You got that right. The last 5 years has been nothing but Apple breaking ground and the rest grabbing shovels to follow.
Like I mentioned in an earlier post, Intel played a pivotal role in designing the form factor the MBA currently has. In fact, they were the ones that presented Apple with the original chassis design. Of course, Apple went on to do the thing it does best and make a beautiful product.
If anything, it's the rest of the PC industry that's scrambling to push out their own versions of the MBA. Intel itself hasn't "stolen" anything, and deserve credit for the millions invested in R&D.
Promoting this new category of Ultrabooks is simply the next evolutionary step, where PC vendors are dying to get aboard. The only difference is that Apple doesn't need Intel to help promote the MBA. Apple is their own marketing powerhouse. Either way, this is a win for Intel.
In reality, Intel and Apple collaborated very closely on the original MBA design. Apple may have lead the aesthetics of the MBA, but it was actually Intel that designed the component architecture. Source: I work in this industry.
Possibly, but who drove the design spec? It's not like Intel came to Apple saying "we'd like to make a chipset for an extremely lightweight, extremely thin laptop with great battery life and a solid state drive. Would you care to design a case for something like that?"
Apple wanted to make the Air, and tasked Intel with making something that would hit Apple's desired parameters. At the time, as you may recall, the Air was dismissed as a niche machine, a typical example of Apple's obsession with thinness and lightness over practicality.
Then, when it turns out that the Air is a huge hit, Intel turns around and takes the stuff Apple had them design and starts touting it for the PC, complete with discounts.
If there was ever a chance that Apple might have considered any of Intel's forthcoming ULV chips for the iPad, I think we can safely kiss it goodbye.
It is quite strange that Intel is putting so much energy/money behind this, i mean, they build processors, just processors. Wouldn't they be happy regardless of what they end up in? If they think they are going to get tons of people to buy ultrabooks in addition to a regular pc, what are they smokin'? At best, people who would be buying a laptop might opt for an Ultrabook, but then, what's the difference really? Nothing, that's what.
Ok, so they are... thinner...
And I also don't get why Intel says that Ultrabooks are better than Macbook Air's... again, what's the difference, just the OS, no?
Possibly, but who drove the design spec? It's not like Intel came to Apple saying "we'd like to make a chipset for an extremely lightweight, extremely thin laptop with great battery life and a solid state drive. Would you care to design a case for something like that?"
Apple wanted to make the Air, and tasked Intel with making something that would hit Apple's desired parameters. At the time, as you may recall, the Air was dismissed as a niche machine, a typical example of Apple's obsession with thinness and lightness over practicality.
Then, when it turns out that the Air is a huge hit, Intel turns around and takes the stuff Apple had them design and starts touting it for the PC, complete with discounts.
If there was ever a chance that Apple might have considered any of Intel's forthcoming ULV chips for the iPad, I think we can safely kiss it goodbye.
I agree with you. It definitely was Apple's extremely strict requirements for the MBA that pushed Intel to develop this new architecture. If it weren't for Apple, it may have never taken off like it has today.
It's the PC vendors that are taking advantage of situation. Their mentality is: Apple made it work, so why not us? As a result, they're using Apple's MBA as a model they can piggyback off of. They are way late to the game for sure, and by then, Apple will have come out with something far better.
In the meantime, Intel can make a ton of money by selling their chips to everyone else playing catchup.
Like I mentioned in an earlier post, Intel played a pivotal role in designing the form factor the MBA currently has. In fact, they were the ones that presented Apple with the original chassis design.
So you have no proof and you use yourself as a source yet haven't commented on what role Intel had with designing the MBA. That's suspect.
We know that Intel had created the SFF chipset prior to the MBA (IDF, April 2007). It's rumoured that Intel never put this chip into production because there was no market for it until Apple made one, much like Corning's Gorilla Glass.
I have not heard nor seen anything that involves collaboration with the MBA design, only the SFF package that Intel created independently of Apple.
What part of "Post-PC" does Intel not understand. They're leading a dead army into a losing war. There is no Wintel market for MBA look-a-likes. it's simply an MBA market in a post PC world. Intel can't turn back time no matter how Ultra hard it tries!
They keep creative people (actors, film makers etc) in work, which is good.
I also think this will help more than hurt Apple. It drives the PC industry to thin and light machines so will encourage adoption of technologies like Thunderbolt in some cases, removal of optical drives, SSD and lower-powered designs.
You can see how much the industry hates anything and everything Apple does. We saw this with Thunderbolt. If it's seen as Intel's idea, well that's ok apparently.
