Slashdot Log In
Reports Say Apple May Manufacture Its Own Chips
Posted by
timothy
on Thu Apr 30, 2009 02:44 PM
from the jalapeno-flavored-are-great dept.
from the jalapeno-flavored-are-great dept.
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
design it's own chips, not manufacture (Score:5, Informative)
Manufacture or design? (Score:5, Informative)
There's a big difference between manufacturing a chip and designing one. Unless Apple suddenly acquires the capital and know how to run a fab, manufacturing is best left to foundries like TSMC.
I'd even be surprised if they did the design completely in-house. Most likely it would be a collaborative effort with an already established low-power design house like ARM.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Course, people were saying the same thing about manufacturing laptop cases, like out of single blocks of aluminum.
Steve jobs seems to get a hard on from fully automated factories. The NEXT factory could produce thousands of computers a week, with a handful of employees.. (they could just never sell that many)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd guess there's at least a few billion dollars difference between a reasonably up-to-date fab and the people/infrastructure it requires, and what is required to cast and CNC chunks of metal (unless it's something like sub propellers). If Apple was throwing around that kind of cash it wouldn't be a secret.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You mean "an already established low-power design house like" PAsemi http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/23/apple-buys-pasemi-tech-ebiz-cz_eb_0422apple.html [forbes.com]
Re:Manufacture or design? (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, if only Apple bought out a chip design company [slashdot.org]. Then maybe they could design their own chips.
In other reports... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:In other reports... (Score:5, Funny)
It was actually revealed that their real motivation behind the Apple team's efforts is to build an uber sophisticated intelligent computer system capable of downloading Steve Jobs' brain in case he becomes too ill to continue his role as RDF overlor...er...CEO.
I, for one, welcome our new mock-turtlenecked overlord.
Parent
Apple Product Cycle revisions (Score:4, Funny)
Looks like the Apple Product Cycle [misterbg.org] may have to be revised slightly.
it seems that this will be a variant of the ARM (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:it seems that this will be a variant of the ARM (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, at last Apple will step out from under Dell's shadow!
Parent
Re:it seems that this will be a variant of the ARM (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:it seems that this will be a variant of the ARM (Score:4, Insightful)
SJ stood on a stage a promised a 3GHZ G5 in one year (because IBM had promised it to Apple), and IBM let him down. That, together with IBM's decision not to develop a low-power G5 suitable for laptops is what closed the book on Apple's PPC machines.
They switched to Intel instead of AMD because they had had quite enough of vendor disappointments. AMD was a far riskier prospect.
-jcr
Parent
Apple chips (Score:4, Funny)
What kind of dip goes with that?
Re:Apple chips (Score:5, Funny)
This [wikipedia.org] kind, of course.
Parent
May? MAY??? (Score:5, Informative)
" ... Reports Say Apple May Manufacture Its Own Chips ..."
" ... "PA Semi is going to do system-on-chips for iPhones and iPods," Apple CEO Steve Jobs said, according to The New York Times during Apple's June 2008 Worldwide Developers Conference. ..."
From the Horse's Mouth, 9 months ago, announced publicly at the WDC. I think I would be going with " ... will manufacture it's own chips ..." since that's what they said they would be doing, right out loud in front of God and everybody.
Shouldn't surprise, they own a chipmaker (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They're a chip designer. Chip makers actually have fabrication plants.
Re:Shouldn't surprise, they own a chipmaker (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe, but it's a line not often drawn by many ... ATI never had a fab.
Parent
Title correction... (Score:3, Interesting)
Reports Say Apple May DESIGN Its Own Chips
The objective likely to be more proprietary enhancements [engadget.com] to their product lines that require licensing and royalties from secondary vendors who wish to manufacture and sell peripherals and products to work with Apple products. Its all about building monopolies, U.S. businesses believe competition is a bad thing.
Apple chips? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Apple chips? (Score:4, Funny)
I know for a fact that those chips are from a different company! Do Apple's lawyers know about this?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
So the difference is that neither one of them really innovates? I don't see the difference. Sure, Apple is good at repackaging things to be pretty and easy-to-use, but that doesn't matter when it comes to chips. In this case, they will *have* to innovate to turn their investments into something useful.
I think this move has more to do with Apple's obsession with controlling everything - they'd like to be a vertical company. It's a risky move, because hardware is a costly industry to enter. Will their recent purchases be worth it? Very possibly, it's an interesting gamble.
Parent
innovation, custom chips == !hackintosh (Score:5, Insightful)
Steve Jobs said it well: "Real artists ship."
