Report: Apple To Switch From Samsung to TSMC For ARM CPU Production

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Report: Apple To Switch From Samsung to TSMC For ARM CPU Production

Posted by timothy on Friday October 12, 2012 @10:41PM from the but-samsung-is-easier-to-pronounce dept.

another random user writes "Apple is planning to shift production of its ARM-based microprocessors from Samsung to the Taiwanese chip-baking giant TSMC as early as next year, according to a report by the China Economic News Service (CENS). The report cites CitiGroup Global Markets analyst J.T. Hsu as saying that TSMC will be Apple's sole supplier of 20nm quad-core processors, with volume production to begin in the fourth quarter of 2013. He also noted that Apple began its 20nm chip-verfication process at TSMC in August of this year. Hsu told CENS that the future quad-core chips were intended for Apple's 'iPad, iTV and even Macbook,' turning up the heat on two rumors that have been simmering for months: that Apple is planning a move into the television market, and that an ARM-based MacBook is in the works."

178 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

No ARM MacBook by kthreadd · 2012-10-12 22:48 · Score: 2

If it was Microsoft that could have been feasible. But I really don't see Apple making ARM laptops. They don't want confusion and x86 MacBooks and ARM iPads seams to have good distinction.
1. Re:No ARM MacBook by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 23:03 · Score: 0
  
  But Apple may want something in between a tablet and a full blown laptop to compete with Microsoft's Surface. Makes sense to me.
  This already exists, it’s called 11" Macbook Air.
2. Re:No ARM MacBook by gl4ss · 2012-10-12 23:08 · Score: 1
  
  But Apple may want something in between a tablet and a full blown laptop to compete with Microsoft's Surface. Makes sense to me.
  This already exists, it’s called 11" Macbook Air.
  Air doesn't run ipad apps.
  now what they might do would be a hybrid with arm chip for ipad-apps mode.
  full osx on arm though? yuck.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
3. Re:No ARM MacBook by jcr · 2012-10-12 23:09 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  to compete with Microsoft's Surface
  You're funny.
  -jcr
  
  --
  The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
4. Re:No ARM MacBook by oh2 · 2012-10-12 23:10 · Score: 1
  
  Meh, accidental AC The iPad is already a market leader and theres keyboards available for it if you want the laptoppy thing. ARM MacBook makes total sense, the MacBook Air has two main selling points : small and pretty. ARM lets you go even smaller and still have battery life enough. Noone buys a MacBook air for its raw numbercrunching potential anyways.
  
  --
  Now the world has gone to bed, Darkness won't engulf my head, I can see by infra-red, How I hate the night.
5. Re:No ARM MacBook by drinkypoo · 2012-10-12 23:21 · Score: 1
  
  If it was Microsoft that could have been feasible. But I really don't see Apple making ARM laptops. They don't want confusion and x86 MacBooks and ARM iPads seams to have good distinction.
  I'm not saying Apple is doing it, it's honestly something I've never thought about Apple doing before, but they could easily avoid confusion by just calling it an iBook. Er, wait...
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
6. Re:No ARM MacBook by gnasher719 · 2012-10-12 23:32 · Score: 1
  
  full osx on arm though? yuck.
  Shouldn't run too bad, actually. There are of course MacOS X apps that you wouldn't want to run on an ARM chip, and full MacOS X on an iPad would also be a rubbish idea, but an Air running MacOS X would be feasible. And as long as an app has a 32 bit version and no assembler code, a recompile should be enough.
7. Re:No ARM MacBook by TheRaven64 · 2012-10-13 00:17 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  a full blown laptop to compete with Microsoft's Surface
  That's not how Apple works. Their business model is to identify market segments with no competitors, enter them, hype their product until it's identified with that market segment, and then move on to the next one before the race to the bottom takes over.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
8. Re:No ARM MacBook by jellomizer · 2012-10-13 00:29 · Score: 2
  
  If you like Apple or not, you have to admit they are good at making an OS that works cross different hardware platforms, and maintain their compatability.
  Microsoft couldn't even make a clean transition between 32 and 64 bit.
  If you had any experience with Linux in Sparc or PowerPC you in essence needed to recompile near everything, and you are out of luck if you have the few closed source apps.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
9. Re:No ARM MacBook by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:45 · Score: 0
  
  The Macbook Air 11" cannot be made smaller and have a functional keyboard, it cannot be made thinner and have ports, and the weight probably can't drop by more than 10% lighter without the unit becoming flimsy. Wintel software compatibility and virtualization is also a huge part of the mac market, and the reason for popularity of it's laptops since the switch to Intel.
  Haswell will probably bring the battery life up to ARM levels.
10. Re:No ARM MacBook by JimCanuck · 2012-10-13 02:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Microsoft couldn't even make a clean transition between 32 and 64 bit.
  Difference is Apple could release 64-bit on their terms, Microsoft is at the whims of the hardware manufacturers.
  
  Apple could put out the G5 series as they saw fit. Microsoft is expected to throw something together the moment the hardware becomes available.
  
  Plus having used XP 64-bit since it was available. Most of the issues were with incompatible drivers. With Apple that is not a problem, their is only one or two of each piece of hardware that is your entire "options" so producing a dozen drivers verses having to produce hundreds by all the hardware manufacturers.
11. Re:No ARM MacBook by Kjella · 2012-10-13 02:31 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  That's not how Apple works. Their business model is to identify market segments with no competitors, enter them, hype their product until it's identified with that market segment,
  I guess it worked on you then since you've forgotten all these MP3 players (Creative etc.), phones (Nokia, Sony Ericsson etc.), tablets (Microsoft etc.) that was before Apple. Of course they've picked their angle of attack to find trendsetters and increase market share quick, but I'd say Apply has pushed a fair number of competitors aside. They're really not into green-fielding completely new types of products, they ambush niches and rapidly increase their size into big markets. I do agree they're looking to be the biggest player though they won't start anything where they'll be second or third fiddle.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
12. Re:No ARM MacBook by TheRaven64 · 2012-10-13 03:04 · Score: 1
  
  I guess it worked on you then since you've forgotten all these MP3 players (Creative etc.),
  The mobile music player market was immature. Most of the existing players had either tiny amounts (128MB or less) of Flash, or 2.5" microdrives. Apple introduced the iPod with a 1.8" drive almost as soon as they became available (Creative got there just before, but the delay between the two means both were in production at the same time) and, importantly, bought up enough of the drive supply that no one else could manage to ship the same sorts of volumes. The availability of the 1.8" drives was the tipping point for the portable music player, because it was the first time you could (affordably) fit enough storage into your pocket to hold a (small, initially) music collection.
  
  phones (Nokia, Sony Ericsson etc.)
  Again, the capacitive touchscreen was a game changer. Apple, again, wasn't quite the first, but they were within a few months and brought the hype machine. People say 'iPhone-like' when they mean 'Smartphone with a capacitive touchscreen' because of this. Nokia didn't have anything similar, and I don't think Sony Ericsson did either. Samsung got there first, but not sufficiently early to define the market.
  
  tablets (Microsoft etc.)
  Microsoft is a bad example here - their tablets were a different class of device, just PCs with a (typically stylus-based) touchscreen, not a capacitive touchscreen and an interface designed around touch. There were Android tablet makers before the iPad though.
  
  Of course they've picked their angle of attack to find trendsetters and increase market share quick, but I'd say Apply has pushed a fair number of competitors aside. They're really not into green-fielding completely new types of products, they ambush niches and rapidly increase their size into big markets.
  
  Mostly their competitors are not well established, because it's a brand new market, which typically has only just become technically feasible.
  
  I do agree they're looking to be the biggest player though they won't start anything where they'll be second or third fiddle.
  That depends. Look at the mobile phone market. Apple could easily get 50% of the market share, but it would mean introducing low-end iPhones. They don't mind other companies getting the less-profitable end of the market, as long as they can hang onto the high-margin part. This is quite a risky strategy, as SGI will attest: it only works if you keep developing new markets before the old ones are commoditised.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
13. Re:No ARM MacBook by Waveguide04 · 2012-10-13 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  The 32 to 64 bit issue really isn't one, its a CPU, make the code run on it. Same rules apply for both MS and Apple. As you mention, the main issue is in the drivers which come in all flavors in the Wild West style when the controllable space is unlimited vs one that has been tested and approved. ie. you don't have 100 companies out there making motherboards with various chip-sets which require special drivers etc. I have spent many many hours in linux with different MBs trying to compile drivers to make machine X work. With Microsoft, its not so much compile drivers as it is try and find one someplace that works. On the Mac, I because of the way they do things, I have never had a driver issue. On all the built in hardware is a given, but even attached things, I have not had to think about I need to d/l some driver or something. Now back to the subject line, its interesting to think about, but I just don't see an ARM macbook in the near future, there are many issues with 'why' and 'how'. it could happen at some point, but I don't see a target market for it right now.
14. Re:No ARM MacBook by abelb · 2012-10-13 03:45 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe I'm living in a bubble here but Microsoft's surface seems like a *competitive* product. It runs on ARM which puts it in the tablet space for power consumption whilst doing most of the things Windows users want to do (Exchange, Office etc) with a real keyboard. I won't be buying one but I would imagine that a smart company like Apple would want to offer an iWhatever alternative, or at least plan for one in this market which has just been given prod by M$.
15. Re:No ARM MacBook by rvw · 2012-10-13 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  Air doesn't run ipad apps.
  now what they might do would be a hybrid with arm chip for ipad-apps mode.
  Air does run ipad and iphone apps. You can run an iphone simulator on all macbooks, and it wouldn't be too difficult for them to make this a more accessible experience.
16. Re:No ARM MacBook by jfengel · 2012-10-13 04:04 · Score: 1
  
