Apple signs delivery agreement with Freescale

[Ti_Poussin]

So if this is for Apple care reason, we should see all G4 model switching to PC processor by 31 december 2005, Apple care can cover 3 years. That sound to me that there will be a X86 switch soon for the Powerbook, Mac Mini, the eMac will be drop IMO.

Supposition:
Paris --> Powerbook move to centrino chip?
Mac Mini for christmas buying season

 

[powerbook911]

So if this is for Apple care reason, we should see all G4 model switching to PC processor by 31 december 2005, Apple care can cover 3 years. That sound to me that there will be a X86 switch soon for the Powerbook, Mac Mini, the eMac will be drop IMO.

Supposition:
Paris --> Powerbook move to centrino chip?
Mac Mini for christmas buying season

I think we'll see an Intel Mac at MWSF, in January, but not sooner.

 

[SiliconAddict]

Watch as everyone jumps to conclusions based on NOTHING.

 

[~Shard~]

I don't see this as necessarily being a bad thing. Sure, the current G4s and their slow progression has left something to be desired, but if we see some dual core G4s out of this deal (possibly for the PowerBook, or if the PowerBook goes Intel first, then the iBook) or a chip for use in the rumored iHome or some similar new product, this could definitely be okay. If nothing else, at least Apple is covering its butt until 2008.

I know where people are coming from when they say, "G4s in 2008! Let the chip die, we'll be on the equivalent of G6s by then!" but if they are legitimate new chips (i.e. dual core) and not just minor speed-bumped versions of our current offerings, I can live with that.

 

[~Shard~]

Watch as everyone jumps to conclusions based on NOTHING.

Too late.

 

[kzin]

I don't suppose any of you actually went to freescale's web page to see what products they offer, did you? Nor have any of you heard of occam's razor?

Here's a hint: Freescale also produces ARM processors.

Does Apple use/buy ARM processors anywhere? Maybe in iPods?

While I would LOVE to see "iHome" move from the fan mock-up and into reality, so I can dump my DirecTivo's in favor of iHome (assuming it would support DirecTV tuning) ... the fact is, that's a pretty "out there" conclusion to reach when there's a much simpler and more supportable conclusion right in front of you. Thus, occam's razor: the simplest explanation is the best.

I know that in the past, Apple got their iPod processors from a company named PortalPlayer, but maybe they've shifted to Freescale since then? Or maybe that's what this deal is about. That makes a lot more sense than "keeping the PPC around longer than they said" or "finally getting around to releasing iHome, but doing it on PPC instead of Intel, during a time when they're starting the PPC->Intel transition".

The other likely explanation would be "hedging their bets". Apple is under no obligation to buy, it's just that Freescale is under obligation to deliver. This could just be extending their current arrangements just in case they need to keep buying G4's _IF_ the Intel transition takes longer than they expect. So, it's not that they know it will take longer, they're just doing due diligence to be sure they don't get left in the lurch if Intel doesn't come through.

I know, neither of those ("this is related to ARM for iPod" or "they're just signing an insurance policy") is quite as fun or sexy to speculate about as things like iHome .... but, really, this makes a lot of sense without having to reach into the realm of fantasy.

 

[psycho bob]

There is another option. This may simply be a creative payoff as I think someone started to talk about at the start of this thread. The fact is when the Intel announcement was made the talk was of IBM and what they would do, no one mentioned Freescale yet right now their chips mke up the majority of Apple computer sales. If IBM had their noses put out by SJ it stands to reason Freescale felt the same way.

I don't know when the current contract ends, I assume it was probably signed with Motorola and maybe topped up with the Freescale sell off, but it is plausible that Apple need a supply of low power PPC chips for another year and in order to keep everyone on side and cover themsleves they offered a longer than needed contract. This does not mean we will have G4's around in 2008, 3 years seems to be a pretty standard length of contract in the computer world. If Apple don't need the processors they won't buy them but this keeps the door open and also encourages continued development of new PPC chips.

The long discussed dual core G4 is apparently still in the pipeline and it is possible that this may still go to Apple. Judging by dual core CPU's in general the price will be high, maybe too high for Apple to feel they can use it in just one incarnation of machines. The longer contract may simply be a way to get a better deal for short term supply.

I assume this is a supply and demand contract with Apple not offering to buy a set quota so some kind of retaining fee will no doubt be involved. It is also possible that Freescale is planning on winding down G4 production in place of something else, this longer contract may simply be to garner enough supply to see them through the transition whilst spreading the cost over a greater period of time.

