Apple places unusual flash memory order

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 128
    ltmpltmp Posts: 204member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LTMP View Post


    Nothing to surprising about the order.



    from July 2008

    http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/02/a...ndustry-starv/



    From today

    http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/09/a/



    Edit: Nothing too surprising about the order.



    It sounds to me like they are expecting the same volume of sales, but for 16 GB and 32GB phones instead of 8GB and 16GB.
  • Reply 82 of 128
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,982member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I agree, as previously stated, but I can't stress enough how happy I will be when that useless component taking so much space in my MB and using up an entire side of port real estate is gone. I don't even burn discs to install Snow Leopard for testing. Apple's own seed notes walk you through a simple partition-to-partition installation. Without that option I wouldn't be wasting my time and money burning DL-DVDs so I could test the software.



    If you're a developer, you have somewhat different interests then the rest of us; the unwashed herd.



    It would still be much too expensive for Apple to do.



    If it costs 50 cents to do a DVD, and say, Apple can get the cost of an equivalent flash drive down to $2.00, and Apple has to send software out to the general public, so they would need to send 10 million copies, the difference is appalling!



    It would cost $5 million to send it by DVD, sans mailing costs, and $20 million via flash drive, sans mailing costs.



    I can't think of a single business reason why Apple would want to do that.



    They would have to charge for it.



    It would be just as bad for developers, being that Apple would have to send out several revisions.



    Download is by far the best way to do this. Honestly, it's incumbent upon people to do their own backups. Apple can't be responsible for everything.
  • Reply 83 of 128
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,982member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MissionGrey View Post


    Yes, I have had about 6 or 7 today.



    Is it happening in bunches, fine for a while, then a number of them happening one after the other? And slow load times?
  • Reply 84 of 128
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,982member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LTMP View Post


    It sounds to me like they are expecting the same volume of sales, but for 16 GB and 32GB phones instead of 8GB and 16GB.



    Or, as has been stated by some analysts, twice as many phones.
  • Reply 85 of 128
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    If you're a developer, you have somewhat different interests then the rest of us; the unwashed herd.



    It would still be much too expensive for Apple to do.



    If it costs 50 cents to do a DVD, and say, Apple can get the cost of an equivalent flash drive down to $2.00, and Apple has to send software out to the general public, so they would need to send 10 million copies, the difference is appalling!



    It would cost $5 million to send it by DVD, sans mailing costs, and $20 million via flash drive, sans mailing costs.



    I can't think of a single business reason why Apple would want to do that.



    They would have to charge for it.



    It would be just as bad for developers, being that Apple would have to send out several revisions.



    Download is by far the best way to do this. Honestly, it's incumbent upon people to do their own backups. Apple can't be responsible for everything.



    I'm not following you on the revisions part of your post. Lets say it costs $5, not $2, for an 8GB flash disc containing the Mac OS X install for Macs shipped with no optical drive. How much are they saving in HW costs alone from not including an optical drive? How much engineering time are they saving by not having to design around this biggest (to nearly biggest) component in notebooks that has to be positioned along a sidewall of all notebooks?



    Apple only has two choices for the next major notebook revision, either include Blu-ray (which I still can't find in 9.5mm sizes and are still cost prohibitive) or exclude optical drives altogether. that doesn't mean exclude them from their desktop lines as there is still plenty of room and port real estate or to not offer an external option, like they do for the MBA, but I think it's clear that CD/DVD drives as being a requirement for notebooks is dying and I think Apple will be the first to jump head first into that movement.
  • Reply 86 of 128
    zeromeuszeromeus Posts: 181member
    They left out the 12 in their post? 128Gb makes more sense for the iPhone since Apple might just produce a 16GB and 32BG iPhones to replace the current 8GB and 16GB iPhones. So 1 128Gb chip = 16GB and 2 128Gb chip = 32GB. Perhaps tomorrow they'll send out an edit saying, "We apologize for the misprint. We meant to say 128Gb and not 8Gb." Yeah?
  • Reply 87 of 128
    kenckenc Posts: 186member
    usesd in SSDs, MLC and SLC. My understanding is that this order was of MLC chips, which are not good for boot SSDs.
  • Reply 88 of 128
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zeromeus View Post


    They left out the 12 in their post? 128Gb makes more sense for the iPhone since Apple might just produce a 16GB and 32BG iPhones to replace the current 8GB and 16GB iPhones. So 1 128Gb chip = 16GB and 2 128Gb chip = 32GB. Perhaps tomorrow they'll send out an edit saying, "We apologize for the misprint. We meant to say 128Gb and not 8Gb." Yeah?