It's a very entrepreneurial idea -- quit all the talking and hand-waving and actually ship something! There's not much value in developing great ideas that never get out of the lab. :) I would say MSFT is far better at marketing their ideas and capturing market share, while Apple is better at inventing. Others will have a different view.
As for the claim that neither innovates? Hogwash. Taking an idea and integrating it into a viable product IS innovation by definition -- it is something that has not been done before that point. Both MS and Apple innovate, to different degrees, which we can squabble about, ad infinitum.
But back to the original subject, I suspect Apple's desire for custom chips comes not from a desire to save power (there are already many viable low-power CPUs and chipsets available) but rather a desire to fight off Hackintosh clones (OSX running on non-apple hardware, such as the Dell mini 9 or generic desktop PCs). Technologically, there's no reason why this can't happen but one must consider that Apple's hardware sales are quite profitable and that share is worth protecting.
Parent
Re:innovation, custom chips == !hackintosh (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I doubt that the hackintoshes are a serious concern to Apple. The fact they exists demonstrates that a certain market exists, but not one that's likely too profitable right now. It's something relatively few people are willing to do, or even have the knowledge (or at least patience) to pull off. Not much of a problem among the Slashdot crowd, but certainly among the general public. More importantly, in order to fight that off, Apple would have to transition back off of the x86 architecture - not a feat o
Re:innovation, custom chips == !hackintosh (Score:4, Funny)
I can see it now:
Apple Strategic Planning Meeting
Steve Jobs: "So, from this point on, we'll build our own iProcessors, "
Edward Applebee: "But sir, then our macs won't be able to run windows!"
Steve Jobs: "Hey... you next to Edward, I want you to go over and hit that fucker in the face, really fucking hard!"
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:4, Insightful)
You are completely mistaken.
Companies like Foxconn and ASUS build Apple's hardware.
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
Companies like Foxconn and ASUS build Apple's hardware to Apple's specifications.
fixed it for you.
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:4, Insightful)
Let me fix that for you:
Companies like Foxconn and ASUS build Apple's hardware to Apple's specifications, as they do for Dell and just like they used to do for Packard Bell.
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe the original point was that microsoft has never attempted any serious hardware development; so comparing microsoft's supposed failure to design "simple hardware" to Apple's attempt to design "real hardware" is stupid.
Generally the hardware is designed well by every company; it's the software where things fall down. I have several Apple and Microsoft Keyboards and Mice.
Of my peripherals that are at least 2yrs old that should still be supported:
1xUSB MS mouse = support officially discontinued(3 out of 5 buttons work with default driver).
1xUSB Apple mouse = supported (but only 1 has button)
2xUSB Apple Keyboards = supported (but new Macs/PCs no longer support the power-button on the keyboard to power on when turned off)
All in all, a pretty pathetic amount of support. Microsoft drops support for their own USB mice(you can still find 3rd party drivers to enable all 5 buttons). Apple didn't officially drop support, but no longer provides the needed circuitry on their motherboards to power-up a computer via a USB keyboard's power button(I'm wondering if this is so they use less power when turned off).
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, didn't MS design that one thing, what was it called, the xbox (or something)? I heard it was just a repackaged computer.
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope, not even close. Apple *designs* or works with manufacturers to create custom *designed* boards and hardware but they build nothing. They are the same chips and chipsets as Dell, which actually does the same thing and custom *designs* their gear just like Apple.
Take off the rose colored glasses please.
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Informative)
Before the Intel switch, Apple absolutely designed its own chipsets and boards. Apple was responsible, for example, for the first marrying of the PPC 970 and HyperTransport.
Apple has never owned a fab, but then, neither do many dedicated chip "manufacturers."
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know for sure, but just because they own a chip "manufacturer" doesn't mean they own a fab. I'd be willing to bet they don't. There's lots of semiconductor companies that don't have fabs at all; they're called "fabless". P.A. Semi was probably one of them. Here's some others you may have heard of: Qualcomm, Broadcom, NVIDIA, Marvell, MediaTek, ATI (before AMD acquired them), Xilinx. Here's an article [wikipedia.org] about them. These companies simply design chips; they get other companies called "foundries" to make their chips for them. The largest and oldest of these is TSMC, a Taiwanese company.
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just think how much [Apple] could power reduce and cost reduce if they dictated the chip-specs!
(I am an electronics engineer, and make chips that Apple buys for many of their products)
They already do, to an extent.
