Apple's ARM Plans in 2009? NetBooks, Tablets, Other?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/08/apples-arm-plans-in-2009-netbooks-tablets-other/)

A couple of speculative reports have come out about what plans Apple might have for its ARM-based processors in the coming year. Apple is rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/07/30/arm-announces-major-new-licensee-is-it-apple/) to be a major architectual licensee for ARM. This would offer Apple an added level of control and ownership over its processors. Apple presently uses the ARM processor in the iPhone and iPod Touch. Additional evidence (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/09/15/apple-developing-arm-processors-for-iphone/) has pointed to the fact that Apple acquired P.A. Semi specifically for their expertise in low-power processor development.

Computerworld blogger Seth Weintraub recently spoke with (http://blogs.computerworld.com/apples_tablet_to_be_based_on_arm_cortex_architecture) Bob Morris, director of platform enablement for ARM's mobile processor group, and believes that Apple will incorporate ARM processors in future netbooks and/or tablets. The newest ARM processors are said to have equal performance to Intel's Atom processor but dramatically lower power consumption: We are talking Apples and Oranges here. Not double, but an order of magnitude better for ARM. Some ARM chips routinely use 10-20 times less power than Intel for similar operations. Battery usage with ARM chips in prospective netbooks could be measured in days, not hours – much like smartphones.Meanwhile, Global Equities Research analyst takes it a step further (http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2008/12/08/apple-working-on-a-secret-new-pa-semi-based-gizmo/) by claiming that Apple will launch "a completely new device category" in the second half of 2009 based on chips produced by P.A. Semiconductor. Unfortunately, the credibility of the report is somewhat marred by the seemingly nonsensical statement that the new processors "will have the Objective-C instruction set built into the chip".

Regardless, Apple seems to have made some major moves in terms of custom processor development in 2008. While it's been assumed that these investments have been directed at the iPhone and iPod Touch, it's conceivable the technology will trickle to future devices.

Article Link: Apple's ARM Plans in 2009? NetBooks, Tablets, Other? (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/08/apples-arm-plans-in-2009-netbooks-tablets-other/)

[pounce]

i can really see the arm chips being used by apple in new products. only seems to make sense and speak to the direction that they are heading.

[Kilamite]

I can see El Jobso changing is tune about netbooks at MacWorld.

[alexbates]

I would do anything for a cheap Mac tablet.

Is ARM completely different from an intel?

[alphaod]

Then we find out OS X has been living a triple life. PPC, x86, and RISC… :p

[notjustjay]

"Battery life measured in days, much like smartphones."

You mean like the iPhone? ;)

[jasonbrennan]

I don't think we'll see many "netbooks" from Apple. They already have 3 models of notebooks as is, I don't think they'll expand (read: complicate) the lineup any more than that. What are netbooks anyway? Netbooks are low cost, low margin machines. Apple operates on very high margins. Why sell 4 netbooks when they could sell one MacbookPro. You know what the benefit of that is? You only have 1, not 4, customers to support. That and it's easier to operations to manufacture/ship/etc. It just makes more sense to have a slimmer lineup.

Expect these new chips to appear in iPods/iPhones. Battery life is their main concern at least with iPhone, so look to them to improve this dramatically over the coming years.

[jasonbrennan]

Then we find out OS X has been living a triple life. PPC, x86, and RISC… :p

Uhh, it does run a triple life. PPC, x86, and ARM (Darwin runs on all these platforms). With the nature of UNIX, it wouldn't shock me if they had Mac OS X running on most other platforms, at least internally.

[pete-01]

i'm guessing the "objective-c instruction set built on the chip" comment is the analyst not understanding how compiling works, and it just means they have developed an objective-c compiler for these chips.

[iOrlando]

but if there was going to be a completely new product line wouldnt we have heard some talk of it by now? if introduced next month at macworld?

[jaw04005]

I would do anything for a cheap Mac tablet.

Is ARM completely different from an intel?

Yes. It's a complete 180. It's more similar to PowerPC than x86.

[twoodcc]

i'll believe it when i see it.

but i hope i do see apple releasing these type of devices next year. i would love to have a tablet-like device that can also run apps from the app store, and that had a battery that lasted for days

[fendol]

Lots of words, lots of plans...

Lots of speculation going on, I need facts and proof :)

It would be nice to see an apple equivalent of the tablet pc for real though :cool::apple:http://seoagora.com/img/1261/v08t1201sxfb/cheers.gifhttp://seoagora.com/img/589/d08l1104oulu/smiley2.gifhttp://seoagora.com/img/308/s08e1024rvou/champagne.gif

[ibwb]

I don't know... has anyone profiled Objective-C performance on embedded hardware like the iPhone? Does it take a big performance hit from its run-time dynamic binding? If so, some hardware help in the form of additional CPU instructions could reduce overhead a lot.

[dguisinger]

i'm guessing the "objective-c instruction set built on the chip" comment is the analyst not understanding how compiling works, and it just means they have developed an objective-c compiler for these chips.

Wouldnt surprise me if they added acceleratation instructions for Objective-C. When using Objective-C, you pass messages instead of calling function pointers (in C++ or .NET), which is inheritly slower. In code that is heavily Obj-C you do have a performance penalty.

I could see Apple looking at adding Obj-C functionality to the instruction set; if you execute message passing at 2x the speed of a non-accelerated CPU, you get higher performance without raising the clock.

What these instructions would be or how they'd work, I'm not sure.

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

Then we find out OS X has been living a triple life. PPC, x86, and RISC… :p
PPC *is* RISC.

[Marx55]

Here it is (first picture):

Next Apple moves will be Books and Games…
http://spidouz.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/next-apple-moves-will-be-books-and-games

ROCKING!!!

[dguisinger]

PPC *is* RISC.

To be fair, most RISC processors have become more CISC over the years. Very few RISC chips have their simplistic instruction sets anymore......and CISC processors like x86 actually decode their instructions into more simplistic RISC instructions before execution. What a strange world we live in :)

[Small White Car]

"Battery life measured in days, much like smartphones."

You mean like the iPhone? ;)

Ha ha...yeah, not sure what product they're talking about there! :p


EDIT: Can someone tell me if I have this right?

Intel -> x86 -> Atom/CoreDuo
PA Semi -> RISC -> ARM

Do those categories line up? Or do I have that wrong? I'm not sure what any of these names are. That's how I currently understand it.

[mixedsig]

I would do anything for a cheap Mac tablet.

Is ARM completely different from an intel?

Yes, ARM instruction is completely different from x86 instruction set. They would need a virtualization to run x86 apps.

[dongmin]

Seems to me 2009 is too early for the investment in PA Semi to bear fruit...

But yes please. Sooner the better

[Rocketman]

ATNN. The common belief is Apple may release a larger display iPhone with more notebook like capabilities.

A generation skip could come from a device the has the pointer on it, but also has an optional heads-up display and voice activated OS.

Theater in an oversized iPhone and some glasses.

Remember when the iPhone was rumored very few of us were clearly saying phone was merely an app on a multi-function handheld computer with full web, multi-homing network, and application access. Now that reality is with us.

Next up . . ATNN.

Apple will redefine worldwide lifestyle.

Rocketman

[dongmin]

On the software side, will this Tablet use the iPhone OS or is Snow Leopard efficient enough to run on, let's say, a 800 mhz ARM system?

[zombitronic]

A quote from Steve Jobs:

“In the last recession, we were going to up our R&D budget so that we would be ahead of our competitors when the downturn was over… And it worked! That’s exactly what we’ll do this time!”

No doubt, there's been much R&D going on at Apple these days. I hope we get to witness the fruits of their labor soon. It doesn't seem that this recession is quite over yet, so they may still be pouring more of their cash-pile on research. Maybe it would make more sense to develop more and release a new product when people start spending again.

[Tallest Skil]

On the software side, will this Tablet use the iPhone OS or is Snow Leopard efficient enough to run on, let's say, a 800 mhz ARM system?

People already know what I want for the MacTablet, so I won't... fine, whatever:

13.3", slab format, MacBook Air internals, no ODD, no 3G built in (weirdos), no WiMAX (clueless), $1,999.

I think that setup is a fair bet, and with a 13.3" screen, it'd run the full OS X.

I think that anything larger than an iPhone that runs the iPhone OS is fairly useless. Just make a MacTablet that can have a full size (hence the screen) virtual keyboard, and then have it run OS X.

I'd bet that they could get Snow Leopard (or, hey, Leopard, please? I want this at MacWorld and we know Snow Leopard's not ready) running on an ARM like that. Heck, they had every version of OS X running natively on x86 internally at Apple.

[goldteef]

I didn't know that Apple was into Adjustable Rate Mortgages??

Wtf?

Dood, expect foreclosures to rise once the rate resets on a new MBP....

Stoopid....Stoopid....

[mac jones]

Thank God

I was getting a bit worried as I haven't heard a single tablet delusion in almost two weeks!!!

back to normal. :)

[jlbrown23]

Apple will not make netbooks OR tablets any time soon. They're both sort of niche, hobbiest gadgets, and for the most part do not have a wide market.

