Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Acquire Chip Designer P.A. Semi for $278 Million
- Thread starter shoulin333
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Compilers do not hide the underlying architecture. A better architecture is more important than 5 years ago, because CPUs are no longer on a continuous single-thread speed race. When every core needs a complex instruction decoder or out-of-order-execution units in order to run at a decent speed, you start looking at more efficient silicon.
Apples move to Intel was contrary to these forces. What intel had was a more efficient factory and the exact products Apple needed, exactly when IBM and Freescale didn't have them. But Intel still makes cruddy widgets, and their advantages are fleeting.
The Intel switch was one of the best things to happen. Now look at Apple, people are buying up the computers.
Steve, you're a genius:
Intel for Computers in one hand, and P.A. Semi for Specialty Devices in the other...
(waits for Ballmer's comments....)
Steve, you're a genius:
Intel for Computers in one hand, and P.A. Semi for Specialty Devices in the other...
(waits for Ballmer's comments....)
I disagree, they are not locked into Intel, but why switch when it is making them so much money? That is what is allowing people to feel comfortable with switching, which is making them more money, andis a business, which means they want to make money. Its what is allowing them to increase their marketshare, which makes them more money. Simple business.
It isn't an issue of switching. They can continue to sell both. Running Windows isn't a core feature of a Mac, and Apple never intends it to be. How many ads have you seen where Mac points out to PC that he can run Vista too?
Good luck with that. Not that it can't be done, but Apple is in the business of making consumer devices and not processors. If they think they'll be able to beat the big players out there, then go for it. IMHO, this deal screams of Apples arrogance getting in the way of sense. But like I said before, there could be some IP in the company that the press release didn't mention.
The core and core2 architectures from Intel have been and are pretty impressive. Just ask AMD, who was doing pretty well against Intel until the Core came out. Besides, Intel chips are mostly RISC now and just have hardware x86 decoders sitting on the front end. What would you do right now to make "more efficient silicon?"
As i read this thread, I wonder if anyone read the original Forbes article, or if somehow I just missed something within the Forbes article.
I believe the article said PA Semi was a chip "designer" not a chip manufacturer. Apple designs their computers, their iPhones, etc. but they DO NOT MANUFACTURE THEM! Designing chips specifically for Apple then having someone like Intel or another major player fabricate them is the likely scenario here. Unlike the current chips, designed by Intel with help and/or motivation from Apple, Intel controls the chips so they can be sold to anyone Intel wants.
I liked the one post referencing that after Apple proved to be the driving factor for the setup used in the current Macbook Air, Intel went on to market it to every other PC manufacturer so those comptitors could compete directly with Apple, to the benefit and profitability of Intel (legally allowed), but at the potential expense of Apple (since the other companies were not involved in the costs, etc of the design). If Apple (via PA Semi) designs chips THEY want, and simply has Intel or another volume fabricator "manufacture" them, Intel would have no such authority to market or sell the designs or chips to any other companies, without Apple's approval. Thus, Apple would have control of its own designs, concepts and setups (just like in their computer designs), without having the rug (aka marketshare) yanked from under them by other competitors, after Apple invested their time, effort and money into a chip's design while the other companies did not.
JMO
Correct, but people buy them, because if they wind up not liking what they get, or they have apps that can only run on Windows, they realize that they will be good even with a Mac. They can run windows when needed, and all I was saying is that is a huge part of their increasing marketshare.
i dont think that anybody has asked
has intel had a hand in this too ???
if semi PA wouldn't play with intel maybe Apple brought them and will shaire the tech with Intel.
look at what happened with fingerworks apple brought them, tucked them under their wing and we all know how that worked out.
what if intel, Semi PA and apple have been working on something undercover and now Apple have brought them up in the same vain as Fingerworks.
has intel had a hand in this too ???
if semi PA wouldn't play with intel maybe Apple brought them and will shaire the tech with Intel.
look at what happened with fingerworks apple brought them, tucked them under their wing and we all know how that worked out.
what if intel, Semi PA and apple have been working on something undercover and now Apple have brought them up in the same vain as Fingerworks.
