PDA

View Full Version : Intel Inside Future iPhone?




MacRumors
Oct 3, 2007, 10:44 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

DigiTimes cites OEM sources stating that Apple is considering using Intel's Moorestown mobile Internet device platform processor (http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20071001PD214.html) in a future iPhone.

Intel had demoed an iPhone-like device based off the platform, due in 2009, at the latest Intel Developer Forum (Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/20/intel-demos-iphone-like-mid-of-the-future/)). Like the Samsung ARM processor currently used, Moorestown is a system-on-chip design, and will combine processing abilities such as the CPU, graphics, video and memory controller onto a single chip. Moorestown can also support standardized communications capabilities such as Wi-Fi, 3G and WiMAX.

Raw Data: Intel Press Release of Moorestown (http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20070919corp_a.htm)

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/03/intel-inside-future-iphone/)



dlastmango
Oct 3, 2007, 10:46 AM
iphone 2.. here we come!

Sandfleaz
Oct 3, 2007, 10:47 AM
"Wi-Fi, 3G and WiMAX" add GPS
What's not to like!

Bring it on!!!

mozmac
Oct 3, 2007, 10:48 AM
I think that would be sweet. However, should Apple put too much dependence on one chip maker? We saw what happened in the PPC days.

Bonte
Oct 3, 2007, 10:48 AM
For me this is the main reason Apple is not allowing 3P apps, switching to new hardware is much easier now and no legacy code to support.

twoodcc
Oct 3, 2007, 10:49 AM
iphone 2.. here we come!

yep! here we go!

the iPhone does need GPS, and wireless-n would be nice

longofest
Oct 3, 2007, 10:55 AM
the iPhone does need GPS, and wireless-n would be nice

I agree 100% on gps, but why 802.11n? Its not like you're doing file transfers. The only reason I have in mind is so that the rest of my network can remain in N mode when the iPhone connects.

Antares
Oct 3, 2007, 10:57 AM
Talk about putting all of your eggs into one basket. Would it be a good thing for Apple to rely on only one chip manufacturer? I suppose it would make it easier for the company to write code for a single, consistent platform (other than something additional, like ARM) but......

joshysquashy
Oct 3, 2007, 10:59 AM
so if the iPhone gets officially opened to 3rd party apps, does this mean something similar to Universal Binaries for the iPhone?

If so this would be great, as developers could design for all Apple Phones at the same time, and older models would not get left in the dust to quickly.

powderblue17
Oct 3, 2007, 10:59 AM
I doubt this would be for the iPhone 2 as this chip doesn't even come out until 2009. Maybe version 3 after version 2 with 3G next year is what I'm thinking.

Data
Oct 3, 2007, 11:00 AM
Bring it on..... in 2009 ?

Ted Witcher
Oct 3, 2007, 11:02 AM
Do you think the market would tolerate a larger form-factor iPhone (an "iPhone Plus" or Pro or whatever), similar in thickness to, say, a Blackberry, if it had all of those functions -- GPS, more memory, etc.?

kenaustus
Oct 3, 2007, 11:03 AM
It will be interesting to see if Intel can beat the 2009 time frame.

The 2008 Christmas buying season is a huge motivation for them and it's hard to believe that they won't beat their schedule in order to take advantage of it.

elppa
Oct 3, 2007, 11:05 AM
iPhone is the mobile computing platform for this decade.

Developments in hardware are part of the progression, Apple have stated they will do 3G, so this doesn't surprise.

The relationship between Intel and Apple is great, a real positive one (who said Apple can't partner :confused:) so I'm not surprised they are looking to Intel to provide them with their next chipset.

Consultant
Oct 3, 2007, 11:06 AM
I agree 100% on gps, but why 802.11n? Its not like you're doing file transfers. The only reason I have in mind is so that the rest of my network can remain in N mode when the iPhone connects.

I want Wireless N on iPhone so the network can stay N too, but currently true wireless-N is expensive and requires multiple antennas to operate. So probably not right away yet. We can always hope though.

plumbingandtech
Oct 3, 2007, 11:07 AM
Awesome!

