It's simple. When Apple released Siri, Andy Rubin said we shouldn't be talking to our phones. Then Google integrated voice search and they stopped saying crap like that.
I expect the Fandroids to stop saying 64-bit is useless or magically faster as soon as Android moves to 64-bit, then it'll be awesome and innovative.
As an aside, someone (Russ Fischer to be precise), speculates that Intel may be behind the production of the A7, not TSMC: see http://bit.ly/167LaOp (found via Gruber/daringfireball.net).
Now, to be fair, Mr Fischer writes this for seekingalpha.com, so he might have financial reasons to stir the pot...
One of the underrated disasters of using 32-bit integers is that they are just big enough to work as counters for a while only to overflow at some future date. There is therefore an endless possibility of Year 2000 type problems and it also complicates the code to have to constantly check for overflow, with resulting bugs from that code.
Specifically the Year 2038 bug. I honestly DO believe that there will be a large number of 32-bit machines and software, Windows or otherwise, left in important use in 2038. Mostly because Microsoft refuses to actually do anything for the betterment of mankind.
Of course, 64-bit also has this problem. And yes, I do believe humanity could very well be around that long.
It's not critical for creating or running an app, but we were talking about whether the original iOS was intended to run third-party apps, not whether it was technically capable of doing so.
No, iOS 1.0 did not support 3rd party apps. As was indicated, Apple was running out of time and wanted to ship the iPhone. If they knew that they were not putting out an API yet for 3rd party developers, why worry about quickly putting in a sandbox before it was needed? Just because the sandbox was not there does not mean they had no intention to support 3rd party apps…
There were 3rd party apps for the iPod (the click wheel one). Don't you think those were to test the waters?
If you read Walter Isaacson book you will see that Jobs was the ONLY one on the board and leadership team who was opposed to Apps, and his initial resistance was based more on wanting the team to finish and that they did not have the bandwidth to figure out all the complexities involved in creating a dev API and policing the store. He wanted focus. And therefore, did not want to talk about it. As soon as the iPhone shipped, he reopened the discussion and the API shipped in less than 8 months.
So, do I think STEVE may have intended 3rd party apps to run on it when the iPhone was brewing? Maybe he was not, but I am sure many people on the team were seeing that as an eventuality, and I cannot imagine Steve not being smart enough to realize it might happen. He just wanted the team to focus on shipping it.
The move to 64 bit may not have many advantages in mobile phones, however ramping up production of a 64 bit chip (which as mentioned is most beneficial to games) while introducing the technology to developers, places them in a great place to introduce a next generation gaming console; which are all 64-bit. This combined with the controller designs presented by apple this summer further indicates the release of a full fledge 64 bit, with over 4 gb of ram, dedicated gaming console.
Why wouldn't Apple introduce a lower-cost gaming platform with a plethora of apps which can be ported over with little frustration at the same time they bring out the next iPad. I would argue that the move to 64-bit may have been a little premature in the mobile industry however it is essential to entering the gaming market.
Why wouldn't Apple introduce a lower-cost gaming platform with a plethora of apps which can be ported over with little frustration at the same time they bring out the next iPad.
Because they already have one, contained in all iDevices.
Because they already have one, contained in all iDevices.
But not for my tv. And using airplay to run games doesn't have the same feel that my PS3 or XBOX 360 has. Besides why would apple introduce the design for a standalone controller if they weren't looking to expand into TV gaming.
There's a picture on the web of an Intel IDF banner with a icon saying "64-bit" next to a picture of the Green Android Robot. That's probably what you were looking for.
Looking at it will probably make you feel less sick.
Probably right that it will apply to ARM as well, but that was IDF, not Google/IO. Intel makes 64 bit CPUs. By the time Android was ported to Intel, it was pretty much exclusive 64 bit CPUs. Of course the INTEL version of Android support 64 bit. I don't think there are any Intel-32 Android devices...
"64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time" is somewhat true, but you're missing the fact that they were targeting server applications. Nobody had any inkling of putting a 64-bit SoC in a phone.
Intel's Merrifield (64-bit x86 Silvermont) was planned for smartphones for quite a long time.
If I'm not mistaken the roadmap was first revealed in May of 2012:
Bay Trail is coming out in October for tablets and Merrifield is coming in Q1 2014.