In reality, Intel and Apple collaborated very closely on the original MBA design. Apple may have lead the aesthetics of the MBA, but it was actually Intel that designed the component architecture. Source: I work in this industry.
Which means nothing (that you "work in this industry").
You could even be working for Apple, and unless you were on the very specific team designing the MBA, you would know nothing about it's design or internals until it was unveiled.
The "component architecture" = they just provided the chipset.
They keep creative people (actors, film makers etc) in work, which is good.
Wow!! Outstanding!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I also think this will help more than hurt Apple. It drives the PC industry to thin and light machines so will encourage adoption of technologies like Thunderbolt in some cases, removal of optical drives, SSD and lower-powered designs.
You can see how much the industry hates anything and everything Apple does. We saw this with Thunderbolt. If it's seen as Intel's idea, well that's ok apparently.
And at the first sight everybody would think the Boy walks in with a MBA.
I guess this might also add to the aspects that are beneficial for Apple.
In reality, Intel and Apple collaborated very closely on the original MBA design. Apple may have lead the aesthetics of the MBA, but it was actually Intel that designed the component architecture. Source: I work in this industry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by supabooma
Like I mentioned in an earlier post, Intel played a pivotal role in designing the form factor the MBA currently has. In fact, they were the ones that presented Apple with the original chassis design. Of course, Apple went on to do the thing it does best and make a beautiful product.
If anything, it's the rest of the PC industry that's scrambling to push out their own versions of the MBA. Intel itself hasn't "stolen" anything, and deserve credit for the millions invested in R&D.
Promoting this new category of Ultrabooks is simply the next evolutionary step, where PC vendors are dying to get aboard. The only difference is that Apple doesn't need Intel to help promote the MBA. Apple is their own marketing powerhouse. Either way, this is a win for Intel.
I see a post count of four. And two suggest that Intel deserves credit for the inspiration, design, and overall success of the MBA. You say you work in this industry. Does that you are an Intel-hired troll?
They are all using the same chips from what i know, it is just that they know when Apple is going to release their products since they send Apple chips. Plus, Apple has different displays.
There's a lot more involved than that. Look at Apple's touchpads compared to everyone else's. An ultralight device like the MBA or Ultrabook depends very greatly on integration of the components. It is very much a case of 'the whole being greater than the sum of the parts' in Apple's case. In the case of some of the competition, the opposite appears to be true.
In spite of using the same chips, it is clear that many of the Ultrabooks are greatly inferior products, some at roughly the same price as the MBA. There are also some Ultrabooks that are greatly inferior at lower price. There really aren't any that are demonstrably superior, and certainly not at the same price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
Apple is not planning on leaving Intel for AMD. They aren't going to use ARM for their laptops/desktops in the foreseeable future.
And that's exactly what I said in the post you were responding to. I was laying out all the possible scenarios to show the net result in different scenarios.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBillyGoatGruff
I see a post count of four. And two suggest that Intel deserves credit for the inspiration, design, and overall success of the MBA. You say you work in this industry. Does that you are an Intel-hired troll?
Or maybe just another of the mindless "attack Apple in any way you can even if you have to make things up" trolls that seem to frequent this place.
I don't understand the branding strategy behind this. Why would Intel claim the rights to the name Ultrabook, when actually they just make the chips and boards that goes into the Ultrabooks that are manufactured by PC vendors. In the end, consumers still aren't going to call them Intel Ultrabooks, instead they'll still refer to the vendor's brand.
I don't understand the branding strategy behind this. Why would Intel claim the rights to the name Ultrabook, when actually they just make the chips and boards that goes into the Ultrabooks that are manufactured by PC vendors. In the end, consumers still aren't going to call them Intel Ultrabooks, instead they'll still refer to the vendor's brand.
Its really easy to understand. Ultrabook is a category type powered by Intel. Intel wants to dominate this category before amd can release a suitable chip to compete
I see a post count of four. And two suggest that Intel deserves credit for the inspiration, design, and overall success of the MBA. You say you work in this industry. Does that you are an Intel-hired troll?
Comments
It is obvious that intel's initiative is to pimp the ultra books that of course use their chip. Duh.
Copying the design of Apple's MacBook Air is a new era in computing?
You got that right. The last 5 years has been nothing but Apple breaking ground and the rest grabbing shovels to follow.
You got that right. The last 5 years has been nothing but Apple breaking ground and the rest grabbing shovels to follow.
Like I mentioned in an earlier post, Intel played a pivotal role in designing the form factor the MBA currently has. In fact, they were the ones that presented Apple with the original chassis design. Of course, Apple went on to do the thing it does best and make a beautiful product.
