Apple to Acquire Chip Designer P.A. Semi for $278 Million

[rtdunham]

Originally Posted by Jericho2550

For me, Apple machines use to have this magic feel. When people would ask me about my PowerBook "how does the processor compare to the new Centrinos?" I proudly answered "you can't compare the processors, these are Apple only processors"

"Everybody believes in something and everybody,
by virtue of the fact that they believe in something,
use that something to support their own existence."
--Frank Zappa

[riversky]

The odd part of this to me is the processors are based on IBM's Power Architecture which is the PowerPC! This will throw everyone. I thought even for mobiles they would go with Intel. I guess not.

[Lepton]

I think they bought the expertise to integrate more on a chip. A nice ARM plus all the custom logic for an iPod, phone, or tablet on one chip. Save space, save power, save costs.

[FoxyKaye]

Originally Posted by Jericho2550

For me, Apple machines use to have this magic feel. When people would ask me about my PowerBook "how does the processor compare to the new Centrinos?" I proudly answered "you can't compare the processors, these are Apple only processors."

That "magic" has kept Apple below 2% market share with minimal developer attention for more than a decade. I was skeptical about the move to Intel chips as well, but I was also wrong. The increasing market share numbers speak for themselves, as well as the new applications getting OS X clients for the first time, and the comfort Windows users feel in moving to a Mac because they can still run the one or several favorite (or un-ported) applications from Windows that they use.

Originally Posted by Thomas2006

[*]UNIX - If I am correct, only the Intel Macs can claim UNIX certification.

You are correct - PPC Macs running Leopard do not have UNIX certification, only the Intels.

Originally Posted by riversky

The odd part of this to me is the processors are based on IBM's Power Architecture which is the PowerPC! This will throw everyone. I thought even for mobiles they would go with Intel. I guess not.

OS X is fairly agnostic WRT PPC or Intel - Apple's primary concern for the mobile market is power consumption, something which the Atom chips still have a way to go on. And, it's not like anyone is going to run an Windows install on their iPhone (yet), so the Intel hardware is less relevant.

[zap2]

apple should team up with some other big companies too, maybe motrola and IBM?

[EagerDragon]

Some of you may not agree, but we are all grasping at straws any way.

These low power chips will be going into iPhone, iPods, Apple TV and other upcoming devices. For two reasons:
a) Less heat and low power utilization
b) Less clones

While they are currently PPC compatible, the next iteration could have new instruction sets added to facilitate some operations like media, encryption and other functions, also the memory handling could be different and the I/O could be different. This should prevent cloners from creating a device that can run the Apple developed software and create an exact clone of these consumer devices. These chips do not have to remain compatible with PPC, but be PPC based.

As Apple would control the supply of the chips, others can not insert those chips on their clones.

Many years from now, they may be used for laptops and desktops, but I do not think that is where Apple is going with them. I think the "Mac" will remain Intel based for quite a while more.

Just my opinion.

[Much Ado]

Originally Posted by EagerDragon

Many years from now, they may be used for laptops and desktops, but I do not think that is where Apple is going with them. I think the "Mac" will remain Intel based for quite a while more.

Just my opinion.

Yes, these are for the post-PC devices, such as the iPod, iPhone, Time Capsule, ATV etc.

Mega-hyper-uber news.

[stargurl84]

why do you think mac will stay intel based?

[EagerDragon]

Originally Posted by Much Ado

Yes, these are for the post-PC devices, such as the iPod, iPhone, Time Capsule, ATV etc.

Mega-hyper-uber news.

Their current PA performance chip, sounds like it would fit nicely in my dream Multi-touch tablet and would also make a nice home media and file server.

Hey there lets see the multi-touch iTablet and the iTheater media server.

[BongoBanger]

Originally Posted by stargurl84

why do you think mac will stay intel based?

Market share. It would be suicidal to move away from Intel when so much of the growth is due to the Macs ability to smoothly run Windows and its associated applications.

[Amdahl]

Originally Posted by stargurl84

why do you think mac will stay intel based?

They believe it for the same reason that people thought it would stay PPC based. It shakes one of the pillars of current Apple canon. People apparently believe Apple is locked in to Intel because that's the only way not to run OS X.

[rolandf]

Congratulations to keep the POWER architecture as well. If it is true, then customers can already this year start to design 32nm chips, based on IBM led foundry technology.

It might be the deal behind the scene, IBM pushes the corporate software market for APPLE, and Apple profits from the foundry technology advance IBM build up over the last years, and will probably even by able to expand over Intel.

Anyway, in the longer run, it it not enough of a differentiation for Apple to use exclusively Intel.

As I wrote back after the switch, it makes sense to have a mixed portfolio; Intel for the mass market, and Power derived chips for Apple exclusives.