I don't expect Merrifield will have much of an impact in the smartphone market, but its bigger brother Bay Trail [Z3740/Z3770] already has a lot to offer. Bay Trail allows for a Windows 8.1 (and/or Android dual boot) tablet to have a 10~11 hour battery inside of a chassis thinner and lighter than the iPad 4, as well the complete API support (DX11, GLES3, GL4) you would expect from a desktop or laptop. Performance has also seen a nice boost, finally allowing Windows 8.1 and 3rd party software to run on a tablet (it can even handle light PC games such as Team Fortress 2, Portal 2, Dota 2, etc.).
If 64-bit is insignificant, why did Samsung CEO pledged 64-bit support?
Because Apple announced a 64-bit CPU, and Samesung does not want people to think they need longer than a year to copy others? I didn't see the CEO pledge "64-bit support". He pledged a 64 bit CPU in a flagship phone in a year. For all we know it could run all 32 bit but on a 64 bit CPU...
I don't expect Merrifield will have much of an impact in the smartphone market, but its bigger brother Bay Trail [Z3740/Z3770] already has a lot to offer. Bay Trail allows for a Windows 8.1 (and/or Android dual boot) tablet to have a 10~11 hour battery inside of a chassis thinner and lighter than the iPad 4, as well the complete API support (DX11, GLES3, GL4) you would expect from a desktop or laptop. Performance has also seen a nice boost, finally allowing Windows 8.1 and 3rd party software to run on a tablet (it can even handle light PC games such as Team Fortress 2, Portal 2, Dota 2, etc.).
Wow so much expectation. I won't hold my breath for an Intel CPU that could compete with ARM efficiency. As much Intel would like, the expensive x86 architecture cannot match Ax lightweight power envelope of 1 watt. Until Intel proves me wrong, the Bay trails is as much FUD than Tegra lineup with huge expectative but disappointing result at the end.
Wow so much expectation. I won't hold my breath for an Intel CPU that could compete with ARM efficiency. As much Intel would like, the expensive x86 architecture cannot match Ax lightweight power envelope of 1 watt. Until Intel proves me wrong, the Bay trails is as much FUD than Tegra lineup with huge expectative but disappointing result at the end.
Bay Trail has already been reviewed and you've already been proven wrong.
The cost for a Bay Trail Z3740 tablet is ~$299 with Windows 8.1 and MS Office. Apparently the Z3740 only costs $32 USD and the Z3770 is $37 USD.
According to Anandtech, at load (during Cinebench) the single thread draws 800mW to 1.2W and the multi thread at load is 2.5W.
There's a picture on the web of an Intel IDF banner with a icon saying "64-bit" next to a picture of the Green Android Robot. That's probably what you were looking for.
Looking at it will probably make you feel less sick.
Neah, don't worry! I just have to look at AAPL price and suddenly I feel great! It's soooo good to make money on the downside!
Because they’ve done no such thing? Restricting developers to a set and configuration of buttons is exactly the opposite of the idea of iOS devices.
Actually, they have done such a thing. iOS 7 supports MFi and they have released both an API and reference specs for game controllers. Check your facts. I even have had app updates for games on my iPhone this morning whose changes state "Now with support for iOS 7 game controllers". I'd link to controllers advertising compatibility, but a simple web search will suffice...
It seems to me Apple's road map is to replace OSX where they make little money. Even Steve Jobs stopped kicking that dead horse with the Mac vs PC ads years ago. Market share will never rise above 7% because of the same old tired Apple policies surrounding it (too expensive, not expandable, or repairable etc). So they will move beyond it like they did with the Apple II replacing it completely with iOS which has a higher market share. To do that they need a faster processor and 64 bit addressing and true multi-tasking. Then they can start making laptops and desktops using their own chips. The first step is now in place. Unfortunately they are too late having made exactly the same mistakes with iOS as they did with Mac OS. They believe somehow their products are made of gold and they can charge a premium even if they are made of cheap plastic. They have been steadily losing market share to Android which is producing smartphones (not so much tablets yet) with higher resolution screens, a better GUI, better cameras, more features. In fact everything is better on the top models than Apple yet their prices are much lower. This is a replay of the attitude that killed Macintosh and almost bankrupted Apple. They just can't learn from past mistakes and so are in the process of repeating them. If I am right about Apple's future plans they are wrong about them becoming reality. This time there is no Steve Jobs to pull their asses out of the fire.
Bay Trail has already been reviewed and you've already been proven wrong.
The cost for a Bay Trail Z3740 tablet is ~$299 with Windows 8.1 and MS Office. Apparently the Z3740 only costs $32 USD and the Z3770 is $37 USD.