This needn't be bad news just good business sense. The talk is of all Apple products going Intel including iPod etc. I see no reason why a home entertainment system unless it is being released this year could not also use the new chip supplier. As far as the transition I think laptops will be first, and then G5 machines next assuming Intel keeps to its targets. Products like the mini could still be using the G4 into 2007 when it will no doubt be replaced with something completely new. Apple have many options but I think it will be the older products that get replaced first, the mini is relatively new and will no doubt have been invested in heavily, it can see out a 2 year life.

 

[chuckzee]

Two architecture solution

What's to stop Apple and Freescale from extending their contract a year or so down the line? I see this as Apple hedging their bets if the whole INhell thing doesn't pan out quite as anticipated. Expect a similar deal with IBM. I believe apple is really working on a two chip architecture solution.

 

[JFreak]

Clock for clock the G4 is faster than the G5. Yes, the G5 has more potential than the G4 to go faster eventually (as it did), but if they were to underclock a G5 to, say, 1.5ghz is wouldn't be as fast as the G4 1.42 in the mini now, would generate more heat, and would cost more.

yes, G4 clock cycle generates more output than G5 cycle, but that's not everything. the G5 is a whole lot more than just the chip, and in real life the data throughput of the G5 system is tremendously higher than a G4 system, even if the bus speed would be crippled like the iMac. we all know that the fast bus of a powermac generates almost as much heat as the cpu itself, but look at the iMac and see for yourself that heat is not an issue. and nothing points to G5 being more expensive than G4, and there's a reason to believe cost per chip would even become cheaper should IBM get more low-spec orders from apple enabling higher yields for them.

Also, the while 64bit-ness of the G5 would be absolutely wasted on the mini. It has ONE RAM SLOT. Even if it had two, it is IMPOSSIBLE for it to have more than 4gb RAM, which is the main/only advantage of a 64bit CPU.

not all 64bit advantage lies in exceeding the 4GB memory barrier. some scientific apps just will not run with a 32bit system, period. 64bits is the future and we will see many more software titles taking advantage of some clever algorighms that programmers have been waiting to use, and sticking with 32bit systems is just wrong, very un-apple-ish i'd say, as that belongs to the past.

yes, currently 32bit systems can still challenge 64bit systems whenever apps can run on both platforms, but how long is that the case? i'd be happy if the industry would just decide to jump to 64bit systems overnight, but we all know it's only a dream.

(mini mac could easily hold two memory modules were it designed to do so. there's space for it. this is however one of the points that i was referring to earlier by saying apple doesn't yet have enough experience regarding 64bit motherboard designs. nobody has, except digital who has had alpha for 13 years...)

 

[psycho bob]

Here's a hint: Freescale also produces ARM processors.

Does Apple use/buy ARM processors anywhere? Maybe in iPods?

The iPod does not use Freescale embedded ARM products. I believe they did move from Portal, or there was talk of it. Intel make embedded chips as well, there is no reason one of these would not be used if they wanted one single chip maker. I think the Intel chip is called Xscale(?).

 

[JFreak]

if we see some dual core G4s out of this deal

why would apple design a new motherboard for a dual core G4 powerbook now that steve has already said they will begin using intels very soon? that's a move that also requires a mobo redesign, and that's the next mobo change i can see.

 

[SiliconAddict]

I think we'll see an Intel Mac at MWSF, in January, but not sooner.

++ Agreed. Apple needs to give their developers at least half a year before they start the transition. I think there would be more then a few developers who would be really pissed off if Apple introed their first x86 system 4 months after telling people that they are moving.

I would like to say this this is purely a cover your assets type move but until Apple Expo's keynote happens making any speculation on what this means would be a complete shot in the dark.

but if they are legitimate new chips (i.e. dual core) and not just minor speed-bumped versions of our current offerings, I can live with that.

you may be able to live with it but I think there are going to be A LOT of pissed off people, me included, all because Apple isn't updating already dilapidated hardware with transition hardware. If this thing was a brand spanking new G5 PowerBook. Yah. Fine. It can last a while. But the thing is 2 year old G4 hardware. If they are going to make any revamps to the system they should simply bite the bullet and just get it done. I as much as the next person want apple to take their time and get the entire system right from firmware to chipset to CPU. But for the love of god any G4 that comes on the market at this point is hardly future proofing your purchase. Its one thing if it’s a Mac Mini. $500-700 rather minor purchase in the grand scheme of things. But a 2000+ purchase? Whatever. I need to go get some caffeine in me. Just woke up. I don't even know if that makes any sense...up way to late trying to figure out how to put together a wiki. *flops and passes out*

 

[Yvan256]

That's my thought too. What's in this for Freescale?