Groundbreaking Apple products have never been based on Intel. Three years passed since the switch and the design of Apple PC's became more and more PC'ish (thick bezel with ugly hinges) and also the magic went away. There is no difference to work on a good PC notebook like HP or a MacBook, but my "old" Titanium is still something special. Imagine what one could pack into that enclosing with today's technology!

[digitalbiker]

Originally Posted by BongoBanger

Market share. It would be suicidal to move away from Intel when so much of the growth is due to the Macs ability to smoothly run Windows and its associated applications.

Exactly. Apple wasn't even a viable alternative for most users until the switch to intel, Parallels, VMware, and bootcamp.

In fact it bothers me that Apple is buying a semi-conductor company. They just have started to establish a good relationship with intel.

Is Steve going to now piss-off intel like he did IBM, & Motorola before that? It seemed like the intel-Apple relationship was really going somewhere with the customization in the MacBook Air CPU. But I suppose greedy Steve isn't happy with the intel cut and is now working on a way to make even more money from mac and iphone sales.

[Much Ado]

Originally Posted by EagerDragon

Their current PA performance chip, sounds like it would fit nicely in my dream Multi-touch tablet and would also make a nice home media and file server.

I'll drink to that!

Originally Posted by digitalbiker

In fact it bothers me that Apple is buying a semi-conductor company. They just have started to establish a good relationship with intel.

They'll still use Intel chips in Macs. Come on, what are Intel going to do- turn down their custom?

[GeeYouEye]

Very interesting. I imagine it's for iPhone 2.0 and/or Xserve RAID 2.0 (3.0?). Those are some mighty nice specs on the high-end chip there.

[eastcoastsurfer]

IMHO, this is a bad move on Apples part. Even if they wanted to use this companies chips, it didn't make much sense to buy them. Apple makes it's money on the combination of many parts. Why do they need (or want to) control something like the processor? Shopping around when they need to build a device will always net them the best proc at the time for their needs. And if it doesn't, companies with many more resources will jump at the opportunity to deliver something to them.

Overall, buying this company seems to be a kneejerk reaction to something and will only add more distractions.

What's next, buying an LCD manufacturer, plastic maker, etc...?

[paja]

Just because Apple bought the company today doesn't mean that they haven't been working with and testing the acquired processor chip(s) for months now.

So new or improved products could be in the development cycle as we read this. Possibly ready for announcement as soon as Macworld 09.

Apple probably liked what they had seen in their research Labs and decided to buy the company before someone else did.

[Much Ado]

Originally Posted by eastcoastsurfer

IMHO, this is a bad move on Apples part. Even if they wanted to use this companies chips, it didn't make much sense to buy them.

Exclusivity.

(And the power to shape the product roadmap.)

[cube]

Good, now Apple can put on the roadmap to stop fiddling with this x86 crud and make real computers again.

[Moonlight]

Originally Posted by rolandf

Three years passed since the switch and the design of Apple PC's became more and more PC'ish (thick bezel with ugly hinges) and also the magic went away. There is no difference to work on a good PC notebook like HP or a MacBook, but my "old" Titanium is still something special. Imagine what one could pack into that enclosing with today's technology!

So...the Macbook, the Air, the iMac...all look more PCish since the switch??

[Moonlight]

Originally Posted by cube

Good, now Apple can put on the roadmap to stop fiddling with this x86 crud and make real computers again.

So you are against the switch to Intel? Why? You like slower computers, and g4 powerbooks?

[pabloman]

Finally we'll see a PowerBook G5!!!!

[cube]

Originally Posted by Moonlight

So you are against the switch to Intel? Why? You like slower computers, and g4 powerbooks?

I like elegant computers. And who said Power is slower than x86?

[digitalbiker]

Originally Posted by Much Ado

They'll still use Intel chips in Macs. Come on, what are Intel going to do- turn down their custom?

Yes!

Both Motorola & IBM started out wanting the Apple market. They woo'd Apple and developed some great processors. However both Motorola and IBM soon realized that the market share wasn't there to support any new development of these chips. They wanted Apple to pay more money for chips. Apple on the other hand wanted to pay less so they could make more money on mac sales.

In both cases, Motorola and IBM eventually broke up with Apple and quit providing them the chips they needed. So I see Apple repeating the same thing with intel. Just when they get to the point where intel is developing new designs exclusively for Apple. Apple turns around and buys a semi-conductor company so now I wonder if intel is going to just forget about developing custom cpu designs for Apple. It just isn't going to be profitable for them to try and garner that meager market share as well as compete with Apple's own semi-conductor designs.

[Moonlight]

Originally Posted by cube

I like elegant computers. And who said Power is slower than x86?

What is not elegant ? The OS is the same, the enclosures are the same... did you open yours and are staring at the intel chip as you work ?


PowerPC in laptops are by far slower than intel... Do you not remember the Powerbook G4, when everything else was a G5 ? And the lack of a 3ghz G5 in towers?