Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Dumps PortalPlayer Chip

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the unhappy-executives dept.

Quash writes to mention a BusinessWeek article about Apple's decision to not use the PortalPlayer chip in a future version of the iPod nano. From the article: "PortalPlayer stock promptly shed $9.46, or nearly 42% of its value, and more than $220 million in market value. Apple generally doesn't discuss future products, nor its manufacturing or component supply strategies. It had no comment on the matter. But theories about who may have been the beneficiary of PortalPlayer's misfortune are abounding."

2 of 147 comments (clear)

  1. PP is expensive! by Fengpost · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Portal Player solution is very expensive. Last time I checked, it requires 2 ARM 7 chips with an external auio codec chip to run the the non video version iPod. There are plenty of more cost effective solution from the competitors such as Sigmatel, Philips or Freescale.

    It is probably just a cost cutting move for Apple.

    --
    The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity....Calvin
  2. Re:Why were they dumped? by xoboots · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Looking at the last earnings report from Apple it seems that the REAL reason they switched to Intel was to lower overall component costs. Scale matters -- being the only retail game for PPC was putting a premium on Apple's marginal costs; since switching to the Intel ecosystem they reap the reward of using essentially commoditized parts.

    So it wasn't really about a supposed technology ramp-up which they touted and I doubt they were banking on "future" technologies. The way I see it, it was simply a matter of the bottom-line: you really can lower costs when using high-availability parts. Go figure.

    Never-the-less, that's some fun technology to be watching.