Ask yourself - why haven't the current tablets fared all that well? Because overall, it is not a great way to input information in to a computer(I know Apple would do a MUCH better job than MS, but that is only part of it). You need a keyboard, and if you have one there are very few inputs(I'm not saying NONE) that would be more efficiently done via a tablet.

Netbooks are also a bit gimmicky. The margins are low, so Apple won't be interested. And they are just not fully functional computers. Tiny screen, cramped keyboard - good for casual use on the move, but most people wouldn't tolerate them as their primary computer. Bottom line is my iPhone does 3/4 of this and fits in my pocket.

I think that there IS a chance we might see a more compact laptop one of these days(I've certainly seen more people pine for a replacement for their 12" iBooks than netbooks). But even that might not happen. The Air already delivers low weight - you think about it and netbooks weigh 2 lbs with 9" screens, while Airs weigh 3 lbs with 13.3" screens. So I think there is a better chance Apple shaves some weight off the Air to get it to 2-2.5 lbs than they try to make a more compact computer. I've never fully understood the big deal about "footprint" - the weight is most of what determines portability. But who knows - a sub-2 lb 12" Air that still has a full keyboard? THAT sounds more like something Apple would do.

[dongmin]

People already know what I want for the MacTablet, so I won't... fine, whatever:

13.3", slab format, MacBook Air internals, no ODD, no 3G built in (weirdos), no WiMAX (clueless), $1,999.

I think that setup is a fair bet, and with a 13.3" screen, it'd run the full OS X.

I think that anything larger than an iPhone that runs the iPhone OS is fairly useless. Just make a MacTablet that can have a full size (hence the screen) virtual keyboard, and then have it run OS X.

I'd bet that they could get Snow Leopard (or, hey, Leopard, please? I want this at MacWorld and we know Snow Leopard's not ready) running on an ARM like that. Heck, they had every version of OS X running natively on x86 internally at Apple.

I don't think Apple will go the route of the typical PC tablets, which is more or less what you're describing.

If it has a touch screen, then it'll be some sort of handheld, i.e. smaller than a MacBook. That's my take.

[gnasher729]

I would do anything for a cheap Mac tablet.

Is ARM completely different from an intel?

It is completely different. And nobody cares. Take a random iPhone developer, and ask them how sure they are and what evidence they have that there is actually an ARM processor in the iPhone, and not an Intel processor, or PowerPC, or MIPS or SH5. MacOS developers know how to write code that doesn't care what processor is used.

On the software side, will this Tablet use the iPhone OS or is Snow Leopard efficient enough to run on, let's say, a 800 mhz ARM system?

iPhone OS = Mac OS. The only difference is that code for backward compatibility is gone (ancient things like QuickDraw, but also the complete Carbon frameworks), there is currently only one supported architecture (no 32/64/x86/PPC versions), and some software that is more intended for servers, like Apache, isn't there.

[macshark]

Steve isn't stupid enough to miss the NetBook revolution. Yes, Apple can not afford the razor thin margins within the $300-$400 NetBook price range that most current vendors (ASUS, Acer, MSI, Samsung) are targeting, but Apple can offer an excellent NetBook solution in the $500-$600 range. Apple can differentiate this product through software (OSX and iLife apps), however, justifying the Apple price premium would be much easier if there are some hardware differentiators as well.

Must current netbooks consist of the Intel Atom chip coupled to a relatively power hungry legacy X86 chipset (NB/SB). Apple's new NetBook solution may be based on a derivative of the PA-Semi chip, which includes many of the chipset functions such as the memory controller, PCI-E controller, etc. on the processor die itself. This would enable Apple to reduce the cost, footprint and the power consumption of the motherboard while offering higher performance - either through increased clock frequency or through multiple cores.

Lower power consumption and smaller footprint may enable Apple to package a NetBook in a much more attractive form factor. Current notebooks are typically 1.10-1.25" thick, Apple may be able to offer a NetBook that is only .75" thick or even only .5" thick. Display port is much more amenable to extra thin form factors compared to the legacy VGA connector that is used on current generation NetBooks. Apple may also offer a 11" or 12" display and a slightly larger size keyboard. If the custom silicon solution can deliver significantly lower power consumption due to the elimination of the Northbridge and use of lower power DDR2 (or DDR3), Apple may be able to get 4-5 hours out of a 3-cell battery or 9-10 hours out of a 6-cell battery. Finally, Apple may chose to include digital audio in/out to make such a notebook very useful in the context of a home music center application.

[Small White Car]

Steve isn't stupid enough to miss the NetBook revolution.

Yes, but we're not there yet.

MP3 players were out for quite some time before the iPod and smart-phones were around for years before the iPhone.

Steve knows that being first matters little, but jumping in at the exact moment before the market explodes counts a lot. They timed the iPod and the iPhone just right. I suspect they'll do the same with netbooks, but that probably won't be for another year or two.

[alexbates]

What I predict that Apple will release at Macworld 2009 is the MacBook Touch. Here are the specs:
8" touch screen
On-screen keyboard
ARM processor
50GB SSD
2GB RAM
Ultra-thin outer aluminum shell
Base price: $899

We'll see what happens at Macworld. Does anyone besides me think that Apple could be releasing a cheaper version of the iPhone to expand their cell phone line-up.

[fluffy]

It is completely different. And nobody cares. Take a random iPhone developer, and ask them how sure they are and what evidence they have that there is actually an ARM processor in the iPhone, and not an Intel processor, or PowerPC, or MIPS or SH5. MacOS developers know how to write code that doesn't care what processor is used.
OTOH, games developers care quite deeply, especially the ones who are trying to push as much performance for 3D as possible. This guy (http://diaryofagraphicsprogrammer.blogspot.com/), for example. The iPhone ARM variant has a vector (SIMD) coprocessor which is very much unlike the SIMD functionality on PPC or x86.

Also, regarding the ARM "RISC" designation, modern ARM chips actually have two separate ISAs, ARM (RISC) and Thumb (CISC). The processor can switch between the two modes on a per-function basis (although most compilers only support the switching at the per-module level). Thumb code is significantly more compact, but also significantly slower since there's an extra instruction decode step.

[Rocketman]

Apple will not make netbooks OR tablets any time soon.

iPhone is an Apple tablet nano. ATN.

Rocketman

[justbn]

I'd like to see those "measured in days" results as well. I've got an iPod touch that only gets about 4 hours of use for very low fps games (solitaire, etc). Pretty pathetic.

[Tallest Skil]

Does anyone besides me think that Apple could be releasing a cheaper version of the iPhone to expand their cell phone line-up.

You mean like a normal cell phone? No.

Ha!

[skellener]

Apple will not make netbooks OR tablets any time soon. I agree 100%. Why won't you see a 10" $599 netbook from Apple? Because the $1800 Air is selling. There is no way Apple will shrink the screen just so they can sell a netbook for less money. Not gonna happen.

[Sun Baked]

I would expect Apple to incorporate more of their own CPUs across the board in their devices.

Might expect the iPhone, iPod, then the Wi-Fi Base Stations Products, and maybe the Apple TV.

[Stately]

I refuse to get myself all worked up again over speculating whether or not a beautiful, crystal clear-screened, perfectly sized to fit in the palm of my hands, extraordinarily functional, tablet type of device slightly larger in size than the iphone will be released at the Macworld convention 2009. . . I refuse. I refuse . . Oh whatever! Yes, I'm still waiting. :D:cool::apple:

[puttputt]

iPhone Pro

[puffnstuff]

Netbook? I got the touch and apparently there are a lot of advancements being made so no need for a netbook at least for me

Tablet? Yes, I would love one 12" powerful enough for me to run photoshop etc. I think anything smaller then 12" is pointless. Especially if you expect it to run osx.

[KindredMAC]

I could really see something taking over the Apple TV SKU that is a "Family Center" like this concept from MacLife. ARM could be good for this:

http://www.maclife.com/article/feature/future_apple_design?page=0%2C4

http://www.maclife.com/files/u32/1202_icom_text_1000.jpg

Granted with out the holophone feature.....

[dongmin]

iPhone OS = Mac OS. The only difference is that code for backward compatibility is gone (ancient things like QuickDraw, but also the complete Carbon frameworks), there is currently only one supported architecture (no 32/64/x86/PPC versions), and some software that is more intended for servers, like Apache, isn't there.

I should have been more clear. Yes, they share a common foundation but the USER EXPERIENCE is clearly different, as is the development environment.

What form factor this netbook/tablet ends up being is intricately tied to what kind of software platform Apple bases the device on.

[dex22]

As an ARM assembly coder from back in the day (and by back in the day I mean for Acorn, who invented the ARM chip before they spun off ARM to handle it) I have a very positive feeling about this.

Apple has much experience with OS X on ARM, and likely has internal XCode with ARM as a checkbox option. Their use of universal binaries supports more than just two architectures. It would be trivial from Apple's POV to use the forthcoming drop of PPC support to add ARM support.