If anything, it's the rest of the PC industry that's scrambling to push out their own versions of the MBA. Intel itself hasn't "stolen" anything, and deserve credit for the millions invested in R&D.
Promoting this new category of Ultrabooks is simply the next evolutionary step, where PC vendors are dying to get aboard. The only difference is that Apple doesn't need Intel to help promote the MBA. Apple is their own marketing powerhouse. Either way, this is a win for Intel.
In reality, Intel and Apple collaborated very closely on the original MBA design. Apple may have lead the aesthetics of the MBA, but it was actually Intel that designed the component architecture. Source: I work in this industry.
Possibly, but who drove the design spec? It's not like Intel came to Apple saying "we'd like to make a chipset for an extremely lightweight, extremely thin laptop with great battery life and a solid state drive. Would you care to design a case for something like that?"
Apple wanted to make the Air, and tasked Intel with making something that would hit Apple's desired parameters. At the time, as you may recall, the Air was dismissed as a niche machine, a typical example of Apple's obsession with thinness and lightness over practicality.
Then, when it turns out that the Air is a huge hit, Intel turns around and takes the stuff Apple had them design and starts touting it for the PC, complete with discounts.
If there was ever a chance that Apple might have considered any of Intel's forthcoming ULV chips for the iPad, I think we can safely kiss it goodbye.
Ok, so they are... thinner...
And I also don't get why Intel says that Ultrabooks are better than Macbook Air's... again, what's the difference, just the OS, no?
Possibly, but who drove the design spec? It's not like Intel came to Apple saying "we'd like to make a chipset for an extremely lightweight, extremely thin laptop with great battery life and a solid state drive. Would you care to design a case for something like that?"
Apple wanted to make the Air, and tasked Intel with making something that would hit Apple's desired parameters. At the time, as you may recall, the Air was dismissed as a niche machine, a typical example of Apple's obsession with thinness and lightness over practicality.
Then, when it turns out that the Air is a huge hit, Intel turns around and takes the stuff Apple had them design and starts touting it for the PC, complete with discounts.
If there was ever a chance that Apple might have considered any of Intel's forthcoming ULV chips for the iPad, I think we can safely kiss it goodbye.
I agree with you. It definitely was Apple's extremely strict requirements for the MBA that pushed Intel to develop this new architecture. If it weren't for Apple, it may have never taken off like it has today.
It's the PC vendors that are taking advantage of situation. Their mentality is: Apple made it work, so why not us? As a result, they're using Apple's MBA as a model they can piggyback off of. They are way late to the game for sure, and by then, Apple will have come out with something far better.
In the meantime, Intel can make a ton of money by selling their chips to everyone else playing catchup.
Like I mentioned in an earlier post, Intel played a pivotal role in designing the form factor the MBA currently has. In fact, they were the ones that presented Apple with the original chassis design.
So you have no proof and you use yourself as a source yet haven't commented on what role Intel had with designing the MBA. That's suspect.
We know that Intel had created the SFF chipset prior to the MBA (IDF, April 2007). It's rumoured that Intel never put this chip into production because there was no market for it until Apple made one, much like Corning's Gorilla Glass.
I have not heard nor seen anything that involves collaboration with the MBA design, only the SFF package that Intel created independently of Apple.
How is it possible, that they copy the MBA almost down to every bolt without being embarrassed down to their socks?
"a young man evoking Michael J. Fox's character in "Back to the Future Part III" walks in
I wouldn't go that far, the ad didn't remind me of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQXOx2lYnA4
Intel won't divulge how much money it has set aside for the ad blitz besides saying the figure is in the "hundreds of millions."
You think they would have aligned the logo:
Still, I like it that they make these ads. They are much better than normal technology ads. Their Chase ad was pretty good:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVfn-rkssxc
They keep creative people (actors, film makers etc) in work, which is good.
I also think this will help more than hurt Apple. It drives the PC industry to thin and light machines so will encourage adoption of technologies like Thunderbolt in some cases, removal of optical drives, SSD and lower-powered designs.
You can see how much the industry hates anything and everything Apple does. We saw this with Thunderbolt. If it's seen as Intel's idea, well that's ok apparently.
In reality, Intel and Apple collaborated very closely on the original MBA design. Apple may have lead the aesthetics of the MBA, but it was actually Intel that designed the component architecture. Source: I work in this industry.
Which means nothing (that you "work in this industry").
You could even be working for Apple, and unless you were on the very specific team designing the MBA, you would know nothing about it's design or internals until it was unveiled.