Now this is a good rumor.

I bet this will be a 3rd gen iphone though. Anyone holding out for this one might have to wait a while.

Prob. one more "big iphone arm" upgrade in between IMO.

Consultant
Oct 3, 2007, 11:07 AM
Do you think the market would tolerate a larger form-factor iPhone (an "iPhone Plus" or Pro or whatever), similar in thickness to, say, a Blackberry, if it had all of those functions -- GPS, more memory, etc.?

iPhone extreme! woo!
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/10/02/iphone_extreme_reference_spotted_in_apple_com_html_code.html

Too bad it's a sloppy copy job from Airport Extreme page.

ks-man
Oct 3, 2007, 11:07 AM
I definitely hope they release a 3g iPhone before 2009. That is the only thing that is stopping me from getting one.

psychofreak
Oct 3, 2007, 11:14 AM
I predict that I'll get the 3rd gen iPhone...as I'll be old enough to want something of that caliber and it will be awesome :)

Whether it has Intel inside or not isn't such a bother for me right now as I don't know what the other options will be...

MacsAttack
Oct 3, 2007, 11:19 AM
so if the iPhone gets officially opened to 3rd party apps, does this mean something similar to Universal Binaries for the iPhone?

If so this would be great, as developers could design for all Apple Phones at the same time, and older models would not get left in the dust to quickly.

I beleive the speculation is that Apple have avoided opening up the iPhone so they will not have to support legacy apps when they switch to the intel platform.

I think it is simpler than that. Apple rushed the iPhone out the door. Sure thay has a bunch on interesting tech, but not as a choerent product. They had to pull developers off Leopard to hit their launch date - and even then there appear to be issues with ill-conceived features and functionality (some of which got fixed in the update). The simple answer to the question of why there is no dev kit for the iPhone/iTouch platform (aside from AJAX web apps)? Apple just didn't have the time to mess with anything but the bare essentials.

It will be Bootcamp all over again. Lots of third party hacking about, then suddenly Bam! iPhone Dev Kit at 2008 (or 2009) dev con.

Apple products "Just work". Problem is the new iPhone/iPod Touch platform "Only just works". It needs time to bed in and have Apple polish it some more.

bogman12
Oct 3, 2007, 11:19 AM
I think this is a great move. the ARM processor is too slow anyway for today's iPHone.

Just scroll through a song list in the iTunes store, the sluggish FPS is annoying..

that, and the photo viewer will then finally be able to process full rez photos as opposed to the jacked up low resolution that iTunes "optimizes" them to before copying them to the iPHone.

RossoA
Oct 3, 2007, 11:22 AM
Bring it on..... in 2009 ?

Remember US contracts are 24 months, it kinda makes sense that Apple would release the 2nd Gen iPhone just before everyone's contracts run out so they can get a new one.

Ah well, I'm still waiting for Nov. to get my 1st Gen! :rolleyes:

Orng
Oct 3, 2007, 11:29 AM
And the default ringtone will be the Intel sound.

crackermac
Oct 3, 2007, 11:31 AM
2009...Just in time for all that beautiful spectrum to be opened up by the FCC. :)

Marx55
Oct 3, 2007, 11:39 AM
Finally, all the posibilities of any Mac OS X laptop or desktop on a handheld device. AWESOME! We need tons for our University.

plumbingandtech
Oct 3, 2007, 11:44 AM
2009...Just in time for all that beautiful spectrum to be opened up by the FCC. :)

Big thumbs up on that comment.

Best one of the thread.

Mmmm.... high speed anyware access. (real high speed. not this edge/3g slow poke stuff.)

Mr. Zorg
Oct 3, 2007, 11:47 AM
so if the iPhone gets officially opened to 3rd party apps, does this mean something similar to Universal Binaries for the iPhone?

