It is even possible to print your own fully functional chips, it won't be with a feature size of 5nm, but more than enough to be as powerful as a computer from the eighties which is sufficient for most embedded applications.
BULLSHIT - you are so full of shit with this post that I HAD to call it out. Show me just one example of a 3D printer that can print ANY circuit board, let alone any functional chip...
You can do circuit boards for prototyping via 3D printing or with CNC routers, but nowhere near the pitch/resolution required for a PCB you'd see in something like a smartphone or any modern PC.
He probably saw one of these prototyping machines and made the assumption it could produce any type of PCB without even understanding the limitations.
Apples prices are still too high to overcome a new wave of DIY and opensource hardware/software designs hitting the market/home. Industrie in the future will be totally distributed, and as such non existent.
Oh yes, any year now the DIY neckbeards will inherit the earth. Hasn't happened in the past twenty years of Linux, but it's comin'! Riiight.
China would be a production powerhouse and the biggest economy, the prediction was 30 years or so in a row. Then people argued that - because it was predicted for such a long time - it would never come true.
Look at reality now.
China is not yet the largest economy. That is a fact, and the prediction that it s or soon will be the largest economy "soon" is based oin a lot of fiction from the CCP.
"One reason economic growth is slowing is that the government is still heavily involved with Chinese businesses. Another is that economic growth depends on consumers. When their income increases, they are able to buy more, which causes GDP to increase."
The fact that it is an authoritarian government, is one of numerous reasons that the West should disengage from China.
It is even possible to print your own fully functional chips, it won't be with a feature size of 5nm, but more than enough to be as powerful as a computer from the eighties which is sufficient for most embedded applications.
BULLSHIT - you are so full of shit with this post that I HAD to call it out. Show me just one example of a 3D printer that can print ANY circuit board, let alone any functional chip...
Actually I think most 3D printers can nowadays, its just a matter of the right filament and currently a bit elaborate changing filaments for different layers (you need multi print heads). I would personally use a normal (non 3D) printer setup to print ‘chips’.
It is even possible to print your own fully functional chips, it won't be with a feature size of 5nm, but more than enough to be as powerful as a computer from the eighties which is sufficient for most embedded applications.
BULLSHIT - you are so full of shit with this post that I HAD to call it out. Show me just one example of a 3D printer that can print ANY circuit board, let alone any functional chip...
Actually I think most 3D printers can nowadays, its just a matter of the right filament and currently a bit elaborate changing filaments for different layers (you need multi print heads). I would personally use a normal (non 3D) printer setup to print ‘chips’.
Are you talking about semiconductor chips? Or printed circuit boards?
The former - I highly doubt it (what printer can lay down P-type and N-type material?); the latter - OK, but line widths will be YUGE.
Speaking of longevity, the iPhone 5s received its latest iOS update (12.4.6) less than a month ago. That would be the 5th update since Apple released iOS 13. Yes, they don't add new features or fix bugs that I'm aware of. But, that's still 6 1/2 years of continual OS support.
For all of the tech press attention glued to shiny objects (FEATURES FEATURES FEATURES), Apple knows how to implement platform transitions better than anyone. There aren't bottlenecks that hold back the ecosystem.Consider Apple's transition to 64-bit. Much of the tech press called the A7 a gimmick. Yet, Apple took a disciplined approach to transitioning the entire product line to 64-bit in less than 2 years, and then unifying iOS and App Store to supporting only 64-bit within 4 years.
Apples prices are still too high to overcome a new wave of DIY and opensource hardware/software designs hitting the market/home. Industrie in the future will be totally distributed, and as such non existent.
Oh yes, any year now the DIY neckbeards will inherit the earth. Hasn't happened in the past twenty years of Linux, but it's comin'! Riiight.
Isn’t it amazing how some people live in a different reality than the rest of us? Can these savants see the future?
"Now, even Apple's $399 iPhone SE uses a more powerful brain than even the most advanced Android flagships with prices above $1,000. How is this possible?"
Apple sacrificed practically everything else to reach that price point. That's how it was possible. Other brands of course could do exactly the same if they wanted to. The difference is that they have no need to do so.
"The A13 is a stronger chip than the Snapdragon 865 for daily use in every category," Hildenbrand noted."
Perhaps Hildenbrand was just plain wrong. Most important catagories also include Wi-Fi and Modem. Is the iPhone stronger in those areas? Ok, I know that Apple has yet to put a modem in its SoC. That is a disadvantage IMO. And how is he even comparing DSPs and ISPs? And are we now brushing aside years of subpar intel modems?
