Apple Announces Long-Term Flash Memory Agreements

[Abstract]

Yeah, I see this announcement as a big deal.

And while they say it's for the Shuffle and Nano, I don't believe that's the only reason Apple needs to secure so much Flash memory.

 

[neilw]

Yeah I know, but that just goes to show you how important keeping their supply chain filled is. That's almost 25% of their on hand cash.

Apple is currently sitting on $8.25 billion in cash, according to Yahoo. They've basically been printing money for the last couple of years. $1.25 billion is a reasonable price to pay for assurances that they'll be able to keep printing, and will still leave them with a cool $7 billion.

Besides, Apples invests is cash pile *very* conservatively. This is as good a use for it as any.

 

[lou tsee]

It's amazing how many of you have no idea what you're talking about.

Flash memory, in its current form, will never be used to replace hard drives or RAM. The current forms of flash memory all have a finite lifespan dictated by a certain number of writes/rewrites. Think of how many times files are altered in any way on your hard drive or how many times the contents of your system memory change. This has nothing to do with some magical implementation in powerbooks/etc.

For your viewing pleasure:
http://www.commsdesign.com/design_corner/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=16502199

nobody said they were gonna use NAND in laptops (it's far to slow to replace HDrives - besides from being unreliable), but possibly some future technology. macrumors had a thread recently about a new flash-memory technology whis was said to be as fast as static RAM!
So let's wait and see. The days of HD are numbered of that I'm sure...

 

[backspinner]

Let's calculate. If Apple gets 1 GB for an average price of $25 in this deal, that 3 months $1.25 billion makes worth of 50 million GB. This is enough for about 20 million iPods (shuffle, nano) in various capacities.

That is not in sync with the current buying rate. So or they are indeed paying in advance or they have another usage for it.

 

[CanadaRAM]

Yeah I know, but that just goes to show you how important keeping their supply chain filled is. That's almost 25% of their on hand cash.

Maybe they learned some lessons: Some of Apple's most spectacular market failures have been due to component shortages. The infamous G4 "downgrade" exercise being particularly painful.

And if they don't get off their @$$=$ and deliver some iMac G5's in Canada over a month after the orders were placed, they will have some very p!$$=& off customers.

 

[EricNau]

Yeah, I see this announcement as a big deal.

And while they say it's for the Shuffle and Nano, I don't believe that's the only reason Apple needs to secure so much Flash memory.

I totally agree. Apple may sell a lot of iPods, but they still wouldn't need this much flash memory prepaid. I think Apple has a new product in the works.
Maybe they are bringing back the Newtons!

 

[kwajo.com]

well I hope apple can sustain the iPod sales, because pre-ordering 1 and a quarter billion dollars of anything seems to be an act of faith if ever there was one

 

[tutubibi]

Let's calculate. If Apple gets 1 GB for an average price of $25 in this deal, that 3 months $1.25 billion makes worth of 50 million GB. This is enough for about 20 million iPods (shuffle, nano) in various capacities.

That is not in sync with the current buying rate. So or they are indeed paying in advance or they have another usage for it.

That's 50 M GB untill 2010. So it's like 50 M shuffles sold till 2010, not counting capacity increases in upcoming models. Nothing extreme.
Apple will probably spend more than 1.25 B in flash memeory in the next 2 years for iPods only if sales projections hold up.

 

[Photorun]

Thats a huge chunk of change, although Apple has over $5 billion in the bank, so this makes it a good investment, considering how popular the iPod has been.

Actually last time I checked Apple has 7.1 billion in the bank, still, to blow through close to 1.5 billion of it just to secure flash output better the hell mean some deals to be first in line with some of these producers latest and greatest if not exclusive arrangements or what the hell is the point really?

 

[AidenShaw]

flash HD cache

nobody said they were gonna use NAND in laptops (it's far to slow to replace HDrives - besides from being unreliable), but possibly some future technology. macrumors had a thread recently about a new flash-memory technology whis was said to be as fast as static RAM!
So let's wait and see. The days of HD are numbered of that I'm sure...

Think different (or - think like Intel's future products, not Apple's past products)....

Intel Boosts Storage Performance with NAND Flash Cache.

According to PCWorld.com web-site, the Robson technology with 128MB cache ensured “immediate” startup of an Intel Centrino notebook and also significantly boosted boot-up time for other programs. For example, the laptop with Robson opened Adobe Reader in 0.4 seconds, while the other notebook required 5.4 seconds. It opened Quicken in 2.9 seconds, while the laptop without Robson technology needed 8 seconds to do the job.