If so this would be great, as developers could design for all Apple Phones at the same time, and older models would not get left in the dust to quickly.
I don't see why not, it does "run OS X" after all...

abrooks
Oct 3, 2007, 11:53 AM
Like the Samsung ARM processor currently used, Moorestown is a system-on-chip design

Not to nitpick or anything but the current Samsung chip is also SoC but based on the ARM RISC architecture, the Intel chip will also be SoC but I'm unsure what architecture they run (just plain x86?)

PlasticMD
Oct 3, 2007, 11:56 AM
Now check out the possibilities with this chip for mobile phones:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,138001-c,graphicschips/article.html

overcast
Oct 3, 2007, 12:11 PM
For me this is the main reason Apple is not allowing 3P apps, switching to new hardware is much easier now and no legacy code to support.

That's REALLY stretching it.

gwangung
Oct 3, 2007, 12:12 PM
I beleive the speculation is that Apple have avoided opening up the iPhone so they will not have to support legacy apps when they switch to the intel platform.

I think it is simpler than that. Apple rushed the iPhone out the door. Sure thay has a bunch on interesting tech, but not as a choerent product. They had to pull developers off Leopard to hit their launch date - and even then there appear to be issues with ill-conceived features and functionality (some of which got fixed in the update). The simple answer to the question of why there is no dev kit for the iPhone/iTouch platform (aside from AJAX web apps)? Apple just didn't have the time to mess with anything but the bare essentials.

It will be Bootcamp all over again. Lots of third party hacking about, then suddenly Bam! iPhone Dev Kit at 2008 (or 2009) dev con.

Apple products "Just work". Problem is the new iPhone/iPod Touch platform "Only just works". It needs time to bed in and have Apple polish it some more.

BINGO!

overcast
Oct 3, 2007, 12:13 PM
I think this is a great move. the ARM processor is too slow anyway for today's iPHone.

Just scroll through a song list in the iTunes store, the sluggish FPS is annoying..

that, and the photo viewer will then finally be able to process full rez photos as opposed to the jacked up low resolution that iTunes "optimizes" them to before copying them to the iPHone.
I take it you have not used any other smart phone before. The iPhone interface is BLAZING fast and extremely slick compared to others. Try a Windows Mobile device, I dare you.

ChrisA
Oct 3, 2007, 12:13 PM
You have to figure that Intel is looking at customers other then Apple for this new chip. What this means is that Intel thinks this kind of device will be very common and popular. Intel is sure enough about this that they are making a serious nine figure investment.

Macinposh
Oct 3, 2007, 12:22 PM
Talk about putting all of your eggs into one basket. Would it be a good thing for Apple to rely on only one chip manufacturer? I suppose it would make it easier for the company to write code for a single, consistent platform (other than something additional, like ARM) but......


Zing. You answered your own questions there.

It would be in apples benefit to streamline their os just to intel based procs.
Now they have to support G4/G5, ARM and Intell. Not that it apparently is a enormoust task,but still, it would be a benefit.

And why not to put all the eggs in the winning basket?

I mean,IBM aint a viable competitor due to their low volume production and other production problems and AMD is caught in the mosh.
What else do you suggest?

AND if there would emerge some mysterious x86 manufacturer out of blue,kicking intels ass, what would stop apple to jump aboard that ship then?

SpinThis!
Oct 3, 2007, 01:08 PM
Now they have to support G4/G5, ARM and Intell. Not that it apparently is a enormoust task,but still, it would be a benefit.
I don't see the benefit. Applications you write for Mac OS X aren't suddenly going to work on the iPhone because the devices use the same chipset. It's a separate platform no matter how you slice it.

And even if Apple decided to put the full Mac OS X (menubar, dock, and all) on the iPhone or a mobile variant, by the time iPhone 2 ships, I would imagine Apple is going to drop support for PPC Macs anyway (at least in the currently shipping OS that is).

