Solve real business challenges on Google Cloud and run workloads for free. For Slashdot users: Get $300 in free credits to fully explore Google Cloud. Get started for free today.
Posted
by
timothy
from the jalapeno-flavored-are-great dept.
afabbro writes "There are scatteredreportstoday that Apple is building a team to design its own chips, with an eye towards reducing power consumption on iPods and iPhones."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The difference is, MS, by nature does not really innovate, they emulate. Apple, while not 100% innovative, usually ends up taking a cutting-edge idea and comes up with a polished product.
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.
They already own a chip maker [forbes.com]. That bit of news was from last year. It shouldn't surprise you today that they plan on actually using the chipmaker they bought.
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)
Apple is a hardware company that also makes software. Microsoft is a software company that also makes hardware. The MS hardware I can think of is their keyboards and mice, the Zune and Xbox 360. Considering that the entertainment division of microsoft that builds the zune and xbox lost 31 million dollars [microsoft-watch.com] last quarter, I wouldn't hold Microsoft up as the paragon of what is possible to do in hardware.
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. 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.:) 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.
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.
I think also for their iPods/iPhones, Apple probably wants more customization than they have right now. They have to accept whatever chip that they are buying balancing processing power/power consumption/functionality. Incidentally this may have been driven by the iPhone. While the iPod is fine with an underpowered chip as its functionality is limited, the iPod touch/iPhone require more computing power. There are rumors that Apple was not happy with the original chip on the iPhone. The problem is the chip was exactly what they specced out. Apple may have lost the chip expertise that they had with the original Macs.
Apple knows how they intend to use the chip, but that is not the same as knowing how the chip gets it done. Participating by writing various specifications and testing is a very long way from designing logic circuity.
That's not to say they can't do it, or wont be good at it. But your making a leap.
Apple made a mistake (*gasp* yes they are capable of it) by ditching IBM when it did. Now that IBM has an amazing chip in the Cell processor, Apple has the same Intels as every other PC. PowerPC was what made Apples so great for a number of applications and uses, they've lost that now.
They bought up PA Semi but I think that was a flailing effort that may or may not pay off... even if it does it would most likely only affect small subsystems and things like the iPod/iPhone.
The Cell chip coupled with the CUDA tech from NVDA would have catapulted them lightyears ahead of standard PCs. Hey, everyone makes mistakes.
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Thursday April 30, 2009 @05:42PM (#27779467)
The difference is thus: If they build everything in house, they don't have to deal with 'leaks' from other companies publishing stuff or giving too much infor before apple believes its time. Apple lives and dies by its appearance and when it brings stuff out and how.
I think the OP's point has been completely lost. Apple, Dell, and HP design/sell "real hardware", and microsoft designs/sells peripherals.
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).
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.
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.
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.
So in the same way, all cars and buildings are exactly alike because they all use exactly the same materials, the design is just a bit different. Right?
Yeah, the CPU and chipset are the same. They even use copper and solder to make their boards, oh my! But there's are millions of ways to lay out the same components, and they do yield different results. Take cities: they all have similar needs (hospitals, police stations.. just play Sim City), but how you lay them out can be the entire difference between a traffic-congested, slow ass stinky, cheap and broken down city, and a beautiful, traffic-free, low crime city.
Of course, we're geeks here. We don't care, as long as it's got the bigger numbers next to its MHz and GBs, we're happy. Meanwhile, there are people who like having computers that last more than 6 months to a year, computers that don't crash whenever someone turns on the microwave down the hall or accidentally turns off the air conditioner, or who's components are literally melting off of the machine (as is the acse with my 2 year old Toshitba laptop).
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (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.
Shouldn't surprise, they own a chipmaker (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Manufacture or design? (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:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:innovation, custom chips == !hackintosh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:4, Insightful)
You are completely mistaken.
Companies like Foxconn and ASUS build Apple's hardware.
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.
Re:Shouldn't surprise, they own a chipmaker (Score:3, Insightful)
They're a chip designer. Chip makers actually have fabrication plants.
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.
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple knows how they intend to use the chip, but that is not the same as knowing how the chip gets it done. Participating by writing various specifications and testing is a very long way from designing logic circuity.
That's not to say they can't do it, or wont be good at it. But your making a leap.
Apple shoulda never left IBM, Cell woulda been it (Score:1, Insightful)
Apple made a mistake (*gasp* yes they are capable of it) by ditching IBM when it did. Now that IBM has an amazing chip in the Cell processor, Apple has the same Intels as every other PC. PowerPC was what made Apples so great for a number of applications and uses, they've lost that now.
They bought up PA Semi but I think that was a flailing effort that may or may not pay off... even if it does it would most likely only affect small subsystems and things like the iPod/iPhone.
The Cell chip coupled with the CUDA tech from NVDA would have catapulted them lightyears ahead of standard PCs. Hey, everyone makes mistakes.
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.
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:1, Insightful)
The difference is thus: If they build everything in house, they don't have to deal with 'leaks' from other companies publishing stuff or giving too much infor before apple believes its time. Apple lives and dies by its appearance and when it brings stuff out and how.
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).
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Manufacture or design? (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:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:2, 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.
I'll fix it for everyone. Apple builds them, tests them and sends them to be assembled to their specs. Done. Get over it.
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.
Re:It didn't work for microsoft... (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
So in the same way, all cars and buildings are exactly alike because they all use exactly the same materials, the design is just a bit different. Right?
Yeah, the CPU and chipset are the same. They even use copper and solder to make their boards, oh my! But there's are millions of ways to lay out the same components, and they do yield different results. Take cities: they all have similar needs (hospitals, police stations.. just play Sim City), but how you lay them out can be the entire difference between a traffic-congested, slow ass stinky, cheap and broken down city, and a beautiful, traffic-free, low crime city.
Of course, we're geeks here. We don't care, as long as it's got the bigger numbers next to its MHz and GBs, we're happy. Meanwhile, there are people who like having computers that last more than 6 months to a year, computers that don't crash whenever someone turns on the microwave down the hall or accidentally turns off the air conditioner, or who's components are literally melting off of the machine (as is the acse with my 2 year old Toshitba laptop).