Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple to Adopt Intel Ultra-Mobile Platform?

rockosmodurnlif said:
No one's talking about the pink elephant in the room?

I always here how innovative and far reaching Apple is and how Redmond are the copycats but I don't hear or see any of that now. It distinctly looks like Apple is on MS's heels with this idea. If it is true. This is just a rumor after all.

Not that I am a fan of the idea. I don't like the UMPCs. But give MS credit where it's due.
Click to expand...

MS credit for entering a market too early with bad implementation :rolleyes:
 
ChrisA said:
The current processor can drive the screen well but if the screen had four times as many pixes the processor would need to be four times faster. (Remember that if you double the screen size you have 4x as many pixels.)

What next? I don't know, Voice input? Natural language understanding? There are applications waiting that can suck up any amount of available computing power. For example wouldn't it be nice if you could simplely ask your phone using the blue tooth headset "any voice mail from John?" Much better then scrolling a screen and looking. Or just say "Ring if John calls, put the others straight to VM" and the phone would do it. The only reason we have a touch screen is because natural language understanding requires far more compute power than we have now even on the Mac Pro. Wait 20 years and it will be on a cell phone.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the computer in Star Trek. Now if only we can invent transporters, replicators & holodecks!
 
One thing that I wonder about: Apple has developed MacOS X "Lite" for the iPhone/iTouch running a Samsung ARM chip (correct??) Isn't switching to this platform going to give us the same situation as we have with PPC/Intel Macs i.e two MacOS X "Lite" platforms - ARM/Intel?
 
Moorestown for the 3rd generation Iphone

Peace said:
They would fit perfectly in a new revision of the iPhone....
Click to expand...

Menlow is still pretty big and power-hungry for a phone. Intel's already announced the follow-on to Menlow, though....


http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7167

Devices with batteries that last all day and offer 50% more performance than 2008 devices

Just recently, Intel introduced its 2007 ultra-mobile computing platform. At IDF Beijing, Intel then demonstrated its Menlow platform. Targeted for 2008, Menlow contains a new 64-bit processor with clock frequencies near 2 GHz , DDR2 memory running at 400MHz or 533MHz, solid-state NAND flash memory and discrete graphics processing.

The big kicker for Menlow is its substantial improvement in battery life over available UMPC offerings. Menlow has approximately twice the life of current devices, reaching up to 6 hours of regular use and 10.5 hours of standby.

Before Menlow devices make it to the mainstream, Intel this week announced another major milestone for its ultra-mobile platform. Called Moorestown, Intel revealed that by roughly mid 2009, we will be able to see devices that consume 20 times less power than devices available in 2006. According to Intel roadmaps, Moorestown devices will be able to last a full day's of mixed productivity and leisure activities -- approximately 24 hours.

What sets Moorestown apart from previous processors is the fact that it combines CPU, GPU and memory controller functions into one chip. Essentially, this is the same intention that AMD has with its Fusion program. AMD's Fusion also encompasses mobile devices as well as desktops. It is only a matter of time before we see the same idea from Intel in the desktop space being applied to devices such as thin clients and budget PCs.

Moorestown's CPU will be 50-percent smaller in size than Silverthorne and consume roughly 50-percent less power. Intel will also be making Moorestown available as a single core or dual core system utilizing DDR3 memory. Despite having internal graphics, Intel is expecting that Moorestown will outperform Menlow's graphics by 50-percent.
Click to expand...
 
rockosmodurnlif said:
No one's talking about the pink elephant in the room?

I always here how innovative and far reaching Apple is and how Redmond are the copycats but I don't hear or see any of that now. It distinctly looks like Apple is on MS's heels with this idea. If it is true. This is just a rumor after all.

Not that I am a fan of the idea. I don't like the UMPCs. But give MS credit where it's due.
Click to expand...

Is it really an apple vs. microsoft issue? Apple does hardware and the os. Microsoft does only the os. Was it the hardware makers or microsoft who pushed for the UMPC that exist already?

Besides, I don't think that anyone here is saying that apple is better than anyone else for having something, rather people are just excited that such a thing would be available with Mac OS X.
 