One of the most attractive features of the ARM chipset is price. Back when I was designing boards around the ARM7500, one could be had for $5, or less in quantity. That is for the processor and entire chipset, including video. Granted, back then it was a 40 or 50MHz device, but it drew less than a watt. Now, we have 600 and 800MHz parts that equal the performance of the Atom, draw similar currents and have bluetooth, wifi, ethernet PHY and video on die.

So, picture if you will that Apple decides to support the ARM architecture with OS X... Think a simple line of low cost 10" netbooks, think of possibly sub-$300 OS X based consoles (or STBs as we used to call them before we knew what to do with them!)

When thinking of some of the accomplishments of ARM, remember: ARM is the definitive architecture for STBs, embedded boards, controllers, and cellphones. ARM cores outsell EVERY other architecture. There are more ARM cores in the world than every other architecture combined.

They are cheap at every level: cheap to license, cheap to fab, cheap to design boards with (so many reference designs), cheap to manufacture (you can buy full ARM computers for under $100) and have very cheap power budgets - usually around 1W.

If Apple has an ARM license, a chip design house with ARM experience and two existing products with ARM cores and good OS X support, it would be simply good use of resources to use this IP more broadly.

How? Well, that's what this thread is all about :)

[mdriftmeyer]

Wouldnt surprise me if they added acceleratation instructions for Objective-C. When using Objective-C, you pass messages instead of calling function pointers (in C++ or .NET), which is inheritly slower. In code that is heavily Obj-C you do have a performance penalty.

I could see Apple looking at adding Obj-C functionality to the instruction set; if you execute message passing at 2x the speed of a non-accelerated CPU, you get higher performance without raising the clock.

What these instructions would be or how they'd work, I'm not sure.

What you're attempting to discern are the differences between dynamically typed and statically typed languages and the accompanying dynamic runtime which is part of ObjC.

ObjC being a superset of C still doesn't have a f'n thing to to do with Chip instruction sets which are sets of assembly language calls.

[illegallydead]

I'd like to see those "measured in days" results as well. I've got an iPod touch that only gets about 4 hours of use for very low fps games (solitaire, etc). Pretty pathetic.

There will need to be a battery revolution for this to happen. Current cell phones and smart phones only have long lives because you are not using them for intensive applications, not to mention you likely use them for minutes at a time instead of like a computer where it is for long bouts.

I don't care how efficient you make the chip, lithium ion is just not power dense enough to power modern computers for "days" of use. And that is not what a mobile computer is meant for. It is meant to be used for school/work/fun during the day, away from home, then to be plugged in at night. Having a laptop that does not need to be charged for a second day's use has no use (to me, at least). So long as it will get through a full day, which a more efficient chip CAN do, I will be more than happy (and 95% of all other laptops users as well)

[Beric]

Wasn't there some news about some 40-hour notebook batteries a while back? I wonder when they will be released.

[=Alb=]

"will have the Objective-C instruction set built into the chip".


Ok, that way it makes no sense.
But it is conceivable, and would be very cool, if the instruction set of the new microprocessor were the IR (Intermediate Representation) of the LLVM compiler that Apple is actively developing (and already using on the iPhone).
That is now a "virtual" instruction set of an imaginary 64 bit processor.

[parapup]

Ok, that way it makes no sense.
But it is conceivable, and would be very cool, if the instruction set of the new microprocessor were the IR (Intermediate Representation) of the LLVM compiler that Apple is actively developing (and already using on the iPhone).
That is now a "virtual" instruction set of an imaginary 64 bit processor.

That would not be ARM then, just like if x86 supported PPC as its instruction set it won't be x86 anymore. And if you are thinking about ARM + LLVM - that would increase the die size and complexity and along with it power consumption.

That aside, Obj-C is compiled to native code unlike say Java which compiles to its own bytecode which is then JITed to machine native code - so really the "Obj-C instruction set" thing does not make any sense.

[=Alb=]

That would not be ARM then, just like if x86 supported PPC as its instruction set it won't be x86 anymore. And if you are thinking about ARM + LLVM - that would increase the die size and complexity and along with it power consumption.

Of course it will be no ARM. And it does not need the extra complexity of an ARM instruction set one on-die.
But it will be for sure more optimized for the compiler they are using, without losing compatibility with x86 computers. Those are just a JIT compilation away from the IR.

[skellener]

Think a simple line of low cost 10" netbooks, think of possibly sub-$300 OS X based consoles....Never gonna happen. Apple doesn't do low cost.

[dex22]

...And it does not need the extra complexity of an ARM instruction set one on-die.

*confused* at its most basic level, ARM assembly is 16 instructions and 16 conditions, with fully conditional execution and a no-penalty barrel shifter.

Compare:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arm_instruction_set#Design_notes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_instruction_listings

[dex22]

Never gonna happen. Apple doesn't do low cost.

I am approaching this from the design POV. Apple does low cost. This is how they protect their margins.

Apple has an ARM OS X with 10,000 apps already written. Is it a stretch to see a game console with a 400 or 600MHz ARM?

You say Apple won't do this, but Apple already does in the form of the :apple:TV. If the :apple:TV could also natively run all the iApps, you'd effectively have a convergence device :apple:TV/iTouch/games console. Apple has shown a preference for selling hardware that is tied in to services like iTunes or the iApp store, and this would allow them to monetize the :apple:TV and open up new markets for iApps, whilst creating a moderately competent game platform that would have similar performance and stature to a Wii.

It's really easy to sit there and say "it won't happen." I'm not saying it will. I'm saying these are the technological/hardware elements in place, and these are the easy steps forward from this position. Nobody knows what Apple WILL do, but we know from the technology they have available what doors are closed and what doors are open - everything else is product packaging and marketing. And that is something Apple does very well.

[richcon]

This could make sense if you assume the author really meant:

Objective-C Runtime Hardware Acceleration, which could take the form of a *new* dedicated instruction set.

I could see Apple wanting to speed up the ObjC runtime. Since ObjC is dynamic, it is both more flexible and significantly slower than C++ in an apples-to-apples comparison.

For example, Objective-C methods are compiled into C functions, with the method name (its "selector") stored in a giant lookup table along with information on which objects have it and the memory location of the function itself. Then calling a method involves looking up the method's name in that giant table, figuring out which version to call, and then running it. The time it takes to perform that lookup is the main reason Objective-C is slower than C++.

If a future chip had a built-in support for objective-c selector lookups, that'd *significantly* speed up anything written in Cocoa.

[I WAS the one]

I don't think we'll see many "netbooks" from Apple. They already have 3 models of notebooks as is, I don't think they'll expand (read: complicate) the lineup any more than that. What are netbooks anyway? Netbooks are low cost, low margin machines. Apple operates on very high margins. Why sell 4 netbooks when they could sell one MacbookPro. You know what the benefit of that is? You only have 1, not 4, customers to support. That and it's easier to operations to manufacture/ship/etc. It just makes more sense to have a slimmer lineup.

Expect these new chips to appear in iPods/iPhones. Battery life is their main concern at least with iPhone, so look to them to improve this dramatically over the coming years.

Netbooks are a true solution today. Not everybody wants to edit a video or build a webpage, I own 4 Macs, One Tower, One iMac and two laptops. Last month I bought a Netbook, erase the Windows XP OS and install Ubuntu OS (better that Windows more Mac feeling) and it´s been great since that day. Today My hard work is made on a Mac but the everyday tasks (office, email, music and web browsing) are made on my Netbook... 8 inches of pure pleasure. Apple need to build this little cheap machines, they do the job.

[ddTaylor]

I am approaching this from the design POV. Apple does low cost. This is how they protect their margins.

Apple has an ARM OS X with 10,000 apps already written. Is it a stretch to see a game console with a 400 or 600MHz ARM?

You say Apple won't do this, but Apple already does in the form of the :apple:TV. If the :apple:TV could also natively run all the iApps, you'd effectively have a convergence device :apple:TV/iTouch/games console. Apple has shown a preference for selling hardware that is tied in to services like iTunes or the iApp store, and this would allow them to monetize the :apple:TV and open up new markets for iApps, whilst creating a moderately competent game platform that would have similar performance and stature to a Wii.

It's really easy to sit there and say "it won't happen." I'm not saying it will. I'm saying these are the technological/hardware elements in place, and these are the easy steps forward from this position. Nobody knows what Apple WILL do, but we know from the technology they have available what doors are closed and what doors are open - everything else is product packaging and marketing. And that is something Apple does very well.

Finally! Someone who is as smart and cogent as I! Seriously, though - I am both smart, and cogent :).

On a more personal and less sarcastic note - your posts have brought light to this thread and I, for one, thank you. A thoughtful post is hard to find on these forums most days (except for mine, of course).

D

[gnasher729]

OTOH, games developers care quite deeply, especially the ones who are trying to push as much performance for 3D as possible. This guy (http://diaryofagraphicsprogrammer.blogspot.com/), for example. The iPhone ARM variant has a vector (SIMD) coprocessor which is very much unlike the SIMD functionality on PPC or x86.