    You won't see a 128GB iPhone anytime soon. The NAND density doubled which will alllow for a 32GB iPhone and 64GB iPod Touch but the current package sizing and NAND density won't allow for larger storage unless the form factor changes.



    Apple uses twice as many chips (16 I believe) in the iPod touch as they use in the iPhone.
  • Reply 89 of 128
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,982member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I'm not following you on the revisions part of your post. Lets say it costs $5, not $2, for an 8GB flash disc containing the Mac OS X install for Macs shipped with no optical drive. How much are they saving in HW costs alone from not including an optical drive? How much engineering time are they saving by not having to design around this biggest (to nearly biggest) component in notebooks that has to be positioned along a sidewall of all notebooks?



    I said—for developers, meaning Apple's OS revisions, like we have now with 10.5 updates, and 10.6 updates. According to your idea of no optical drive, and apparent horror at the thought of downloads, these would all have to be sent out on these sticks.



    For everyone else, well, just a small number will have machines without optical drives.



    You can't talk as though there aren't many things that will still need an optical drive, because there will.



    No one will be saving any money from not having one, because the OS delivery system is, by far, the least important part of it. Most people will want an optical drive for many years to come, and then downloads will have taken over.



    Quote:

    Apple only has two choices for the next major notebook revision, either include Blu-ray (which I still can't find in 9.5mm sizes and are still cost prohibitive) or exclude optical drives altogether. that doesn't mean exclude them from their desktop lines as there is still plenty of room and port real estate or to not offer an external option, like they do for the MBA, but I think it's clear that CD/DVD drives as being a requirement for notebooks is dying and I think Apple will be the first to jump head first into that movement.



    I don't understand how you can see those as THE two choices. Very few computers come with Blu-Ray support of any kind. Only a handful of models, and except for those with one drive slot, portables, they all have DVD drives as well.



    I don't think it's clear at all. In a few years, maybe.
  • Reply 90 of 128
    mactelmactel Posts: 1,275member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trip1ex View Post


    ON-board flash for Macbooks and iMacs etc?



    Or is this for the new MacTouch?



    Most likely for the Mac Netbook. The Netbook would have the space and just like RAM it is good to have multiple banks of flash for performance.



    I can't see these in iPods or iPhone as the article mentions. It has to be a new device. Again the Mac Netbook is a good candidate.
  • Reply 91 of 128
    kolchakkolchak Posts: 1,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by voretaq7 View Post


    This could be what Apple is doing -- Put the boot parts of OS X (kernel, bootloader, etc) on a flash drive -- ala the current XServe.



    Is that very useful at all? How often do most people boot their systems? I only reboot mine after an OS or security update, once every few months. Otherwise, I put them to sleep when not in use. I suspect most people with modern (21st century) systems do the same.
  • Reply 92 of 128
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Wow- Apple is becoming the new SONY day by day. No wonder their computers are getting suckier day by day.



    Strangely this might be the closest call. The desktop machines do seem to be dwindling and a lack of design innovation intimate Mr Ive's talents are being used elsewhere. Taking the MacBooks with standard storage of 128GB+ to solid state goes too far against the market's downward cost trends and Netbook success shows something a little smaller is in order.



    A shrunken MacBook has been dismissed & every Netbook I've seen seems to require goggles. What if on the 25th anniversary of giving us the PC as we know it today (& as a last hail to it's ailing leader) Apple re-invent the PC as we know it. Something for those 10" touch-screens?



    McD
  • Reply 93 of 128
    agaaga Posts: 42member
    First, it's easily the right amount for the next rollout of touch devices. But, that's not what I want to make a point on. Let's talk about the Math of USB software distribution.



    Cost to make and distribute a DVD:

    $ - Master DVD

    $ - Duplicate DVD

    $ - Package DVD

    $ - Distribute DVD

    $ - Shelf Space DVD (retail)

    $ - Ship DVD (online orders etc)



    Cost to make and distribute USB solution

    $ - Duplicate USB

    $ - Package USB

    $ - Distribute USB

    $ - Shelf Space USB (retail)

    $ - Ship USB (online orders etc)



    So, you can fill in the blanks, because I do not know what apple pays for their solutions. Here is what I do know. Apple can save money with USB in the following ways:

    - Duplication

    - Packaging

    - Distribution

    - Shelf Space

    - Warehouse Space



    Then, as others said, Snow Leopard may be a bit thinner / more compact. Without the legacy PPC code, more native Cocoa code, and other optimizations, Apple can easily fit more on less.



    Next, tagging a drive for some more security... keeping the hackers jumping through hoops... sure a lot of you are right and Apple would never do something like that.



    Speeding up the install process, what point is there in that?



    Mac Book Air? why would apple not want those people to buy another $100 device?



    Well, here's the answer you have all been waiting for (probably not, but it's the thing you have to be thinking about). How long does it take to install Mac OS X on 1 computer, 2 computers, 3 computers 4....?



    That's right folks, Apple has Big plans for these new little USB Installers. Plug one into your Airport Base or Time Machine Box, and you now have your network install. How do I know it will work? because I have set it up with other wireless routers, and the technology is old, tried, and true. The best part, now you can keep your install disk up to date along with your computers. Great thing is, now you can net boot your machine off the base. Great reason to buy another base. Oh, and a hardware key... Great way to add some other features but...



    The rest we should leave for Steve or our friend from Alabama to show.



    \
  • Reply 94 of 128
    Hey guys, Its obviously for the new Apple iWatch being announced at WWDC.



    The device has a 1GB flash storage and a small 1" high density display with single (not multi) touch screen. It also has a small speaker and microphone built in plus Bluetooth.



    This is plenty for acting as an iPod/iPhone peripheral via bluetooth (as announced in iPhoneOS 3.0). A single finger swipe will change the currently viewed application. Applications are "Read only" status icons - like the buttons on the home screen of an iPhone/iPod Touch.



    Apple has to showcase what the new peripheral functionality can do and implement the most common applications of it itself leaving the more "vertical" applications to third party developers. WWDC will see the API for the iWatch opened as part of IPhoneOS 3.0 so other developers can write their own applications for it.



    Examples of the iWatch's applications include:
    • iPod: Browsing playlists and changing currently playing song. (also volume/shuffle controls etc.)

    • Calendar events: The watch can store your entire iCal calendar and trigger visual and audible alarms you have set. This functionality works wether or not the watch is currently connected to an iPhone/iPod.

    • Push Messaging: Receiving and displaying push notifications such as new emails/text messages.


      The screen is not for displaying the full messages only notification - at most short SMS messages can be displayed. Apple's new push messaging service allows for three things:
      1. an icon badge (e.g. number of unread messages)

      2. a notifiction sound and

      3. a short text message only

      all three of these can be done on the watch. In effect it is like the home page of an iPod touch or iPhone except it can only display one icon at a time.


    • Widgets: Common widgets such as "Weather" and "Stocks" will display in icon mode and be updated live when the watch is connected to an iPhone/iPod touch and the iPod/iPhone is connected to the internet via WiFi or the Cell network.

    • Telephony: Receive incoming calls via the paired iPhone, but use the watch's microphone and speaker instead of the iPhone's

    • Video Telephony: Like a voice call but the screen displays the incoming video of the caller (but only at a slow frame rate because Bluetooth cannot handle high frame rate video even of a small sized video)

    • Voice commands: Like the new iPod shuffle the iWatch will allow simple voice commands for very limited interaction with apps.

    • Time: Oh, yeah and it can display the time too - full world clock functionality


  • Reply 95 of 128
    davidwdavidw Posts: 977member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by by teckstud


    Wow- Apple is becoming the new SONY day by day. No wonder their computers are getting suckier day by day.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I hope you're not using his statement as a fact.



    melgross, you should know by now. When has teckstud ever let the "fact", get in the way of his post?
  • Reply 96 of 128
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,322member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DestructoTex View Post


    These are for laptops. I bet there's something in the works with flash memory that contains the boot drive for quicker and more energy efficient power-on, similar to what they recently did in the new Xserve.







    This would be for all systems.
  • Reply 97 of 128
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,417member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I hope you're not using his statement as a fact.







    With teckstud no statement is a fact; every statement is just that, a statement.



    What amazes me is that he somehow manages to rile people - even the veterans - enough that they feel compelled to respond.



    And, in the meantime, he continues to relentlessly keep increasing the number of posts with utterly inane (and often oblique) comments, thereby signaling that he must somehow be a veteran himself, esp. to the newbies on the list. And they feel compelled to respond..... and on it goes......
  • Reply 98 of 128
    xwiredtvaxwiredtva Posts: 389member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaringDeveloper View Post


    Hey guys, Its obviously for the new Apple iWatch being announced at WWDC.



    The device has a 1GB flash storage and a small 1" high density display with single (not multi) touch screen. It also has a small speaker and microphone built in plus Bluetooth.