Huge Flash cache also allows to decrease power consumption as well as reliability of storage sub-system, as HDD’s media is accessed less often. While conventional HDDs usually use dynamic random access memory (DRAM) devices as cache, which are faster compared to Flash, the size of such cache does not generally exceed 16MB.

There are lots of possibilities:

• cache frequently used files (especially the program files needed to boot)
• do predictive readahead (if you start photoshop, load all the photoshop application files that you touched the last time you ran photoshop)
• cache writes so that the disk won't have to spin up every time there's a write

You can also control where the cache chunks are, to spread the write "wear" out and avoid "burning out" a particular section. Add strong ECC, and you won't even care when large numbers of bad sections appear in the cache.

 

[Fender2112]

An iTunes phone perhaps is in the near future. Also with technologies such as RAM disks and fuel cells becoming available, I think we'll see some really kickass laptops in the next few years.

 

[Mainyehc]

I totally agree. Apple may sell a lot of iPods, but they still wouldn't need this much flash memory prepaid. I think Apple has a new product in the works.
Maybe they are bringing back the Newtons!

The Apple iPhone, anyone??

Many people speculated about whether the Motorola phones with iTunes were just a "rehearsal" for the big act: the iPhone...

Hey, I'm wildly speculating here, but just yesterday, I was looking at a Nokia brochure, and I thought "gee, they have like, 20 or 30 different models, with appealing names like 6680 or 6021... which one would fit my needs?" (not that I'm in the market for a new cell phone, but anyway...). And then I realised, that's precisely the way Sony cranks out DAPs (and other consumer electronics stuff), which, IMHO, isn't as good an approach as Apple's...

Now, why did cell phones always sell like mad anyway, while DAPs were a stagnant market until the advent of the iPod? Simple: cell phones are essential items, without which people can't live without, whereas music players, whichever their media, are not...

IF Apple can make people buy superfluous goods like iPods - and they're sure making one hell of a job at it -, they can surely make people buy intuitive, beautifully styled cell phones! Because... as I said, people NEED cell phones, and they sure like 'em as stylish as possible!

This kind of gadget would become the ultimate Double and Reciprocal Halo Effect™ generator! iPods driving people to iPhones, iPhones driving people to iPods, and then, iPods and iPhones driving people to increasingly affordable Intel-based Macs... Hmmm, sounds plausible...

Add iTunes licensing to cell phone brands other than Moto to the mix, and you know, besides showing a lot of good karma, Apple would get great press, and avoid potential antitrust issues in the future. Okay, maybe this approach would probably cannibalize small capacity iPod sales (nano & shuffle), but with an iPhone on the market, Apple could easily recover part of the profits...

Either way, just imagine, phone carriers offering iPhones at near-zero cost (through credits and such), and Apple profiting from both those sales and exploding iTMS sales (as if they weren't exploding already, eh)...!

So, here comes the speculation part: MAYBE that's where all that flash memory is going into... iPhones!... This is all wishful thinking, but if Apple introduced a fairly comprehensive range of iPhones (maybe 5 different ones, as oposed to the 20+ Nokia models ), I would seriously consider getting one, if not for the user interface and industrial design alone, as I'd probably keep my 1GB shuffle and my 20GB 3G (soon to be replaced by a 60GB iPod w/video )... Seriously, how many of you in these forums wouldn't? And... how many happy iPod owners wouldn't!!??

Think about it, you heard it here first! (although everyone has been talking about iPhones and reborn Newtons since... ages! )

edit: eh, Fender2112 beat me to it (but I called it an iPhone anyway! )

 

[cuzog]

supply companies including Hynix, Intel, Micro, Samsung Electronics and Toshiba.

Just in case people are confused, it is Micron, not Micro.

 

[Fiveos22]

It's amazing how many of you have no idea what you're talking about.

Flash memory, in its current form, will never be used to replace hard drives or RAM. The current forms of flash memory all have a finite lifespan dictated by a certain number of writes/rewrites. Think of how many times files are altered in any way on your hard drive or how many times the contents of your system memory change. This has nothing to do with some magical implementation in powerbooks/etc.

For your viewing pleasure:
http://www.commsdesign.com/design_corner/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=16502199

If not as a hard drive replacement, maybe as a place to put the operating system. No one is going to rewrite the operating system enough times to wear out flash (that would be one hell of a feat). Think about how fast boot times would be.

 

[sjo]

This is all wishful thinking, but if Apple introduced a fairly comprehensive range of iPhones (maybe 5 different ones, as oposed to the 20+ Nokia models )

well nokia sold 200m phones last quarter whereas Apple sold 6.5m ipods. I'm sure there will be 20+ ipod models when they reach the 200m/q mark

 

[aussie_geek]

Far out!!! That's a hell of alot of chips people. Apple is definitely trying to monopolise the market. One way to beat the competition is to deny your rivals the raw materials!!!!