Also, regarding the ARM "RISC" designation, modern ARM chips actually have two separate ISAs, ARM (RISC) and Thumb (CISC). The processor can switch between the two modes on a per-function basis (although most compilers only support the switching at the per-module level). Thumb code is significantly more compact, but also significantly slower since there's an extra instruction decode step.

No, I said they don't care that it is an ARM processor and is different from an x86 processor. They may care about speed of code, and they might care about code size (although I find that unlikely, because code size is quite irrelevant compared to the size of everything else). They don't care one bit whether it is an ARM processor or a bunch of crazy monkeys moving bits around at enormous speeds.

[lgoodlove]

Uhh, it does run a triple life. PPC, x86, and ARM (Darwin runs on all these platforms). With the nature of UNIX, it wouldn't shock me if they had Mac OS X running on most other platforms, at least internally.

so true. I could see apple using this to easily take a low end product to the market with in one quarter (Q1 2009). but i agree that they will probably do it mid 2009

[ddTaylor]

Netbooks are a true solution today. Not everybody wants to edit a video or build a webpage, I own 4 Macs, One Tower, One iMac and two laptops. Last month I bought a Netbook, erase the Windows XP OS and install Ubuntu OS (better that Windows more Mac feeling) and it´s been great since that day. Today My hard work is made on a Mac but the everyday tasks (office, email, music and web browsing) are made on my Netbook... 8 inches of pure pleasure. Apple need to build this little cheap machines, they do the job.

I agree - although I installed OS X on my netbook (please - I know how some of you feel - but I bought a valid, legal copy - and I know, Apple says I am using it in an incorrect fashion, but make a netbook and I will gladly restore it to factory software). I think I use the netbook for most tasks such as web-surfing on the go with WiFi and e-mail at the house - and iTunes.

D

[macrobert]

This makes a lot of sense considering Apple's long history with ARM, the company, and the CPU. I wonder if Apple retained any rights, licenses, at all from when they helped found ARM Holdings back in the 90s. I remember talking up the StrongARM used in the Newton when I was an Apple Student Rep.

[jasonbrennan]

Netbooks are a true solution today. Not everybody wants to edit a video or build a webpage, I own 4 Macs, One Tower, One iMac and two laptops. Last month I bought a Netbook, erase the Windows XP OS and install Ubuntu OS (better that Windows more Mac feeling) and it´s been great since that day. Today My hard work is made on a Mac but the everyday tasks (office, email, music and web browsing) are made on my Netbook... 8 inches of pure pleasure. Apple need to build this little cheap machines, they do the job.

I'm not saying they aren't becoming popular, but I really don't think this is where Apple would be headed. The desktop space (this includes netbooks, notebooks, and desktops) are basically dead, in a sense. The two big things right now are web and mobile. Apple seems to be clearly focused on mobile.

They've now got a pretty strong mobile platform with 2 devices so far, and I expect that to grow. So I don't think they are going to bother with netbooks, as it's not a way for them to push forward.

I think they'd be smarter putting a mobile OS (iPhone OS) on a device than a desktop OS (Mac OS) in a cramped fashion (let's face it, if you put Ubuntu or XP on a 5inch netbook, it's going to feel super cramped). Apple upsizes the user experience, not downsize.

[dongmin]

There will need to be a battery revolution for this to happen. Current cell phones and smart phones only have long lives because you are not using them for intensive applications, not to mention you likely use them for minutes at a time instead of like a computer where it is for long bouts.

I don't care how efficient you make the chip, lithium ion is just not power dense enough to power modern computers for "days" of use. And that is not what a mobile computer is meant for. It is meant to be used for school/work/fun during the day, away from home, then to be plugged in at night. Having a laptop that does not need to be charged for a second day's use has no use (to me, at least). So long as it will get through a full day, which a more efficient chip CAN do, I will be more than happy (and 95% of all other laptops users as well)

I don't think "days" of use is the holy grail. But the expectation is there for a handheld device (e.g. the iphone) to last at least a full day's use without charging. The iPod was able to do 8-10 hours of playback from day one. That to me is the appropriate threshold.

[bigmoosey]

Back in the day (late to mid 90's I think) when I was working at an ISV that was an Apple Developer Partner, we got access to really early Mac Os 8 (Copeland) and CHRP hardware - remember that?

Anyways, the CHRP box we were provided had a Java VM built in on a chip. I think it was JDK 1.0.2 if I remember correctly. The machine was fast all around, but the JVM screamed (until the VM had heap issues).

To my knowledge we were one of two ISV's (for very specific reasons) that were provided these boxes. It would not be a far fetch to consider that they may put objective-c on a chip as well. This would accelerate almost every Apple app on the current Mac.

Food for thought - let me see if I can dig up some old shots of the box and the innards....

[hiimamac]

I would do anything for a cheap Mac tablet.

Is ARM completely different from an intel?

Cheap and Mac?

What's wrong with the above statement. If anything, cheap is always followed by "crippled" or "missing "standard" features" if anything at all. I mean, now look at the Macbook vs Macbook Pro - same chasis (unibody) with exception of a .50 cent piece of silicon (firewire), an express slot, $39.00, and a few extra inches and worth $700? I don't think so. Maybe it was worth more when you were comparing plastic (previous macbook) to 50+ screws that had to be screwed and un-screwed, now it's apple that's doing the screwing. LOL.

But seriously, does anyone in their RIGHT mind think we'll ever see a workable "inexpensive" piece of hardware that has features that we ALL need? Right now they can't even get PUSH or FLASH to work on the iPhone and FLASH is 80% of the internet.

Only a failed economy and slow sales would force the above scenario to happen, unless of course, Jobs steps down and the marketing department takes over the way it should.

Here come all the "defending" why should Apple accommodate (fill in the blank statements) - hey, I'm not the one who told Mac Specialists that they don't do a good job if they don't sell Apple care and One to One with Macs then turn One to One (which used to be PRO CARE) and training for Logic, Shake, FCP into a place where barking dogs, baby's, and people that don't know what an attachment is try to learn iLife with out FW support for their camcorders while pushing the creatives (those that kept apple alive for years) making the decisions.


Have a nice day.

[firewood]

That would not be ARM then, just like if x86 supported PPC as its instruction set it won't be x86 anymore. And if you are thinking about ARM + LLVM - that would increase the die size and complexity and along with it power consumption.

Of course it would still be as ARM, just as it is today after several extensions and a nearly complete different instruction set have been pasted on (arm4, 2 thumb ISAs, Jazelle, VFP, & etc.)

CPU architects study things such as the best optimized LLVM output and Obj-C runtime, and look for opportunities to decrease average instruction path length by greater amounts than the required additional hardware. Having not done that (recently), I can't say whether it's a good idea or not.

.

[firewood]

Is ARM completely different from an intel?

Actually, Intel used to make ARM processors (XScale), but sold that operation off to Marvell a couple years back.


.

[firewood]

"Battery life measured in days, much like smartphones."

You mean like the iPhone? ;)

The iPhone is only rated for around 3 to 7 hours if you watch a running app continuously. The graphics display refresh and backlight take up a huge chunk of the power. So, without major display improvements, battery life would not go up to days even if the CPU took ZERO power. So maybe they have some clever display technology (as has the OLPC) in the works as well.

.

[mdriftmeyer]

Actually, Intel used to make ARM processors (XScale), but sold that operation off to Marvell a couple years back.


.

The dumbest move they every made. Talking to colleagues at Intel they all agree its the dumbest move and their answer, Atom, pales in comparison.

[mdriftmeyer]

Back in the day (late to mid 90's I think) when I was working at an ISV that was an Apple Developer Partner, we got access to really early Mac Os 8 (Copeland) and CHRP hardware - remember that?

Anyways, the CHRP box we were provided had a Java VM built in on a chip. I think it was JDK 1.0.2 if I remember correctly. The machine was fast all around, but the JVM screamed (until the VM had heap issues).

To my knowledge we were one of two ISV's (for very specific reasons) that were provided these boxes. It would not be a far fetch to consider that they may put objective-c on a chip as well. This would accelerate almost every Apple app on the current Mac.

Food for thought - let me see if I can dig up some old shots of the box and the innards....

The Java VM isn't the Java Runtime.

The equivalent would be putting the LLVM on a chip and leveraging optimizations with CLang to be tuned to the best optimizations for C, C++, ObjC, Java, etc.

[BJWanlund]

I'm guessing that this is why Steve is going to make everything iTunes Plus in the near future, according to 1 rumor. He doesn't want this announcement to take away from the stuff he's sure to announce at MacWorld Expo in just a few short weeks! :D

BJ

[MattInOz]

What you're attempting to discern are the differences between dynamically typed and statically typed languages and the accompanying dynamic runtime which is part of ObjC.

ObjC being a superset of C still doesn't have a f'n thing to to do with Chip instruction sets which are sets of assembly language calls.

Ok i maybe completely dumb as well here.
But what about LLVM that Apple have been hard at work using and improving to make a lot of new stuff in core libraries in the past and SL into the future.

Could this custom ARM be a Low Level Virtual Machine that wasn't so Virtual.
At least in part a Low Level Hybrid Machine if you will.