I guess the deal must be something along the lines of "If Apple buys G4-class processors, it must buy them from Freescale".

I wouldn't mind a Freescale G4 in a palmtop computer that runs the full version of OS X. I don't want anything from Microsoft (PocketPCs are out) and PalmOS is too weird (reminds me of Windows 3.11). Why did Palm buy BeOS for? They're not doing anything with it!

 

[~Shard~]

why would apple design a new motherboard for a dual core G4 powerbook now that steve has already said they will begin using intels very soon? that's a move that also requires a mobo redesign, and that's the next mobo change i can see.

Actually, that's a very good point - thanks for the insight.

you may be able to live with it but I think there are going to be A LOT of pissed off people, me included, all because Apple isn't updating already dilapidated hardware with transition hardware. If this thing was a brand spanking new G5 PowerBook. Yah. Fine. It can last a while. But the thing is 2 year old G4 hardware. If they are going to make any revamps to the system they should simply bite the bullet and just get it done.

And another excellent point I hadn't really thought of. Perhaps Apple should be concentrating on redesigning their systems to incorporate new hardware and chip architectures, as opposed to old ones.

Kay, I'm starting to change my opinion now... thanks guys...

 

[SiliconAddict]

why would apple design a new motherboard for a dual core G4 powerbook now that steve has already said they will begin using intels very soon? that's a move that also requires a mobo redesign, and that's the next mobo change i can see.

The only possibility is that they are waiting for Merom in Fall of 2006 which really IS the next generation of the Pentium M. A 1 year timeframe MIGHT be worth it to Apple to create a mobo for a dual core G4....As much as I LOATH the idea I see some possibility there. It really depends on what they come out with next month at Apple Expo. Sept 2005’s AE is going to really tell us where Apple is going in the next 6 months with their hardware. January would be too late for a dual CPU G4 to be introed but Sept. Its right on the edge but I think it’s a “possibility” God. I need to get drunk. That idea just doesn’t sit well with me.

 

[Sun Baked]

There is another option. This may simply be a creative payoff as I think someone started to talk about at the start of this thread. The fact is when the Intel announcement was made the talk was of IBM and what they would do, no one mentioned Freescale yet right now their chips mke up the majority of Apple computer sales. If IBM had their noses put out by SJ it stands to reason Freescale felt the same way.

A payoff+purchase option is about the only thing that makes sense, it's a common way to end long-standing relationships without major litigation and keep the relationship intact.

The CPUs in the fab are a paltry sum that Apple could always buy outright, and clearance them out at a later date.

The actual cost of design of some of the stuff designed for Apple, that Freescale cannot recoup the R&D expense at the new lower production levels -- is a big sum (ie, dual core and the 7448.)

If Apple doesn't buy any of the new CPUs, Freescale stands to lose a big wad of money. Your major customer just walked.

Repair parts ... Apple can always buy on the open market or from Freescale. And Freescale does keep a bunch of drop in replacements in the pipe for the embedded market. Apple's repair stock or 10k unit order shouldn't dent this unless a entire revision cycle needs to be included in a G4 REP.

When a dual core or 7448 is designed for Apple, and Apple declines to use it -- they have lost the majority of that products sales. Freescale had bet the farm and Apple, and they have finally walked.

This like Wal-Mart deciding to stop buying from a supplier that had bet the farm on their Wal-Mart account.

 

[nagromme]

What's in it for Freescale? Some sales--maybe not many, but if it's just selling replacement chips that have already been developed anyway (and if a few more months of BIG orders were part of the negotiation) then I can see it. Besides, Apple may have agreed to pay unusually HIGH prices for small quantities, to make it practical for Freescale. Also, Freescale makes other chips besides CPUs, don't they? Maybe it's a relationship Freescale wants to keep up for other reasons.

What's in it for Apple? Fulfilling their AppleCare commitments on the next few months of G4 Macs that get sold. And getting some faster new G4 chips too probably--for one more revision or so--but that part won't last long. Soon it will be just replacement chips, and an agreement Apple wants "just in case."