  Apple needs to ensure that it has enough of a market share in the iPhone that developers continue to target it. Even if iOS and their hardware were superior, some people expect to use third-party add-ons, especially games. If their market share dips to a point where popular game-makers start to treat it as an afterthought, they'll go downhill quickly.
  Right now they're getting the best of both worlds: a premium product with a premium price, and a hefty market segment. They seem to be managing it well, but they have to remain on top or the low-end will catch up.
17. Re:No ARM MacBook by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 04:52 · Score: 0
  
  bought up enough of the drive supply that no one else could manage to ship the same sorts of volumes.
  Something that has been Apples MO ever since. Palm ran into that when evaluating parts for the Pre. Nearly every part they had as primary choice had been scooped up by Apple for their next iPhone in the mean time.
18. Re:No ARM MacBook by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 04:57 · Score: 0
  
  If you attach via USB the no driver thing is thanks to a whole set of predefined device profiles/protocols.
19. Re:No ARM MacBook by Cinder6 · 2012-10-13 06:40 · Score: 1
  
  If it was Microsoft that could have been feasible. But I really don't see Apple making ARM laptops. They don't want confusion and x86 MacBooks and ARM iPads seams to have good distinction.
  Apple has a better record of handling a CPU architecture change than any other company I know of. For years, they were shipping OS X as hybrid PPC-x86 code (fat binaries, or "Universal Binaries" in Apple parlance) and Xcode would automatically compile for both architectures and bundle them in the same executable file. Even outside of universal binaries, Apple's Intel-based computers could run PPC-only code just fine, thanks to Rosetta (removed last year with Lion). I don't think confusion over which architecture your computer is would be a problem with Apple, should they decide to move to ARM (unlike Microsoft with WinRT).
  I would imagine that, until recently, the biggest hurdle (other than speed) has been that modern OS X requires a 64-bit CPU, which wasn't available until ARMv8 was released last year.
  
  --
  If you can't convince them, convict them.
20. Re:No ARM MacBook by Cinder6 · 2012-10-13 06:42 · Score: 1
  
  I believe that when you compile with the Simulator as a target, it generates x86 code, which is a large part of why the Simulator runs so smoothly.
  
  --
  If you can't convince them, convict them.
21. Re:No ARM MacBook by elashish14 · 2012-10-13 07:23 · Score: 2
  
  You forgot to mention the part where they (attempt to) sue anyone else who dares enter the same market back out.
  
  --
  I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
22. Re:No ARM MacBook by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 08:22 · Score: 0
  
  The general public is known for buying crap again and again. Or even old crap disguised as new.
  Surface might not be best in the world but it's a pretty decent tablet with Win8 and it has gathered lots of positive reviews.
  Why do you think Surface won't sell?
23. Re:No ARM MacBook by Solandri · 2012-10-13 11:23 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I guess it worked on you then since you've forgotten all these MP3 players (Creative etc.), phones (Nokia, Sony Ericsson etc.), tablets (Microsoft etc.) that was before Apple.
  Actually, that's something else I've noticed about Apple. Their hype/marketing/RDF/whatever is so good that many laypeople mistakenly believe that Apple invented a lot of that stuff. GUI, MP3 player, smartphone, thin tablet (Archos was trending in that direction before the iPad), touchscreens, multi-touch, pinch to zoom, slide to unlock, and on and on. Most of my non-tech friends think Apple invented all of those, even though they invented none of it. The last time I've seen mass misunderstanding to this extent was right after Windows 95, when a lot of my non-tech friends thought Microsoft invented the Internet.
  
  The one thing Apple is really good at though is understanding laypeople. They know how to design and product and UI so that the average Joe will know how to use it and even enjoy it. The opposite of most Linux distros. I think that's one of the reasons they're disliked by technophiles. Technophiles would rather try to teach laypeople how the technology works. Apple just dumbs it down to their level. Laypeople of course prefer the latter approach, which is why Linux on the desktop is still a niche market.
24. Re:No ARM MacBook by Hamsterdan · 2012-10-13 16:57 · Score: 1
  
  Gotta love how they handled those changes (either hardware or software architecture) so the transition would be almost transparent to users...
  6502 to 68k via an add-on board (basically a 6502 on an expansion card to give full 2e compatibility), that one was both a hardware and software transition so a Mac could run Apple 2 apps.
  When they switched from 68k to PPC during 7.x or 8 they used emulation again so apps would run on the new architecture, then Classic mode (emulation) when they switched from OS9 to OSX on PPC, then again PPC to x86 via emulation in OSX, everything always going smoothly and transparent for users. So going from x86 to ARM shouldn't be that hard for them to do.
  The only problem is all those transitions were on newer, faster platforms (6502->68k->PPC, OS9->OSX, then PPC to x86). Going from x86 to ARM is going to take a serious performance hit because x86 hardware is just way faster than ARM.
  But yes, If and when they choose to do it it's probably going to be painless.
  
  --
  I've got better things to do tonight than die.
25. Re:No ARM MacBook by RocketRabbit · 2012-10-13 18:13 · Score: 1
  
  Apple does not heavily promote the CPUs it uses. They are mere details and the user shouldn't have to care or know about that.
26. Re:No ARM MacBook by superwiz · 2012-10-13 19:54 · Score: 1
  
  XP 64 has bigger issues. There is a reason it had such a shortage of drivers. Visual Studio doesn't support 64 bit operations for XP (only starting with Vista). Worse, it doesn't support memory barriers for XP. So rolling your own 64 bit operations on XP essentially means a good deal of getting dirty with assembler. Since in the presence of pipelining the execution path is fairly unpredictable, writing your own concurrency code in assembler is a black art.
  
  --
  Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
27. Re:No ARM MacBook by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 21:59 · Score: 0
  
  Because it's not from Apple, duh!
28. Re:No ARM MacBook by jcr · 2012-10-14 18:29 · Score: 1
  
  Why do you think Surface won't sell?
  For all the same reasons that MS's previous attempts at tablets have failed. They keep trying to cram Windows into it.
  -jcr
  
  --
  The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
29. Re:No ARM MacBook by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-15 14:50 · Score: 0
  
  I know this is a late reply but... no, sorry, I'm afraid your premise is totally false. Apple actually started shipping G5s long before a true 64-bit version of OS X was ready. They couldn't afford to sit on the hardware till the software was done. If they had, they'd have lost all their high margin creative workstation customers to x86/Windows, just based on performance (not 64-bitness).
  Apple never even truly completed the transition to PPC64 before switching to Intel, and when they did make that move, their initial target was i386 not x86-64 (the first shipping Intel Macs actually had 32-bit only CPUs). So they actually kinda did two 64-bit transitions, one on PPC and one on x86. The reason things went smooth for them was they had a few key technologies Microsoft didn't.
  1. Apple has a "fat" binary format, Mach-O. This means they don't need the stupid mess of separate, partially duplicated filesystem hierarchy which Microsoft has in 64-bit windows (note: a similar problem also exists on 64-bit Linux):
  http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-windows_programs/why-is-java-under-program-files-and-windows/58cc27a9-a4cd-4d5f-baf6-9c4fae780828
  In OS X, none of this user-hostile garbage exists. Applications go under /Applications and libraries go under /Libraries. For a while, Apple actively supported four architectures in OS X Mach-O: PPC32, PPC64, i386, x86-64. Developers could ship quad architecture binaries without need for special installers or any other user-facing complications.
  2. The driver situation on OS X is somewhat closer to Windows (the 64-bit kernel needs 64-bit drivers). However, the API differences between 32- and 64-bit are minimal. I seem to recall that Microsoft tied 64-bit to a fairly large kernel driver API change and a push to make the kernel only load signed drivers, which harmed efforts to get OEMs to port drivers.
  3. Apple effectively hid their driver compatibility problem by architecting their 32-bit kernel so it could run 64-bit applications. (Yes, including addressing more than 4 GB RAM.) It was literally only as of "Mountain Lion", the 2012 OS X release, that the 64-bit kernel became mandatory (because they dropped support for 32-bit CPUs altogether). Because the default kernel was 32-bit for so long, users didn't have to deal with driver issues up front.
  Apple never even needed to ship a special "64-bit" edition of OS X. Ever since the first baby steps of 64-bit support (in 10.4, I think), it's always been a single unified OS. They just kept incrementally adding more and more 64-bit stuff until it was done. This was much easier on users than Microsoft's more all-or-nothing approach.
Well if they want ... by lord_rob+the+only+on · 2012-10-12 22:59 · Score: 3, Insightful

Well if they want to be independent from Samsung, that's the way to go of course.
This thing is a new reaction to this trial which bothers both of us, normal people vs Apple fanboys ...
1. Re:Well if they want ... by collet · 2012-10-12 23:11 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I don't even own a phone yet I seem morally obliged to support Android over Apple.
2. Re:Well if they want ... by gnasher719 · 2012-10-12 23:22 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I don't even own a phone yet I seem morally obliged to support Android over Apple.
  Why would that be? Google is the world's biggest advertising company, and all their actions are aimed at hurting companies that might interfere with that. That's why you have Google+ attacking Facebook, Google Apps attacking Microsoft, and Android attacking Apple. None of these are there to make money for Google, they are just meant to keep their competitors busy. Google just spent $12 billion on Motorola, to get patents to attack Apple and Microsoft even more, in a business where Google doesn't actually make any meaningful money, just to attack companies that might eventually get into the advertising business.
  
