Apple's A4 Processor is Based on Cortex A8, Not A9?

[napabar]

I'm not the same person who said more better.

What you say makes no sense. The A9 is better than the A8, and the ipad would have been more powerful if it had an A9, because of the fact. There's no way Apple could have made it better with and A8 than an A9, and that's just common sense.

So in the future, when the next generation of Ipads use the A9, are those going to be worse than the current ones? The A4 is not a good name.

Nobody said "more better". I was choosing the right vernacular for my intended audience.

Did you not read what I wrote???? Going with the A9 could have drained battery life, or increased the cost. Would the iPad have been a better product starting at $899 and running only 5 hours? I think not. And this is not just a stock A8/A9 comparison, since this is customized silicon.

Was Apple smarter going with the "more better" G4 PowerPC chip?? Motorola's failure to get those clock speeds up meant suppressing the true potential of the G3. Apple decided that the G4 was their premium chip, so it couldn't have iMacs surpassing the G4 in clock speed. Apple could have been shipping 800 Mhz G3's when the G4 was stuck at 500 Mhz. AltiVec be damned, 99 percent of the apps didn't take advantage of it anyway. Was the Mac community really better off with the "latest and greatest" G4 chip? Not during the time period it was released, I would argue.

 

[inlovewithi]

Remember how much better PowerPC was over the competing x86 processors of the times?

God I wish I was here during those times. Perhaps I can check the archive.

 

[840quadra]

What intended purpose would that be? For me that has been a question that has never been answered.

The problem with your statement is that potentially this product could be outdated in a short period of time because it is using a year old processor. What happens with future OS upgrades that adds more features? My 3G is already much slower in OS 3.0 than in 2.x.

Another problem is what kind of features are coming in iPhone 4.0 with only a minimal upgrade in the processor? If multitasking is too much of a problem with the 3GS, then there is a very good chance we won't see it in OS 4.0 if the A4 makes its way too the iPhone.

So is it like a day old dohnut, soggy, tastes funny?

As with most computer / tablet systems. The iPad is more of a general purpose platform for developers / users to decide what the dedicated intended purpose is. I have a use for it, and am happy to see it, however I don't expect everyone to be as excited about it, and don't project that on anyone.

Also, the iPhone -> iPhone 3GS can multitask just fine. They already do so, and quite well. Ever listen to music while using an other application, or been notified of a new email while those two applications are running?

The problem is, Apple does not allow any 3rd party developers to enable multitasking at this point. The reason Apple states, is to give a smooth, stable user experience without the potential for system crashes.

I understand their viewpoint, however I think their concerns could be addressed by putting preference pane for multitasking in the system, and setting the default mode to no multitasking. If the user decides to turn on multitasking, give them a huge prompt that they need to OK before it is enabled, warning them of potential speed / stability issues. They could even go an extra step and let users select which applications they want to be able to run in the background, before they could do so.

I hope this is something that we see in the next year or so, I currently jailbreak my iPod Touch simply because I want to enable multitasking of a couple applications. Outside of that (for me), there is really no reason to jailbreak, or modify the OS.

 

[dernhelm]

God I wish I was here during those times. Perhaps I can check the archive.

Go ahead. It was fun times. You can count the number of times "megahertz myth" is used.

 

[Eidorian]

Who cares. It doesn't make any difference.

Welcome to the iToaster. Keep your hands and feet inside the car.

 

[kakapo]

Mostly negatives.

Jeez, who cares it's plenty fast enough for its intended purpose.

Making arbitrary comparison between A8 and A9 is superficial. Having the latest chip in the iPad doesn't specifically make the user experience better. You do not have the knowledge that Apple does as to what it takes to drive this device, versus the compromises that might ensue, such as price and battery life.

So, to sum it up in layman's terms for you, the A9 is not "more better".

i don't understand this "old technology is good enough for now so why want more" argument. the PDP-11 was good enough for a while too, but people certainly wanted to move on when there was better tech and i don't see many people today says it's good enough now. the point here is that there's already something better than the A8, so why choose an older tech? now, if the argument is that the design cycle started before the A9 spec was finalized, then that's completely different and understandable.

it's also crazy to say that apple knows better what the device should do. apple has no idea. the beauty of the app store is that you have the whole world (speaking in hyperbole) making things for the devices to do! what the ipad can do is constrained only by their imagination... oh, and an older processor.

 

[inlovewithi]

Nobody said "more better". I was choosing the right vernacular for my intended audience.

Did you not read what I wrote???? Going with the A9 could have drained battery life, or increased the cost. Would the iPad have been a better product starting at $899 and running only 5 hours? I think not. And this is not just a stock A8/A9 comparison, since this is customized silicon.

Was Apple smarter going with the "more better" G4 PowerPC chip?? Motorola's failure to get those clock speeds up meant suppressing the true potential of the G3. Apple decided that the G4 was their premium chip, so it couldn't have iMacs surpassing the G4 in clock speed. Apple could have been shipping 800 Mhz G3's when the G4 was stuck at 500 Mhz. AltiVec be damned, 99 percent of the apps didn't take advantage of it anyway. Was the Mac community really better off with the "latest and greatest" G4 chip? Not during the time period it was released, I would argue.