[Full of Win]

I agree 100%. Why won't you see a 10" $599 netbook from Apple? Because the $1800 Air is selling. There is no way Apple will shrink the screen just so they can sell a netbook for less money. Not gonna happen.


If they use the Touch OS (for want of a better term) for this so-called Netbook, then using the Air as a point of comparison is not partially apt.

[motulist]

Apple NEEDS a netbook category computer. They are a very quickly growing segment of the laptop market. And as Jobs has always quoted Gretsky "you skate to where the puck is going to be." (or something like that). If Apple doesn't start making relatively low cost netbooks soon, Apple is gonna start to lose marketshare again.

Apple can sell netbooks at a nice profit too, because people expect to pay more up front for Apple hardware and OS X. If Apple sells a new netbook type device with hardware equivalent to the $400 netbooks already out there, and then sell it for $600, they'd sell like hotcakes and Apple would make a boatload of money. At over $200 profit on each device, Apple would sell a zillion of these and MORE than make up the profit that they'd lose in MB Airs. Apple probably makes much more than $200+ profit on each MBA, but Apple would sell SOOOO many $600 netbooks that they'd wind up making a LOT more money.

[Tampa Tom]

Hey, my Newton 2100 has an ARM processor and still works great!

[bruinsrme]

The dumbest move they every made. Talking to colleagues at Intel they all agree its the dumbest move and their answer, Atom, pales in comparison.

yeah there were a slew of horrible decisions during that time frame.

We never understood why the arm chip wasn't ported over to the 860/861 process. They could have ported it over to 120nm then 90nm then to 65nm years ahead of others.

The atom may be bloated but on a 32nm platform it will be interesting to see what it does for handhelds and notebooks.

[happydude]

i wish apple would buy my arm . . . oh wait, i just bought a new macbook. they got it and my leg. at least it was worth it . . .:apple:;):apple:

[doubleusn]

Steve isn't stupid enough to miss the NetBook revolution. Yes, Apple can not afford the razor thin margins within the $300-$400 NetBook price range that most current vendors (ASUS, Acer, MSI, Samsung) are targeting, but Apple can offer an excellent NetBook solution in the $500-$600 range. Apple can differentiate this product through software (OSX and iLife apps), however, justifying the Apple price premium would be much easier if there are some hardware differentiators as well.

Must current netbooks consist of the Intel Atom chip coupled to a relatively power hungry legacy X86 chipset (NB/SB). Apple's new NetBook solution may be based on a derivative of the PA-Semi chip, which includes many of the chipset functions such as the memory controller, PCI-E controller, etc. on the processor die itself. This would enable Apple to reduce the cost, footprint and the power consumption of the motherboard while offering higher performance - either through increased clock frequency or through multiple cores.

Lower power consumption and smaller footprint may enable Apple to package a NetBook in a much more attractive form factor. Current notebooks are typically 1.10-1.25" thick, Apple may be able to offer a NetBook that is only .75" thick or even only .5" thick. Display port is much more amenable to extra thin form factors compared to the legacy VGA connector that is used on current generation NetBooks. Apple may also offer a 11" or 12" display and a slightly larger size keyboard. If the custom silicon solution can deliver significantly lower power consumption due to the elimination of the Northbridge and use of lower power DDR2 (or DDR3), Apple may be able to get 4-5 hours out of a 3-cell battery or 9-10 hours out of a 6-cell battery. Finally, Apple may chose to include digital audio in/out to make such a notebook very useful in the context of a home music center application.

Hi

Ever since I got my AlumiBook MacBook I have been staring at the mini-displayport on it and then keep thinking about the iMac-ish patent app that came out a while back. (small box that slides into the side of an iMac screen)

Your post is one of the first I have seen that also thinks about minidisplayport in other ways. 99.99% of the others are how minidisplayport stole their girlfriend or kicked their dog and that it's just plain evil :-)

Now given that iphone game apps are being outputted (unsupported) to larger displays, I have to think now more than ever that their will be an iphone to miniDisplayPort cable in the future.

The idea of hooking up my iPhone to my 24" LED ACD and then just using my Apple BT keyboard with it just feels 'too cool' & 'so right'.

...and maybe 'too real' in the near future.

Is it MW yet?

Cheers
-wsn

I assuming everybody on here is also stuck in this Holiday/Christmas game. I only want Mac stuff, and it has to be a gift card as 'my' Christmas is not till Jan :-)

[alexbates]

Apple NEEDS a netbook category computer. They are a very quickly growing segment of the laptop market. And as Jobs has always quoted Gretsky "you skate to where the puck is going to be." (or something like that). If Apple doesn't start making relatively low cost netbooks soon, Apple is gonna start to lose marketshare again.

Apple can sell netbooks at a nice profit too, because people expect to pay more up front for Apple hardware and OS X. If Apple sells a new netbook type device with hardware equivalent to the $400 netbooks already out there, and then sell it for $600, they'd sell like hotcakes and Apple would make a boatload of money. At over $200 profit on each device, Apple would sell a zillion of these and MORE than make up the profit that they'd lose in MB Airs. Apple probably makes much more than $200+ profit on each MBA, but Apple would sell SOOOO many $600 netbooks that they'd wind up making a LOT more money.

I entirely agree with this, but I don't think that its going to happen soon. As Steve Jobs said, "We've Got Some Interesting Ideas", but I think that there not quite ready to throw anything out there that might not be very good. Apple has always tried to sell the best, but most expensive computers. I think that they are going to keep it that way for just a little longer. In the near future, they will have to make some cheaper products because of the economic slow down that could continue for another year or so. I sure do hope that Apple will do this soon, so maybe one day, they can put Microsoft out of business.

[headfuzz]

:apple: Netbooks dockable into new iMac at MWSF09 :p

[Vidd]

I hope Apple bring out a netbook next year (however unlikely that is).

If they could scale the iPhone user-experience up, that would do.
I find sometimes browsing on an iPod touch is less of a pain than on some netbooks with their awkward trackpads so I'd love to see Apple's take on them.

[bytethese]

I have a sneaky suspicion that my next Mac purchase will cost me an ARM and possibly a leg. :)

[aaarrrgggh]

I'm not saying they aren't becoming popular, but I really don't think this is where Apple would be headed. The desktop space (this includes netbooks, notebooks, and desktops) are basically dead, in a sense. The two big things right now are web and mobile. Apple seems to be clearly focused on mobile.

They've now got a pretty strong mobile platform with 2 devices so far, and I expect that to grow. So I don't think they are going to bother with netbooks, as it's not a way for them to push forward.

I think they'd be smarter putting a mobile OS (iPhone OS) on a device than a desktop OS (Mac OS) in a cramped fashion (let's face it, if you put Ubuntu or XP on a 5inch netbook, it's going to feel super cramped). Apple upsizes the user experience, not downsize.

Went into an Apple store with my netbook this weekend to see if I could rationalize buying a MB or MBA for a cleaner solution than my AA1. I really wanted to make it work. My wife wanted it to work. It doesn't, and the footprint is the real issue. The MBA is close on weight... but it can't take the place of the netbook!

Juggle a netbook on an airplane once and you will be sold for life. I could fit my dinner and my netbook on the tray at the same time! I could effortlessly get out of my seat without having my neighbor hold something. It makes the decision of bring or not go away altogether.

The problem with Apple focusing on its current lineup is that the full-size notebook market is being subjugated by netbooks and cell phones. Devices with higher pixel densities that are perfect for 75% of the tasks people do, and adequate for at least 15-20% of what is left. I have a fairly complicated Sketchup model I work with, no problems. Financial spreadsheets, no problems. Powerpoint... no problem. Everything I use my 17" MBP for (aside from AutoCAD) works just fine.

There is also significant room for improvement... the keyboards and touchpads are awful, and the over all workmanship could be better.

[Doctor Q]

I have a new design for Apple to consider. Use an iPhone or an iPod touch as the trackpad for a MacBook or MacBook Pro. They will come with a depression where the trackpad would otherwise be, with padding to cradle the phone or touch. You just drop it in and use the touchscreen. You'd tap once for a "click" and the phone/touch would support single or multi-touch gestures just as the trackpads do now, but in addition it could display menus or other information to help you use the active application. When the phone gets thin enough, it could be used in the MacBook Air too.

You could even talk on the iPhone while it's cradled, using either the iPhone's or the Mac's microphone and speaker.

You're welcome, Steve.

[wizard]

Wouldnt surprise me if they added acceleratation instructions for Objective-C.

Anything is possible but it is not like Cortex has a surplus of instruction codes. What wouldn't surprise me is a co processor that works within the current ARM hardware architecture. It would be nice if they could accelerate the heavy parts of Objective C but it would also be nice to see Apple introduce a decimal math co processor.

When using Objective-C, you pass messages instead of calling function pointers (in C++ or .NET), which is inheritly slower. In code that is heavily Obj-C you do have a performance penalty.