Go Apple


aussie_geek

 

[aafuss1]

Good to see Intel is in.

 

[Yvan256]

Apple will prepay up to $1.25 billion for flash memory over the next three months.

That's $1.25b in three months, people. Talk about money spent in a flash.

 

[Yvan256]

If not as a hard drive replacement, maybe as a place to put the operating system. No one is going to rewrite the operating system enough times to wear out flash (that would be one hell of a feat). Think about how fast boot times would be.

And maybe also part of the "hardware lock-out" for those x86 boxes...?

 

[EricNau]

Far out!!! That's a hell of alot of chips people. Apple is definitely trying to monopolise the market. One way to beat the competition is to deny your rivals the raw materials!!!!

Go Apple


aussie_geek

I guess that's a possibility, but no matter how many chips Apple buys, there are still plenty out there for other companies to buy.

I'm still thinking Apple has a new product up their sleeve.

 

[EricNau]

The Apple iPhone, anyone??

I think it is unlikely, but it could happen...maybe.

I would love to have an iPhone.

 

[Yvan256]

Unless it's for a 20GB flash iPod, it makes no sense (can't be all the iPod shuffle and iPod nano they're selling). An iPhone wouldn't have more memory than an iPod shuffle either.

So I'll throw my old idea in this again: this is for a Palm-sized portable computer (full version of OS X, not some stripped-down, useless crap that requires its own "OS X lite" versions of software).

Low-power Intel processor, low-res (800x600 or 1024x768) touch-screen display (OLED?), flash storage (with enough room for OS X, iLife, iWork, 10 to 20GB of data). Built-in S-Video output (for presentations, movie playback), USB2 ports, small keyboard, etc...

Since Palm left the market, it only leaves Microsoft and their PocketPCs... which require their own versions of everything (and also has a multiple CPUs mess which doesn't help).

Apple could enter that market and redefine it (like they did with the iPod), portable computing the way it should be (small, portable but still the same software as on your desktop computer).

 

[pubwvj]

Perhaps they are not just thinking about iPods. It would be interesting to do an iBook with a flash drive... Or perhaps an iPal.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

iPhone, iPhone...here's the thing with an iPhone

the iPod nano is currently selling at 2 and 4 gigabyte sizes. an iPhone couldn't debut with anything greater than 2 gigs worth of space without canabalizing nano sales. THEREFORE, Apple will need to raise the nano's capacity. They'll probably do two models, at either 4, 6, or 8 gigabyte sizes. That will leave room for an iPhone that has upto 2 gigs of space.

Low-power Intel processor, low-res (800x600 or 1024x768) touch-screen display (OLED?), flash storage (with enough room for OS X, iLife, iWork, 10 to 20GB of data). Built-in S-Video output (for presentations, movie playback), USB2 ports, small keyboard, etc...

Now as for having a pocket mac, with OS X on it and everything, here's the problem: If they didn't put 20 gig flash drives in their ipods, why would they do that for a pocket PC. dream on, but not for 2005/06

what I can see, however, is a mac that boots a basic version of OS X up in the time it takes to spin up a hard drive, so that your system can be mostly booted up within 5 seconds.

P.S. What's an iPal?

 

[EricNau]

Unless it's for a 20GB flash iPod, it makes no sense (can't be all the iPod shuffle and iPod nano they're selling). An iPhone wouldn't have more memory than an iPod shuffle either.

So I'll throw my old idea in this again: this is for a Palm-sized portable computer (full version of OS X, not some stripped-down, useless crap that requires its own "OS X lite" versions of software).

Low-power Intel processor, low-res (800x600 or 1024x768) touch-screen display (OLED?), flash storage (with enough room for OS X, iLife, iWork, 10 to 20GB of data). Built-in S-Video output (for presentations, movie playback), USB2 ports, small keyboard, etc...

Since Palm left the market, it only leaves Microsoft and their PocketPCs... which require their own versions of everything (and also has a multiple CPUs mess which doesn't help).

Apple could enter that market and redefine it (like they did with the iPod), portable computing the way it should be (small, portable but still the same software as on your desktop computer).

Maybe an iPhone wouldn't have that much more memory in it, but it is one more product that apple would need Flash Chips for.

I do like the idea of a Palm Sized Computer, that can run like a full sized laptop - it would be very cool - but we can only hope. (I really doubt we'll ever see one)