  So what makes you morally obliged to support an OS created by the world's biggest enemy of privacy solely for the purpose to hurt its competitors?
3. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 23:44 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  They're the only ones that let you run what code you want on your device without needing to get it pre-approved by the mothership? They release the source for their operating system (except for that one release where the engineers were embarrassed by it but management shoved it out the door)?
4. Re:Well if they want ... by UnknowingFool · 2012-10-12 23:44 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  This is not a new reaction. It was confirmed last year that TSMC would be making Apple A5 chips in addition to Samsung. From a logistical standpoint does it make sense for Apple to have only one supplier of a critical component? Also 20nm is another reason to use TSMC. Samsung won't move to this size until later from what I remember.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
5. Re:Well if they want ... by AmiMoJo · 2012-10-12 23:48 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Google only uses its patents defensively, never attacking like Apple does. Its products compete by being better and more innovative, not through litigation.
  They are far from perfect but Apple has actually gone over to the dark side.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
6. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 23:50 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Why would that be? Google is the world's biggest advertising company, and all their actions are aimed at hurting companies that might interfere with that. That's why you have Google+ attacking Facebook, Google Apps attacking Microsoft, and Android attacking Apple. None of these are there to make money for Google, they are just meant to keep their competitors busy. Google just spent $12 billion on Motorola, to get patents to attack Apple and Microsoft even more, in a business where Google doesn't actually make any meaningful money, just to attack companies that might eventually get into the advertising business.
  You keep using that word but you clearly don't know what it means.
7. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 23:50 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  So what makes you morally obliged to support an OS created by the world's biggest enemy of privacy solely for the purpose to hurt its competitors?
  You mean it has no other merits at all, that's why 60% of smartphones are Android and they're keep improving it just "to hurt its competitors"?
  This whole post is so ridiculous it doesn't even merit refuting it point by point.
  P.S: "(Score:5, Insightful)", LOL. Nice troll! I'll bookmark this shit for the next time some butthurt appleite mentions "pro-Google /. groupthink"
8. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 23:54 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Very true. But it is a bit of a zero sum game isn't it? Along with all that freedom you get a lot of security problems. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in love with the tight grip apple has on their kingdom but you have to admit it zero sums the other way.
9. Re:Well if they want ... by TummyX · 2012-10-13 00:06 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  How many people *ACTUALLY* need to run custom code tho? It keeps the iPhone mostly free of viruses or crash prone apps and the target audience for iPhone is customers not DIY hackers.
  Android is so open but yet the Jelly Bean installation base is only 1.5% after 3 months. There's a difference between "theoretically open" and actual real world practise.
  If you really want to run your own code for whatever reason (custom robot?) you can either Jailbreak or just get an enterprise license from Apple then you can run any code you want.
10. Re:Well if they want ... by evilviper · 2012-10-13 00:12 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  "Competing" or even running at a loss for a while, trying to break into a market, isn't "attacking", What Apple is doing, meanwhile, IS attacking.
  And you're wrong about Android. Google is making plenty of money, and NOT from advertising. While Android proper is free, anybody who wants-in on Google's Apps (Gmail, maps, navigation, etc) and the Market / Play Store, has to get a license from Google. They're making good money from it.
  What's more, Google has no reason to use patents to attack Apple or Microsoft. Google doesn't have any lock-in on Android that would make that profitable from an advertising perspective. Anybody (see: Amazon) can change out the Google apps, and not use Google search... Some handset makers change everything to Bing, because the Microsoft money is better (though their service is unreliable), and I personally changed my Android phone to use DDG. Meanwhile, Google *does* have ample reason to aquire patents for defensive purposes, since there are concerted attacks by Apple, which Google needs to defend against to ensure the survival of Android.
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
11. Re:Well if they want ... by java_dev · 2012-10-13 00:17 · Score: 1
  
  Well stated!
12. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:25 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, and quality of OS (though I find Windows on desktop, Linux on server and Android on mobile to be good choice for me) wasn't even the original point. Your reading comprehension is severely lacking.
  Hint: GP's point was "everything Google does is solely to keep competition out of advertising business". Try again.
13. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:49 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I prefer to be treated as an adult, not as a child. I'll be responsible for security on my own device, thank you.
14. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 01:08 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Are you trolling or you really are that stupid?
  The iSheep/Fandroid wars aren't that fucking simple. Primarily, because there's no such thing as a "fandroid".
  The part iSheep don't get is that they are irrational and total brand loyalty to anything and everything Apple shits out, to the extent of defending to the death bad products.
  So-called 'fandroids' on the other hand, would switch from Android to Symbian, BB10, whatever (I can't be bothered listing other smartphone OS's) *tomorrow* if (by some miracle) it was BETTER than Android, and they'd ditch their Samsung for whatever, if they felt like it.
  So you see, you will always be iSheep and an easy target.
  Meanwhile, calling us 'fandroid' and 'shamstung' is like water off a duck's back to us - in fact calling us that only goes to highlight just how utterly and completely you iDrones don't get it.
  The 'war' isn't so much about a hatred of Apple, as it is a sport targetting Appletards for amusement.
15. Re:Well if they want ... by MightyYar · 2012-10-13 01:43 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Jelly Bean? I can't even run full ICS! Samsung is closed-source on all the drivers for my "open" Android phone. You can install ICS, but you get no video acceleration or camera - and other quirks like the face sensor and the accelerometers not working properly (or at all). It's a fun geek toy, but honestly you could load not-quite-functioning Android even on the iPhone. (To be fair, that project seems to have stalled recently.)
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
16. Re:Well if they want ... by MrDoh! · 2012-10-13 01:46 · Score: 1
  
  All this from something that probably started as a negotiation to bring the price of the chips down. Now it's full out war, and Apple are planning on leaving now (though that became obvious some time ago), time for Samsung to just dump them fully, re-use that capacity for cheaper/faster Android phones.
  
  --
  Waiting for an amusing sig.
17. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 01:57 · Score: 0
  
  If you really want to run your own code you could just stay away from an iPhone. Morally you should.
18. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  Motorola (Google) vs Microsoft
19. Re:Well if they want ... by gnasher719 · 2012-10-13 02:13 · Score: 1
  
  You keep using that word but you clearly don't know what it means.
  You clearly have never thought about _why_ Google would bother releasing Android at all.
20. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 02:18 · Score: 0
  
  You mean running code you don't want.
  Your argument is flawed. The Apple App store has more apps than all Android software sources together. If you jailbreak your iPhone, you even get more. Chances are, you're more likely to get the code you want if you have iOS.
21. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 02:25 · Score: 1
  
  Some would argue that Google being new has relatively few patents to attack with and a business model which lends itself to directing users to their search engine.
22. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 02:47 · Score: 0
  
  Strawman Much?
23. Re:Well if they want ... by blind+biker · 2012-10-13 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  How many people *ACTUALLY* need to run custom code tho? It keeps the iPhone mostly free of viruses or crash prone apps and the target audience for iPhone is customers not DIY hackers.
  Android is so open but yet the Jelly Bean installation base is only 1.5% after 3 months. There's a difference between "theoretically open" and actual real world practise.
  If you really want to run your own code for whatever reason (custom robot?) you can either Jailbreak or just get an enterprise license from Apple then you can run any code you want.
  Android is open source. Anyone can modify it and submit changes to Google, or just run the modified Android as they see fit (Amazon). There are, indeed, many companies that make Android phones. So it's very practically open.
  You mention jailbreaking - I can access any appstore with my Android phone without jailbreaking it. Which again shows that it's very practically open.
  