According to Anandtech, at load (during Cinebench) the single thread draws 800mW to 1.2W and the multi thread at load is 2.5W.
If the Bay trail is so great, why Anandtech gives absolutely no detail on battery life of actual product? At 2.5 watts max the Z3740 it still 2.5 times more power hungry than Apple SoC. And Anandtech doesn't count the whole system build around the Z3740, things like external RAM (the Z3740 SoC doesn't have ram) have impact on the battery drainage.
Comments
I expect the Fandroids to stop saying 64-bit is useless or magically faster as soon as Android moves to 64-bit, then it'll be awesome and innovative.
As an aside, someone (Russ Fischer to be precise), speculates that Intel may be behind the production of the A7, not TSMC: see http://bit.ly/167LaOp (found via Gruber/daringfireball.net).
Now, to be fair, Mr Fischer writes this for seekingalpha.com, so he might have financial reasons to stir the pot...
Specifically the Year 2038 bug. I honestly DO believe that there will be a large number of 32-bit machines and software, Windows or otherwise, left in important use in 2038. Mostly because Microsoft refuses to actually do anything for the betterment of mankind.
Of course, 64-bit also has this problem. And yes, I do believe humanity could very well be around that long.
It's not critical for creating or running an app, but we were talking about whether the original iOS was intended to run third-party apps, not whether it was technically capable of doing so.
No, iOS 1.0 did not support 3rd party apps. As was indicated, Apple was running out of time and wanted to ship the iPhone. If they knew that they were not putting out an API yet for 3rd party developers, why worry about quickly putting in a sandbox before it was needed? Just because the sandbox was not there does not mean they had no intention to support 3rd party apps…
There were 3rd party apps for the iPod (the click wheel one). Don't you think those were to test the waters?
The move to 64 bit may not have many advantages in mobile phones, however ramping up production of a 64 bit chip (which as mentioned is most beneficial to games) while introducing the technology to developers, places them in a great place to introduce a next generation gaming console; which are all 64-bit. This combined with the controller designs presented by apple this summer further indicates the release of a full fledge 64 bit, with over 4 gb of ram, dedicated gaming console.
Why wouldn't Apple introduce a lower-cost gaming platform with a plethora of apps which can be ported over with little frustration at the same time they bring out the next iPad. I would argue that the move to 64-bit may have been a little premature in the mobile industry however it is essential to entering the gaming market.
Why wouldn't Apple introduce a lower-cost gaming platform with a plethora of apps which can be ported over with little frustration at the same time they bring out the next iPad.
Because they already have one, contained in all iDevices.
More bullshit from you, Daniel. Even the long dead Symbian had a 64-bit roadmap.
It did? Please show some proof of that...
Because they already have one, contained in all iDevices.
But not for my tv. And using airplay to run games doesn't have the same feel that my PS3 or XBOX 360 has. Besides why would apple introduce the design for a standalone controller if they weren't looking to expand into TV gaming.
There's a picture on the web of an Intel IDF banner with a icon saying "64-bit" next to a picture of the Green Android Robot. That's probably what you were looking for.
Looking at it will probably make you feel less sick.
Probably right that it will apply to ARM as well, but that was IDF, not Google/IO. Intel makes 64 bit CPUs. By the time Android was ported to Intel, it was pretty much exclusive 64 bit CPUs. Of course the INTEL version of Android support 64 bit. I don't think there are any Intel-32 Android devices...
"64-bit mobile ARM processors have been in the pipeline for a long time" is somewhat true, but you're missing the fact that they were targeting server applications. Nobody had any inkling of putting a 64-bit SoC in a phone.
Intel's Merrifield (64-bit x86 Silvermont) was planned for smartphones for quite a long time.
If I'm not mistaken the roadmap was first revealed in May of 2012:
Bay Trail is coming out in October for tablets and Merrifield is coming in Q1 2014.
I don't expect Merrifield will have much of an impact in the smartphone market, but its bigger brother Bay Trail [Z3740/Z3770] already has a lot to offer. Bay Trail allows for a Windows 8.1 (and/or Android dual boot) tablet to have a 10~11 hour battery inside of a chassis thinner and lighter than the iPad 4, as well the complete API support (DX11, GLES3, GL4) you would expect from a desktop or laptop. Performance has also seen a nice boost, finally allowing Windows 8.1 and 3rd party software to run on a tablet (it can even handle light PC games such as Team Fortress 2, Portal 2, Dota 2, etc.).
If 64-bit is insignificant, why did Samsung CEO pledged 64-bit support?