Interesting news. Just the other day I saw again the session in D5 where bill gates and steve jobs talked together about the industry and their visions. Jobs clearly stated that Apple is a SOFTWARE company.
Buying this chip company doesnt necessarily contradict his claim - after all chips are designed to run software, but nevertheless it means that apple will now have a hardware division designing and building chips and this means that additional resources are going to be allocated to hardware research and development. This is not exactly a SOFTWARE company.
In the end, whats important is what Apple will DO with these chips and I also wonder what impact, if any, it will have on Apples relations with Intel in light of the later efforts in the mobile processors market and the Atom cpu.
You know, if Apple is going head to head with Intel this is not good news for Apple. Whatever they can crank out of this chip and company, Intel will just do 10 times the efforts, with 10 ties the money. Eventually apple won't be able to keep up.
Let's hope for the best.
Buying this chip company doesnt necessarily contradict his claim - after all chips are designed to run software, but nevertheless it means that apple will now have a hardware division designing and building chips and this means that additional resources are going to be allocated to hardware research and development. This is not exactly a SOFTWARE company.
In the end, whats important is what Apple will DO with these chips and I also wonder what impact, if any, it will have on Apples relations with Intel in light of the later efforts in the mobile processors market and the Atom cpu.
You know, if Apple is going head to head with Intel this is not good news for Apple. Whatever they can crank out of this chip and company, Intel will just do 10 times the efforts, with 10 ties the money. Eventually apple won't be able to keep up.
Let's hope for the best.
Aren't you the same guy that said, "If they think they'll be able to beat the big players out there, then go for it. IMHO, this screams of Apples arrogance...", back when they first announced the iPhone? Just kidding...
But seriously, you sound like one of those guys saying Apple is crazy for getting in the phone business.
Apple has always been consistent about a couple things.
1. They don't care what other people are doing - it's about the consumer, not the other companies.
2. They like to keep things "in house" whenever possible.
You keep hearing people say, "10 years ago this..." and "10 years ago that...". I think Apple is pretty aware of the steps they have taken to get where they are today. There are always going to be unexpected detours - it's called LIFE.
No kidding. Jobs may be finicky, but he's not an idiot. Moving from Intel would be the stupidest move they could possibly make. I have no idea what this is for, but there's no way it's a replacement for Intel. It's not like Intel has been bad to them or anything, unlike IBM...
So please, fanboys, stop claiming the sky is falling.
So....Apple just bought Steve Wozniak MkII and his personal team of uber-talented designers.
I think they are planning to build something VERY SECRET and very complicated and TRULY UNIQUE that CANNOT be 'contracted out' to a third-party contractor...
Given that the 'Apple Mac' lead directly from such a secret fusion of home-grown H/W and S/W we can only deduct that *something* equally phenomenal needs 'the same magic mix' for a 2010 release time frame...
This is a very interesting day...
I think they are planning to build something VERY SECRET and very complicated and TRULY UNIQUE that CANNOT be 'contracted out' to a third-party contractor...
Given that the 'Apple Mac' lead directly from such a secret fusion of home-grown H/W and S/W we can only deduct that *something* equally phenomenal needs 'the same magic mix' for a 2010 release time frame...
This is a very interesting day...
To those fighting about PPC versus Intel.
IBM is up to G6 and is playing with 6 Ghz systems, not sure if this company Apple purchased is stuck with G4 architecture or not. But that aside .....
We do not know how well a 8-core PPC based system would run in comparison to a Intel 8-core system.
I think it is a bit early for this fight, don't you think?
IBM is up to G6 and is playing with 6 Ghz systems, not sure if this company Apple purchased is stuck with G4 architecture or not. But that aside .....
We do not know how well a 8-core PPC based system would run in comparison to a Intel 8-core system.