  --
  "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
24. Re:Well if they want ... by TummyX · 2012-10-13 03:11 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not arguing that its not open. I'm questioning how useful that is for consumers when in the end they can't even run the latest OS release until months or years after its released.
  If you want an opn platform for hacking and modifying an contributing back to google then go for android. No problems there. Just don't think that that somehow means its better when you look at it from the consumers' perspective.
25. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 03:15 · Score: 0
  
  Well aren't you clever. You know that was well before Google acquired Motorola, right?
26. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 03:21 · Score: 0
  
  Competition. Google likes to make money, just like any other company. Are you just too stupidly on apple's side to see? If we turned it around, it could be said that everything apple released was to attack someone else.
27. Re:Well if they want ... by BeanThere · 2012-10-13 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  I do own a phone (an old Nokia) but likewise, Apple's behavior against Samsung is immoral, and my next phone purchase will probably be a Samsung. I like a lot of what Apple did historically (loved the early Mac's) but their behavior now, boycotting Apple is unfortunately the only moral thing to do.
28. Re:Well if they want ... by knarf · 2012-10-13 04:06 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  It keeps the iPhone mostly free of viruses or crash prone apps
  FYI, apps on iOS are more crash prone than Android apps.
  
  --
  --frank[at]unternet.org
29. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  Google is making plenty of money, and NOT from advertising.
  
  95% of Google's revenue comes from advertising. App licensing isn't even a percentage point.
  
  ... has to get a license from Google. They're making good money from it.
  Not according to their filing. Do you have another source?
30. Re:Well if they want ... by SilenceBE · 2012-10-13 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  You know that was well before Google acquired Motorola, right?
  
  So why do I read in European newspapers that Motorola are still seeking sales ban on for example the Xbox AFTER Google acquired Motorola. I've seen that argument numerous times that this is before Google acquired it, but when they are today still seeking bans that doesn't make any sense.
  
  Even with regard of the cases that started before Google acquired Motorola, there is no reason why you should go through with a lawsuit that goes against your "philosophy". You can settle at anytime and you are certainly not obligated to look for future sales bans... . So why is that when Apple (and I'm against it regardless who tries to enforce it) uses sales ban to block competition we get a whole discussion about how evil it is, but when Google/Motorola does it the outcry is a lot less.
  
  It is even funny how people can be against patents but at the same time doesn't seem to find anything wrong in abusing FRAND patents. From my POV the whole Microsoft/h.264 ordeal is a way to make it less attractive then Google's WebM format. And regardless of what you feel about h.264 (which I'm not a big supporter of) I find it particularly strange that we tend to have discussions about how "evil" companies could abuse patents to play such games when the "don't do evil company" (which is pure marketing) does it and the whole "critical thinking" tends to flow away...
  
  And then some have the nerve to talk about blind fanaticism of Apple users... .
31. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 06:25 · Score: 0
  
  Because if they back down on the lawsuit that Motorola started before they acquired them, they lose the case and set a precedent. Which then opens them up for additional attacks from Microsoft. They're doing the right thing by seeing it through.
32. Re:Well if they want ... by Cinder6 · 2012-10-13 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  Google doesn't make that much money from Android. They actually make more off iOS than Android.
  
  --
  If you can't convince them, convict them.
33. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 07:35 · Score: 1
  
  There's a bit of shortsightedness in this argument: the usefulness of open platforms is that you can make them do things no one had actually thought of ahead of time. On iOS, all new abilities for your phone have to be approved by Apple. On Android, any new ability for your phone can come from anyone and does not need to be approved by Google. Maybe there's nothing right now, but supporting open platforms means that in the future someone can come up with a killer app that Apple/Google don't approve of and people can still use it.
34. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 09:13 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, because we all know that the previous iteration of Android stops working the moment a new version comes out. All those poor Gingerbread and ICS users unable to use their phones until manufacturers/carriers upgrade their phones. /sigh
35. Re:Well if they want ... by whisper_jeff · 2012-10-13 10:02 · Score: 0
  
  Google only uses its patents defensively, never attacking like Apple does.
  BULL-FUCKING-SHIT!!
  Perhaps you've heard of this company called Motorola? Yeah - they're owned by Google. They are using their patents offensively against a significant number of companies.
  Just because people _think_ Google is all sweet and nice and wonderful doesn't mean they actually are. They're just smart enough to hide their less-than-savory activities behind the Motorola brand...
36. Re:Well if they want ... by whisper_jeff · 2012-10-13 10:04 · Score: 1
  
  What's more, Google has no reason to use patents to attack Apple or Microsoft.
  Then why are they doing exactly that? You do know that Motorola, a company that has filed patent infringement suits against both Apple and Microsoft, is owned by Google, right?
37. Re:Well if they want ... by Plumpaquatsch · 2012-10-13 10:08 · Score: 2
  
  It keeps the iPhone mostly free of viruses or crash prone apps
  FYI, apps on iOS are more crash prone than Android apps.
  It's a headline in the form of a question - so no, they aren't.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
38. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 10:18 · Score: 0
  
  Correct. The proper term is "Freetard."
39. Re:Well if they want ... by thegarbz · 2012-10-13 10:52 · Score: 1
  
  Android is so open but yet the Jelly Bean installation base is only 1.5% after 3 months. There's a difference between "theoretically open" and actual real world practise.
  These two facts are completely unrelated. The vast majority of people I know with Android phones either don't know that an update is available, or simply don't care. Sure there are a few tinkerers. I imagine if you actually took a survey of the Slashdot Jelly Bean install base it would be quite different than a survey which includes my sister who had enough trouble turning the damn phone on and now a year later seems to have all of 3 apps installed and is 2 updates behind.
  Or how about my girlfriend? She's running Gingerbread on a Galaxy S2. I told her she should upgrade the OS on her phone and she asked why. The sad part is I didn't know why. To make the phone slightly faster? Apple introduce killer features with each update that makes them really worthwhile to get. Cut and Paste, notification drawer, etc. Android on the other hand is open and different vendors include their own flavours, so lets run through the ICS feature list and convince her to upgrade:
  Refined UI: - Touchwiz replaces the UI so nothing changes there.
  New Lock Screen Actions: The lockscreen on the S2 is different from the standard Android so nothing changes there.
  Quick response for incoming calls: Samsung's dialer already did that.
  Swipe to dismiss notifications: YES!
  Improved text and input: The S2 comes with Swype. Every Android phone I've had I've gotten rid of the standard keyboard and used Swype.
  Powerful voice: I've yet to see someone use it.
  Control over network data: There's an app for that
  Resizable widgets: Only a problem if your widgets were the wrong size to begin with like the retarded calendar widget that ships with Android.
  Accessibility improvements: Well she's not blind.
  Better contact management: S2 is different to standard Android, no change.
  New camera capabilities: S2 is different to standard Android, no change.
  Ok I give up reading the rest of the list. But you should get my point. Gingerbread to ICS was one of the most hyped up upgrades I've heard of yet for users of one of the most popular Android phones the Galaxy S2, very little actually changes due to the customisations Samsung apply to Android. So .... why upgrade?
40. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 10:56 · Score: 0
  
  Please list offensive patent actions by Motorola Mobility since the Google acquisition.
  I'll give you a hand, you only get to pick from lawsuits brought on in the last 4 months because thats how long Google has owned them.
  Fuck it I'll do it all for you. They've brought 1 patent lawsuit against another party. Apple, on Aug 19th. To which every man and his dog says it's about fucking time.
41. Re:Well if they want ... by evilviper · 2012-10-13 13:53 · Score: 1
  
  Google only recently aquired Motorola Mobility, so you can't attribute previous actions to them. HOWEVER, I'd say suing Apple is fair game, because Apple fired the first big shot, a billion dollar lawsuit, plus import bans against Samsung over their Android devices. That's the kind of big action Google would need to respond to.
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
42. Re:Well if they want ... by evilviper · 2012-10-13 14:01 · Score: 1
  
  95% of Google's revenue comes from advertising.
  Those numbers obviously AREN'T for mobile phones. You can't compare Android licensing to their ENTIRE business, because mobile isn't their entire business.
  "$543 million from Android devices between 2008 and December 2011"
  That may be tiny percentage of ALL their income, but it's more than enough to make development of Android profitable, without forced advertising.
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
43. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 15:35 · Score: 0
  
  Same here ... But I do tech support for twenty executives in my company. With the iPhone I spend a fraction of the time then the large variety of quirky android devices. In fact the iPhone saves the company so much time in support they are implementing an iPhone only support policy going forward.
44. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 15:37 · Score: 0
  
  Bullshit
45. Re:Well if they want ... by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-10-13 19:10 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't have to be one or the other. The problem with Android malware is not because Android can run custom code, it's because their app store is not premoderated, while Apple's is. If the default was a premoderated store, but there would still be a checkbox somewhere deep in "Advanced settings" that enables running third-party apps - or heck, even a command-line tool that would enable it from the console (which you first have to find and download a terminal emulator for) - it would be just as safe as Apple's model, and still open enough for the rest of us.
46. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-14 00:35 · Score: 0
  
  Most Android users aren't like Apple users in the fact that they have to have the latest version. Android 2.3 works great for millions. Its such a strange argument that a OS is no good if all its devices can't upgrade to the latest OS. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
47. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-14 00:40 · Score: 0
  
  Neither have you. It became clear to them that phones were and avenue to sell ads, not to attack competitors. GM doesn't make trucks to attack the Ford F-series, they do it to fill a demand.
48. Re:Well if they want ... by rtb61 · 2012-10-14 06:05 · Score: 1
  
  The next Google Nexus will be an LG and Nokia either spits an an Android range or dies, hell you can even go waterproof with a Panasonic Eluga or piss of the bagde and buy direct from a Chinese Manufacturer like Huawei. Boycotting Apple only really counts if they are the best choice, when the phones are trailing the pack in terms of features an price, not buying them means you are not a victim of marketing.
  
