I've been thinking about something posted in the Waiting for Arrandale thread - what are the logical reasons for Apple taking so long? A similar thing happened with another major tech company just recently, and if any of you are interested in the high-end GPU sector, you're probably familiar with the nVidia Fermi fiasco. The more I compare the two scenarios, the more similar they are, and taking what we now know about nVidia's reasons, perhaps we can deduce that Apple is suffering similar problems.
The basic story is that around October/November of last year, people started wondering what nVidia's next generation card would be, when it would come out, how it would compare to ATI, etc. The original predicted release dates were based largely on the same idea we're basing our predictions on; that is, the typical length of time between refreshes, and historical months/days when products were announced. nVidia, unlike Apple, does not employ Fort Knox-esque security measures regarding new products, but at the time, nothing was really known. Many, including myself, were sure that nVidia would have to release something in time for Christmas, as they usually do, for risk of having nothing new for the holiday buying season and essentially getting raped by the competition. Around that same time, ATI began releasing their 5000 series GPUs, which we know became incredibly successful. In our case, we see virtually all computer companies using ix chips in notebooks; Apple is one of the few that haven't yet updated their line. People began to worry what was taking so long, and many nVidia fans jumped ship and started buying ATI simply because nVidia was taking too damn long. No one wanted to buy a 200 series GPU because they were outdated, and it made sense to wait for the update. Panic, rumors, wild speculation, and mass disappointment began to mount. Starting to see the similarities?
Well, as it turned out, the reason for all the delays was a mass failure in production, countless F-ups with engineering, and a slew of other obstacles that made it impossible for nVidia to make their chip perfect in the time frame they originally set. Essentially, they had envisioned a chip that was to be extremely powerful, revolutionary, and groundbreaking - and if it had come out on time, it would have been. But they overshot the mark, and Fermi ended up being too large, too hot, too expensive to produce, and came with a pretty low rate of yield. On top of all that, it was 6 months late to the game, and in the end, wasn't fast enough to warrant an upgrade for 5000 series owners. Granted, it still hasn't come out yet, but by now pretty much all the details, including pricing, are known. The general consensus is that nVidia failed pretty hard, and there's no debate that ATI wins this round by a longshot. By the time Fermi is in stores, ATI will be ready to refresh the 5000 series.
Did nVidia do this on purpose, knowingly, willingly? Of course not. Much of it wasn't their fault since TSMC (the corp that makes the silicon) had their own problems in manufacturing. But the point is that, no matter how much nVidia WANTED to get their shiny new product out the door and smash the competitor, no matter how crucial it was to get it done on time, they simply couldn't because of low-level hardware issues, a problem with their supplier, and unforeseen issues with manufacturing.
I think, since I'm a firm believer that the iPad doesn't have anything to do with the MBP refresh, Apple's delay is due for many of the same reasons. I think there probably were/are problems with Intel, possibly a poorly planned GPU solution that ended up being revised at the last second, or maybe some other screw-up that we don't know about. Maybe Apple really did want to make this a huge revision instead of a minor speed bump, but in developing/adding new features, it took much longer for all the bugs to be sorted out. I think Apple, just like nVidia, wants this thing in the consumer's hands as soon as possible, in fact possibly more so. But both companies, I think, are smart enough to know that they've screwed up in the past when they rushed an unfinished and flawed product out the door, and paid for it dearly, and don't want to do the same thing again.
So ultimately, I think it's more complicated than the half-assed answer people give about SJ sitting on a pile of Arrandale MBPs and hoarding them so that the iPad can get all the attention. I also think that the wait is almost over. I predict that it will be released by the end of April. If nothing happens by then, alternatively I think we can expect to see much more than a mere processor upgrade. Bottom line, I think the wait will be worth it either way.
Let me know what you guys think.
The basic story is that around October/November of last year, people started wondering what nVidia's next generation card would be, when it would come out, how it would compare to ATI, etc. The original predicted release dates were based largely on the same idea we're basing our predictions on; that is, the typical length of time between refreshes, and historical months/days when products were announced. nVidia, unlike Apple, does not employ Fort Knox-esque security measures regarding new products, but at the time, nothing was really known. Many, including myself, were sure that nVidia would have to release something in time for Christmas, as they usually do, for risk of having nothing new for the holiday buying season and essentially getting raped by the competition. Around that same time, ATI began releasing their 5000 series GPUs, which we know became incredibly successful. In our case, we see virtually all computer companies using ix chips in notebooks; Apple is one of the few that haven't yet updated their line. People began to worry what was taking so long, and many nVidia fans jumped ship and started buying ATI simply because nVidia was taking too damn long. No one wanted to buy a 200 series GPU because they were outdated, and it made sense to wait for the update. Panic, rumors, wild speculation, and mass disappointment began to mount. Starting to see the similarities?
Well, as it turned out, the reason for all the delays was a mass failure in production, countless F-ups with engineering, and a slew of other obstacles that made it impossible for nVidia to make their chip perfect in the time frame they originally set. Essentially, they had envisioned a chip that was to be extremely powerful, revolutionary, and groundbreaking - and if it had come out on time, it would have been. But they overshot the mark, and Fermi ended up being too large, too hot, too expensive to produce, and came with a pretty low rate of yield. On top of all that, it was 6 months late to the game, and in the end, wasn't fast enough to warrant an upgrade for 5000 series owners. Granted, it still hasn't come out yet, but by now pretty much all the details, including pricing, are known. The general consensus is that nVidia failed pretty hard, and there's no debate that ATI wins this round by a longshot. By the time Fermi is in stores, ATI will be ready to refresh the 5000 series.
Did nVidia do this on purpose, knowingly, willingly? Of course not. Much of it wasn't their fault since TSMC (the corp that makes the silicon) had their own problems in manufacturing. But the point is that, no matter how much nVidia WANTED to get their shiny new product out the door and smash the competitor, no matter how crucial it was to get it done on time, they simply couldn't because of low-level hardware issues, a problem with their supplier, and unforeseen issues with manufacturing.
I think, since I'm a firm believer that the iPad doesn't have anything to do with the MBP refresh, Apple's delay is due for many of the same reasons. I think there probably were/are problems with Intel, possibly a poorly planned GPU solution that ended up being revised at the last second, or maybe some other screw-up that we don't know about. Maybe Apple really did want to make this a huge revision instead of a minor speed bump, but in developing/adding new features, it took much longer for all the bugs to be sorted out. I think Apple, just like nVidia, wants this thing in the consumer's hands as soon as possible, in fact possibly more so. But both companies, I think, are smart enough to know that they've screwed up in the past when they rushed an unfinished and flawed product out the door, and paid for it dearly, and don't want to do the same thing again.
So ultimately, I think it's more complicated than the half-assed answer people give about SJ sitting on a pile of Arrandale MBPs and hoarding them so that the iPad can get all the attention. I also think that the wait is almost over. I predict that it will be released by the end of April. If nothing happens by then, alternatively I think we can expect to see much more than a mere processor upgrade. Bottom line, I think the wait will be worth it either way.
Let me know what you guys think.
