After whipping Intel, Nvidia & AMD in mobile chips, sky's the limit for Apple Inc's silicon design t

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 53
    plovellplovell Posts: 804member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Eggleston View Post

     

    Other than for encryption, can anyone here suggest what a 128 bit CPU would be used for?


    Maybe for graphics. But crypto would be a big reason.

  • Reply 42 of 53
    plovellplovell Posts: 804member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Inkling View Post



    Apple needs to be careful the same hubris doesn't do it in.

    A good point. Back in the early 90's Apple was full of it (in both senses). There was just no way any regional person could deny the advantages of AppleTalk (EtherTalk) and stick with lame, stupid TCP/IP. It just wasn't thinkable.

     

    Yeah. Right.

     

    But much has changed since then. And I think that Apple's in-house university (the one created by Steve in the years leading up to his death) is a big reason that we're not likely to see this hubris return. Not impossible but I think it's unlikely.

  • Reply 43 of 53

    Apple could put a camera at each end of their phone so it could be used to capture stereo views. That would be pretty cool. With some practice you can view  two pictures side by side on a computer screen and blend them without any other equipment like a magic eye pic, or Apple could supply some sort of electronic digital viewmaster for easy 3D viewing. 

     

    Processed By eBay with ImageMagick, z1.1.0. ||B2

  • Reply 44 of 53
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    Well, after all of DED's rumor mongering and Chicken Little fantasies here's the last word from Intel... Never!
    http://www.businessinsider.com/intel-and-apple-relationship-2015-2
  • Reply 45 of 53
    For Apple to keep ahead of the game, it has to 'boldly go where no one has gone before'. A difficult trick to pull off, but better, much better than more of the same but better by degrees. Apple has the money to take the risks. It seems to have the collective courage to take those risks. That's what Jobs did at the very beginning.
  • Reply 46 of 53
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,891member
    mj web wrote: »
    Well, after all of DED's rumor mongering and Chicken Little fantasies here's the last word from Intel... Never!
    http://www.businessinsider.com/intel-and-apple-relationship-2015-2

    You do realize that this is a complete bogus piece to be referencing. Apple has never designed its own chips for PC's. Macs started out with Motorola 68000 series processors and the jumped to PowerPC which came from IBM but resulted in a partnership with what ended up as FreeScale. Apple didn't design much of anything here though I do believe they had a big hand in the vector processor.

    So quoting this article isn't doing much for you.
  • Reply 47 of 53
    Thanks for this, Mr. Dilger.

    Here's another subject for an article:

    The mobile networks languished with 3G until the iPhone appeared. Discuss.
  • Reply 48 of 53
    Batteries would be a great idea - if they could leapfrog others and produce some really great new battery tech....
  • Reply 49 of 53
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Eggleston View Post

     



    Whoa... While that sounds like a minor bump, that would literally be the game changer. Also not very likely. Although it could store 3,588,860,714,729,490 Yottabytes (that is the next power up from Exabytes). That is a lot of RAM that a phone, tablet, or even modern computer cannot even come close to having. (Review this post in about 20 years, and then mock me in the same way we mock Bill Gates for thinking people will never need more than 64 Kb of RAM).

     

    Other than for encryption, can anyone here suggest what a 128 bit CPU would be used for?




    Mining Bitcoins?

    Running the world?/s

  • Reply 50 of 53
    With any kind of brain they are right now deep in the process of rolling their own completely own architecture. Something which is quite easy. And even easier to get at least better than the current standards.
    Acorn made the ARM core as a small company. Imagine what can happen with Apples weight behind.
    They could easily make an architecture that is both Intel and Arm compatible with a programmable control store/FPGA etc. and beat both architectures at their own game.
  • Reply 51 of 53
    One more huge slice of the Apple that has not been priced into the stock. Is QCOM in trouble?
  • Reply 52 of 53
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,891member
    With any kind of brain they are right now deep in the process of rolling their own completely own architecture. Something which is quite easy. And even easier to get at least better than the current standards.
    The harder path is to realize unique non Von-Neumann architectures. Neural nets and other technologies that aid voice and natural language processing come to mind here.
    Acorn made the ARM core as a small company. Imagine what can happen with Apples weight behind.
    Apple is behind it. For a long time Apple was one of three primary investors in ARM.
    They could easily make an architecture that is both Intel and Arm compatible with a programmable control store/FPGA etc. and beat both architectures at their own game.

    The thing is the world doesn't need Intel compatibility going forward. IPad clearly demonstrates this. If the implementation is compelling software will come. Beyond that there is a huge issue with power when it comes to FPGA that sometimes negates the performance advantage. That being said I can see FPGA like technology being built into a future processor for app acceleration. However we still have a long ways to go with GPU acceleration.
  • Reply 53 of 53
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post



    "...what will Apple want to do next?"



    Good question, because since their next market to disrupt could be dang near any one they pick. And because of their secrecy, no one can prepare for it to happen. So, when it happens Apple will have already moved several pieces into place to support their jump...




    Normally that's true but with the ?Watch Apple let everyone else have two years advance notice and sat back watched them all scramble.

     

    Apple never announced a watch, it was just a rumor. Using your logic, the ?Television has been rumored even longer. Now we got an ?Car rumor starting up... If Tim Cook scratches his nuts, someone is sure Apple is going into the jockstrap business... I swear.

     

    The silly SmartWatches that hit the market in the last two years were nowhere on target where Apple wanted to go with their ?Watch. First off Apple was aiming for the upper segment of the market...higher then Microsoft and Samsung could even imagine. High design and luxury were central to Apple's focus. Finally, being highly integrated with the rest of the Apple products makes for a more seamless experience and encourages a user to buy more Apple products to have that experience. So, if you look at the ?Watch as a way to encourage more other Apple products, it has a reason for being in the Apple lineup. Since it has utility, and fashion in addition, it has a purpose all its own as well.

Sign In or Register to comment.