 2008

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 33
    elliots11elliots11 Posts: 270member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by winterspan View Post


    Atom seems like a whole lot of hype with little substance. The performance numbers are certainly not there with the first generation, although the coming Menlow platform, which will see Atom as a system-on-a-chip should change that somewhat.

    What everyone forgets about is that ARM is by no means standing still. The current iPhone uses an old ARM processor. Their current generation, the Cortex-A9, scales up to over 1.0 Ghz and dual-core, while using a fraction of the power the Atom will. Who knows what will come out next year. I just don't know if there are enough advantages of using x86 in the embedded market for it to make any dent. Certainly with apple, they have already ported and optimized the OSX kernel and supporting libraries over to ARM. Why would they want to throw all that work away and go to a potentially bigger, slower, and more power-hungry x86 chip in a future iPhone?

    If there are systems engineers here that know stuff I dont, please by all means let us know!



    How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air. I'd heard that it is capable of dual core 1.6 ghz, and wikipedia says it's 1.87.



    The reason this would be a big deal is that the iphone would literally become a computer in your hand or pocket. You'd have to interact differently with it based on its size, but a handheld computer would be a huge deal. The Intel Atom processor would lend that legitimacy (or harm the macbook air's), though it'd probably have it with arm anyway.



    I need a decent speed handheld computer, I don't think the current iphone has the power.



    What would I do with it? What wouldn't I do with it!
  • Reply 22 of 33
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elliots11 View Post


    How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air.



    In the MacBook Air?



    Where did you get that?
  • Reply 23 of 33
    monstrositymonstrosity Posts: 2,234member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Texadian View Post


    I see that as a very valid point but the truth is in the numbers. Look at sales of Apple products (the computers) before they went Intel and after. MANY people switched from PC to Apple just for the sheer fact that it now has Intel as a processor (known name and abilities) instead of a PowerPC processor (known only to Apple(ites)). People saw the potential Intel gave the Apple system and we (Appleites) are seeing a steady increase of adopters. Do you think the same thing would happen with a lesser known product name like...... Centaur Technology? They have a good product but no product name. Apple didn't choose Intel for there technology but rather there name. If they thought it was the best product out there they would do everything Intel and not just bits and pieces.



    p.s. Okay you Intel lovers just so you know I think they make great products so please don't ream my post just bc I used Intel as the example.



    The intel brand has made very insignificant difference, infact if apple were to start slapping intel inside stickers everywhere it would eventually have the reverse effect and sell less computers. why? because apples marketing does not follow the rest of the industry, they are selling (along with 'it just works') a certain cool factor. Apples products have style through simplicity, overemphasis of the intel brand would erode this.



    If you were selling Max Factor lipstick, you wouldn't market it as 'colored castor oil stick', (this may be reassuring for those who heard the rumor about cows brains). You would likely skip past the details and market a way of life, a way of thinking instead.



    And dont get me wrong, Apple are not just selling style here, they also have substance to back it up. Being intel compatible obviously removed the worry of migration for many, but also remember that apple were on a serious roll anyway, OSX was looking very sexy, vista was screwing up royally etc etc..



    What I'm trying to say is... An Apple computer is greater than the sum of it's parts (in terms of marketing anyway).
  • Reply 24 of 33
    futurepastnowfuturepastnow Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by synp View Post


    In the MacBook Air?



    Where did you get that?



    From nowhere. The Macbook Air does not use an Atom processor, and never will.
  • Reply 25 of 33
    futurepastnowfuturepastnow Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elliots11 View Post


    How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air. I'd heard that it is capable of dual core 1.6 ghz, and wikipedia says it's 1.87.



    The reason this would be a big deal is that the iphone would literally become a computer in your hand or pocket. You'd have to interact differently with it based on its size, but a handheld computer would be a huge deal. The Intel Atom processor would lend that legitimacy (or harm the macbook air's), though it'd probably have it with arm anyway.



    I need a decent speed handheld computer, I don't think the current iphone has the power.