Chip design companies are constantly battling it out to get design wins at big companies like Apple. If Apple tells them, "Hey, we want this chip to do X and Y while consuming Z mA," then those companies are going to try their best to meet those requirements so that they can get Apple as a customer.
Your assertion that chips are being overcomplicated for the purpose of driving up cost is incorrect. Semiconductor companies are constantly trying to simplify their chips' designs, in order to improve yield and reduce costs, while charging the same price to their customers. It's much, much easier to improve margin than it is to convince your customers to pay more.
I doubt that Apple will be able to substantially improve cost or power consumption. While they do have some experience in chip design, it's highly unlikely that they'll be able to go in and do a better job than all of the companies that do nothing else.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Microsoft doesn't have that experience, because they don't build systems.
So the Xbox, Xbox 360 and Zune are what now?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple is not going to waste money developing their own chips just for bragging rights.
That's right, they won't do it just for bragging rights. They'll do it for a compelling performance, power consumption, and/or cost advantage. Right now, they pay Intel, Nvidia, and AMD a hell of a lot of money for CPUs and GPUs, and I'm sure they'll do their homework before making the next build or buy decision.
-jcr
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:4, Interesting)
The question is, would Apple seriously get into developing their own CPUs?
That would depend on what advantages they thought they could gain from it. They can certainly afford to do it, they've got about 37 billion dollars in cash on hand, they've got most of the talent they'd need for such a project, and they could easily recruit anyone else they might need. Building a whole new architecture isn't an opportunity that comes along that often for a hardware designer these days.
Given how competitive the CPU market is and how hard AMD have to work to even compete with Intel
That's the market for commodity parts. It doesn't apply to vertically integrated companies like IBM with their POWER CPUs or Sun with the SPARC. The question for Apple isn't whether a new CPU would fly with other users, it would be whether it works for Apple's needs. Outside OEM sales would be gravy.
Another thing to keep in mind here is that Apple's very big on recruiting the top talent in any area they go into, and you don't get the best chip designers by offering them run-of-the-mill projects to work on.
-jcr
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Informative)
Apple also participated in the design of the initial ARM processors. That seems to be going pretty well. (Direct descendants of the design are in iPhone).
Apple is also a participant in LLVM, which is going to help Apple shorten the design-to-deployment cycle for new silicon.
It's going to work out just fine.
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
Mini was zippy? My friend, in a Mac world the correct term is "snappy". Amateur!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe he hadn't updated Safari yet...
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:4, Informative)
Apple also participated in the design of the initial ARM processors. That seems to be going pretty well. (Direct descendants of the design are in iPhone).
Nitpick: Acorn, not Apple, solely did the design of the initial ARM1, ARM2, and ARM3. They then spun the ARM CPU (which originally stood for Acorn RISC Machine) off into another company, Advanced RISC Machines, which was a joint venture between themselves (40%,) VLSI (who did most manufacturing of ARM CPUs and chipsets at that point - 40%,) and Apple (20%,) as Apple had expressed interest in using the chip, but didn't want to use a competitor's chip (Acorn directly competed with Apple in the personal computer market, especially in schools.)
Only the ARM6 (there was no ARM4 or ARM5) and newer had any Apple involvement, and I doubt anything newer than the DEC StrongARM had much of any Apple influence. (The ARM6, ARM7, and StrongARM were all used in the Newton.)
And, the ARM6 and ARM7 are essentially tweaked versions of the ARM3 with 32-bit addressing (as opposed to 26-bit on the previous ARMs,) and more cache and a slightly faster clock in the case of the ARM7. As for the StrongARM, it wasn't even designed by ARM, it was designed by Digital, to meet the ARMv4 ISA.
Parent
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:5, Interesting)
When Apple moves into a new area, they go and hire the people they need to do it right. They knew nothing about retailing, so they hired Ron Johnson. When they decided to make the iPod, they hired Tony Fadell, who had a lot of experience in portable devices.
Apple now employs Dan Dobberpuhl , who was the lead architect of the DEC Alpha, and the StrongARM. He was the founder of PA Semi. One of their more recent hires was a GPU designer at ATI and AMD, who also happens to have worked on the Pixar Image Computer back before Pixar became a movie studio.
The way I read the writing on the wall is Apple's going to start making their own CPUs, and possibly their own GPUs as well. Whatever they come up with, I expect it to fit in very well with the work they're doing on LLVM and their software OpenGL implementation.
-jcr
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why don't we list other things that didn't work for Microsoft.
Who has that kind of time? An even bigger challenge is to figure out why people bought it anyway.