Steve Jobs also said that native apps are not necessary, that notebooks with a netbook form factor are crap and other things in Apple's development that he didn't want to give away.
Anyway, who cares what a dead, very fallible person once said?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Demos Future Ultrabook Designs, 4th Generation Core Processor Family
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Steve Jobs also said that native apps are not necessary, that notebooks with a netbook form factor are crap and other things in Apple's development that he didn't want to give away.
Anyway, who cares what a dead, very fallible person once said?
EXACTLY
For every person pops out a "well, Steve said..." line as proof for why something works/won't work, they need to be reminded that "Steve said" a lot of dumb things in his day that turned out to be completely wrong.
That isn't to say the guy was a complete idiot (gotta preempt being labeled an Apple Hater here), but much like anyone, he had his good ideas and bad.
So how much of a threat to ARM is this chip, as well as Haswell?
And it seems like if an x86 based mobile ecosystem starts to gain traction, Apple will have a problem.
And it seems like if an x86 based mobile ecosystem starts to gain traction, Apple will have a problem.
Medfield in 32nm already competes against ARM and there will be a new generation in 22nm soon enough.
Ignoring ecosystems, is it possible for the Haswell architecture to enter the tablet space, counter ARM and make Atom redundant?
I'm wondering because with all these upcoming Win8 tablets using Sandy Bridge or Haswell and companies like Apple building their mobile ecosystems around ARM, anything that converges toward ARM and takes away its leverage looks really disruptive
Haswell's own Y Series will hit the 7-13W range and not require a PCH. We are talking about and x86 tablet able to run desktop applications. Current Windows 8 tablets are Atom, ULV Ivy Bridge, or Tegra 3 based.
Lenovo just showcased their first Ivy Bridge Y Series 11.6" Yoga tablet/notebook. Anything smaller than that is Atom territory and that is receiving and architecture update later this year. The Ivy Bridge Y Series does dip into the Pentium Dual Core and Core i3 lines. I doubt they will truly match Atom's die size or price points but you get an entirely different architecture and IGP.
The Core i3 based Yoga 11S is targeted for a $799 price point with 4 GB of RAM and a 128 GB SSD. Currently, you can purchase a Clover Trail based 10.1" Acer W510 tablet (no keyboard) for $499 with 2 GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage. They both come with IPS displays at 1366 x 768.
Last edited:
Whoops I meant Ivy Bridge. Anyway thanks, I'm just trying to get a sense of where the standard might be heading, esp if the Surface Pro gains traction.
The Surface Pro may or may not be using a Y Series processor but instead a more common ULV Ivy Bridge processor.
The target here is 7-13W while ULV aims for 13-17W.
I wouldn't label them as "good and bad" ideas.
The guy could lie with a poker face to convince the fans that only the particular thing that Apple was selling at the moment was "perfection" - even when he knew that Apple had prototypes and plans for exactly the item that he was dissing.
I wonder how many talks he gave promoting the PowerPC as god's gift, even while the move to x86 was well underway. I wonder how he could sleep at night after falsely claiming that the G5 was the first 64-bit desktop - even though it had no way of using 64-bit instructions (a double-lie - it wasn't first, and it couldn't actually execute in 64-bit mode).
The Surface Pro may or may not be using a Y Series processor but instead a more common ULV Ivy Bridge processor.
The target here is 7-13W while ULV aims for 13-17W.
Yeah unless MS has been doing something behind the scenes with Intel (I doubt it), it's the ULV. The ULV would also correlate the 5 hour battery life rumor
Unless it's a flop, I can see the Pro, and all the Win8 tablets that would benefit from Surface Pro branding, being upgraded to the Y and eventually Haswell. If the merged desktop/mobile ecosystem model catches on, I can also see Apple at a disadvantage in the tablet space for architecture reasons
It is a pretty crummy time to release Windows 8 or RT. We are between ARM and x86 architecture updates. The Intel Y Series and Tegra 4 were for CES 2013 and Haswell has been bumped out past Computex. Windows 8 was released in October of 2012. You are looking at waiting 5-6 months for "appropriate" hardware instead of shoehorning it in with Clover Trail and Ivy Bridge.
That's true, but I think the Pro has disruptive features on the ecosystem and software side that compensate for the less optimal hardware. The whole brand would need 5-6 months to gain traction anyway
It was really hard to beat late 2009's double whammy of Lynnfield/Clarksfield alongside the Windows 7 launch.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/01/power-saving-through-marketing-intels-7-watt-ivy-bridge-cpus/
Lower clocks and marketing over better binning this time around. I really wanted to know what Intel meant with their "scenario power design" number.
It does to the loyalists.
----------
No it won't, because it is a niche product that won't find many buyers. Just wait and see how the Windows 8 touch screen notebooks won't sell.
That's why they released an 8" tablet with a different form factor
It's not 8". It's 7.85". Remember? Any tablet smaller than the original iPad just wouldn't work. Isn't that what Steve said?
Oh come on. Don't you have any other word to say? This expression is kind of boring. Along with "Steve never allow", "Developer will be pissed", "This", "lol", "Shut up, take my money", "Android sucks", "This rumour is BS", "Where is my Mac Pro?", "fanboy".
Say something else big guy.
Agreed.
There is a Surface floating around the office here and whenever anyone use it they always go for the trackpad far more than the touchscreen.
Reaching over a keyboard sucks, especially over a laptop keyboard which are typically full sized plus trackpad.