The question is how do you accelerate that? One thing that comes to mind is the incredible amount of string processing that goes on in a modern iPhone type app. So much is done by string look up and comparison that instructions to accelerate that might have a significant impact on performance.


I could see Apple looking at adding Obj-C functionality to the instruction set; if you execute message passing at 2x the speed of a non-accelerated CPU, you get higher performance without raising the clock.

I'm not so certain that the big hold up is message passing, might be I just don't know. What I do know is that Apple wouldn't do anything hardware wise without profiling a lot of code. So they likely have an eye already on what ever the big hold ups are. It is very possible that they could do for embedded devices what they did for vector processing with Alt-Vec.


What these instructions would be or how they'd work, I'm not sure.

Like wise I'm not sure if Apple is up to anything here but I do know that ARM has the provisions for co processors. What they implement is likely to be via that mechanism.

As for the next gen iPhone a 1.5 to 2x speed up would be very welcomed. For most apps it is not needed but Safari can always use more horsepower. Even then next gen iPhone will need significantly more RAM. I'd like to see Apple jump to 512meg of RAM, especially if they go the route of a larger tablet.

Dave

[Trip.Tucker]

I didn't know that Apple was into Adjustable Rate Mortgages??

Wtf?

Dood, expect foreclosures to rise once the rate resets on a new MBP....

Stoopid....Stoopid....

Huh? Methinks you be the court jester!

[Trip.Tucker]

I'd like to see those "measured in days" results as well. I've got an iPod touch that only gets about 4 hours of use for very low fps games (solitaire, etc). Pretty pathetic.

That's Apple taking care of your life style choices. 4 hours of games is plenty, go outside and play in the sun after!

[chickenninja]

days instead of hours, that would be nice. I never take my laptop anywhere without its Ac adapter.

[wizard]

..........

That aside, Obj-C is compiled to native code unlike say Java which compiles to its own bytecode which is then JITed to machine native code - so really the "Obj-C instruction set" thing does not make any sense.

No it doesn't make sense but you have to take into account that the source might be a liberal arts major. He may have info we don't but simply can't connect the dots. Frankly I do believe it would be possible to extend ARM to enhance it's ability to run iPhone apps. A co processor for string handling might help for example.

It is interesting that Apple is rolling it's own ARM processor wise. The question is what special sauce are they going to put into their SoC to justify it?
Certainly high integration of support logic is part of the goal but what about special logic such as a co processor for string handling. Just a thought.


Dave

[talkingfuture]

I am really looking forward to Macworld. I have a good feeling that we're getting something exciting. This ARM tablet idea would be amazing. I reckon they can revolutionise the Netbook market on a similar scale to what the iPhone did for phones.

[newb16]

Intel -> x86 -> Atom/CoreDuo
PA Semi -> RISC -> ARM

Do those categories line up? Or do I have that wrong? I'm not sure what any of these names are. That's how I currently understand it.

(ARM Ltd) -> ARM -> *custom implementation by PA Semi/Samsung/etc name here*

ARM is an architecture like x86, and whatever implementation of it by licensee is counterpart of atom/coreduo

[alexbates]

I have a new design for Apple to consider. Use an iPhone or an iPod touch as the trackpad for a MacBook or MacBook Pro. They will come with a depression where the trackpad would otherwise be, with padding to cradle the phone or touch. You just drop it in and use the touchscreen. You'd tap once for a "click" and the phone/touch would support single or multi-touch gestures just as the trackpads do now, but in addition it could display menus or other information to help you use the active application. When the phone gets thin enough, it could be used in the MacBook Air too.

You could even talk on the iPhone while it's cradled, using either the iPhone's or the Mac's microphone and speaker.

You're welcome, Steve.

Apple has not used this idea, but there is an application in the App Store that let's you do the same thing, Touchpad Elite.

[Lesser Evets]

Apple of all places knows the use of lesser/older technology to make new devices. Heck they were built on that premise. I just can't see them taking a decisive step to netbooks next year because they could have taken such steps already and haven't.

A quote from Steve Jobs:

“In the last recession, we were going to up our R&D budget so that we would be ahead of our competitors when the downturn was over… And it worked! That’s exactly what we’ll do this time!”


He's got 4 years. No hurry.

[137489]

Why sell 4 netbooks when they could sell one MacbookPro. You know what the benefit of that is? You only have 1, not 4, customers to support. That and it's easier to operations to manufacture/ship/etc. It just makes more sense to have a slimmer lineup.


I see your point, but.... I live in North Carolina where we have a lot of lower-incomed families (as compared to other areas in the country [or even parts of NC for that matter]). During black Friday, Target started stocking netbooks (linux Asus EE PC - Black and White), 4gb hard drive for $399. You should have seen them flying out of there. People were buying them to introduce their kids to their first computer. Adults were buying them for themselves, so that they could finally have a computer, get on the internet, etc.

I think the price point is what is sriving the netbook rage. For me, I would just want one for when I travel on vacation (internet, email, download pictures/video from my camera to free up the SD card, and maybe MS-Office).

Like Apple, netbooks are a niche market that seems to be filling nicely.

[mdriftmeyer]

No it doesn't make sense but you have to take into account that the source might be a liberal arts major. He may have info we don't but simply can't connect the dots. Frankly I do believe it would be possible to extend ARM to enhance it's ability to run iPhone apps. A co processor for string handling might help for example.

It is interesting that Apple is rolling it's own ARM processor wise. The question is what special sauce are they going to put into their SoC to justify it?
Certainly high integration of support logic is part of the goal but what about special logic such as a co processor for string handling. Just a thought.


Dave

:D

Shoot the author of this article or teach them to have their work checked by someone in the field their writing on.

[pilotError]

The dumbest move they every made. Talking to colleagues at Intel they all agree its the dumbest move and their answer, Atom, pales in comparison.

Certainly is!

Now that Intel has recaptured the desktop (for the moment) and has a clear strategy on that front for the next 8 years, your definitely going to see a big push into the low power CPU market.

I think a hint of that was shown by the frustration vented by an Intel engineer in the press a few months back over the decision of Apple to use ARM instead of the Atom. It was quickly dismissed by everyone, but the mini success of the Atom really got Intel's attention. Based on that alone, I would think Intel has something in the works.


Hi

Ever since I got my AlumiBook MacBook I have been staring at the mini-displayport on it and then keep thinking about the iMac-ish patent app that came out a while back. (small box that slides into the side of an iMac screen)

Your post is one of the first I have seen that also thinks about minidisplayport in other ways. 99.99% of the others are how minidisplayport stole their girlfriend or kicked their dog and that it's just plain evil :-)

Now given that iphone game apps are being outputted (unsupported) to larger displays, I have to think now more than ever that their will be an iphone to miniDisplayPort cable in the future.

The idea of hooking up my iPhone to my 24" LED ACD and then just using my Apple BT keyboard with it just feels 'too cool' & 'so right'.

...and maybe 'too real' in the near future.

Is it MW yet?

Cheers
-wsn

I assuming everybody on here is also stuck in this Holiday/Christmas game. I only want Mac stuff, and it has to be a gift card as 'my' Christmas is not till Jan :-)


Since the news of the TV out libraries has been pushed around in the iPhone SDK, how different is an iPhone or iPod Touch from an Apple TV? What if the App store was suddenly available to the Apple TV and they used an iPhone or iPod Touch as the controller (like the Remote app). It would certainly give that ATV Hobby a little more legs.

The things that make you go Hmmmn...

[newb16]

Thumb code is significantly more compact, but also significantly slower since there's an extra instruction decode step.

I can understand that it's slower ( in terms of time per task ) as it's less powerful due to no conditional execute prefixes, no operand shift, etc, but is penalty for thumb really that significant in cycles per instruction?

[devinsblog]

I think this post is a validation of the prediction that I made that if Apple comes out with a netbook, they're not going to create a typical "cheap" laptop - they're going to reinvent the category.

http://devinsblog.com/2008/12/07/apples-netbook-release-strategy-redefining-netbook/

[firewood]

Thumb code is significantly more compact, but also significantly slower since there's an extra instruction decode step.

Any additional decode is usually hidden in a pipeline stage, so it only appears as a missed branch prediction penalty. I have one benchmark where the Thumb code was faster... because it was small enough to fit in icache, whereas the ARM version wasn't. YMMV.

.

[Tallest Skil]

...if Apple comes out with a netbook, they're not going to create a typical "cheap" laptop - they're going to reinvent the category.

They'll make the same thing as everyone else, but instead of "cheap", it'll be "expensive"! :D

[iMacmatician]

Lower power consumption and smaller footprint may enable Apple to package a NetBook in a much more attractive form factor. Current notebooks are typically 1.10-1.25" thick, Apple may be able to offer a NetBook that is only .75" thick or even only .5" thick. Display port is much more amenable to extra thin form factors compared to the legacy VGA connector that is used on current generation NetBooks. I hope Apple can make it thin without sacrificing too much performance. Absolute performance at least would be quite good.

They've now got a pretty strong mobile platform with 2 devices so far, and I expect that to grow. So I don't think they are going to bother with netbooks, as it's not a way for them to push forward.I've always thought of the iPhone and iPod touch as the first foray into the mobile arena for Apple.