    What would I do with it? What wouldn't I do with it!



    And just because you don't know anything about Atom, don't assume that its specs and abilities aren't very well known. It is an in-order x86 processor with a TDP of 2-4W for single-core and 8W for dual-core. Single core speeds range from 800MHz to 1.86GHz, dual-core is not yet released but will probably be 1.6 and 1.86GHz.



    As an in-order processor, it's pretty crappy for general-purpose computing and benchmarks reflect that: the 1.6GHz Atom is roughly equivalent to a 1.0GHz Pentium M. At 2-4W it's also way too power hungry for a cell phone or iPod-type device.



    What it is good for, and designed for, is ultra-mobile PCs (like the EEE PC) and computing appliances.



    The Macbook Air, by the way, uses a low-voltage, small-package version of the Penryn core processor. A highly capable out-of-order CPU with a TDP of something like 25W.
  • Reply 26 of 33
    Apple is going to use the processor in a wireless range extender product called the Atom Ant.
  • Reply 27 of 33
    merdheadmerdhead Posts: 587member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elliots11 View Post


    How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air. I'd heard that it is capable of dual core 1.6 ghz, and wikipedia says it's 1.87.



    The reason this would be a big deal is that the iphone would literally become a computer in your hand or pocket. You'd have to interact differently with it based on its size, but a handheld computer would be a huge deal. The Intel Atom processor would lend that legitimacy (or harm the macbook air's), though it'd probably have it with arm anyway.



    I need a decent speed handheld computer, I don't think the current iphone has the power.



    What would I do with it? What wouldn't I do with it!



    You obviously don't know much about processors or computers. You don't seem to know the first think about the MAcBook Air either. The iPhone is a handheld computer. It has a processor, memory, storage, screen, input devices just like any other computer. Just because it's sold as a phone is neither here nor there.



    I don't know why you think the ARM processor is not powerful enough. You can get them in a 4-core version and you can clock them past 1GHz. You could put any processor you like in a handheld machine, but if you put in anything other than an an ARM it will probably be too big, too power hungry and lacking features. The Atom just doesn't compete with the ARM, it seems to be targeted at small laptops.
  • Reply 28 of 33
    elliots11elliots11 Posts: 270member
    I heard that the Air using the Atom processor from speculation that I'd read prior to its release on sites like this. Never was that interested in the Air so I never researched it and read otherwise. Obviously I should have before commenting.



    My concern with iPhone's current state is that it's a single core and only doing 412mhz according to Wikipedia (not a fantastic source, but I'm not in the industry). If accurate, that's not very impressive as a computer today, though probably great compared to the competition. Nothing against ARM at all, I'd just like something in the dual core, 1.6 ghz territory and I don't care who makes. It would be overpowered for what's available for the iphone today, opening a lot of doors for projects in the future with third party apps.



    Maybe they could write an app for me that reads forum posts and warns of factual errors, or even one that monitors for excessive condescension. Might come in handy.
  • Reply 29 of 33
    futurepastnowfuturepastnow Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elliots11 View Post


    My concern with iPhone's current state is that it's a single core and only doing 412mhz according to Wikipedia (not a fantastic source, but I'm not in the industry). If accurate, that's not very impressive as a computer today, though probably great compared to the competition. Nothing against ARM at all, I'd just like something in the dual core, 1.6 ghz territory and I don't care who makes. It would be overpowered for what's available for the iphone today, opening a lot of doors for projects in the future with third party apps.



    It's a PHONE.
  • Reply 30 of 33
    winterspanwinterspan Posts: 605member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Texadian View Post


    I see that as a very valid point but the truth is in the numbers. Look at sales of Apple products (the computers) before they went Intel and after. MANY people switched from PC to Apple just for the sheer fact that it now has Intel as a processor (known name and abilities) instead of a PowerPC processor (known only to Apple(ites)). People saw the potential Intel gave the Apple system and we (Appleites) are seeing a steady increase of adopters. Do you think the same thing would happen with a lesser known product name like...... Centaur Technology? They have a good product but no product name. Apple didn't choose Intel for there technology but rather there name. If they thought it was the best product out there they would do everything Intel and not just bits and pieces.

    p.s. Okay you Intel lovers just so you know I think they make great products so please don't ream my post just bc I used Intel as the example.



    Sorry, but that is rubbish. It's actually very easy to reason why Apple choose Intel and why their computers are selling so well after the transition. Apple probably choose Intel for a few reasons, not least because their x86 processors could natively run windows (and thus windows software). Of similar importance would be Intels' ability to provide an entire cost-effective line-up of processors to suit all of Apple's different computer segments, and to update them at regular intervals.



    Similarly, the consumer market success of the move is most likely due to these factors as well. I would assume the primary driver is the ability to run windows in parallel with OSX (pun not intended). This is not only highly re-assuring for "new switchers", but allows them to still make use of software that is only available for windows. Secondary to that would be the more economical retail prices afforded by using such mass-produced processors, in addition to the highly-publicized market failure of Windows Vista and the increased consumer familiarity with Apple products created by the iPod's success. It's sort of become a "perfect storm" if you will.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elliots11 View Post


    How much is really known about the atom at this point? All I know for sure is that it's brand new and in the Macbook Air. I'd heard that it is capable of dual core 1.6 ghz, and wikipedia says it's 1.87.



    The reason this would be a big deal is that the iphone would literally become a computer in your hand or pocket. You'd have to interact differently with it based on its size, but a handheld computer would be a huge deal. The Intel Atom processor would lend that legitimacy (or harm the macbook air's), though it'd probably have it with arm anyway.



    I need a decent speed handheld computer, I don't think the current iphone has the power.

    ______________



    My concern with iPhone's current state is that it's a single core and only doing 412mhz according to Wikipedia (not a fantastic source, but I'm not in the industry). If accurate, that's not very impressive as a computer today, though probably great compared to the competition. Nothing against ARM at all, I'd just like something in the dual core, 1.6 ghz territory and I don't care who makes. It would be overpowered for what's available for the iphone today, opening a lot of doors for projects in the future with third party apps.





    I think you are on a different wavelength than everyone else. I mean you are not really describing a phone anymore, right? Without even talking about the miserable battery life that such a device would have, how in the world would a 3.5" touchscreen device even take advantage of a (roughly) dual-core 1600mhz CPU? Without a much larger and higher-resolution screen, not to mention a different use profile, what were you think of doing exactly that would require so much horsepower? I mean you are really describing an entirely different form factor with entirely different uses --- most likely a so-called Ultra-mobile PC (UMPC) or tablet-type device, and one that would run a standard desktop operating system.
  • Reply 31 of 33
    rockon52rockon52 Posts: 11member
    Rumors are flying that the 3G Iphone though being introduced on the 9th of June wont be hitting the shelves until late August or early September. The problems seem to be mostly component rleated. Unfortunately this puts them behind the release of the 3G phone by Blackberry...BUMMER
  • Reply 32 of 33
    elliots11elliots11 Posts: 270member
    I think you are on a different wavelength than everyone else. I mean you are not really describing a phone anymore, right? Without even talking about the miserable battery life that such a device would have, how in the world would a 3.5" touchscreen device even take advantage of a (roughly) dual-core 1600mhz CPU? Without a much larger and higher-resolution screen, not to mention a different use profile, what were you think of doing exactly that would require so much horsepower? I mean you are really describing an entirely different form factor with entirely different uses --- most likely a so-called Ultra-mobile PC (UMPC) or tablet-type device, and one that would run a standard desktop operating system.[/QUOTE]



    Honestly I probably don't need that much power. All I really want is a sort of a remote desktop control program on the iPhone.
  • Reply 33 of 33
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post


    It's a PHONE.



    That might be the biggest misconception/mistake I've ever seen in these forums!



    Dave
Sign In or Register to comment.