If one looks at who is on the staff there, you would see people that where deeply involved in Intels old ARM ventures. Everything indicates that the staff would be able to easily transition to modern ARM hardware.
Yes, as I already said?OLD.
I'm not saying that this is too daunting a task. I'm only saying that it won't take 6 months from acquisition of the company to full fledged chips with Apple's add-ons, incorporated into designs, manufactured, and out into the market.
Is that what you, and others here think? Because that's what I'm reading.
Quote:
Well speculation is all you can get right now. I do know that trade papers from the valley at one time stated that PA was purchased so that a project could be finished up. Of course that could be speculation too.
That's much too generalized a statement. Do you have a link or two to those trade papers?
What we do have now is photos of the physical Touch 2G. One thing is obvious is the much smaller logic board. The question then becomes where did all the discrete components go. I'm wondering if we are looking at a PA based iPod right now. it is an incredibly small logic board yet duplicates the functionality of the old and adds features.
It wouldn't surprise me if the first PA SoC was a modest effort. In this case to shrink the logic board. Touch production by itself is strong enough to justify a custom chip.
Dave[/QUOTE]
That's not even within the realm of possibility. There have already been teardowns that show that board. none of the companies involved in those teardowns, who are so interested in finding out exactly what's in them, have mentioned anything odd.
That's meaningless. I already acknowledged that OLD experience. The industry moves on very rapidly. The ARM chips that a few in PA Semi worked on were very different, and much more primitive, that what is being done today. So their experience amounts to a basic understanding of the thrust of the designs, which is nice. But they still have to come up to speed on the new technology, and develop any new features for the chips that Apple now wants incorporated into them. That's not such an easy task.
I don't know why some here seem to think it is.
So?
It not that we think it is an easy task to build a SoC but rather the whole point of buying PA Semi was so that they could finish off a project before they went bankrupt. It appears that the project for iPod/IPhone chips at PA had been around for awhile. The purchase was made to assure that the hardware was finished.
As a side note the experience that PA has with Low power chips is applicable to anything ARM can offer up. PA is as state of the art as ARM when it comes to low power processors. It is the mix of abilities that could lead to some interesting designs from PA.
It not that we think it is an easy task to build a SoC but rather the whole point of buying PA Semi was so that they could finish off a project before they went bankrupt. It appears that the project for iPod/IPhone chips at PA had been around for awhile. The purchase was made to assure that the hardware was finished.
As a side note the experience that PA has with Low power chips is applicable to anything ARM can offer up. PA is as state of the art as ARM when it comes to low power processors. It is the mix of abilities that could lead to some interesting designs from PA.
Dave
They weren't going bankrupt, and we don't know anything about an "unfinished" project that had anything to do with anything they were working on other than their PPC designs. One unfinished project that we do know about was a newer version of their PPC.
Here's hoping that Apple will finally be able to put a stop to hacking and jailbreaking the iPhone. With a custom processor it would seem this is a possibility. Jailbreaking has done enormous damage to the Apple brand reputation not to mention lost revenue and profits.
hahah. Maybe if Apple stopped locking people out of their hardware it wouldn't happen. Apple are quickly forgetting about monopolies not being cool.
hahah. Maybe if Apple stopped locking people out of their hardware it wouldn't happen. Apple are quickly forgetting about monopolies not being cool.
Your name is disturbing dude but whatever. Anyways, if Apple does become a monopoly it will be because they earned it. Not because they rode a rollercoaster of ignorance and of no choice.
The same goes with google. They have a monopoly hold of the market share and they so very greatly deserve that market share.
Your name is disturbing dude but whatever. Anyways, if Apple does become a monopoly it will be because they earned it. Not because they rode a rollercoaster of ignorance and of no choice.
The same goes with google. They have a monopoly hold of the market share and they so very greatly deserve that market share.
Disturbing? Hmmm. Anyway, there's nothing too wrong with apple now, but they're starting on a disturbing path that COULD be abused, same for google but google don't necessitate one product to only work with one other product, it's just that they do, and very well. Also, they don't make hardware that is locked to software. I'd like to have the option to use my ipod or iphone however I like, which is the direction that I have a problem with, that you can't really shop on the itunes store and use your purchases how you want. But y'know, it's not really a biggie.