    This is plenty for acting as an iPod/iPhone peripheral via bluetooth (as announced in iPhoneOS 3.0). A single finger swipe will change the currently viewed application. Applications are "Read only" status icons - like the buttons on the home screen of an iPhone/iPod Touch.



    Apple has to showcase what the new peripheral functionality can do and implement the most common applications of it itself leaving the more "vertical" applications to third party developers. WWDC will see the API for the iWatch opened as part of IPhoneOS 3.0 so other developers can write their own applications for it.



    Examples of the iWatch's applications include:
    • iPod: Browsing playlists and changing currently playing song. (also volume/shuffle controls etc.)

    • Calendar events: The watch can store your entire iCal calendar and trigger visual and audible alarms you have set. This functionality works wether or not the watch is currently connected to an iPhone/iPod.

    • Push Messaging: Receiving and displaying push notifications such as new emails/text messages.


      The screen is not for displaying the full messages only notification - at most short SMS messages can be displayed. Apple's new push messaging service allows for three things:
      1. an icon badge (e.g. number of unread messages)

      2. a notifiction sound and

      3. a short text message only

      all three of these can be done on the watch. In effect it is like the home page of an iPod touch or iPhone except it can only display one icon at a time.


    Widgets: Common widgets such as "Weather" and "Stocks" will display in icon mode and be updated live when the watch is connected to an iPhone/iPod touch and the iPod/iPhone is connected to the internet via WiFi or the Cell network.

    Telephony: Receive incoming calls via the paired iPhone, but use the watch's microphone and speaker instead of the iPhone's

    Video Telephony: Like a voice call but the screen displays the incoming video of the caller (but only at a slow frame rate because Bluetooth cannot handle high frame rate video even of a small sized video)

    Voice commands: Like the new iPod shuffle the iWatch will allow simple voice commands for very limited interaction with apps.

    Time: Oh, yeah and it can display the time too - full world clock functionality






    Microsoft Did it... And it sucked, royally.
  • Reply 99 of 128
    zeromeuszeromeus Posts: 181member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    You won't see a 128GB iPhone anytime soon. The NAND density doubled which will alllow for a 32GB iPhone and 64GB iPod Touch but the current package sizing and NAND density won't allow for larger storage unless the form factor changes.



    Apple uses twice as many chips (16 I believe) in the iPod touch as they use in the iPhone.



    Notice in my original post, I said, "128Gb" meaning 128 gigaBIT. There are 8 bits in 1 byte, so divide 128Gb by 8, you get 16GB.



    Go here if you wanna read about it. http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-...and-a-byte.htm



    So again, I think they left out the 12 in their post... unless this NAND memory is not for the iPhone or iPod touch, it cannot be 8Gb because 8Gb=1GB. and who'd put 32 of those in one piece of equipment? Unless they're the unfinished product that will be put together in stacks to make the final product. I doubt it, though. It'd be a pain to put 32 pieces together to make a 32GB block.
  • Reply 100 of 128
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by xwiredtva View Post


    Microsoft Did it... And it sucked, royally.



    Is the essence of your comment : "because Microsoft can't do it therefore Apple can't" ? If so, what makes you think the maker of the iPhone, iPod Touch, iPod shuffle/nano can't do better?



    You're right about Microsoft:



    Microsoft did mobile phones (Windows Mobile) and they suck.

    Microsoft did music players (Zune) and they suck.

    Microsoft did game consoles (XBox 360) and they suck.

    Microsoft did tablet computers (Windows for Tablet PCs) and they suck.

    Microsoft did home media centers (Windows media center) and they suck.

    Microsoft did watches (SPOT initiative) and they suck



    Microsoft has lost billions of dollars on many of these failed hardware and platform initiatives while Apple has made huge profits in some of the same product categories.



    There is one major failing with you equating the Microsoft SPOT initiative to iWatch:
    SPOT watches are attempting to be the central computing device and communicate over a 100Mhz band to MSN Direct service. So firstly the watch won't do much if your not in an area covered by MSN Direct; secondly there's not enough processing power in there to do much anyway.



    In comparison the iWatch uses the processing power of an iPhone/iPod Touch. You missed the point about it being an iPhoneOS 3.0 PERIPHERAL not a computer in itself like SPOT watches are attempting to be. Comparing wireless coverage; an iWatch inherits (via its Bluetooth connection) the same coverage as the host device (WiFi or cell network) unlike the limited MSN Direct service.
    Thanks for bringing up the "Microsoft sucks" fact. I appreciate your insight into that.
Sign In or Register to comment.