And maybe the option to unveil the super new PowerMac G4 (alongside the ROKR phone) at WWDC 2008, if Intel just can't deliver

 

[Yvan256]

Watch as everyone jumps to conclusions based on NOTHING.

mov AX, $0000
jmp @conclusions

;-)

 

[EricNau]

I think Apple made the contract last til 2008 just to be on the safe side. They may not plan on getting anything from this company after 2007, but in the unlikely event that the trasition takes longer than expected, they'll still have processers. I think Apple chose 2008 thinking "It's better to be safe than sorry!"

 

[kwnd]

Yeah, if you buy a G4 based mac just before the middle of 2006 and buy applecare for it, Apple would still need to have a stockpile of those systems until the middle of 2009.

Guaranteeing a supply of chips until the end of 2008 would ensure that I guess.

I don't think this is anything but Apple covering themselves against disgruntled PPC owners who need replacement chips.

Have you seen the new Intel roadmap? Those are the chips they'll be using for embedded systems.

Bingo. Thank you.

In fact, if I remember correctly, Apple provides parts for up to 5-7 years after the last sale of a product. I believe this has something to do with various state laws, but don't quote me on that.

Apple always replaces like for like. If you bought a computer with a 4x SuperDrive and it needs to be replaced under the warranty or AppleCare, even if lowest speed SuperDrive current shipping in new computers is 8x, and even if the new PowerMacs have 16x drivers, you're going to get a 4x drive. No exceptions. Apple isn't going to start dropping Intels in to old G4s just because they need a replacement part. They want you to have to buy a new one at some point, after all.

This deal does not signify that Apple believes the transition to Intel will take longer than expected. Nor does it signify that they are planning on sticking with the G4 for certain applications (home media device, tablet PC, whatever).

This isn't a clue in to new products, not a brave new branching out for the company. This is a boring, day to day practical/logistical consideration.

 

[Yarvin]

I have a question: Does a speed bump on a ~1.5GHz processor with only a 167MHz single-channel, single-data-rate (from what I've read the G4 doesn't use the DDR features, even though it uses DDR chips) FSB really do any good? Isn't the FSB bottleneck vastly more significant than the processor speeds at such high speeds?

 

[VanNess]

I read this as a sign that G4 Macs are about to be EOL. Which means Intel products are just around the corner. I'm guessing eMac or Mini will be the first ones.

Don't forget that Jobs said (at the WWDC keynote about the Intel switch) that they are a lot of "great" new PPC products in the pipeline that have yet to be introduced. Actually, he said that more than once in the keynote and, so far, we havn't seen any.

Watch as everyone jumps to conclusions based on NOTHING.

But that's the reason why we're all here, lol.

 

[rosalindavenue]

The whole year of the notebook thing. Of course, I guess he could have been talking about any year.

The "year of the notebook" was not a promise. And I think it had more going for it in the way of notebooks than this year, the "year of HD," has going for high definition video.

 

[heisetax]

They have the equipment

That's my thought too. What's in this for Freescale?

Why not? THey already have the wquipment to do the job. Some of the older machines would probably need some older slower ones that had in the past missed the speed mark.

Bill the TaxMan

 

[pigwin32]

The only possibility is that they are waiting for Merom in Fall of 2006 which really IS the next generation of the Pentium M. A 1 year timeframe MIGHT be worth it to Apple to create a mobo for a dual core G4....As much as I LOATH the idea I see some possibility there. It really depends on what they come out with next month at Apple Expo. Sept 2005’s AE is going to really tell us where Apple is going in the next 6 months with their hardware. January would be too late for a dual CPU G4 to be introed but Sept. Its right on the edge but I think it’s a “possibility” God. I need to get drunk. That idea just doesn’t sit well with me.

It's a weird situation. The dual-core G4 is a worthy chip but would require wholesale changes to the PB architecture. This alone makes it unlikely, tooling up for a new mobo has got to be expensive. I foresee the 7448(?) pin compatible dropped into the existing architecture providing a minor speed bump perhaps plus lower power consumption but very little else.

The Yonah sounds like a decent PB chip, obviously also requiring a completely new mobo and paving the way for a new enclosure and high-res display. But who wants to own a rev A PB based on a completely new chip architecture.

What is perhaps a little surprising is that despite the impending switch to Intel and the perception that the PBs are well overdue for a refresh, Apple is selling truckloads of them. Joe Customer is ignoring the specs and buying the Apple experience.

Personally I'm still a bit sad we won't be seeing the freescale dually in a PB and I still mistrust Intel, their business practices are not dissimilar to MS. But if they can deliver on their roadmap and Apple can innovate on top of the new chips my next PB will be an impressive beast. And Intel have said they're having much less difficulty moving to the 65nm process than the transition to 90nm.