From what I've read from poster who are defending Apple like yourself is that the A9 draws less power than the A8. Newer chips are typically more efficient.

 

[Romanesq]

hey...

what they're overlooking is the magic that is also infused into it.

I almost forgot about that. That equals 6 million units sold in the first year.

But on a serious note, a lot of us get caught up with the idea of having the most speedy processor when the reality is it's a new product and they want to make it run quite well and ensure it's longevity.

Most Apple products have good engineering and last a good while. Let's see if this one stands up. Based on this approach, it should. Besides, if it is splendidly running what it is designed, you can't complain.

Okay, please go back to complaining. Yes, your favorite game on your alienware system won't port over to the iPad.

Still have a mac mini intel solo as a music server. No matter how I would like to replace it, there's just no justifying doing so. Such as it is.

 

[blackcrayon]

Let me ask you, why not buy a Tegra 2 tablet, it's many times more powerful and can do a whole lot more, USB, SD Card 1080p on hdtv (575p for Ipad) and the one I saw costs $325.

Where's this $325 Tegra 2 tablet? Link?

 

[eppel]

Who cares about all this? Bring on the new Mac Pro's or shve it!

 

[SeanMcg]

I tend to agree with those who contend that Apple wanted the transition from iPhone/iPod Touch apps to go more smoothly. Unlike when the iPhone or iPod Touch came out, software is available in droves for the new platform. That helps speed adoption.

I also have to wonder when they locked the hardware specs in. Was the A9 Spec available to them then? Apple takes a long time to bring a new product to market. Besides, they have done a good job in the past of managing processor transitions, so maybe they understand this kind of thing.

 

[08380728]

Would it really need to be dual-core? In every single video of the iPad I see absolutely no lag. Dual-core would just consume more battery (yes, if it was dual-core it'd pretty much be no question as to whether multi-tasking is included, but still).

Yes there was, go back an watch again, this time more carefully. In particular, when he clicks on the PDF in Mail and zooms in, the file did not come into focus for about 3 seconds, then he scrolled the file left an it took another 3 seconds to redraw the data into focus.

 

[inlovewithi]

Where's this $325 Tegra 2 tablet? Link?

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/notion_ink’s_adam_poses_fierce_competition_ipad

It also has a camera, and a GPS, 16 hour life when just using the internet. It's the 1st price I've seen for a Tegra tablet, so I'm curious to see how others will be priced. I know the HP slate is going to cost $620 or so, and I rather get that for many specific programs that I use on Windows, and video game emulators that I would like to run on my television.

 

[hexor]

What the sam hill difference does it make what the name of the processor is! All that matters is the user experience! Everyone who has already used one has stated how blazingly fast it is so why the negative ratings?

 

[str1f3]

From what I've read from poster who are defending Apple like yourself is that the A9 draws less power than the A8. Newer chips are typically more efficient.

It is a wash. The A9 at full usage does exceed the A8 since it has two processors that most mobile devices are running at 1.0Ghz. The A9 also has a significant advantage in its 45nm manufacturing process compared to the A8 at 65nm.

 

[dernhelm]

i don't understand this "old technology is good enough for now so why want more" argument. the PDP-11 was good enough for a while too, but people certainly wanted to move on when there was better tech and i don't see many people today says it's good enough now. the point here is that there's already something better than the A8, so why choose an older tech? now, if the argument is that the design cycle started before the A9 spec was finalized, then that's completely different and understandable.

it's also crazy to say that apple knows better what the device should do. apple has no idea. the beauty of the app store is that you have the whole world (speaking in hyperbole) making things for the devices to do! what the ipad can do is constrained only by their imagination... oh, and an older processor.

Part of the problem of producing your own custom SOC is that you need to start from some baseline. When they started the A4 project, it is quite possible that Cortex A9 was not a viable part yet - so they started from the A8 base line. When it was finished, they COULD have went back and expended the extra engineering to wedge an A9 in there, and upped their materials cost accordingly, or they could reduce both costs and stick with what they have.

Then they checked the performance, and you know what? It was already excellent. So there would be a (relatively) few geeks that discover they built on top of an A8 instead of A9, and raise a stink. I doubt Apple cares. If the product has the performance characteristics required for the functions today, there was no real justification for the extra expenditure of capital.

Most people will just use the device, see that it works well, and simply not care. As far as whether the processor will be good enough in 3 years time, that's not something Apple worries about when trying to release a product today. And I have news for you - no other company worries about it either.

 

[anthonylambert]

A8 or A9

Is it an A8 or an A9? no it's a A4 !!!

Wonder what the reason was for the name???

 

[Chupa Chupa]

A) No FLASH support on a device that is supposed to be a computer, NOT a HUGE iPOD.
B) No multitasking. And this processor rumor just adds insult to injury there too, no doubt.
C) No Mac or PC software support & requires developers to create all new apps that are basically iPhone/iPOD Touch apps.

Link please where any ranking Apple official has ever claimed the iPad is "supposed to be a computer." If you can't provide one, which I'm pretty sure you cannot, then your supposition B & C is logically flawed as well.