Disturbing? Hmmm. Anyway, there's nothing too wrong with apple now, but they're starting on a disturbing path that COULD be abused, same for google but google don't necessitate one product to only work with one other product, it's just that they do, and very well. Also, they don't make hardware that is locked to software. I'd like to have the option to use my ipod or iphone however I like, which is the direction that I have a problem with, that you can't really shop on the itunes store and use your purchases how you want. But y'know, it's not really a biggie.
Anyway, enough thread derailing, whoops!
1) iTS audio is both with and without DRM. Note that Apple's iTS was teh first digital music store to get a major studio to release their sounds with DRM. Jobs wrote an open letter to stop DRM, which a Warner Music exec publicly called it lunacy and then offered a DRM-free catalog on Amazon. Apple is being left out of the DRM-free party because of their push to get the studios to offer better media for the consumer. Even the DRM audio can be un-DRMed. It's the video that is the real issue.
2) You can install Linux on your iPod. You can even use alternate apps to get music on your iPod.
3) You don't have to use the iTS to use iTunes or the iPod. It's a separate entity that is convenient, not mandatory.
4) It would be virtually impossible for Apple to get enough of the PC marketshare be considered a monopoly. Eve Dell and HP, with the nearly zero profti margin budget PCs filled with crapware only gets them 16 and 20% worldwide, respectively.
I keep wondering if Apple could sue the content companies for causing damage to their business from not offering Apple the same product as others, that is, DRM-free content.
But the question is, is Apple's business being damaged?
Of course, collusion is also illegal, it amounts to price fixing between companies.
I keep wondering if Apple could sue the content companies for causing damage to their business from not offering Apple the same product as others, that is, DRM-free content.
But the question is, is Apple's business being damaged?
Of course, collusion is also illegal, it amounts to price fixing between companies.
There definitely seems to be a basis for a legal case, but at the same time, the content providers could say that they would if Apple agreed to the same conditions that Amazon has. We don't know how much control Amazon has, but I'd wager that they are just the puppet here which is allowing them to get some ground in the digital content market.
The argument that iTS has grown too powerful too quickly would be a good rebuttal and they overwhelming dominance of the iPod HW and iTunes Software is tying people to Apple's HW, SW and store, whereas Amazon is open to all players on all PCs.
There definitely seems to be a basis for a legal case, but at the same time, the content providers could say that they would if Apple agreed to the same conditions that Amazon has. We don't know how much control Amazon has, but I'd wager that they are just the puppet here which is allowing them to get some ground in the digital content market.
The argument that iTS has grown too powerful too quickly would be a good rebuttal and they overwhelming dominance of the iPod HW and iTunes Software is tying people to Apple's HW, SW and store, whereas Amazon is open to all players on all PCs.
So far, the deal with Amazon it to sell DRM-free music at lower prices than Apple is selling them. I don't know what, if any, "hidden" clauses say.
iTunes still only has a fraction of music sales. I don't think that argument would work.
But you're still not allowed to collude on prices for any reason.
I will only add that I seem to remember that Apple was either investing in or paying for services from PA Semi. So the notion that nothing was done prior to Apple purchasing is out if what I am remembering is correct. Anyone else remember hearing this? I remember someone saying that the real cost to Apple was much less than the price payed because Apple only protected their original investment. It appeared that PA may drop the Apple contract due to their success in selling chips to military. If Apple wanted their investment in PA to payoff they had to buy them. So it could be that they had been working on an Apple design at least for some time prior to the purchase.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olternaut
I seriously think that the all the work your describing was done (or mostly done) months ago. And I really think some sort of product (most likely a handheld wireless product) containing a PA Semi designed component will debut at MacWorld 2009. So this brand new product can be announced then debuted later by June I would think. This should give them wayyyy enough time to produce the product.
If PA are making an ARM CPU (as it seems they are), then it will probably be a single CPU that can be used for all of their next generation devices. Just look at what goes into such a SoC these days!
- ARM CPU Core
- (Second ARM CPU Core for high-end devices using MPCore)
- GPU (PowerVR SGX from Imagination)
- DSP (Audio and Video decode, Imagination have a suitable product)
- Wireless a/b/g/n
- Bluetooth 2.1 with Low Power Support
- Multitouch Driver
- Flash controller
- Memory controller
- Audio subsystem
- USB
- all that other SoC stuff like UARTs, JTAG, LPC buses
I will only add that I seem to remember that Apple was either investing in or paying for services from PA Semi. So the notion that nothing was done prior to Apple purchasing is out if what I am remembering is correct. Anyone else remember hearing this? I remember someone saying that the real cost to Apple was much less than the price payed because Apple only protected their original investment. It appeared that PA may drop the Apple contract due to their success in selling chips to military. If Apple wanted their investment in PA to payoff they had to buy them. So it could be that they had been working on an Apple design at least for some time prior to the purchase.
You remember this? From where? I don't "remember" this.
I will only add that I seem to remember that Apple was either investing in or paying for services from PA Semi. So the notion that nothing was done prior to Apple purchasing is out if what I am remembering is correct. Anyone else remember hearing this? I remember someone saying that the real cost to Apple was much less than the price payed because Apple only protected their original investment. It appeared that PA may drop the Apple contract due to their success in selling chips to military. If Apple wanted their investment in PA to payoff they had to buy them. So it could be that they had been working on an Apple design at least for some time prior to the purchase.
P.A. Semi was trying to sell Apple Power PC processors to replace the G5 in the Mac. That all fell through when Apple switched to Intel.
I do beleive P.A. Semi had to show Apple something within it's ARM abilities that impressed Apple enough to buy the company. I doubt they started from scratch right at the time of purchase.
Even if P.A. Semi had a chip ready to go soon. Apple will wait to next year to introduce under normal fanfare.
Comments
If one looks at who is on the staff there, you would see people that where deeply involved in Intels old ARM ventures. Everything indicates that the staff would be able to easily transition to modern ARM hardware.
Yes, as I already said?OLD.
I'm not saying that this is too daunting a task. I'm only saying that it won't take 6 months from acquisition of the company to full fledged chips with Apple's add-ons, incorporated into designs, manufactured, and out into the market.
Is that what you, and others here think? Because that's what I'm reading.
Well speculation is all you can get right now. I do know that trade papers from the valley at one time stated that PA was purchased so that a project could be finished up. Of course that could be speculation too.
That's much too generalized a statement. Do you have a link or two to those trade papers?
What we do have now is photos of the physical Touch 2G. One thing is obvious is the much smaller logic board. The question then becomes where did all the discrete components go. I'm wondering if we are looking at a PA based iPod right now. it is an incredibly small logic board yet duplicates the functionality of the old and adds features.
It wouldn't surprise me if the first PA SoC was a modest effort. In this case to shrink the logic board. Touch production by itself is strong enough to justify a custom chip.
Dave[/QUOTE]
That's not even within the realm of possibility. There have already been teardowns that show that board. none of the companies involved in those teardowns, who are so interested in finding out exactly what's in them, have mentioned anything odd.
That's meaningless. I already acknowledged that OLD experience. The industry moves on very rapidly. The ARM chips that a few in PA Semi worked on were very different, and much more primitive, that what is being done today. So their experience amounts to a basic understanding of the thrust of the designs, which is nice. But they still have to come up to speed on the new technology, and develop any new features for the chips that Apple now wants incorporated into them. That's not such an easy task.
I don't know why some here seem to think it is.
So?
It not that we think it is an easy task to build a SoC but rather the whole point of buying PA Semi was so that they could finish off a project before they went bankrupt. It appears that the project for iPod/IPhone chips at PA had been around for awhile. The purchase was made to assure that the hardware was finished.
As a side note the experience that PA has with Low power chips is applicable to anything ARM can offer up. PA is as state of the art as ARM when it comes to low power processors. It is the mix of abilities that could lead to some interesting designs from PA.
Dave
Engineers that have ARM experience being acquired for devices that use ARM processors. The dots aren't difficult to connect.
I don't understand your point.
We now know that they are working on ARM. Have I said anything different here?
It not that we think it is an easy task to build a SoC but rather the whole point of buying PA Semi was so that they could finish off a project before they went bankrupt. It appears that the project for iPod/IPhone chips at PA had been around for awhile. The purchase was made to assure that the hardware was finished.
As a side note the experience that PA has with Low power chips is applicable to anything ARM can offer up. PA is as state of the art as ARM when it comes to low power processors. It is the mix of abilities that could lead to some interesting designs from PA.
Dave
They weren't going bankrupt, and we don't know anything about an "unfinished" project that had anything to do with anything they were working on other than their PPC designs. One unfinished project that we do know about was a newer version of their PPC.
I don't understand your point.
We now know that they are working on ARM. Have I said anything different here?
I suppose not. I guess I misunderstood what you were saying.
I rhink it's been exaggerated by those who want us to think it's been a bigger thing than it is.
Again, unlocking phones was a much bigger force around the world than jailbreaking.
But it seems as though some people are constantly confusing the two.
I confess - I read unlocked
I'm looking forward to the 3G iPhone. (That's 3G as in 3rd-generation).
Since I consider the iphone 3G as a 1.5 generation device whatever comes next will be the real 2nd generation device.
erm...I think.
Since I consider the iphone 3G as a 1.5 generation device whatever comes next will be the real 2nd generation device.
erm...I think.
Pretty much.
A second generation device would be redesigned, inside and out. This one has a few more features, that's about it.
Here's hoping that Apple will finally be able to put a stop to hacking and jailbreaking the iPhone. With a custom processor it would seem this is a possibility. Jailbreaking has done enormous damage to the Apple brand reputation not to mention lost revenue and profits.
hahah. Maybe if Apple stopped locking people out of their hardware it wouldn't happen. Apple are quickly forgetting about monopolies not being cool.
hahah. Maybe if Apple stopped locking people out of their hardware it wouldn't happen. Apple are quickly forgetting about monopolies not being cool.
Your name is disturbing dude but whatever. Anyways, if Apple does become a monopoly it will be because they earned it. Not because they rode a rollercoaster of ignorance and of no choice.
The same goes with google. They have a monopoly hold of the market share and they so very greatly deserve that market share.
Your name is disturbing dude but whatever. Anyways, if Apple does become a monopoly it will be because they earned it. Not because they rode a rollercoaster of ignorance and of no choice.
The same goes with google. They have a monopoly hold of the market share and they so very greatly deserve that market share.
Disturbing? Hmmm. Anyway, there's nothing too wrong with apple now, but they're starting on a disturbing path that COULD be abused, same for google but google don't necessitate one product to only work with one other product, it's just that they do, and very well. Also, they don't make hardware that is locked to software. I'd like to have the option to use my ipod or iphone however I like, which is the direction that I have a problem with, that you can't really shop on the itunes store and use your purchases how you want. But y'know, it's not really a biggie.
Anyway, enough thread derailing, whoops!
Disturbing? Hmmm. Anyway, there's nothing too wrong with apple now, but they're starting on a disturbing path that COULD be abused, same for google but google don't necessitate one product to only work with one other product, it's just that they do, and very well. Also, they don't make hardware that is locked to software. I'd like to have the option to use my ipod or iphone however I like, which is the direction that I have a problem with, that you can't really shop on the itunes store and use your purchases how you want. But y'know, it's not really a biggie.
Anyway, enough thread derailing, whoops!
1) iTS audio is both with and without DRM. Note that Apple's iTS was teh first digital music store to get a major studio to release their sounds with DRM. Jobs wrote an open letter to stop DRM, which a Warner Music exec publicly called it lunacy and then offered a DRM-free catalog on Amazon. Apple is being left out of the DRM-free party because of their push to get the studios to offer better media for the consumer. Even the DRM audio can be un-DRMed. It's the video that is the real issue.
2) You can install Linux on your iPod. You can even use alternate apps to get music on your iPod.
3) You don't have to use the iTS to use iTunes or the iPod. It's a separate entity that is convenient, not mandatory.
4) It would be virtually impossible for Apple to get enough of the PC marketshare be considered a monopoly. Eve Dell and HP, with the nearly zero profti margin budget PCs filled with crapware only gets them 16 and 20% worldwide, respectively.
5) The thread is a day old so derail away.
But the question is, is Apple's business being damaged?
Of course, collusion is also illegal, it amounts to price fixing between companies.
I keep wondering if Apple could sue the content companies for causing damage to their business from not offering Apple the same product as others, that is, DRM-free content.
But the question is, is Apple's business being damaged?
Of course, collusion is also illegal, it amounts to price fixing between companies.
There definitely seems to be a basis for a legal case, but at the same time, the content providers could say that they would if Apple agreed to the same conditions that Amazon has. We don't know how much control Amazon has, but I'd wager that they are just the puppet here which is allowing them to get some ground in the digital content market.
The argument that iTS has grown too powerful too quickly would be a good rebuttal and they overwhelming dominance of the iPod HW and iTunes Software is tying people to Apple's HW, SW and store, whereas Amazon is open to all players on all PCs.
There definitely seems to be a basis for a legal case, but at the same time, the content providers could say that they would if Apple agreed to the same conditions that Amazon has. We don't know how much control Amazon has, but I'd wager that they are just the puppet here which is allowing them to get some ground in the digital content market.
The argument that iTS has grown too powerful too quickly would be a good rebuttal and they overwhelming dominance of the iPod HW and iTunes Software is tying people to Apple's HW, SW and store, whereas Amazon is open to all players on all PCs.
So far, the deal with Amazon it to sell DRM-free music at lower prices than Apple is selling them. I don't know what, if any, "hidden" clauses say.
iTunes still only has a fraction of music sales. I don't think that argument would work.
But you're still not allowed to collude on prices for any reason.
I seriously think that the all the work your describing was done (or mostly done) months ago. And I really think some sort of product (most likely a handheld wireless product) containing a PA Semi designed component will debut at MacWorld 2009. So this brand new product can be announced then debuted later by June I would think. This should give them wayyyy enough time to produce the product.
- ARM CPU Core
- (Second ARM CPU Core for high-end devices using MPCore)
- GPU (PowerVR SGX from Imagination)
- DSP (Audio and Video decode, Imagination have a suitable product)
- Wireless a/b/g/n
- Bluetooth 2.1 with Low Power Support
- Multitouch Driver
- Flash controller
- Memory controller
- Audio subsystem
- USB
- all that other SoC stuff like UARTs, JTAG, LPC buses
I will only add that I seem to remember that Apple was either investing in or paying for services from PA Semi. So the notion that nothing was done prior to Apple purchasing is out if what I am remembering is correct. Anyone else remember hearing this? I remember someone saying that the real cost to Apple was much less than the price payed because Apple only protected their original investment. It appeared that PA may drop the Apple contract due to their success in selling chips to military. If Apple wanted their investment in PA to payoff they had to buy them. So it could be that they had been working on an Apple design at least for some time prior to the purchase.
You remember this? From where? I don't "remember" this.
We would need a source for this.
I will only add that I seem to remember that Apple was either investing in or paying for services from PA Semi. So the notion that nothing was done prior to Apple purchasing is out if what I am remembering is correct. Anyone else remember hearing this? I remember someone saying that the real cost to Apple was much less than the price payed because Apple only protected their original investment. It appeared that PA may drop the Apple contract due to their success in selling chips to military. If Apple wanted their investment in PA to payoff they had to buy them. So it could be that they had been working on an Apple design at least for some time prior to the purchase.
P.A. Semi was trying to sell Apple Power PC processors to replace the G5 in the Mac. That all fell through when Apple switched to Intel.
I do beleive P.A. Semi had to show Apple something within it's ARM abilities that impressed Apple enough to buy the company. I doubt they started from scratch right at the time of purchase.
Even if P.A. Semi had a chip ready to go soon. Apple will wait to next year to introduce under normal fanfare.