I think they'd be smarter putting a mobile OS (iPhone OS) on a device than a desktop OS (Mac OS) in a cramped fashion (let's face it, if you put Ubuntu or XP on a 5inch netbook, it's going to feel super cramped). Apple upsizes the user experience, not downsize.What I've been saying for a long time now. I don't see Mac OS X working out for mobile devices. Not only are the specs are too high (note that minimum specs are exactly that: MINIMUM specs), but the user experience won't be as good. Mac OS X (and apps) work well with a certain resolution (display size) or higher. The smaller the device gets, the worse the user experience is, and I don't see either specs or Snow Leopard changing that. A user interface designed for a small device would work well on a bigger one, with small tweaks. I see things being much snappier with iPhone OS than Mac OS X.

Plus, apparently small devices are used for tasks like general web browsing and document editing. Well, if iPhone OS included iLife and iWork (as well as more editing capabilities in general), wouldn't it do most if not all of what the device would be used for even if it had Mac OS X?

Maybe it was worth more when you were comparing plastic (previous macbook) to 50+ screws that had to be screwed and un-screwed, now it's apple that's doing the screwing. LOL.:D:D:D:D

[137489]

Hi

Ever since I got my AlumiBook MacBook I have been staring at the mini-displayport on it and then keep thinking about the iMac-ish patent app that came out a while back. (small box that slides into the side of an iMac screen)

Your post is one of the first I have seen that also thinks about minidisplayport in other ways. 99.99% of the others are how minidisplayport stole their girlfriend or kicked their dog and that it's just plain evil :-)

Now given that iphone game apps are being outputted (unsupported) to larger displays, I have to think now more than ever that their will be an iphone to miniDisplayPort cable in the future.

The idea of hooking up my iPhone to my 24" LED ACD and then just using my Apple BT keyboard with it just feels 'too cool' & 'so right'.

...and maybe 'too real' in the near future.

Is it MW yet?

Cheers
-wsn

I assuming everybody on here is also stuck in this Holiday/Christmas game. I only want Mac stuff, and it has to be a gift card as 'my' Christmas is not till Jan :-)

hmmm..

line up a mini display port, usb, and macsafe - and then slide them into the side of a slate or netbook laptop. (you need the magsafe for power as the slate/netbok would be the processor, display port to power the larger LSD, and USB to power the USB hub on the back. Yep. Sounds good.

As someone posted about netbooks being a peice of junk. Target had them locked down with plexi-glass over the top (and were non-working units), so I could not play with them. they were flying off the shelf at $399. But what what got me was the trackpad. Felt awful, and the rocker mouse bar. Looked and felt cheap.

Why would Target show the cheap ASUS ee PC, when they have the MSI Wind on their website with better specs and only a fraction more. they should ahve had the MSI wind in stores.


Maybe this could be an interesting MW after all. too bad all I need is, well.. Hey wait!!! I have most I need, just a smaller foot print mackbook for taking on vaca, so I do not have to risk my $2500 mackbook (yeah I beeed it up and bought lots of software.

[milatchi]

Wow, Apple is going to put out a $4,000 Netbook, what a great deal! At such an affordable Apple price it will sell great in this down economy.

Apple's so great, innovative, intelligent, intuitive, receptive to their customers, and non-litigious. Leave it to innovative Apple to lead this paradigm shift in the market to smaller, more affordable, Netbooks.

Keep this under your hat everyone... I heard that Apple is going to have a higher tier Netbook available with one FireWire port for just $5,100. Can you believe it? For just an additional $1,100 you get FireWire! What a fantastic deal, it's "insanely great!"

GOD I LOVE APPLE!

APPLE! APPLE! APPLE! APPLE!

SEGA!

[winterspan]

I generally try to be helpful and friendly on message forums, communicating accurate information, building charts and informational graphics for the community, and trying to participate in thoughtful, reasoned debate, but admittedly I get aggravated quite easily and have minimal patience for the arrogant, rude, and abrasive characters that always seem to flourish in the anonymity of online forums. My (decidedly pre-New Years) resolution is to become less adversarial and confrontational on these forums, and instead of arguing over the merits of Apple's more controversial moves or clashing with both anti-Apple trolls and the always ubiquitous fanboy apologists, I'm going to solely stick to providing information....

Anyways, getting to the real reason for this post, I just wanted to inform/remind everyone about the merits of ARM processors. Currently, The iPhone and other high-end smartphones use a system-on-a-chip processor that is centered around an ARM11 Core usually running between 300-600mhz . In addition to the ARM core, most manufacturers include a SIMD/DSP coprocessor for speeding up floating point, video, media and other signal processing tasks. Currently, on higher end chips, most include a dedicated 3D graphics core based on PowerVR MBX technology (licensed from Imagination inc.) The iPhone is one of these with a 420mhz-clocked ARM11 CPU with a "PowerVR MBX lite" graphics core. We've all seen the impressive performance of this technology when coupled with Apple's software engineering prowess, but the hardware in the iPhone pales in comparison to the next-generation tech that is ready to go.

The newest out of ARM is the ARM "Cortex" series based on the new ARMv7 instruction set (compared to the ARM11's v6 instruction set -- I know, it's confusing, try to stay with me). The initial implementation is the Cortex-A8, which is currently integrated into the newest generation of Texas Instruments popular OMAP line of processors (OMAP 3000 series specifically). The core is usually said to be capable of running anywhere from 600mhz to over 1.0Ghz, and Qualcomm recently has claimed that their ARM Cortex based "SnapDragon" chip is up to 1.5Ghz. The Cortex-A8 is not simply an ARM11 running at high clockspeeds, it's a full evolutionary improvement with a new superscalar architecture that is over twice as fast as ARM11 at the same clock speed. So in a best case scenario, a future iPhone with a Cortex-A8 running at 800mhz could possibly be 3-4X faster than the current iPhone's 420mhz ARM11. that's huge!
The future (~2010) of ARM Cortex is the Cortex-A9 processor, a multi-core improvement over the A8. It combines a modified, out-of-order Cortex architecture with the multi-core capability of the ARM11. The out-of-order architecture of the Cortex-A9 combined with the capability of up to quad-core operation will really make this thing scream! (Intel Core 2 Duo, PowerPC, etc are out-of-order. Intel ATOM and previous ARM cores are in-order). They are already talking about netbooks with a high-clocked Cortex-A8 CPU, so a multi-core Cortex-A9 setup would easily have enough power to run a fully featured laptop!

Similarly, Imagination has a new generation of PowerVR graphics processors called "POWER SGX". These are directX 10 and OpenGL 3.0 capable, and are a generational leap ahead of the PowerVR MBX used in the iPhone. Apple's PA SEMI could be actively working on integrating an SGX core onto a new ARM Cortex-A8 based system-on-a-chip for iPhone 3.0 right now!

All in all, I'm definitely excited to see where this is headed in the near-future..

[Vagelturf]

The only difference is that I thought they would customize Intel chips, not ARM.

http://www.bagelturf.com/files/2a28b5fc10d2daab5456832528a49f1c-916.php

The piece that most people are missing is that Objective-C has a runtime. Actually it can have several, and whichever is the appropriate one gets used. The runtime provides the run-time support for the compiled code and as such does an awful lot of simple things very often, making it ripe for an optimized instruction set. We're talking things like memory allocation for objects, message passing between objects, finding and caching objects to receive messages, returning message values, etc.

So calling it the Objective-C instruction set is not accurate, but does describe what is going on in general terms. And it could be a killer because it ties the code to Apple CPUs along with saving power and running faster.

[davidChief]

We know that Snow Leopard is going to focus on improved performance and reduced footprint.

These two objectives seem particularly relevant to cheap, low spec machines.

Apple could release a netbook with a fairly slow processor if the operating system was significantly more efficient.

[Trip.Tucker]

We know that Snow Leopard is going to focus on improved performance and reduced footprint.

These two objectives seem particularly relevant to cheap, low spec machines.

Apple could release a netbook with a fairly slow processor if the operating system was significantly more efficient.

...like, for example, the iPhone?

[winterspan]

...like, for example, the iPhone?

Besides not having a decent-resolution ~10" screen and full-size keyboard, yes. I love the iPhone/Touch, and think it is great for browsing the web and text message/email duty, but for many tasks it just cannot replace a netbook/notebook. You cannot realistically do things like light photo editing and document/spreadsheet work on an iPhone.

[jackfrost123]

I generally try to be helpful and friendly on message forums, communicating accurate information, building charts and informational graphics for the community, and trying to participate in thoughtful, reasoned debate, but admittedly I get aggravated quite easily and have minimal patience for the arrogant, rude, and abrasive characters that always seem to flourish in the anonymity of online forums. My (decidedly pre-New Years) resolution is to become less adversarial and confrontational on these forums, and instead of arguing over the merits of Apple's more controversial moves or clashing with both anti-Apple trolls and the always ubiquitous fanboy apologists, I'm going to solely stick to providing information....

