Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Intel To Build Next Gen Processor For iOS Devices

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the out-with-the-old dept.

Desktops (Apple) 255

BogenDorpher writes "It looks like Apple will be using Intel as a main processor manufacturer to power the iPad, iPod touch, and the iPhone. Apple, who currently uses Samsung, will focus on making a switch to Intel within a year."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Retribution (4, Informative)

Hardhead_7 (987030) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010592)

Apple hasn't been happy with Samsung launching android phones, and this is how they're showing their displeasure.

Re:Retribution (-1)

cozzbp (1845636) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010608)

Um, this has nothing to do with android phones.... Android is not an Intel based OS

Re:Retribution (2)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010668)

Um, nobody said it was?

Grandparent is asserting that Apple, which uses ARM processors (made by Samsung) for its iPhones, is unhappy because Samsung is directly competing with it by making Android-based phones (which also use ARM processors).

Re:Retribution (2, Insightful)

intheshelter (906917) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010720)

Not so much that Samsung is competing, but that Samsung is blatantly copying Apple.

Re:Retribution (-1, Flamebait)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010812)

So, only Apple is allowed to blatantly copy? The allegations that Apple has leveled are tantamount to a toddler throwing a hissy fit because somebody else has a similar teddy bear.

Re:Retribution (1)

uglyduckling (103926) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010966)

Sorry, what is it that you think Apple blatantly copied?

Re:Retribution (0)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011104)

There is a certain fruiting tree native to Asia that wants its name back.

Re:Retribution (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011132)

GUI

Re:Retribution (1)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010972)

Your example of what Apple blatantly copied?

Re:Retribution (4, Insightful)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011080)

They copied the idea that anyone with a remotely similar (read: competitive) product must have "copied" or "stolen" all their ideas from them, from Microsoft. Microsoft really ought to file a copycopyright suit.

Seriously, though; I own a Samsung device that is allegedly "copied" from the iPhone. Trust me, if it were ANYTHING like an iPhone, I would NOT own it.

Re:Retribution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011176)

Apple made a personal computer with graphical user interface!!! They must have copied that from Xerox or IBM! Scream! Panic!

Seriously, Apple is blaming Samsung copying grid based touch UI among other things. These things are MUCH older than even the first IPhone. I could also say that I've been using "facetime" with my Nokia 5 years ago, before the first IPhone. The point is: these are all common technologies, and shouldn't be awarded to one manufacturer. Imagine your favorite DWM in linux being sued by Microsoft - because they have windows in their GUI..

That being said, my Samsung Galaxy S kinda does look like IPhone 3GS..

Re:Retribution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010984)

Really?
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-copying-samsung-2011-4

Re:Retribution (1)

CheerfulMacFanboy (1900788) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011082)

Proven wrong about 20 seconds after it was first posted.

Re:Retribution (1)

sosume (680416) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011196)

Apple and Samsung are blatantly copying WinCE 6 and PalmOS!

Re:Retribution (1)

cozzbp (1845636) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010970)

I apologize, the fact that Samsung manufactured the ARM processors slipped my mind. But I also imagine they could save a lot of money by just having Intel's engineers design and manufacture their IOS processors.

Re:Retribution (2)

jwilcox154 (469038) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010750)

Um, this has nothing to do with android phones.... Android is not an Intel based OS

Although you are correct about Android not being an Intel based OS you are incorrect about it being about Android Phones. Samsung is a manufacturer of both Android phones [samsung.com] and tablets. [samsung.com]

Re:Retribution (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010866)

You love nigger cock, moron.

Re:Retribution (0)

rpresser (610529) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010928)

Yeah, that's pretty much what Apple is saying to Samsung.

Re:Retribution (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011026)

LOL, wooosh! Really? Did it sound anything like the assertion was that Apple (who competes with Android) was unhappy with Intel (who they just sent a boatload of chip business)?

Re:Retribution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011148)

O rly? [slashdot.org]

Re:Retribution (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010850)

April 1st was last month.

Re:Retribution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011006)

No this is plainly the case that Samsung can not produce the volumn of A4 and A5 processors that apple needs as witnessed by the supply shortages of iPhone 4 and iPads.