  --
  Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
49. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-14 07:42 · Score: 0
  
  i guess you're missing the whole point about potential. it's like the early days of linux - the fact that it's open is going to make some smart developer port it to hardware you have never thought of in the initial product; say, an interactive alarm security system. apple/microsoft take away that possibility - which means they sap innovation which is not controlled by them
50. Re:Well if they want ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-16 16:44 · Score: 0
  
  It runs better.
  Smoother, faster, less crash prone.
  VPN apps that don't require root.
  Ability to disable built in crapware.
  panorama mode for the camera.
  Newer (less buggy) versions of built in apps.
  What more do you want? A new phone?
  (are you really calling the addition of cut+paste a good thing... How about how fucking horrible it was that the iPhone never had cut+paste?)
Ah that sour taste by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 23:00 · Score: 0

It is delicious, you must have some!
Seems that Apple are a little mad. I wonder why...
Or they'll go Intel: Haswell processors from 10W by IYagami · 2012-10-12 23:05 · Score: 3, Informative

According to Anandtech, Intel Core 2013 ULV processors will start from 10W
See http://www.anandtech.com/show/6355/intels-haswell-architecture/4
" Finally, at IDF Intel showed a demo of Haswell running the Unigen Heaven benchmark at under 8W.
The chain of events tells us two things: 1) Intel likes to play its cards close to its chest, and 2) the sub-10W space won't be serviced by Atom exclusively.
Intel said Haswell can scale below 10W, but it didn't provide a lower bound. It's too much to assume Haswell would go into a phone, but once you get to the 8W point and look south you open yourself up to fitting into things the size of a third generation iPad. Move to 14nm, 10nm and beyond then it becomes more feasible that you could fit this class of architecture into something even more portable."
o please apple won't make a tv by arbiter1 · 2012-10-12 23:15 · Score: 3, Insightful

There is no money in TV market, most companies in the market lose money only a hand full make money. Apple knowing them would sell their tv's at 50-100% markup compared to next closest set. Only apple fanboy idiots would buy them, everyone else will say screw that and get cheaper ones that are proven to be good quality tv.
1. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by kthreadd · 2012-10-12 23:37 · Score: 2
  
  I think you're right.
  But, that's what people said about Apple making phones.
2. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:36 · Score: 0
  
  go back to Ars and troll you narrow minded idiot
3. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:42 · Score: 0
  
  except the point of the apple tv is to stream the display off your macbook air and eventually ipad onto your giant 72 inch screen or whatever. when itunes starts rolling out higher than bluray rez videos for the next generation of hd people with ipads would rather just buy an apple tv rather than get some new sony disc player since discs are dead. apple tv isn't actually a tv, it's a way to stream the display from other apple products on to your tv. as usual apple haters don't get it, which is why they don't run a mutli-billion dollar company.
4. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:48 · Score: 0
  
  It could actually be true. I would never buy any apple product, as there every alternative is cheaper and does the same, but millions still do.
5. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by beelsebob · 2012-10-13 01:04 · Score: 1
  
  That exact argument would have made exactly as much sense when it looked like Apple were rumored to be entering the Phone market.
  All apple needs to do is find something their TV can do that none of the competitors do well (for the iPhone it was browse the web, well), and make that the killer app.
6. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 01:10 · Score: 0
  
  appleTV != iTV Get off your high horse and pay attention to the article.
7. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Karlt1 · 2012-10-13 02:06 · Score: 1
  
  Welcome to the world of cell phones. Only three companies are making any money selling phones - Apple, Samsung, and HTC with Apple making 2/3rds of the profit, HTC making 1%, and Samsung making the rest.
8. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by tuppe666 · 2012-10-13 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  Welcome to the world of cell phones. Only three companies are making any money selling phones - Apple, Samsung, and HTC with Apple making 2/3rds of the profit, HTC making 1%, and Samsung making the rest.
  No they are not that is complete nonsense. Please don't continue that lie. Google make money from their Nexus range, Sony phone division is the only profitable part of the company, as for ZTE and Huawei also doing really really well. I suspect there are others but of the big ones they seem to be doing awfully well.
9. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 06:25 · Score: 0
  
  Prior to the iPhone, I knew I needed a better way to browse the web from a mobile device. Prior to the iPad, I knew there were enough situations in which a thin but larger iPhone like device would be useful (planes, for example).
  But TV? It's a passive experience that should stay passive. There's a bunch of smart-TV junk now, that's attempting to do what I've been doing for the past decade by attaching a computer to my TV, and never doing it quite as well. It just makes sense to have the TV de-coupled from the interface (like AppleTV already is). I've been through dozens of different DVRs, game consoles, etc, but I have the same plasma TV from 2003 and I have no real need to change it.
10. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Karlt1 · 2012-10-13 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.mobiledia.com/news/159036.html
  Says that Sony's mobile division continues to lose money.
  Google's mobile division includes Motorola Mobility and it hasn't seen a profit in years and Google is having to spend more money on layoffs.
  RIM is losing money.
  Nokia is losing money
  LG is losing money.
  Do you have a link for ZTE and Huawei's financials?
  Even Google said that 2/3rds of their mobile profit comes from ios and they pay Apple $100 million a year to be the default search engine on all of their devices.
11. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 07:41 · Score: 0
  
  Erm, source? I find it really, really hard to believe LG (or Motorola, or Nokia) isn't making a fair amount of money selling cell phones.
12. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by tuppe666 · 2012-10-13 07:59 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think your comment really justifies that much white space, its still a tiny list of companies that can't evolve from their feature phones. The reality is Android companies with a compelling product are doing well. Apple is doing really well selling shit as gold, but its market share is dropping everywhere. As for Google making money from Android this is only the beginning. In countries like china Where it has 12x the market share of Apple...and Apple is dropping. I think you need to stop having an Apple/US centric view of the mobile market. The world is dominated by Android.
13. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Karlt1 · 2012-10-13 19:26 · Score: 1
  
  So which Android companies are doing well besides Samsung? Companies are in business to make a profit - not increase market share. As far as Android doing well on China, that may very well be the case, but it does Google no good when a company uses its own fork of Android and uses no Google services like most of the Chinese companies do.
14. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 20:20 · Score: 0
  
  The irony is they'd then be beholden to Samsung again, as Samsung make far and away the best panels such that even Sony gave up and started using Samsung panels.
  Well, that or release an inferior product with crap display quality just to spite Samsung, I'd like to think they learnt their lesson on using an inferior item just to spite a competitor when they ditched Google maps, but we'll see I guess if they do.
15. Re:o please apple won't make a tv by Karlt1 · 2012-10-14 07:27 · Score: 1
  
  "Erm, source? I find it really, really hard to believe LG (or Motorola, or Nokia) isn't making a fair amount of money selling cell phones."
  Motorola
  http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-05-01/business/chi-motorola-mobilitys-loss-widens-in-q1-20120501_1_motorola-mobility-holdings-google-s-android-mobile-devices
  Nokia:
  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444464304577536440351488600.html
  LG:
  http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/25/lg-q2-2012-earnings/
Cheaper Alternatives by dohzer · 2012-10-12 23:15 · Score: 3, Funny

I can't wait for the prices of non-Apple TVs to crash, just like the MP3 player market.
This can only be good for the discerning consumer.
1. Re:Cheaper Alternatives by tsa · 2012-10-12 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  You want them even cheaper than they are now? That's hardly possible.
  