Not necessarily. If you look at what's on Android, all of the apps in the Android Market place are compiled for ARM but Intel found a way to let them run on their x86 phones that are shipping in Asia and Europe. All of the Android apps run on x86 even though they were build for ARM. In theory, I don't think it would be hard to do the same with iOS.
----------
I don't think Ultrabook is targeting MBA as much as it is targeting iPad. Ultrabook was a marketing effort to get people excited about laptops again (to appeal to those who are deciding between a laptop and an iPad or other tablet).
Don't forget that Intel is inside the MBA. Intel wins if a MBA is sold or an Ultrabook is sold. They lose when people decide not to refresh their laptops/desktops and go for a tablet instead. I am sure Apple isn't happy about Ultrabooks because they see it as competition for MBA, but from Intel's perspective Intel wants to sell lots of MBAs and lots of Ultrabooks.
If Intel is doing this huge shift to lower power (sub 10W) for their main chip line, they need more customers than just Apple for the MBA.
I agree. The design genius of Apple is in the details. Nevertheless, even the apple variant carries weight and bulk, and its real place is on the table, not in the bag.
P.S. I remember my first "ultrabook", the compaq armada m300, the machine was so beautifully light, but the power brick weighed almost as much as the computer. I thought then, that laptop specs shoud always list two weights: computer and computer&powersource.
True. However whilst it may be physically possible to do. I just dont see it ever happening. It's be a big step backwards in terms of the ecosystem as you can guarantee that the 'emulator' wouldnt work for everything (especially some of the newer high powered games).
Actually, that's not true. Apps built using the Android SDK are compiled to Dalvik bytecode. The Dalvik VM then uses JIT compilation to produce a native binary on your device. Apps built the NDK (Native Development Kit) are built to ARM phones and do not run on Medfield based x86 Android phones like the Xolo X900 or the RAZR i.
That is one advantage of using a VM and bytecode vs going native compilation, it's that architecture changes on the CPU means you need to port the VM, not all the apps.
----------
And that is why Android didn't choose the emulator route for such a thing. Their decision to run their code on top of Dalvik is what made it possible. Something the iOS platform just doesn't have as an advantage if an architecture switch became needed in the future.
yes. people waits..and they announce another 'new' things next year..again wait..
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6600/...rformance-compared-to-nvidias-geforce-gt-650m
While Dirt gameplay video is not that impressive on an IGP/fGPU, Intel is showcasing the existence of GT3e with embedded DRAM!
While Dirt gameplay video is not that impressive on an IGP/fGPU, Intel is showcasing the existence of GT3e with embedded DRAM!
We will have to agree to disagree then I guess. I have read numerous articles on this. They are basically at a point that they just can't fit anymore onto the chip design.
I've read things like that as well. I've always heard that one of the reasons for multi-core architectures is because of a so called 'speed limit' to current silicone.
However, I also think there's a limit to 'motivation' to improve clock speeds and per-core performance. CPU's have greatly outrun I/O, hard disks, bus speeds, etc. Give a couple years for those to catch up, and I think there will be a good reason to begin developing even faster CPU's. Aside from a handful of tasks, most tasks would be benefited with faster drives, bus speeds, and I/O than a faster CPU
----------
Exactly. Steve AND Jony Ive (in regards to Steve) have been quoted saying he was wrong MOST of the time, it was those few GOOD ideas he had that made him great.
Steve changed his mind on a LOT of things as technology changed.
He thought flash based media players were the wrong way to go. That's why he tasked Apple with developing a media player that used a 1.8" Hard Drive. Sometime later, flash technology changed, became cheaper and more reliable, and a flash based iPod became the flagship model.
He said that 'globbing' a mac on the back of an LCD display was forcing the computer to do something it doesn't want to do. He said the genius of the iMac was that it allowed the computer to remain horizontal, and the display to remain vertical. The very next generation of iMac (which was the third generation, but, was the first generation after he made that comment at the iMac G4 unveiling) was exactly what he said wouldn't work. Why? Because Apple found a way to make it work.
When he announced the MacBook Air, he said that nobody likes or wants those 11 and 12" displays. He said they only bought computers with those small displays because they were cheap. Then Apple released the 11.6" MacBook Air.
He thought a 7" tablet was pointless, that's true. However MacRumors reported that several within Apple thought it was a good idea. The presence of an iPad mini shows two things. 1) Great ideas can come from other great people within Apple, and 2) Apple is not afraid to go against Steve Jobs when he's (quite obviously) no longer at the helm. Steve Jobs was notorious for caring more about products and innovation than people, so it makes sense that the type of people who could succeed in that environment would eagerly push their own ideas even if they go against what a former, deceased CEO wanted.
I could go on. Point is, technology changes over time. Apple nearly died in the 90's because they struck their hooves into the mud and refused to innovate, just kept things the way they always were. As things change, and technology moves, the people who make GOOD technology move with it.
The idea that Apple won't ever make a netbook though... what's the 11.6" air then? It's everything about a netbook. We just don't call it that because 'netbook' is synonymous with 5 year old performance in a small form factor. With the 11.6" air, you have the same very small form factor, you just have much better performance. I suppose they could build a 7" Air, but I honestly think the iPad fills that space. No, it's not an OS X Mountain Lion running x86 machine, but it does everything a person using a 7" netbook would do.
Ah yes, Haswell. I forgot about that. I didn't know about those other names, though.