On a wider note, the Apple graphic says 'fastest' CPU, 'fastest' GPU, but only 'faster' NPU. They are not comparing the NPU to Android SoCs, just other iPhones.
It seems the whole point only boils down to CPU/GPU performance but we have long seen far beyond that, as all flagships now fly and have done for years.
We also know that CPU/GPU performance is definitely not the only key metric involved. If it were, there would literally be no Android flagship market. 'Fastest' CPU/GPU lost their key selling factors long ago. Now though, we are focused, among many other non-CPU aspects, on their perceived performance chops with elements like screen refresh rates and the claimed silky smooth enhancements in UI response (although once again, few if any flagship users were even seeing a 'problem' in the first place).
"Apple's A13 Bionic isn't just faster, it's deployed wider than any high-end Android chip"
What's the takeaway here? I can see zero relevance to anything. Android phones use varying SoCs at varying price points to offer wider value points - by design. And I'm not limiting this to just 'older' SoCs but new SoCs too.
That means for a so called 'lesser' SoC the consumer gains options in other areas. The SE sacrifices most of that for its price point and the A13.
Neither approach is right or wrong. They are simply options. No doubt some SE users would have preferred a 'lesser' SoC in exchange for other features. Either way, more choice for iPhone users can only be a good thing.
Seeing as Android manufacturers have a far wider choice of SoCs available to them, obviously 'deployment' of each one isn't t as wide as it could be. Not that it is even remotely relevant.
"However, 2020 is turning out to be a bad year to be pushing 5G as your only strength. It will be some time before 5G becomes broadly available outside of a few leading markets such as South Korea and specific urban markets. For budget phone buyers, 5G offers little more than faster battery drain and often the requirement to pay extra for mobile service, whether that 5G service is consistently available and capable of delivering noticeably better, real-world mobile data speeds than the best 4G LTE or not."
No one foresaw (or can foresee) the Covid-19 pandemic. The 5G roll out may have been hampered for few months in 2020 but that is completely and utterly irrelevant. The situation is exactly the same for potential purchasers as it was before the pandemic. The roll out continues and in some places (China for example, will be accelerated more - again). In fact, the roll out never even stopped as ICT is considered an 'essential' industry and Nokia, Ericsson and Huawei have been working around the clock on increasing network capacity to meet confinement demands. COVID-19 has served to spur industrial use of 5G too.
As a smartphone purchaser in 2020 (budget or not) , if you have 5G in your area you should have 5G on your phone wishlist. Even if you don't have 5G in your area yet, it should be on your list of features all the same if 5G is scheduled for your area. As a result, 5G remains a vital strength to have and many budget purchasers will simply put off purchases altogether to futureproof the phone purchase when it does happen, depending on their personal 5G circumstances or buy now. For example, some may choose to only bite on an on-SoC modem, NSA and SA support etc. Whichever way you look at it, not having 5G support for your phones is not a comfortable place to be.
As for the reference to 4G LTE and 5G speeds, yesterday I was checking out UK 5G speeds against 4G LTE in a range of different cities. None of the sites checked had 4G in the same ball park as 5G.
You might say that 'fast 4G' is sufficiently fast to make 'faster' 5G an unimportant aspect in the real world but in pure performance terms that would be as futile as trying to claim the A13 is faster than Android SoCs while ignoring reality, where Android SoCs 'perform' better in other key areas like WiFi, modem, photography, battery, biometrics etc.
That is, 5G towers and phone hardware can offer benefits that go beyond the speed of just downloads and uploads. Obviously latency being one of those.
Or that certain vendors are using proprietary enhancements to existing standards to improve their hardware's performance.
Huawei claims its late 2018 WiFi 5 is faster than Apple's WiFi 6 and Huawei has just rolled out its 'WiFi 6+' on phones (there was already an entire suite of WiFi 6+ products on the market) which draw on its 5G technology to improve baseline WiFi 6 performance.
Like Huawei is offering 40Wwireless charging too.
Is there anything stopping Samsung, Huawei et al from stripping most of their phones' features away and plunking in a high end chipset? No. Nothing.
In fact the high end chipsets are not reserved for the high end at all. In 2018, Huawei launched the Mate 20 Pro with the Kirin 980. A month later it appeared on Honor phones (Huawei's sub brand). Last year it was the same with the Kirin 990/Kirin 9905G.
The difference is they didn't strip most of the bells and whistles away just to reach the lower end. That makes a lot of sense in their markets because they also have new SoCs for other price bands which allow them to add desired features like, you guessed it, 5G, along with full screens and tri-cameras.