I think it is a bit early for this fight, don't you think?
All Wrong
You guys are all wrong. This is for non-Mac based products. iPhone perhaps, but unlikely. Think about it....
Apple TV/Some new Media server?? something that has no benefit from Intel processors (ie doesn't need virtualization or cutting edge) or benefit from the existing ARM platforms.
Think different. Think appliances, TV, mediacenters, routers, etc.
You guys are all wrong. This is for non-Mac based products. iPhone perhaps, but unlikely. Think about it....
Apple TV/Some new Media server?? something that has no benefit from Intel processors (ie doesn't need virtualization or cutting edge) or benefit from the existing ARM platforms.
Think different
. Think appliances, TV, mediacenters, routers, etc.
Actually, it would be the "G7." If I'm remembering correctly, IBM's POWER4 was the G5. So, following that, the POWER5 would be the G6 and the POWER6 would be the G7.
Nonetheless, I don't think we're seeing a move to include Gx processors as an optional CTO.
1. As other's have pointed out, ARM Ltdl. was a joint venture by Apple, Acorn, and VLSI. Apple has a long history of being directly involved in designing microprocessors, especially in the low-power, embedded variety. ARM-based processors dominate the phone/PDA market.
2. Apple may be buying talent here as much as anything else. And this direct knowledge and individual talent will give Apple a major advantage over others in the phone/pda/tablet field that looks to be a major growth market for apple.
3. PA Semi is a "fab-less" semi-conductor company meaning they farm out the manufacturing to others. So Apple will not be directly manufacturing chips.
If as a user I directly interfaced with a proc for some reason, then Apple could probably improve that experience. The last time I built a machine it had a ZIF socket which worked pretty darn well though. I guess they could color the procs like fruit so when I open up my next iPhone I can say it has a grape inside.
Apples core competency is designing trendy consumer devices. I worry that now having to design and somehow manufacture their own chips is going to end up distracting them from their core.
LOL.
For my part, I don't want to go back to PPC for Macs.... Intel (for Windows specific apps) and OS X (for all the rest) is pretty much the perfect combination for me... right now.
...Intel for their Mac so they can run Windows. But eventually, they'll get used to OS X and will only use OS X applications and then, they can finally get rid of their Windows needs and habits.... And then, Steeve shall rule!
Mouhahahahaha!!!!
I agree, while I already dumped 1/2 my software since I switched, there are still some Windows apps I need (no good equivelant that keeps me compatible with the rest of the world). Intel allows the best of both worlds in one computer.
As for those mentioning that PPC is slower, I remember and article that came out during the switch to Intel. the reasons for the switch were:
1. Hotness of PPC which atributed to running slower.
2. While Intel is a slower chip (not by much), it ran cooler and with Dual Core and faster buses/cache, it out-performed PPC.
3. PPC manufacturers could not keep up with the demand for the CPU/chips.
4. A G5 laptop was never made as it would run too hot.
I think apple has a good thing going in the Mac lineup with Intel. if they ever changed and we could not run the good MS apps which most businesses rely on, then I think apple would start losing sales and I would have to reconcider my decision on buying another Apple once my macbook is no longer relevant (which will be many years down the road). And I was just thinking of dumping my 4 year old HP desktop to get my wife a mini that she could do more than just surf the new (that is all the 4 year old HP media center is being used for these days).
The iPhone and iPod touch don't use Intel or PowerPC chips. They use ARM which Xcode now supports as well. This really isn't an issue.
Anyway this has NOTHING to do with moving off of Intel. No small internal group can keep up with Intel (or AMD). This is about some specific need that Apple cannot find a good solution for "off the shelf".
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)
This is very interesting. I wonder if this will lead to cheaper manufacturing of core components of the iPhone and a savings that can be passed along to the consumer.
This is very interesting. I wonder if this will lead to cheaper manufacturing of core components of the iPhone and a savings that can be passed along to the consumer.