TurboSC
Oct 3, 2007, 01:10 PM
sounds like it'll be awesome... I can't wait for the future. :apple:

Dagless
Oct 3, 2007, 01:14 PM
But it took the iMac years to get to Intel!

psychofreak
Oct 3, 2007, 01:22 PM
What will be awesome is when phones are powerful enough to run things like Folding@Home :)

miketcool
Oct 3, 2007, 01:24 PM
But it took the iMac years to get to Intel!

Yeah, but how long was the Moto-IBM transisition?

feakbeak
Oct 3, 2007, 01:24 PM
I think that would be sweet. However, should Apple put too much dependence on one chip maker? We saw what happened in the PPC days.
Dependence on PPC and IBM/Motorola is much different. IBM and Motorola are much more diversified companies and the PPC platform was not their bread and butter. It got neglected and fell behind Intel and AMD by a fair margin before Apple finally woke up and realized their was no future with PPC.

This isn't so much depending on Intel as it is forming a dependence on x86. x86 has been around forever, despite it's weaknesses it has amazing dominance in the market and Intel is bringing x86 to much smaller devices with these new SoC designs that they plan on shrinking down even further.

Even if you do consider it as dependence on Intel - Intel isn't going anywhere and this market is Intels bread and butter. IMO, this was the reason Apple came over - the Core architecture, focus on efficiency and Intels vision to replace ARM/MIPS in mobile devices with x86 is exactly why Apple teamed up with Intel.

I used to give Intel crap for their NetBurst architecture and the P4 woes but Intel has gotten their act together and done amazing things. They deserve all the fanfare they've been getting. If Intel comes through on their SoC x86 roadmap we're going to see some impressive devices in a few short years.

lazyrighteye
Oct 3, 2007, 01:25 PM
It will be interesting to see if Intel can beat the 2009 time frame.

The 2008 Christmas buying season is a huge motivation for them and it's hard to believe that they won't beat their schedule in order to take advantage of it.

I wouldn't mind an iPhone revision around... say... June 29, 2009. ;)

lazyrighteye
Oct 3, 2007, 01:35 PM
Awesome!

Now this is a good rumor.

I bet this will be a 3rd gen iphone though. Anyone holding out for this one might have to wait a while.

Prob. one more "big iphone arm" upgrade in between IMO.

Agreed.
There will be a v2 before we see Intel inside.
And then, things will get really interesting.

lazyrighteye
Oct 3, 2007, 01:45 PM
I beleive the speculation is that Apple have avoided opening up the iPhone so they will not have to support legacy apps when they switch to the intel platform.

I think it is simpler than that. Apple rushed the iPhone out the door. Sure thay has a bunch on interesting tech, but not as a choerent product. They had to pull developers off Leopard to hit their launch date - and even then there appear to be issues with ill-conceived features and functionality (some of which got fixed in the update). The simple answer to the question of why there is no dev kit for the iPhone/iTouch platform (aside from AJAX web apps)? Apple just didn't have the time to mess with anything but the bare essentials.

It will be Bootcamp all over again. Lots of third party hacking about, then suddenly Bam! iPhone Dev Kit at 2008 (or 2009) dev con.

Apple products "Just work". Problem is the new iPhone/iPod Touch platform "Only just works". It needs time to bed in and have Apple polish it some more.

Hmm, very well said.
This product does feel a bit rushed. Not 100% Apple polish.
Solid, but we can all see the potential.
Exciting!

lazyrighteye
Oct 3, 2007, 01:45 PM
Weird... 4 posts in a row. :confused:

psychofreak
Oct 3, 2007, 01:47 PM
Weird... 4 posts in a row. :confused:

You can press 'edit' below your post if you want to add something BTW :)

emotion
Oct 3, 2007, 02:53 PM
Remember US contracts are 24 months, it kinda makes sense that Apple would release the 2nd Gen iPhone just before everyone's contracts run out so they can get a new one.

I have a feeling this will be the next revision (apart from 16GB version in February). Yes 2009. It better be good :)


Ah well, I'm still waiting for Nov. to get my 1st Gen! :rolleyes:

Same here if I ever make a decision, Apple aren't making it easy.