Anyways, getting to the real reason for this post, I just wanted to inform/remind everyone about the merits of ARM processors. Currently, The iPhone and other high-end smartphones use a system-on-a-chip processor that is centered around an ARM11 Core usually running between 300-600mhz . In addition to the ARM core, most manufacturers include a SIMD/DSP coprocessor for speeding up floating point, video, media and other signal processing tasks. Currently, on higher end chips, most include a dedicated 3D graphics core based on PowerVR MBX technology (licensed from Imagination inc.) The iPhone is one of these with a 420mhz-clocked ARM11 CPU with a "PowerVR MBX lite" graphics core. We've all seen the impressive performance of this technology when coupled with Apple's software engineering prowess, but the hardware in the iPhone pales in comparison to the next-generation tech that is ready to go.

The newest out of ARM is the ARM "Cortex" series based on the new ARMv7 instruction set (compared to the ARM11's v6 instruction set -- I know, it's confusing, try to stay with me). The initial implementation is the Cortex-A8, which is currently integrated into the newest generation of Texas Instruments popular OMAP line of processors (OMAP 3000 series specifically). The core is usually said to be capable of running anywhere from 600mhz to over 1.0Ghz, and Qualcomm recently has claimed that their ARM Cortex based "SnapDragon" chip is up to 1.5Ghz. The Cortex-A8 is not simply an ARM11 running at high clockspeeds, it's a full evolutionary improvement with a new superscalar architecture that is over twice as fast as ARM11 at the same clock speed. So in a best case scenario, a future iPhone with a Cortex-A8 running at 800mhz could possibly be 3-4X faster than the current iPhone's 420mhz ARM11. that's huge!
The future (~2010) of ARM Cortex is the Cortex-A9 processor, a multi-core improvement over the A8. It combines a modified, out-of-order Cortex architecture with the multi-core capability of the ARM11. The out-of-order architecture of the Cortex-A9 combined with the capability of up to quad-core operation will really make this thing scream! (Intel Core 2 Duo, PowerPC, etc are out-of-order. Intel ATOM and previous ARM cores are in-order). They are already talking about netbooks with a high-clocked Cortex-A8 CPU, so a multi-core Cortex-A9 setup would easily have enough power to run a fully featured laptop!

Similarly, Imagination has a new generation of PowerVR graphics processors called "POWER SGX". These are directX 10 and OpenGL 3.0 capable, and are a generational leap ahead of the PowerVR MBX used in the iPhone. Apple's PA SEMI could be actively working on integrating an SGX core onto a new ARM Cortex-A8 based system-on-a-chip for iPhone 3.0 right now!

All in all, I'm definitely excited to see where this is headed in the near-future..


Excellent post, thank you very much, people like you make the forums worthwhile.

[SeeLos]

honestly. i want a:

10"-13" hd screen tablet
128gb solid state
wireless n, bluetooth, mini displayport, usb
1.6GHz Intel Core 2 Duo base
no optical drive obviously
full length or near touch keyboard
2GB's of memory

I am a student and this would own. I hate being one of the obnoxious kids with a computer in class typing away on his computer, with the back of their screens facing the professor, which i find to be rude. This device would lay flat on my desk and i could take notes or do whatever else right on my desk. This is also good for people behind you watching what you are doing (privacy). I know people are shaky about touch keyboards but it's absolutely ridiculous to think it's going to be anything but that in the near future. i love the keyboard on my iphone and i type just as fast on that as i ever have on another keyboard. if i had a full size touch one, that would work perfectly. Just imagine switching spaces by swiping four fingers across your screen...I'd pay 2,000 no problem for this if i had to.
Edit: Pair this up with a new 24 inch display and a hopefully new mac mini and i think you have a pretty damn dreamy set up for the not so demanding user.

[Tallest Skil]

10"-13" hd screen

Eh... no. Try just MacBook resolution.

Edit: Pair this up with the new 24 inch display and a hopefully new mac mini and i think you have a pretty damn dreamy set up for the not so demanding user.

Heck yes. I'd buy a 10-13" MacTablet in a heartbeat. Any smaller and I'm already covered (iPhone and iPod touch).

[puffnstuff]

I need a tablet I can do work on anything lower then 12" would be pointless. I have a touch.

[skellener]

No netbook from Apple. Period. They will never release a laptop in the $599 range let alone this....

RadioShack To Offer $100 Netbook With AT&T (http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/desktop/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=QUBVK4UI14PTGQSNDLOSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=212500093)
http://i.cmpnet.com/infoweek/galleries/automated/130/AcerMini-Laptop_12-08_full.jpg

[VoR]

You get iphones/consoles/laptops free with all sorts of contracts, why is that any different?
$1500+ for an atom netbook is pretty pricey

[Imhotep397]

I doubt very seriously there will EVER be an Apple product using an atom processor. I suspect Atom is shrunken and weak Centrino technology. Remember it was not that long after Intel supposedly showed Atom behind closed doors that Apple pulled the trigger on the PA-Semi deal citing that it was obvious that they had to start designing their own chips.

The MacBook Air is Apple's netbook. I doubt that a netbook is forthcoming, but a 13" MacBook Air is another story. Apple already had a lot of success with their 13" PowerBook a couple of years ago and after cutting that and the 12.4" iBook there's been a small void. The scarcity of LCDs at 12" and 13" drove the prices up and Apple out of that market. The largest determining factor is going to be whether Apple can actually get 13" LED screens at a reasonable pricing level. Apple is unwilling to use environment damaging LCDs so current market options probably won't work.

An Apple/Google merger is something else I wouldn't be surprised to see.

[wizard]

I doubt very seriously there will EVER be an Apple product using an atom processor. I suspect Atom is shrunken and weak Centrino technology.

Actually ATOM is an all new in order design. It certainly isn't a ultimate performance design but rather a low power platform to execute i86 code on.

If you limit the discussion to handheld devices I would agree that we won't see an Atom processor. However for something like Apple TV or a very low power desk top it might be a possibility.

Remember it was not that long after Intel supposedly showed Atom behind closed doors that Apple pulled the trigger on the PA-Semi deal citing that it was obvious that they had to start designing their own chips.

I have this suspicion that Apple was well involved with PA before they even knew about Atom. It was pretty clear that they had a working relationship with Apple on PPC projects before the Intel switch. In any event it is not completely clear what PA is currently doing for Apple. To the best of my knowledge we haven't seen any of their handy work yet.


The MacBook Air is Apple's netbook. I doubt that a netbook is forthcoming, but a 13" MacBook Air is another story.

AIR isn't a netbook and wouldn't be one even if it had a 13 inch screen. Netbooks ate much smaller than that. The reason innovative netbooks need ARM processors is the limited space for batteries. Small thin devices mean small thin batteries which means you need power optimized processors.

Apple already had a lot of success with their 13" PowerBook a couple of years ago and after cutting that and the 12.4" iBook there's been a small void. The scarcity of LCDs at 12" and 13" drove the prices up and Apple out of that market. The largest determining factor is going to be whether Apple can actually get 13" LED screens at a reasonable pricing level. Apple is unwilling to use environment damaging LCDs so current market options probably won't work.

Getting the hardware is obviously not a problem as Apple moves a lot of LCD screens. Plus it is obvious the competition has no issues. Besides the smaller the device the more display options Apple has. It wouldn't be out of the question to see an OLED screen in a suitably sized device.


An Apple/Google merger is something else I wouldn't be surprised to see.

I'm not sure were you are getting some of the stuff in this post but I could never see that working out well. Plus why, both companies are doing fine right now and niether would gain from the other.

I don't know anymore if we are going to see anything new at Mac World after recent events. I was really hoping for a net tablet in the mold of Touch. This of course would be an ARM powered device. The interesting question is how far up the performance curve this new device will move. It would be great if they could triple real world performance. That per processor a dual processor would be ideal. That performance level would be great for a single app but what I really want to see Apple do is to free up multi processing and back ground apps. If there is extra performance on the platform Apple won't have an excuse anymore.

I think that the bigger issue with Apples devices, isn't the processor or if that processor is ARM based but rather the limitations Apple puts on the device. If the programming environment remains restrictive the fact that ARM is in the device doesn't mean squat. It is like this the limitations on iPhone is more tolerable because it is a cell phone and is a small device. People expect to be able to do more on a larger device and frankly by virtue of the larger screen more apps are possible.

I'm just hoping MWSF doesn't turn out to be the big disappointment that it is looking to become.

Dave

[gr8ful]

As far as a netbook category device form factor, I'd like to see Apple do something around a 10 inch LCD with a near full size (~92%) keyboard. I'd like to see a device that allows the same flexibility as the HTC Shift (tablet with a decent keyboard available).

154831

Tablet form-factor for ebook/doc reading, browsing, music, pictures, and videos. Laptop form-factor for document creation, editing, blogging, etc.

This would be the ideal in-between device (bigger than the iphone but not as large as a laptop). Thin and light enough to be something you would grab and take with you everywhere, unless you needed the full keyboard and screen real estate of a laptop (13, 15, or 17 inch).