Apple needed the new SE, as stripped down as it may be, but do you really think Apple was all in on the idea or that it felt that market conditions simply made it something they had to do?
Sour grapes bla bla, more sour grapes bla, 5G bla bla, 5G, more 5G bla bla. Shit 5G caused corona, a sticky MEME said, now they (the public) burns the towers to end the rollout and stop 5G in its track ...
It is even possible to print your own fully functional chips, it won't be with a feature size of 5nm, but more than enough to be as powerful as a computer from the eighties which is sufficient for most embedded applications.
BULLSHIT - you are so full of shit with this post that I HAD to call it out. Show me just one example of a 3D printer that can print ANY circuit board, let alone any functional chip...
You can do circuit boards for prototyping via 3D printing or with CNC routers, but nowhere near the pitch/resolution required for a PCB you'd see in something like a smartphone or any modern PC.
He probably saw one of these prototyping machines and made the assumption it could produce any type of PCB without even understanding the limitations.
You make a lot of assumptions about me. Back in the days the transistor was invented, potentially replacing at that time current tubes for switching. People argued that transistors would never be as good as tubes, because they didn’t had the same specs - at that time. Now, I am sure you can see the logical flaw in that kind of reasoning (do you?).
It is even possible to print your own fully functional chips, it won't be with a feature size of 5nm, but more than enough to be as powerful as a computer from the eighties which is sufficient for most embedded applications.
BULLSHIT - you are so full of shit with this post that I HAD to call it out. Show me just one example of a 3D printer that can print ANY circuit board, let alone any functional chip...
Actually I think most 3D printers can nowadays, its just a matter of the right filament and currently a bit elaborate changing filaments for different layers (you need multi print heads). I would personally use a normal (non 3D) printer setup to print ‘chips’.
Are you talking about semiconductor chips? Or printed circuit boards?
The former - I highly doubt it (what printer can lay down P-type and N-type material?); the latter - OK, but line widths will be YUGE.
Both, it will be a very big chip of course. I see no (fundamental) chemical problem making P/N type print filament (you know plastic semiconductors exist!). Also 10 μm line with (using a 1400dpi printer) is not that HUGE for a circuit board, in fact it is very very small.
"Now, even Apple's $399 iPhone SE uses a more powerful brain than even the most advanced Android flagships with prices above $1,000. How is this possible?"
Apple sacrificed practically everything else to reach that price point. That's how it was possible. Other brands of course could do exactly the same if they wanted to. The difference is that they have no need to do so.
"The A13 is a stronger chip than the Snapdragon 865 for daily use in every category," Hildenbrand noted."
Perhaps Hildenbrand was just plain wrong. Most important catagories also include Wi-Fi and Modem. Is the iPhone stronger in those areas? Ok, I know that Apple has yet to put a modem in its SoC. That is a disadvantage IMO. And how is he even comparing DSPs and ISPs? And are we now brushing aside years of subpar intel modems?
On a wider note, the Apple graphic says 'fastest' CPU, 'fastest' GPU, but only 'faster' NPU. They are not comparing the NPU to Android SoCs, just other iPhones.
It seems the whole point only boils down to CPU/GPU performance but we have long seen far beyond that, as all flagships now fly and have done for years.
We also know that CPU/GPU performance is definitely not the only key metric involved. If it were, there would literally be no Android flagship market. 'Fastest' CPU/GPU lost their key selling factors long ago. Now though, we are focused, among many other non-CPU aspects, on their perceived performance chops with elements like screen refresh rates and the claimed silky smooth enhancements in UI response (although once again, few if any flagship users were even seeing a 'problem' in the first place).
"Apple's A13 Bionic isn't just faster, it's deployed wider than any high-end Android chip"
What's the takeaway here? I can see zero relevance to anything. Android phones use varying SoCs at varying price points to offer wider value points - by design. And I'm not limiting this to just 'older' SoCs but new SoCs too.
That means for a so called 'lesser' SoC the consumer gains options in other areas. The SE sacrifices most of that for its price point and the A13.
Neither approach is right or wrong. They are simply options. No doubt some SE users would have preferred a 'lesser' SoC in exchange for other features. Either way, more choice for iPhone users can only be a good thing.
Seeing as Android manufacturers have a far wider choice of SoCs available to them, obviously 'deployment' of each one isn't t as wide as it could be. Not that it is even remotely relevant.