Because Apple announced a 64-bit CPU, and Samesung does not want people to think they need longer than a year to copy others? I didn't see the CEO pledge "64-bit support". He pledged a 64 bit CPU in a flagship phone in a year. For all we know it could run all 32 bit but on a 64 bit CPU...
I don't expect Merrifield will have much of an impact in the smartphone market, but its bigger brother Bay Trail [Z3740/Z3770] already has a lot to offer. Bay Trail allows for a Windows 8.1 (and/or Android dual boot) tablet to have a 10~11 hour battery inside of a chassis thinner and lighter than the iPad 4, as well the complete API support (DX11, GLES3, GL4) you would expect from a desktop or laptop. Performance has also seen a nice boost, finally allowing Windows 8.1 and 3rd party software to run on a tablet (it can even handle light PC games such as Team Fortress 2, Portal 2, Dota 2, etc.).
Wow so much expectation. I won't hold my breath for an Intel CPU that could compete with ARM efficiency. As much Intel would like, the expensive x86 architecture cannot match Ax lightweight power envelope of 1 watt. Until Intel proves me wrong, the Bay trails is as much FUD than Tegra lineup with huge expectative but disappointing result at the end.
Wow so much expectation. I won't hold my breath for an Intel CPU that could compete with ARM efficiency. As much Intel would like, the expensive x86 architecture cannot match Ax lightweight power envelope of 1 watt. Until Intel proves me wrong, the Bay trails is as much FUD than Tegra lineup with huge expectative but disappointing result at the end.
Bay Trail has already been reviewed and you've already been proven wrong.
According to Anandtech, at load (during Cinebench) the single thread draws 800mW to 1.2W and the multi thread at load is 2.5W.
There's a picture on the web of an Intel IDF banner with a icon saying "64-bit" next to a picture of the Green Android Robot. That's probably what you were looking for.
Looking at it will probably make you feel less sick.
Neah, don't worry! I just have to look at AAPL price and suddenly I feel great! It's soooo good to make money on the downside!
Should feel roughly identical.
Because they’ve done no such thing? Restricting developers to a set and configuration of buttons is exactly the opposite of the idea of iOS devices.
I missed that on the first go-around. I like it, even if it’s outdated.
Because they’ve done no such thing? Restricting developers to a set and configuration of buttons is exactly the opposite of the idea of iOS devices.
Actually, they have done such a thing. iOS 7 supports MFi and they have released both an API and reference specs for game controllers. Check your facts. I even have had app updates for games on my iPhone this morning whose changes state "Now with support for iOS 7 game controllers". I'd link to controllers advertising compatibility, but a simple web search will suffice...
It seems to me Apple's road map is to replace OSX where they make little money. Even Steve Jobs stopped kicking that dead horse with the Mac vs PC ads years ago. Market share will never rise above 7% because of the same old tired Apple policies surrounding it (too expensive, not expandable, or repairable etc). So they will move beyond it like they did with the Apple II replacing it completely with iOS which has a higher market share. To do that they need a faster processor and 64 bit addressing and true multi-tasking. Then they can start making laptops and desktops using their own chips. The first step is now in place. Unfortunately they are too late having made exactly the same mistakes with iOS as they did with Mac OS. They believe somehow their products are made of gold and they can charge a premium even if they are made of cheap plastic. They have been steadily losing market share to Android which is producing smartphones (not so much tablets yet) with higher resolution screens, a better GUI, better cameras, more features. In fact everything is better on the top models than Apple yet their prices are much lower. This is a replay of the attitude that killed Macintosh and almost bankrupted Apple. They just can't learn from past mistakes and so are in the process of repeating them. If I am right about Apple's future plans they are wrong about them becoming reality. This time there is no Steve Jobs to pull their asses out of the fire.
Bay Trail has already been reviewed and you've already been proven wrong.
According to Anandtech, at load (during Cinebench) the single thread draws 800mW to 1.2W and the multi thread at load is 2.5W.
If the Bay trail is so great, why Anandtech gives absolutely no detail on battery life of actual product? At 2.5 watts max the Z3740 it still 2.5 times more power hungry than Apple SoC. And Anandtech doesn't count the whole system build around the Z3740, things like external RAM (the Z3740 SoC doesn't have ram) have impact on the battery drainage.
So where is sources that been proven me wrong ?
Neah, don't worry! I just have to look at AAPL price and suddenly I feel great! It's soooo good to make money on the downside!
Since when Wallstreet is backing Apple decision?