Chaszmyr said:
Moreover, Apple's got an exclusive deal with AT&T, and AT&T has no plans to adopt WiMax.
Click to expand...

AT and who?

Like Apple cares about that relationship. It's very clear that if there was a better option (Google's 700MHz WiMax network anyone?) then Apple would go with that.

Let's face it most mobile phone companies really suck. They over promise and under deliver.

As for Intel not being interested in WiMax?

Why did they just declare 2008, the "year of wimax"?

http://www.edn.com/article/CA6513211.html

...and very publicly included the support for the standard in Menlow.

Big things in mobile computing are coming on several levels. This coming year will be interesting to watch (because of the above).

Not to mention Android implementations will be announced later on in 2008 (just in time for Moorestown in 2009).
 
Rocketman said:
To me, this platform was the carrot at the end of a long 3 year stick that cinched the deal for Apple to cross over. The Wintel compatibility is a big factor, but Apple is, at its core, an all-in-one consumer device company.

Macintosh "platform"
iPhone "platform"

Rocketman
Click to expand...

Agreed.
While Wintel compatibility was certainly a driving force, ultra-mobile processing was what Apple was really interested in. The crux of the biscuit, as Frank might say.

I fully expect a UMPC in '08 and don't think it completely out of the question for this to be the device rumored for MWSF. Something like a hybrid iPhone/MacBook is what I'd like to see released. With Apple's focus on the Asian market, this device will have to exist sooner than later. Have to.

We'll see.
 
P-Worm said:
Sounds good. Faster speeds, longer battery life, smaller chips.

P-Worm
Click to expand...

mmm I can't wait for the future... get here faster dammit. If I could freeze myself for a few years, I'd so do it... just in time for the next Apple device.. now that's the ultimate fanboy.
 
Wi-Max

P-Worm said:
Sounds good. Faster speeds, longer battery life, smaller chips.

P-Worm
Click to expand...

This destination on Intel's roadmap was one of the many incentives which convinced Apple to make the shift from IBM. Wi-Max and 3G, he we come!
 
mrgreen4242 said:
That was true up until the CoreDuo line was released, which was right around the time of the switch. I don't think anyone who knew what they were talking about was, at that point, contending that AMD was outpacing Intel.

Anyways, the idea of the UMP was cool about a year or two ago, but lately I've been less interested in the technology. Here's what made me look twice: the Asus eeepc (arguably the best of the UMPs, when you consider form factor, features, and price) vs. the touch/iPhone. The only thing the eeepc has on either handheld is a keyboard, expansion ports, and a bigger screen. The handhelds, tho, have superior battery life, a more innovative input mechanism, and most importantly portability.

I think my point is that rather than a 7" laptop or even a tablet, I'd rather see a 4" touch with an (obviously) larger, higher res screen and BT to connect it to a BT keyboard (and mouse if you wanted). A small, option docking station with some ports including USB, DVI, and audio out would certainly make it really interesting in my book.

Slightly larger/higher res multitouch screen, bigger battery, 16/32gb of flash, maybe more RAM than the touch, BT, a docking station to charge and connect a USB HDD and a cheap 17/19" LCD... charge $500 for the handheld (16gb version, +$150ish for the 32gb?), another $50 for the dock, a $100 for a decent sized USB HDD (320gb or so), $150 for a cheap LCD, $100 for a BT keyboard/mouse set and you're up to $900-1000 for a device that would serve as a laptop, desktop, PDA, and iPod. Not the most powerful thing in the world, but it would certainly be adequate for my wife, me at work (and most of my co-workers) and be really, really cool. Take (and access) all your files everywhere you go... anywho, just my end of the week ramblings.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't call an "EEPC" or whatever it's name is a real UMPC. It's more of a gimmick to me. I'm not ridiculing it or it's owners, but to get to the price it sells at, they obviously had to use some low speed, low quality components.
A UMPC to me is just what the acronym stands for, an "Ultra-Mobile PC". AKA a small and powerful laptop/tablet with at least moderately high-end components, processor, RAM, Screen res, etc.
 