  --
  -- Cheers!
2. Re:Cheaper Alternatives by fa2k · 2012-10-12 23:59 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Don't hold your breath.. The TV business already has thin margins, and the display manufacturers partly make it up on smaller screens.
3. Re:Cheaper Alternatives by ikaruga · 2012-10-13 00:05 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Doubt it. The first reason AppleTVs are not popular is because home consoles even though they cost way more. The PS3 and Xbox360 can do everything the AppleTV do and much more(Bluray and DVD, real games, more digital content etc, better media streaming tools, better control interfaces and recording capabilities). The only thing I know more complete than a PS3 to hook up to a home theater setup is a custom made HTPC.
  The other reason is the bad marketing. Apple success is marketing and when they find a way to distort the reality around the appleTV, it will fly off the shelves.
4. Re:Cheaper Alternatives by Sponge+Bath · 2012-10-13 01:01 · Score: 1
  
  As you say, consoles cost way more than the Apple TV ($99). They also tend to be a lot bigger and have fan noise. Now say you want streaming media to four TVs in a household. That cost difference becomes a problem. The solution is a very small, very silent puck for under $100. Welcome to Roku. $50 to $99, same form factor (almost exactly) as Apple TV. The advantage of Roku is they push their SDK for third party apps as whoring hard as possible to everyone possible. Apple is mired in their desire to have tight control over content.
  That is the real reason Apple TV is not popular.
5. Re:Cheaper Alternatives by Vitriol+Angst · 2012-10-13 03:15 · Score: 0
  
  Internal memos at Apple show that THEY HAVE TREATED the AppleTV as kind of a hobby project -- another extension of iTunes.
  They aren't dominating the TV market because they haven't decided to until now.
  There are dozens of ways an iOS powered device connected with Wireless (maybe using the upcoming 50Ghz standard) could make life much easier and fun for the TV.
  I also have an XBox, and we don't want to pay for XBox live just to watch netflix, and we've watched about four movies on it. The DEMO seems promising, but it really doesn't have a huge assortment of content yet.
  Google's offering is geekware and not ready for prime time.
  >> No, the TV market is ripe for the picking, and I think you have a limited imagination if you don't know how.The major impediment is the kind of licensing that Apple managed to swing with iTunes. It's much tougher now to consolidate content -- but there is hope because groups like NetFlix and Blockbuster know their time is limited if the service providers end "unlimited" and get into the content business at the same time with things like; "streamed content from us doesn't count towards your bandwidth cap." Great -- they meter the internet our tax dollars paid for....
  Basically, the greed and the coming "cap and trade" with video content is going to make more content providers go with Apple. The major impediment is bandwidth, as the carriers are trying to pretend it's limited. The solution isn't about a better device or gimmick or marketing -- whoever solves the "Smart TV" of the future problem is going to have to create an infrastructure that gets around the gatekeepers with their hands out.
  
  --
  >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
6. Re:Cheaper Alternatives by gnasher719 · 2012-10-13 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  Doubt it. The first reason AppleTVs are not popular is because home consoles even though they cost way more. The PS3 and Xbox360 can do everything the AppleTV do and much more(Bluray and DVD, real games, more digital content etc, better media streaming tools, better control interfaces and recording capabilities). The only thing I know more complete than a PS3 to hook up to a home theater setup is a custom made HTPC.
  Actually, Apple TV sold more units in the last quarter than XBox 360. Admittedly, this is more because XBox 360 sales are dropping, and not so much because Apple TV is selling so well.
7. Re:Cheaper Alternatives by cant_get_a_good_nick · 2012-10-16 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  Gen2 apple TVs are selling for above original price on Craigslist. Having an easily hackable (I run XBMC on mine) low power (no fan noise) is still a draw, even though it's 720P only (it does an on the fly re-encode to 720P for 1080p, but that tends to slow video).
  People always think Apple is marketing marketing marketing. They look at specs and see "hey, this has better specs than the apple equiv, yet people buy the apple, therefore the sales are from marketing". Apple products just work. You plug it in, it works. "It works" is not going to be a check on any checklist. But people value it, as seen by the fact that Apple products can charge margin and people will pay that margin.
  Remember that at one time, Apple was in shambles. They were dropping market share like crazy. There was no halo effect from their success, cause there was no success. Eventually they built good enough products that people wanted them.
Re:A lesson learned by arbiter1 · 2012-10-12 23:17 · Score: 2, Informative

Show's how little apple fanboyz know. Apple been stealing others idea's for years, not exactly a new concept.
Mac Pro by Jerry+Smith · 2012-10-12 23:21 · Score: 4, Interesting

Dammit Apple, how about doing something on your other lines?? Mobility is nice but desktop needs improvement! Big improvement!

--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
1. Re:Mac Pro by tsa · 2012-10-12 23:59 · Score: 1
  
  New iMacs would be good too.
  
  --
  -- Cheers!
2. Re:Mac Pro by PopeRatzo · 2012-10-13 00:20 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Dammit Apple, how about doing something on your other lines?? Mobility is nice but desktop needs improvement! Big improvement!
  Apple doesn't want you to use desktop computers any more because you're likely to do something besides shop.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
3. Re:Mac Pro by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 01:26 · Score: 0
  
  yeah, man. i need a new mac mini bad but i'm not buying the current model which is old with no usb3, limited ssd and only quadcore in the server version (which sacrifice the video card).
  also i can't wait for the matte screen imacs, not that i would buy one for myself but i work on an imac all day at school and the reflections in the current imac screen are distracting like when some hot chick is sitting behind you and her face is reflected in the screen haha.
4. Re:Mac Pro by ducomputergeek · 2012-10-13 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  Apple's getting out of the desktop business. They may keep the iMac line for a while longer, but everyone I know in video production for 3D and major post production are off Apple and have either gone to windows 7 or Linux depending on their particular software preference.
  Now, ironically, most of the videographers I know in small shops are all still Apple or gone to Apple, but not on the desktop. They are all using 15" or 17" Mac Book Pros and some do have 27" iMacs. Mostly, though, that's because with an external thunderbolt drive they can now work from anywhere. If they are shooting a documentary or commercial or wedding or what not, they can start to do editing right there in the hotel that night. No need to drag 50lbs of equipment to do editing anymore.
  I mean hell, I have 16GB of Ram in my MacBook Pro. It has both an ATi 6770m and the Intel HD3000 graphics and switches based on what I'm doing. If I'm playing a game it's using the ATi. If I'm watching netflix it's usually the HD3000.
  
  --
  "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
5. Re:Mac Pro by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 07:16 · Score: 0
  
  Apple now sees desktops as very heavy and cumbersome iPods, and their vision will come to full fruition in another version or two of OS X. No one's going to buy a 40 lbs. iPod that doesn't even come with a screen, so why bother to update the product line?
6. Re:Mac Pro by Plumpaquatsch · 2012-10-14 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  Dammit Apple, how about doing something on your other lines?? Mobility is nice but desktop needs improvement! Big improvement!
  Apple doesn't want you to use desktop computers any more because you're likely to do something besides shop.
  And that's why they are pushing their notebooks - yeah, that makes sense. Because the RMBP screams "go buy something with me".
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
7. Re:Mac Pro by PopeRatzo · 2012-10-15 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  And that's why they are pushing their notebooks - yeah, that makes sense. Because the RMBP screams "go buy something with me".
  You haven't noticed what the average macbook user is doing.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
8. Re:Mac Pro by Plumpaquatsch · 2012-10-15 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  And that's why they are pushing their notebooks - yeah, that makes sense. Because the RMBP screams "go buy something with me".
  You haven't noticed what the average macbook user is doing.
  I have noticed you lost your argument.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Re:Or they'll go Intel: Haswell processors from 10 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 23:36 · Score: 0

Any chip will scale to below 10w if it's run slow enough - ergo, the proof is in the pudding.
In the same way you support stalin over hitler by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 23:48 · Score: 0

You know, like America did in WWII along with the UK and the rest of the Allies.
Even though they knew Stalin (toward the end of WWII anyway) was a dick and dangerous, they chose him over Hitler.
Even for an apple fanboi like gnasher should be able to get this:
Stalin: Android
Hitler: Apple
1. Re:In the same way you support stalin over hitler by TheRaven64 · 2012-10-13 00:21 · Score: 2
  
  The best strategy for the USA in this situation might have been to broker a peace deal between Germany and Britain and let Hitler and Stalin destroy weaken themselves with a long war before stepping in to pick up the pieces, providing covert support to whichever side looked like losing until both empires were in shambles. They didn't, because countenancing genocide on that scale wouldn't have gone over well with the electorate in any vaguely civilised nation.
  In this situation, however, no one actually dies when the two sides 'fight', so the best strategy is to encourage them to pursue a course of mutual destruction until a non-obnoxious competitor appears (this may take a while).
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
2. Re:In the same way you support stalin over hitler by sFurbo · 2012-10-13 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  They didn't, because countenancing genocide on that scale wouldn't have gone over well with the electorate in any vaguely civilised nation.
  
  As the magnitude, or even existance, of the nazi genocides were not known to anyone outside Germany until after the war, I find this reasoning dubious.
3. Re:In the same way you support stalin over hitler by beelsebob · 2012-10-13 00:59 · Score: 1
  
  Congratulations, you just made godwin's law imply that indeed, it's wrong to favour android over iOS.
4. Re:In the same way you support stalin over hitler by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-10-13 01:18 · Score: 0
  
  As the magnitude, or even existance, of the nazi genocides were not known to anyone outside Germany until after the war, I find this reasoning dubious.
  Actually, reports on events taking place in Auschwitz first appeared in Western media in June 1944.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
5. Re:In the same way you support stalin over hitler by sFurbo · 2012-10-13 01:38 · Score: 1
  
  OK, let me correct that to "before after D-day".
  