"However, 2020 is turning out to be a bad year to be pushing 5G as your only strength. It will be some time before 5G becomes broadly available outside of a few leading markets such as South Korea and specific urban markets. For budget phone buyers, 5G offers little more than faster battery drain and often the requirement to pay extra for mobile service, whether that 5G service is consistently available and capable of delivering noticeably better, real-world mobile data speeds than the best 4G LTE or not."
No one foresaw (or can foresee) the Covid-19 pandemic. The 5G roll out may have been hampered for few months in 2020 but that is completely and utterly irrelevant. The situation is exactly the same for potential purchasers as it was before the pandemic. The roll out continues and in some places (China for example, will be accelerated more - again). In fact, the roll out never even stopped as ICT is considered an 'essential' industry and Nokia, Ericsson and Huawei have been working around the clock on increasing network capacity to meet confinement demands. COVID-19 has served to spur industrial use of 5G too.
As a smartphone purchaser in 2020 (budget or not) , if you have 5G in your area you should have 5G on your phone wishlist. Even if you don't have 5G in your area yet, it should be on your list of features all the same if 5G is scheduled for your area. As a result, 5G remains a vital strength to have and many budget purchasers will simply put off purchases altogether to futureproof the phone purchase when it does happen, depending on their personal 5G circumstances or buy now. For example, some may choose to only bite on an on-SoC modem, NSA and SA support etc. Whichever way you look at it, not having 5G support for your phones is not a comfortable place to be.
As for the reference to 4G LTE and 5G speeds, yesterday I was checking out UK 5G speeds against 4G LTE in a range of different cities. None of the sites checked had 4G in the same ball park as 5G.
You might say that 'fast 4G' is sufficiently fast to make 'faster' 5G an unimportant aspect in the real world but in pure performance terms that would be as futile as trying to claim the A13 is faster than Android SoCs while ignoring reality, where Android SoCs 'perform' better in other key areas like WiFi, modem, photography, battery, biometrics etc.
That is, 5G towers and phone hardware can offer benefits that go beyond the speed of just downloads and uploads. Obviously latency being one of those.
Or that certain vendors are using proprietary enhancements to existing standards to improve their hardware's performance.
Huawei claims its late 2018 WiFi 5 is faster than Apple's WiFi 6 and Huawei has just rolled out its 'WiFi 6+' on phones (there was already an entire suite of WiFi 6+ products on the market) which draw on its 5G technology to improve baseline WiFi 6 performance.
Like Huawei is offering 40Wwireless charging too.
Is there anything stopping Samsung, Huawei et al from stripping most of their phones' features away and plunking in a high end chipset? No. Nothing.
In fact the high end chipsets are not reserved for the high end at all. In 2018, Huawei launched the Mate 20 Pro with the Kirin 980. A month later it appeared on Honor phones (Huawei's sub brand). Last year it was the same with the Kirin 990/Kirin 9905G.
The difference is they didn't strip most of the bells and whistles away just to reach the lower end. That makes a lot of sense in their markets because they also have new SoCs for other price bands which allow them to add desired features like, you guessed it, 5G, along with full screens and tri-cameras.
Apple needed the new SE, as stripped down as it may be, but do you really think Apple was all in on the idea or that it felt that market conditions simply made it something they had to do?
Sour grapes bla bla, more sour grapes bla, 5G bla bla, 5G, more 5G bla bla. Shit 5G caused corona, a sticky MEME said, now they (the public) burns the towers to end the rollout and stop 5G in its track ...
Sour grapes?
I have been arguing in favour of this entrant for a long time and openly support it as a necessary move.
That is one thing. Another is what I managed to get through in this article. Let's not get carried away.
Comments
I would personally use a normal (non 3D) printer setup to print ‘chips’.
Sour grapes bla bla, more sour grapes bla, 5G bla bla, 5G, more 5G bla bla.
Shit 5G caused corona, a sticky MEME said, now they (the public) burns the towers to end the rollout and stop 5G in its track ...
Back in the days the transistor was invented, potentially replacing at that time current tubes for switching.
People argued that transistors would never be as good as tubes, because they didn’t had the same specs - at that time.
Now, I am sure you can see the logical flaw in that kind of reasoning (do you?).
Both, it will be a very big chip of course.
I see no (fundamental) chemical problem making P/N type print filament (you know plastic semiconductors exist!).
Also 10 μm line with (using a 1400dpi printer) is not that HUGE for a circuit board, in fact it is very very small.
I have been arguing in favour of this entrant for a long time and openly support it as a necessary move.
That is one thing. Another is what I managed to get through in this article. Let's not get carried away.
Everything I posted is perfectly reasonable.
If you have a qualm with it, put it on the table.