In fact, Jobs said the iPad is intended to fit in between an iPod/Touch and a laptop. By that very definition it's not meant to be a computer in the lay use of the concept. The iPad is a new platform. Developers will support it or not based on whether they can make money doing so, just like any other platform.

 

[blackcrayon]

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/notion_ink’s_adam_poses_fierce_competition_ipad

It also has a camera, and a GPS, 16 hour life when just using the internet. It's the 1st price I've seen for a Tegra tablet, so I'm curious to see how others will be priced. I know the HP slate is going to cost $620 or so, and I rather get that for many specific programs that I use on Windows, and video game emulators that I would like to run on my television.

Have you watched the videos of that tablet? It's slow, unfinished looking... The Notion Ink guy has to whack buttons on the screen multiple times for it to respond. There aren't even any videos of it on the website, and the ones around the internet are mostly blurry videos of it running a web browser (though it does apparently do flash It looks like a pre-alpha concept device more than something that's about to ship, but who knows...

It should certainly have potential in terms of the hardware, but right now the state of the software looks FAR behind the iPad. Elsewhere they listed $325-$800 as the price... So who knows which features are really going to be on the $325 model (if they can even really sell it worldwide for that little).

 

[*LTD*]

Do Windows sufferers and OS X users who want to turn OS X into Windows (I never understood this) still not get the iPad?

Nowadays the line between "mobile device" and "computer" is being blurred noticeably. Apple leads the way in this movement. Eventually Microsoft and the box-assemblers will catch on to this.

The iPhone and iPod Touch were the first steps in this direction. The iPad is a major leap in this direction. It's the new computing foundation. All the work we do on standard PCs and Macs (as we know them today) will be transitioned gradually to the iPad platform, and ostensibly, the same sort of evolution (which right now seems like a transformation) will happen industry-wide.

Right now, the iPad is perfectly fine as a complementary device. Mostly because we can't quite fit a 1GB videocard into an iPad, etc. But with advances in miniaturization and with apps and games being written for the iPad, the iPad platform will in time function as a replacement for larger computing/game devices. Convergence will succeed. The level of gaming tech we're seeing now in the App Store is nothing compared to what we'll see as the iPad software/hardware ecosystem evolves. The potential of this platform is insane.

THAT is where the iPad will take us.

 

[anthonylambert]

Keep 'em wanting more....

This is a new market they have no competition so they can release a throttled back product knowing they can easily improve it when they need to. They always leave room for next years product to be better... So next year we may get dual core A9 and a front facing camera....

 

[dernhelm]

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/notion_ink’s_adam_poses_fierce_competition_ipad

It also has a camera, and a GPS, 16 hour life when just using the internet. It's the 1st price I've seen for a Tegra tablet, so I'm curious to see how others will be priced. I know the HP slate is going to cost $620 or so, and I rather get that for many specific programs that I use on Windows, and video game emulators that I would like to run on my television.

There was a video on slash gear showing it. It looked pretty raw (and even showed a broken Flash icon at one point ).

Not sure how far along this really is. Certainly, the prototype they were showing off looked to be significantly less performant than the iPad. Not that would matter if all you cared about were its spec sheet.

 

[*LTD*]

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/notion_ink’s_adam_poses_fierce_competition_ipad

It also has a camera, and a GPS, 16 hour life when just using the internet. It's the 1st price I've seen for a Tegra tablet, so I'm curious to see how others will be priced. I know the HP slate is going to cost $620 or so, and I rather get that for many specific programs that I use on Windows, and video game emulators that I would like to run on my television.

Yuck. You're getting a case of feature-itis. See Apple User Experience for a cure.

 

[jsbaugh]

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/notion_ink’s_adam_poses_fierce_competition_ipad

It also has a camera, and a GPS, 16 hour life when just using the internet. It's the 1st price I've seen for a Tegra tablet, so I'm curious to see how others will be priced. I know the HP slate is going to cost $620 or so, and I rather get that for many specific programs that I use on Windows, and video game emulators that I would like to run on my television.

The reason I would buy an ipad over that is because of the Apps. Yes Android has Apps also but 99% of them are half assed and suck. It's not so much what the iPad will do out of the box, but what Apps the developers will come up with.

 

[inlovewithi]

Have you watched the videos of that tablet? It's slow, unfinished looking... The Notion Ink guy has to whack buttons on the screen multiple times for it to respond. There aren't even any videos of it on the website, and the ones around the internet are mostly blurry videos of it running a web browser (though it does apparently do flash It looks like a pre-alpha concept device more than something that's about to ship, but who knows...

It should certainly have potential in terms of the hardware, but right now the state of the software looks FAR behind the iPad. Elsewhere they listed $325-$800 as the price... So who knows which features are really going to be on the $325 model (if they can even really sell it worldwide for that little).

It comes out in May - June, it also uses that E-Ink. Personally I'm not planning on getting it, since I'm not that familiar with that company, I just find the Tegra 2 specs and price interesting. I saw video of it a few weeks ago, it looked fine to me.