  Already in June? Reports form whom? Allied forces? Did they reach concentration camps that soon? Or the red cross?
6. Re:In the same way you support stalin over hitler by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-10-13 02:12 · Score: 2
  
  OK, let me correct that to "before after D-day". Already in June? Reports form whom? Allied forces? Did they reach concentration camps that soon? Or the red cross?
  Well, I've found this - American press had finally got whiff of it - which reported on the exact place, nature and scale of events. However, the information had been diffusing ever since Wetzler, Vrba and others escaped from Auschwitz. Wetzler and Vrba passed their report to Hungarians, and those were unwilling to believe it for quite some time. As far as non-public information is concerned, even before that, Witold Pilecki had been sending his reports to the Brits between 1941 and 1943, but they kept dismissing them as an unreliable exaggeration. And what about this?
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
7. Re:In the same way you support stalin over hitler by DigiShaman · 2012-10-13 02:57 · Score: 1
  
  That was quick. You just godwinned an Apple/Samsung story.
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
8. Re:In the same way you support stalin over hitler by Kupfernigk · 2012-10-13 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  That's largely what the US did until Pearl Harbor. Even after, King was more concerned with ensuring the end of the British Empire and defeating Japan than destroying totalitarianism. Both Germany and Russia bought US goods.
  
  --
  From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Made in Taiwan by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:02 · Score: 0, Insightful

Made in Korea -> Made in Taiwan
This means they will sell cheap crap for big money. Who would buy it? Oh...
1. Re:Made in Taiwan by tuppe666 · 2012-10-13 05:02 · Score: 1
  
  Made in Korea -> Made in Taiwan
  This means they will sell cheap crap for big money. Who would buy it? Oh...
  Not really sure what company you mean, but if you mean Samsung...ironically makes chips are made in Austin in the US.
Re:A lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:08 · Score: 1

What kind of new concept has Google invented? Answer : not one.
Search : Excite
Maps : Mapquest
Webmail : loads of companies
Google+ : Facebook, MySpace
Ad supported business model : beyond being old
Google glasses : known from SciFi movies (hey, if you gSheeps celebrate Samsung for using that reference, I can use it too)
So tell me : where is the original thinking from Google? There is none.
ARM laptop by JanneM · 2012-10-13 00:25 · Score: 5, Interesting

Actually, I could imagine having a 64-bit ARM Ubuntu laptop. Something fairly light-weight and long battery life, but with a number of cores (most CPU intensive stuff I actually do on my laptop is very parallelisable), plenty of memory and a largish SSD.

--
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Re:Or they'll go Intel: Haswell processors from 10 by gsnedders · 2012-10-13 00:30 · Score: 3, Informative

That's not really relevant, to be honest: it's still at least double the power consumption compared with Cortex-A15 SoCs (and you can be sure as hell the Intel figure is processor only, not memory, chipset, interfaces, etc.), and they idle at an order magnitude less, which is important for mobile devices.
Re:A lesson learned by icebraining · 2012-10-13 00:39 · Score: 2

At that level, nobody is actually original. There's only something resembling originality in the outskirts (technical stuff, business models, etc).

--
Dilbert RSS feed
Re:A lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 00:51 · Score: 0

Mapquest didn't invent cartography, the Babylonian's did.
Re:A lesson learned by beelsebob · 2012-10-13 01:01 · Score: 0

Right... Which is rather the farce that the parent was trying to point out, no? Saying Apple doesn't invent anything is like saying Google didn't invent anything, or Edison didn't invent anything... Rediculous.
Re:Or they'll go Intel: Haswell processors from 10 by beelsebob · 2012-10-13 01:02 · Score: 3, Informative

8W is way too much for an iPad... The current iPad uses 1.5W for the processor and 2W for the screen... 8W on the processor is not gonna happen.
Nope, that's only true if you're neonazi by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 01:15 · Score: 0

If you deny the Holocaust, then of course you would think that.
Nope, Hitler WAS worse than Stalin.
You would NOT favour Hitler unless you're a nutjob.
1. Re:Nope, that's only true if you're neonazi by Cinder6 · 2012-10-13 06:54 · Score: 2
  
  Stalin killed many, many more people than Hitler. This doesn't change the fact that both were evil.
  
  --
  If you can't convince them, convict them.
2. Re:Nope, that's only true if you're neonazi by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-10-13 19:13 · Score: 1
  
  For some mysterious reason, when various politicized writings (like the "Black Book of Communism") count victims, for Stalin they count everyone whose unnatural death can even remotely be linked to any government policies, or even lack thereof - for example, all people who died from starvation in the USSR during his reign. For Hitler and others, on the other hand, they only count victims of war and direct genocide, but not e.g. indirect death in a country, the infrastructure of which collapsed due to the war. A bit of a double standard there if you ask me.
3. Re:Nope, that's only true if you're neonazi by Plumpaquatsch · 2012-10-14 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  If you deny the Holocaust, then of course you would think that.
  Nope, Hitler WAS worse than Stalin.
  You would NOT favour Hitler unless you're a nutjob.
  Ahh, so Hitler was worse because Jews are worth more than other people.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
4. Re:Nope, that's only true if you're neonazi by Cinder6 · 2012-10-15 04:50 · Score: 1
  
  It's important to remember that Stalin would intentionally starve various regions and townships.
  
  --
  If you can't convince them, convict them.
5. Re:Nope, that's only true if you're neonazi by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-10-15 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but that doesn't mean that every single famine that had occurred in the USSR in that period was engineered.
It's a false dilemma by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 01:32 · Score: 0

Maybe he prefers Mussolini^WWindows Phone.
This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by csumpi · 2012-10-13 01:38 · Score: 5, Interesting

My wife just swapped her phone for a Samsung Galaxy S3. In a long time (probably since the iPhone1) I'm jealous and want one, too. The S3 looks fantastic and works great. The interface is awesome, there's no need to root it like with older Android phones.

The patent trolling from Apple also made Google/Samsung to invent. One example is screen unlock. On the S3 you can swipe the screen anywhere and even launch apps (like email or camera) directly from the unlock screen. Better user experience with more functionality.

In the meantime Apple had to do some catching up and they made the screen larger on the iPhone5. But instead of making the screen larger in both directions, they opted to change the aspect ratio, so now ios developers have to support yet another screen layout (at least pre-iphone5, iphone5 and ipad for a universal app). On the other hand, Android was designed from the beginning to support multiple aspect ratios, so one layout can handle it all (and no, this is not a cause of fragmentation, it's a solution to it).

Then Apple tried to stick it to Google with dropping maps. We all know how that turned out.

The solution is simple: Apple should stop with the patent trolling. It is biting them in the rear. Android is here to stay. They should go back to inventing and competing, otherwise they will be out-invented and out-competed. I know they are making money hand over fist, but just take a look at their stock price since iphone5 release.
1. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by TummyX · 2012-10-13 03:08 · Score: 0
  
  I don't think patent trolling is what you think it is. Apple actually use their patents in products.
2. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by mbourgon · 2012-10-13 03:21 · Score: 1
  
  Yes to skip the trolling, but "multiple aspect ratios" only really came with ICS.
  
  --
  "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
3. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by tuppe666 · 2012-10-13 05:00 · Score: 2
  
  I don't think patent trolling is what you think it is. Apple actually use their patents in products.
  They do use some of their patents in products, but they have a policy of patenting things not in their products. Personally using others FRAND patents and not cross licensing their own basic interface patents, has effectively worked the same way [no comeback], with the additional nastyness that the goal is not to extract as much money as possible...but to stop other companies competing with them by having the government remove them from the marketplace. Apple need to be boycotted.
4. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by noh8rz10 · 2012-10-13 06:52 · Score: 0
  
  to stop other companies competing with them by having the government remove them from the marketplace.
  
  congrats on going full retard. certain companies are granted monopolies on government-approved standards. In return, they make obligations to the government to share these patents on certain terms. instead, they try to bully apple with frand patents, and the government (should) say no way jose.
5. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by fermion · 2012-10-13 07:16 · Score: 1
  
  I am not sure what you think happened with maps. Apple sold only 5 million phones instead of 10 in a saturated market. Dreadful, but iPhone 5 traffic is reported to exceed the Samsung galaxy 3, which means guess who is actually using their pohone? OTOH google lost huge amounts of data overnight and is soon going lose a large chunk of the money that funds adroid development. Goolge live and dies othe ability to mine user data? do you really think collecting personal data on the mapping cars was an acciddnet? iPhone users are buying mapping apps that are superior to google, if no other reason then data is stored locally so phone can get directions when the connection is not good. I bought mine about a year ago. It is good to have. When developers are selling product life is never bad.
  
  --
  "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
6. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by csumpi · 2012-10-13 08:07 · Score: 1
  
  """I am not sure what you think happened with maps."""
  
  You are not serious, right? This was so big, Tim Cook even had to come out to apologize. And you are saying that users are better off when they have to buy something that they had yesterday? Superior? Show me one map alternative that tells me the hours of the local violin repair shop, how long it will take me to get there with current traffic conditions and also gives me user reviews?
  
  """Apple sold only 5 million phones instead of 10 in a saturated market. Dreadful,"""
  
  I don't know if your numbers are correct, but 50% off target sounds like a pretty big deal to me. Just google AAPL.
  
  """but iPhone 5 traffic is reported to exceed the Samsung galaxy 3, which means guess who is actually using their pohone?"""
  