The "component architecture" = they just provided the chipset.
Still, I like it that they make these ads. They are much better than normal technology ads.
I have to agree This add has just the right amount of humor and a real funny twist at the end.
Also the camera shots and edits are First class.
Their Chase ad was pretty good:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVfn-rkssxc
They keep creative people (actors, film makers etc) in work, which is good.
Wow!! Outstanding!!
I also think this will help more than hurt Apple. It drives the PC industry to thin and light machines so will encourage adoption of technologies like Thunderbolt in some cases, removal of optical drives, SSD and lower-powered designs.
You can see how much the industry hates anything and everything Apple does. We saw this with Thunderbolt. If it's seen as Intel's idea, well that's ok apparently.
And at the first sight everybody would think the Boy walks in with a MBA.
I guess this might also add to the aspects that are beneficial for Apple.
In reality, Intel and Apple collaborated very closely on the original MBA design. Apple may have lead the aesthetics of the MBA, but it was actually Intel that designed the component architecture. Source: I work in this industry.
Like I mentioned in an earlier post, Intel played a pivotal role in designing the form factor the MBA currently has. In fact, they were the ones that presented Apple with the original chassis design. Of course, Apple went on to do the thing it does best and make a beautiful product.
If anything, it's the rest of the PC industry that's scrambling to push out their own versions of the MBA. Intel itself hasn't "stolen" anything, and deserve credit for the millions invested in R&D.
Promoting this new category of Ultrabooks is simply the next evolutionary step, where PC vendors are dying to get aboard. The only difference is that Apple doesn't need Intel to help promote the MBA. Apple is their own marketing powerhouse. Either way, this is a win for Intel.
I see a post count of four. And two suggest that Intel deserves credit for the inspiration, design, and overall success of the MBA. You say you work in this industry. Does that you are an Intel-hired troll?
They are all using the same chips from what i know, it is just that they know when Apple is going to release their products since they send Apple chips. Plus, Apple has different displays.
There's a lot more involved than that. Look at Apple's touchpads compared to everyone else's. An ultralight device like the MBA or Ultrabook depends very greatly on integration of the components. It is very much a case of 'the whole being greater than the sum of the parts' in Apple's case. In the case of some of the competition, the opposite appears to be true.
In spite of using the same chips, it is clear that many of the Ultrabooks are greatly inferior products, some at roughly the same price as the MBA. There are also some Ultrabooks that are greatly inferior at lower price. There really aren't any that are demonstrably superior, and certainly not at the same price.
Apple is not planning on leaving Intel for AMD. They aren't going to use ARM for their laptops/desktops in the foreseeable future.
And that's exactly what I said in the post you were responding to. I was laying out all the possible scenarios to show the net result in different scenarios.
I see a post count of four. And two suggest that Intel deserves credit for the inspiration, design, and overall success of the MBA. You say you work in this industry. Does that you are an Intel-hired troll?
Or maybe just another of the mindless "attack Apple in any way you can even if you have to make things up" trolls that seem to frequent this place.
MacBooks were kicking the industry's butt well before the Vaio showed up to try and out-glam Apple. Once again, Apple lead, others followed.
2004: Sony vaio VGN-X505VP
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-20020535-64.html
first macbook air came out 2008 which sucked greatly.
It wasnt until a discrete graphics card was added and a faster cpu that made it viable.
Now with Sandybridge integrated graphics is not needed.
Intel does not need Apple. Apple needs Intel.
I don't understand the branding strategy behind this. Why would Intel claim the rights to the name Ultrabook, when actually they just make the chips and boards that goes into the Ultrabooks that are manufactured by PC vendors. In the end, consumers still aren't going to call them Intel Ultrabooks, instead they'll still refer to the vendor's brand.
Its really easy to understand. Ultrabook is a category type powered by Intel. Intel wants to dominate this category before amd can release a suitable chip to compete
I see a post count of four. And two suggest that Intel deserves credit for the inspiration, design, and overall success of the MBA. You say you work in this industry. Does that you are an Intel-hired troll?
I call BS on your BS
2004: Sony vaio VGN-X505VP
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-20020535-64.html
first macbook air came out 2008 which sucked greatly.
It wasnt until a discrete graphics card was added and a faster cpu that made it viable.
Now with Sandybridge integrated graphics is not needed.
Intel does not need Apple. Apple needs Intel.
No metal chassis.
No unibody construction.
$3000 for a 10" notebook.
Low quality display for its time.
Couldn't run the OS well.
Has worse battery life than MBA.
So where exactly was Apple inspired by Sony?