DogcowUK said:
One thing that I wonder about: Apple has developed MacOS X "Lite" for the iPhone/iTouch running a Samsung ARM chip (correct??) Isn't switching to this platform going to give us the same situation as we have with PPC/Intel Macs i.e two MacOS X "Lite" platforms - ARM/Intel?
Click to expand...

More hopefully, is that it would allow Apple to use a common Intel-based operating system across their entire product line.

If OS 10.6 does indeed end-up as Intel-only on the Mac, it would likely be beneficial if it could also run on an Intel CPU in an iPhone, an iPod, an :apple:tv and any other computing/consumer device.
 
winterspan said:
I wouldn't call an "EEPC" or whatever it's name is a real UMPC. It's more of a gimmick to me. I'm not ridiculing it or it's owners, but to get to the price it sells at, they obviously had to use some low speed, low quality components.
A UMPC to me is just what the acronym stands for, an "Ultra-Mobile PC". AKA a small and powerful laptop/tablet with at least moderately high-end components, processor, RAM, Screen res, etc.
Click to expand...

You may have a point regarding the definition of an "Ultra-Mobile PC", but as for the EEE PC I have used one and its really very fast. I remember when my desktop had a 166mhz processor, and it wasn't significantly slower than my macbook pro which has 2 cores each well over 10 times as fast as that single processor.

There is absolutely no reason to go putting desktop, or even high end laptop grade hardware into something that will be used primarily for browsing the web, typing documents, etc. I could do all of that just fine on my 166mhz processor, and one can do it all fine on an EEE PC.

That being said, I'm not buying an EEE until the second generation comes out. The current generation uses Celeron processors, whereas the second generation is supposed to Intel Core 2 type processors.

I don't think anyone imagines themselves using an ultra-mobile pc as a primary computing platform, so loading them down with expensive hardware seems pointless. The key is using optimized software. Take an iPhone, give it a little more "oomph" in the hardware category, give it a real, albeit small, keyboard and a larger screen (touch optional), then put on optimized versions of iWork, Safari, a media playing interface and release an SDK and Apple would have themselves a killer product. Especially if it came with integrated EDGE and/or 3G. I'm not sure voice would be necessary, I think most people would rather use a more-dedicated phone for that.
 
The real innovators will be seen on 7 January, not 15 January...

It'll be interesting to see if Apple will show up at CES and show that the real "ultra-portable" Mac is a new UMPC form factor....
 

Attachments

  • untitled0.jpg
    untitled0.jpg
    79.1 KB · Views: 98
  • untitled1.jpg
    untitled1.jpg
    85.1 KB · Views: 112
rockosmodurnlif said:
No one's talking about the pink elephant in the room?

I always here how innovative and far reaching Apple is and how Redmond are the copycats but I don't hear or see any of that now. It distinctly looks like Apple is on MS's heels with this idea. If it is true. This is just a rumor after all.

Not that I am a fan of the idea. I don't like the UMPCs. But give MS credit where it's due.
Click to expand...

iPhone and iPod Touch aren't UMPCs, they are the next generation PDA. That is a point where everyone has been failing. PDAs were sliding out of favor. Convergence was necessary to add PDA features to phones and music players because the features are actually useful at times. And Surprise! The iPhone and iPod touch are popular. They run a version of a full OS, with innovative networking support and APIs. The SDK coming out soon is going to sweeten the deal (hopefully). People will stop hacking iPhone apps and officially make them, and this will be very promising.

So to get back to your thought on where credit is due...MS didn't make the first PDA, did they? They(MS) are doing something different than Apple and with limited success. Apple is converging PDA features with the gadgets that people use everyday.
 
So would all this be incorporated on the ipod touch? I was thinking of picking one up but i don't need it right away so I could easily wait for a revamp.
 
Gunga Din said:
So would all this be incorporated on the ipod touch? I was thinking of picking one up but i don't need it right away so I could easily wait for a revamp.
Click to expand...

It is possible, but no one except Apple and Intel can say when.
 
Does anyone know when the AT&T - Apple exclusive relationship officially ends?

I could certainly see Apple doing 3G this year for the Asian market and WiMax the following year. Just in time for all those 2 year iPhone contracts to run out here in the USA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back