  You lost me here. Not sure how data usage has anything to do with your argument. Or how you came up with this assessment. But just to play along, maybe iphone users are streaming their movies, while S3 users play them from their micro SD card.
  
  Maybe you are just jealous, like me of the wife's new phone. But I got good news: just like my contract, yours will end, too, and we can both get a nicer toy. Then we won't be morose like these people.
7. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 09:59 · Score: 0
  
  iPhone is made of easily broken glass and have a inferior battery (you can't change it your self)
8. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 15:47 · Score: 0
  
  iPhone 5 already has more page visited then SG III. So as a developer I will prioritize. Besides iPhone users are much more likely to purchase things. Sorry GS III will have to wait in line.
9. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by jittles · 2012-10-14 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  Except that the SOP between all the big players has always been cross-licensing. Apple came in as the new kid and patented some trivial UI features that were not remotely novel and added them to a phone. Then when other people started doing the same thing, they started suing. There is nothing the iPhone does that the Sony Clie didn't do back in 2000. It just has a nicer display, a capacitive instead of resistance display, and a different OS. But the look and feel isn't much different at all. In fact the Palm Treo had a lot of the iPhone capabilities. The biggest difference I can think of is the Treo had a handwriting are of the screen instead of an on-screen keyboard.
10. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by jittles · 2012-10-14 02:42 · Score: 1
  
  I do know there's plenty of things done wrong with Android. I hear grumbling about the size: ~5" phones are almost mini-tablets, and are quite a lump to try shove in an average size pocket-- it also makes it pretty awkward to operate one-handed. The battery life is atrociously short. (My running joke is: "Android phones are like Cinderella's night: It may work like a dream but everything shuts down before midnight".)
  Are you kidding? I can stick a 7" google nexus, with case in my pack pants pocket, cargo short pockets, etc. If you can't fit a 5" phone in your pocket then you need to stop wearing skinny jeans, or carry a purse. My dad's business partner is a small woman with a Samsung Galaxy Note. It's big, but she just throws it in her purse. She loves the thing, and picked it specifically over the iPhone, which my dad suggested she get.
11. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by Plumpaquatsch · 2012-10-14 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  iPhone is made of easily broken glass and have a inferior battery (you can't change it your self)
  Hint: Google "drop test galaxy s3 vs iphone 5" - most of them even have to mention the battery.
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
12. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by cavebison · 2012-10-14 16:46 · Score: 1
  
  just take a look at their stock price since iphone5 release
  LOL! You either don't understand than a climb up Mt Everest involves going downhill occasionally, or you can't read graphs. Share price hit an all-time high of 700 just before the iPhone5 release. A peak before release is to be expected these days. It has since dropped to ~630 or something, which is still higher than *any time in Apple's entire history* - except when it was building up to 700 of course.
  Apple's peak after the original iPhone was "only" 200. That was *after* release, because people didn't realise it would be so successful. Now we see pre-release rise, because people *assume* a release will be successful. The same pre-release build-up followed by a dip which you've noticed now, happened just the same after the 3G, 3GS and 4 models.
  It simply signifies people frantically making money on trades in anticipation of another Apple success, then it calms down. That says quite a bit about confidence in the company, wouldn't you say? I assume you don't make much trading shares.
  I don't own shit by Apple, by the way, I use Windows and Android, but just felt that needed explaining.
13. Re:This won't save them from Samsung/Android. by csumpi · 2012-10-15 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, I got that. But I have two questions:
  
  Shouldn't we be climbing again in the anticipation of the ipad mini release? Or shouldn't the ipad mini release, a month from iphone 5 release at least hold the value?
  
  The stock value was around $660 for about a month before the iphone5 release. The $700+ craziness started after the release, then retracted to $630. So I thought the hype was 700, not 660.
apple should make a TV box to bad the cable co's by Joe_Dragon · 2012-10-13 01:45 · Score: 1

apple should make a TV box to bad the cable co's have to much control and the satellite market is just as locked in.
Cable card is nice when it's working right but the cables co's seem to do a lot to make it hard to work so you rent there box and in some systems you need the add on SDV tuner as well.
also no VOD and must order ppv events by phone. And the lack of VOD sucks on comcast as they have cut down on the HBO HD, STARZs HD, SHOW HD and MAX HD channels and they say most of that is on VOD.
Tru2way does have VOD and all the 2way stuff but it forces the cable co Guide on you.
All vid is not going anywhere as well as the cable co want to lock you into there own all vid like boxes that can't work with your own boxes.
Re:A lesson learned by IllForgetMyNickSoonA · 2012-10-13 02:51 · Score: 2

Edisson, indeed, was a brutal leech sucking the blood and inventions of other people who worked for him. He was succesfull at that, yes, but he was not the inventor you seem to be implicating here.
Re:A lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 02:56 · Score: 0

They even stole the idea of suing from patent trolls.
Coming soon: by Mashdar · 2012-10-13 03:27 · Score: 1

TSMC sued for unreasonable pricing.
Samsung make the iPad screen by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 03:29 · Score: 0

Samsung displays make the iPad's high resolution display, so if Apple want to play games with Samsung it would likely not go well for them.
I think personally that Sammy has been holding off using the super high res displays for Android to be nice to Apple. If Apple start getting crappy with them, that won't last long.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/04/samsung-tablet-ipad-retina-display/
Advantage needed by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 03:49 · Score: 0

Balance: Cost vs Performance vs Power
Apple will do what it must, inspire & cajole others & keep ahead of the pack to stay in the curl.
Re:Or they'll go Intel: Haswell processors from 10 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 03:52 · Score: 0

It will if jumping into bed with Intel furthers Apple's bottom line... it doesn't really matter what their users think if the system is suddenly using much more power.
They will say the magic Jobs fairies are using the extra power to speed Steve's ascent to godhood... and all the Apple fans will rush out to buy it.
Re:A lesson learned by immaterial · 2012-10-13 05:41 · Score: 1

If you get lucky they'll start stealing apostrophes next.
Re:Or they'll go Intel: Haswell processors from 10 by asliarun · 2012-10-13 06:41 · Score: 1

That's not really relevant, to be honest: it's still at least double the power consumption compared with Cortex-A15 SoCs (and you can be sure as hell the Intel figure is processor only, not memory, chipset, interfaces, etc.), and they idle at an order magnitude less, which is important for mobile devices.
Dont' be so quick to dismiss Intel from the race. Intel is already shipping Medfield at 2GHz which has the same peak and idle power consumption as other ARM chips. It still lags the very high end ARM chips in performance but is very competitive when compared to mid range ARM phones and chips - in terms of performance, price, power - everything.
You will soon see Clovertrail based Windows 8 tablets by the end of this month. Again, Clovertrail is able to hold its own against the top end ARM tablets, which is why so many vendors are using it.
Let's be clear - ARM is still the king when it comes to mobile phones and tablets, but while it is trying to dramatically increase processing power while slowly increasing power consumption, Intel is doing exactly the opposite - it is trying to dramatically decrease power consumption while slowly decreasing performance.
Let's also be clear about one more thing - Intel is the king when it comes to performance and sheer processing power. Even the highest end ARM chip doesn't even begin to compete with say, a mid-range Intel laptop chip.
Another thing to consider is that in most of these handheld devices, display power consumption is quickly becoming the biggest factor - CPU/GPU power consumption is a clear second - which also gives Intel a bit of an edge, along with its manufacturing superiority.
Who will meet in the middle first - is anyone's guess. All I am saying is that it is too early to count Intel out of this race. Intel is clearly worried and wants to own this space. The next couple of years will be extremely interesting.
What would make it even more interesting, is if Intel bought out a big ARM player or did a cross-licensing agreement to compete with Qualcomm.
TSMC? Get Real by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 11:56 · Score: 0

Just ask Nvidia and AMD/ATI how much you can actually depend on TSMC to supply chips in quantity, with good yields and on time.... Apple likes to order in huge quantities up front. They're just not going to be able to do this with TSMC. If they're talking with Intel at all they should be talking both 20nm and 14nm.
good knowin ya crApple by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-13 17:59 · Score: 0

TSMC has a history of under-delivering. Every time they introduce a new process takes 2-8x as long as other major fabs. Their yields are inconsistent, introducing wide variability into their customers' supply chains. Apple is cutting off its nose to spite its face. As much as they hate Samsung and Android, the reality is that business is business. Apple's hubris will be (already is?) its undoing.
With Jobs gone, what will be Apple's Next Big Thing? Apple TV? Gimme a break. There are signs that Apple is at the beginning of a slow death spiral, resting on its laurels instead of innovating, indignant with partners instead of collaborating. Smart folks better cash out on their stock. Better yet, short it while they bleed.
Re:Or they'll go Intel: Haswell processors from 10 by jittles · 2012-10-14 02:21 · Score: 1

Please. I have an i3 Sandy Bridge that uses les than 10W for the entire system. When its doing work, it might jump up to 23W. I had to get a smaller DC power supply to run the thing because the bigger supply would turn off for undervolt protection when I tried to power the machine on. The CPU's TDP is 35W but most of the time its barely using any power.