Rocketman
Oct 3, 2007, 06:13 PM
ATNN (large format iPhone) plus WiMax. Hmmm.

In message #29 the link refers to a new Broadcom chip with HD video and 12mp still pictures that also offers "EDGE (Enhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution), a fast version of GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications), Strauss said."

Rocketman

spydr
Oct 3, 2007, 06:25 PM
iphone 2.. here we come!
More like iPhone 4...

I would bet we are getting a iPhone 2 and 3 in 2008...

Football1maniac
Oct 3, 2007, 07:33 PM
Wouldn't be great that you finally have an iPhone that Safari doesn't lock up on you, the memory has been doubled, the AT&T network has finally been updated to 3G, opened to 3rd party developers, and a cheaper price will be around in a year and a half?:D I just got my iPod touch and I've been thinking about an iPhone too for when they come out with a better model at a cheaper price. This just makes my even more excited. Hopefully the iPhone w/ Intel inside doesn't turn out to be another Apple Pippen Game System...:rolleyes:

EagerDragon
Oct 3, 2007, 08:53 PM
iphone 2.. here we come!

That is tear 2009 so likely iPhone3

EagerDragon
Oct 3, 2007, 09:17 PM
Well this is more than likely! One of the reasons Apple does not have 3g right now I believe is that 3g drains power like no other. So hopefully the implementation of 3g will also be the implementation of new battery technologies, like those new lithiums?? I think thats what they are.

well anyway, it will be awesome!

I think Steve said something about expecting new 3G technology around summer 2008.

hulugu
Oct 4, 2007, 12:58 AM
I agree 100% on gps, but why 802.11n? Its not like you're doing file transfers. The only reason I have in mind is so that the rest of my network can remain in N mode when the iPhone connects.

I agree with you here, GPS and 3G are great additions, but 802.11n might not be worth it, unless your network is 'n' only.

...

I think it is simpler than that. Apple rushed the iPhone out the door. Sure thay has a bunch on interesting tech, but not as a choerent product....

While the iPhone needs some polish, I disagree with your point that it's not a coherent product. Having used one for several weeks I can honestly say that the whole widget works quite well and that the ideas are relatively well-executed.

I'd like cut-n-paste, a real SDK for developers, and a number of other refinements (Safari is great, but it does occasionally just quit on me), but I don't accept the idea that the iPhone isn't a 'coherent' product, there's far too much thought in the device for that kind of judgement.

ryanchandl
Oct 4, 2007, 01:21 AM
These are wat i wan the future iphone has:

HSDPA
Memory Card Slot
3rd Party Applications

gnasher729
Oct 4, 2007, 08:00 AM
Intel would probably be happy for Apple to use this chip, but ARM is not sleeping either: The new ARM Cortex-A9 chips should be available earlier, and you get four ARM cores, multi-scalar and OOO execution, running at 1000 MHz, up to 8000 MIPS, fully synthesizable, and using about 250 milliwatt.

Since MacOS X runs on ARM, and applications just compile (if you use a slightly patched version of XCode), I think Apple would consider this chip for an ultra-portable.

Thomas2006
Oct 4, 2007, 08:14 AM
Talk about putting all of your eggs into one basket. Would it be a good thing for Apple to rely on only one chip manufacturer? I suppose it would make it easier for the company to write code for a single, consistent platform (other than something additional, like ARM) but......
I think Intel is way too big to be considered "one basket". Apple developed OS X in parallel, for both the PPC and x86, and it would not surprise me if they also had AMD machines in a lab, "just in case". Apple recommends using the Accelerate.framework instead of manually coding AltiVec/SSE instructions so if a different CPU is used the application does not need to be changed.

abrooks
Oct 4, 2007, 08:27 AM
I think Steve said something about expecting new 3G technology around summer 2008.

Jobs noted that Apple was working on a 3G iPhone but made no mention of when it would be released, wouldn't be a smart thing to do if Apple want to sell iPhones now :rolleyes: