Intel is just complaining because apple ditched their chip sets for nVidia on the Macbooks. They could have made their completely ridiculous argument a year ago if they wanted to. Browsing the web does not require a powerful processor, and intel has nothing that's efficient enough to be put into a mobile phone.
The iPhone has NEVER been capable of the "Full Internet" Huge swaths of the internet are flash based, and are completely inaccessible to the iPhone. To add insult to injury, Apple prevents other flash enabled browsers from being developed for that platform.
I love my iPhone, but the lack of flash is a real issue for me.
Sheldon
To me, lack of flash is a godsend and not a detriment. I keep the plugin disabled on my MB and if a website designer can't design an HTML page to go with all that flash nonsense, then i usually don't bother visiting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macFanDave
Not having Flash is not a disadvantage -- it's wisdom. Flash is a clusterf@#k and web designers who rely on it heavily risk losing customers. I hate Flash!
+1
Quote:
Intel vice president of mobility Shane Wall teamed with colleague Pankaj Kedia, the chipmaker's ultra-mobility ecosystems director, in lambasting the iPhone as a device dependent on technology that's a full two to three years behind that which Intel can offer.
what kind of utter garbage is this statement? "you're 2 years behind what we haven't put out yet"? silliness.
Intel keeps promising more power per watt but has not delivered very often. The company was rescued by their Israeli notebook CPU designers after their Pentium 4 efforts were looking like they would require small nuclear power plants to come included with your PC. Northwood was the last semi-reasonable iteration of the P4, and had nearly twice the TDP as the more efficient AMD offerings.
The move to Intel was brilliant because it allowed VMs and because the PowerPC roadmap was even crummier than Intel's. But Apple need not be married to Intel. If they deliver, great. If they don't, then something else will do.
To that, Kedia added: "I know what their roadmap is, I know where they're going and I'm not worried."
No he does not. Apple has told no one what the P.A. Semi people are now working on, and never will. You will only know some of it when a new product is released containing it. Then you will still not know completely what the part can do. You will use an API in your code and magic will happen...
If someone says they know what Apple is doing, they don't know what they are talking about.
Well, Apple can move to the ARM Cortex A8 quad core designs, which offer 8x the performance without additional power consumption. Perfect for Grand Central.
And they can adopt the Imagination SGX to replace the MBX. Perfect for OpenCL.
They are licensees for both.
Perhaps in the 2010 iPhone?
Probably that is one of the reasons Apple got PA Semi, but don't think we will have to wait until 2010 since Apple is consistent on implement new technology on the iPhone or their entire product line but the mini.
To that, Kedia added: "I know what their roadmap is, I know where they're going and I'm not worried."
No he does not. Apple has told no one what the P.A. Semi people are now working on, and never will. You will only know some of it when a new product is released containing it. Then you will still not know completely what the part can do. You will use an API in your code and magic will happen...
If someone says they know what Apple is doing, they don't know what they are talking about.
He could be saying that he knows they are building another ARM with PA Semi (like everyone suspects) and he (Intel) is not worried. I don't think it implies that Apple will use Intel, but that Intel thinks they will be up to the task to compete with what Apple has coming out processor wise.
Either way, Intel is clueless. Why trash your partner's products that don't use your chips?
"I know what their roadmap is, I know where they're going and I'm not worried."
What does it mean? That Apple will use Intel for the iPhone and iPod touch? I HOPE SO BECAUSE THAT WILL ALLOW THE FULL MAC OS X EXPERIENCE ON YOUR HAND ON A TRULY POCKETABLE DEVICE!
First, don't use all caps. Its retarded. Second, the iPhone *is* the full OS X experience in a pocketable device. The current OS X GUI does not work on an interface the size of the iPhone. Having an intel processor means nothing. OS X could run on ARM just fine. But the GUI would be awful on that screen.
I can't wait to see and hear Apple's response to this stupid statement. Why would Intel want to blatantly bash an Apple product publicly? Do they actually think Apple will respond to such crap? Do they think they have Apple over a barrel now that Apple uses Intel processors in their computer hardware?
Instead of Intel being respectful to their new customer, they slam them?! If I were Apple I'd go AMD all the way, screw Intel. AMDs are better anyway.
Please don't get delusional. Apple relies on Intel waaaaaaaaaaay more than Intel relies on Apple. All these millions of converts to mac over the last few years are due to the fact that they have Intel processors now, you take that away, and you might as well turn back the clock on Apple.
To the chagrin of the fanboy faithful, Apple market share skyrocketed after transitioning to the Intel processor family.
Might another transition do the same for iPhone performance?
And another thing... I don' have a problem with Intel but... Is running ones mouth and coming off like an arrogant arse when speaking of a customer the new thing? Is this just the tech world doing this? Is it really necessary?
"If you want to run full internet, you're going to have to run an Intel-based architecture,"
Which, according to Intel, means that nor AMD or IBM is capable of running the "full Internet". MR. Wall and Mr. Kadia apparently know nothing about software, it's the software that allows access to the "full internet" not the architecture. Apple decided not to program the "full internet" into the iPhone because it would've been stupid, how many people would use FTP on their iPhone.
Intel is obviously sticking it to Apple since the UK's courts decided that Apple's ad presented a false claim of offering the whole internet in your pocket, and now Intel is implying that it was because Apple did not use Intel architecture.
There is nothing that can run the "full internet" because the internet is a communication platform not a language. Even IE received a score of 14% on the Acid3 test.
If I were SJ I'd be dusting-off that same campus used to snag Macs from IBM, and would say helloooo AMD, a much better and more reasonable company. I wouldn't be surprised if SJ is already considering pulling the same stunt as he did on ATI after they spilled the beans right before the MW Expo.
Comments
If that's the case, how do Nokia's Internet tablets manage to implement the full web on a slower ARM chip? Magic?
The iPhone has NEVER been capable of the "Full Internet" Huge swaths of the internet are flash based, and are completely inaccessible to the iPhone. To add insult to injury, Apple prevents other flash enabled browsers from being developed for that platform.
I love my iPhone, but the lack of flash is a real issue for me.
Sheldon
To me, lack of flash is a godsend and not a detriment. I keep the plugin disabled on my MB and if a website designer can't design an HTML page to go with all that flash nonsense, then i usually don't bother visiting.
Not having Flash is not a disadvantage -- it's wisdom. Flash is a clusterf@#k and web designers who rely on it heavily risk losing customers. I hate Flash!
+1
Intel vice president of mobility Shane Wall teamed with colleague Pankaj Kedia, the chipmaker's ultra-mobility ecosystems director, in lambasting the iPhone as a device dependent on technology that's a full two to three years behind that which Intel can offer.
what kind of utter garbage is this statement? "you're 2 years behind what we haven't put out yet"?
The move to Intel was brilliant because it allowed VMs and because the PowerPC roadmap was even crummier than Intel's. But Apple need not be married to Intel. If they deliver, great. If they don't, then something else will do.
No he does not. Apple has told no one what the P.A. Semi people are now working on, and never will. You will only know some of it when a new product is released containing it. Then you will still not know completely what the part can do. You will use an API in your code and magic will happen...
If someone says they know what Apple is doing, they don't know what they are talking about.
Well, Apple can move to the ARM Cortex A8 quad core designs, which offer 8x the performance without additional power consumption. Perfect for Grand Central.
And they can adopt the Imagination SGX to replace the MBX. Perfect for OpenCL.
They are licensees for both.
Perhaps in the 2010 iPhone?
Probably that is one of the reasons Apple got PA Semi, but don't think we will have to wait until 2010 since Apple is consistent on implement new technology on the iPhone or their entire product line but the mini.
To that, Kedia added: "I know what their roadmap is, I know where they're going and I'm not worried."
No he does not. Apple has told no one what the P.A. Semi people are now working on, and never will. You will only know some of it when a new product is released containing it. Then you will still not know completely what the part can do. You will use an API in your code and magic will happen...
If someone says they know what Apple is doing, they don't know what they are talking about.
He could be saying that he knows they are building another ARM with PA Semi (like everyone suspects) and he (Intel) is not worried. I don't think it implies that Apple will use Intel, but that Intel thinks they will be up to the task to compete with what Apple has coming out processor wise.
Either way, Intel is clueless. Why trash your partner's products that don't use your chips?
Mucho pettiness from Intel person; naughty boy.
"Er, Hello?... Oh Hi, I've got Steve Jobs on the line for you...."
The honeymoon is over.
The lovers are quarreling.
Instead of Intel being respectful to their new customer, they slam them?! If I were Apple I'd go AMD all the way, screw Intel. AMDs are better anyway.
I'd like to know exactly what sites are too big and complex for the iPhone to use.
Porn.
I am sure Apple had thoroughly evaluated Moorestown platform and roadmaps before putting a cross on it.
Why trash your partner's products that don't use your chips?
"Er, Hello?... Oh Hi, I've got Steve Jobs on the line for you...."
Instead of Intel being respectful to their new customer, they slam them?!
Apple has never been vindictive about anything, have they?
Apple has never been vindictive about anything, have they?
I don't remember Apple ever slamming their customers, do you?
"I know what their roadmap is, I know where they're going and I'm not worried."
What does it mean? That Apple will use Intel for the iPhone and iPod touch? I HOPE SO BECAUSE THAT WILL ALLOW THE FULL MAC OS X EXPERIENCE ON YOUR HAND ON A TRULY POCKETABLE DEVICE!
First, don't use all caps. Its retarded. Second, the iPhone *is* the full OS X experience in a pocketable device. The current OS X GUI does not work on an interface the size of the iPhone. Having an intel processor means nothing. OS X could run on ARM just fine. But the GUI would be awful on that screen.
Instead of Intel being respectful to their new customer, they slam them?! If I were Apple I'd go AMD all the way, screw Intel. AMDs are better anyway.
Please don't get delusional. Apple relies on Intel waaaaaaaaaaay more than Intel relies on Apple. All these millions of converts to mac over the last few years are due to the fact that they have Intel processors now, you take that away, and you might as well turn back the clock on Apple.
Might another transition do the same for iPhone performance?
And another thing... I don' have a problem with Intel but... Is running ones mouth and coming off like an arrogant arse when speaking of a customer the new thing? Is this just the tech world doing this? Is it really necessary?
Same was said about Apple retail stores and iPods.
"If you want to run full internet, you're going to have to run an Intel-based architecture,"
Which, according to Intel, means that nor AMD or IBM is capable of running the "full Internet". MR. Wall and Mr. Kadia apparently know nothing about software, it's the software that allows access to the "full internet" not the architecture. Apple decided not to program the "full internet" into the iPhone because it would've been stupid, how many people would use FTP on their iPhone.
Intel is obviously sticking it to Apple since the UK's courts decided that Apple's ad presented a false claim of offering the whole internet in your pocket, and now Intel is implying that it was because Apple did not use Intel architecture.
There is nothing that can run the "full internet" because the internet is a communication platform not a language. Even IE received a score of 14% on the Acid3 test.
If I were SJ I'd be dusting-off that same campus used to snag Macs from IBM, and would say helloooo AMD, a much better and more reasonable company. I wouldn't be surprised if SJ is already considering pulling the same stunt as he did on ATI after they spilled the beans right before the MW Expo.