Re:Retribution (1)

smash (1351) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011202)

or, you know... could just be that they want to support a single architecture to make debugging and porting code between OS X and IOS a whole shitload easier.

Could be interesting if they have a cut down x86/x64 based console coming out - cross platform IOS/OS X apple games anyone?

The after math of suing (2)

motang (1266566) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010594)

I wonder if they has anything to do with the Samsung and Apply suing each other

Re:The after math of suing (2)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010808)

Captain Obvious says yes.

Art of War (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010922)

I wonder if they has anything to do with the Samsung and Apply suing each other

Yes, but it's not a vindictive type of thing - it's strategy. "Well Samsung, you have a bit more to lose if you stay on your present course." The law is only one prong of corporate battle - a very slow and costly one. One of my favorite stories from business history is about Cornelius Vanderbilt who was screwed over by (fellow?) Robber Barons. To paraphrase: "The legal system works too slow. I'll ruin you both." And he did just that in less time law suits would have taken.

Don't be surprised if a couple of years from now, Apple signs a deal with Samsung for something.

You can't get where Apple is by being vindictive and petty - contrary to the public rumors about Jobs.

There's a reason why the "Art of War" is so popular among the business types.

Re:Art of War (1)

Skuto (171945) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010974)

Yes, but it's not a vindictive type of thing - it's strategy. "Well Samsung, you have a bit more to lose if you stay on your present course.

How big is the revenue Samsung gets from making Apple devices, percentagewise? It should be tiny compared to all of their business, right?

And the revenue they get from their own Android devices? Is it even less than they get from Apple? After all, the margins on them should be much better for Samsung.

I have some problems believing Samsung would be at all impressed by this, but maybe the numbers I have in my head are off.

Re:Art of War (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011044)

a. Unless you're some insider of either company, you're going by public information - such as I.

b. In this integrated globalized World, we have no idea how things work. It could be something like, "Well Samsung, you do as we say or your deal with 'XYZ' goes down the toilet because Apple is more important to them than you are,"

There's many reasons why this works in a strategic plan and the only people who really know what's going on are the people at the top at Samsung and Apple.

Re:Art of War (1)

jpapon (1877296) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011110)

Well, if Samsung sells the processors to Apple for 20 dollars (a number I pulled out of my ass, for arguments sake), that's 140 million dollars in sales in the most recent quarter on iPads alone (nevermind iphones or ipods).

You may call that drop in the bucket if you want, but I don't Samsung is going to.

Re:Art of War (1)

Skuto (171945) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011212)

that's 140 million dollars in sales in the most recent quarter on iPads alone (nevermind iphones or ipods).
You may call that drop in the bucket if you want, but I don't Samsung is going to.

Sure, but they sold over 10 million of the Android phones Apple is pissed about (Galaxy S), at what, 400 bucks each? So that's over twice as much, for one model alone.

How long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010596)

How long before they sue Intel?

Re:How long? (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010700)

I don't think intel are going to produce any rectangular-with-rounded-edges shaped tablets any time soon.

Re:How long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011116)

I don't think intel are going to produce any rectangular-with-rounded-edges shaped tablets any time soon.

So you mean just tablets, what other shape would they be?
Probably not, but I never thought Amazon would become the world's largest tablet producer either.

Ahh... that explains it. But ... (1)

cranil (1983560) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010602)

I'm not sure if it's a good idea... Intel doesn't seem to be very good with battery (duh!).

Re:Ahh... that explains it. But ... (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010944)

It's probably more accurate to say "x86 architecture doesn't seem to be very good with battery (duh!)". The iPhone won't be switching to an x86 processor.

But the source? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010610)

And it seems like the only article is a Windows/MS obsessed site? Doesn't seem reliable to me...

Re:But the source? (1)

Zcar (756484) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010730)

Here's a similar report from EETimes [eetimes.com] .

Re:But the source? (5, Informative)

CheerfulMacFanboy (1900788) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011190)

Here's a similar report from EETimes [eetimes.com] .

Of course that article says that the "Next Gen Processor For iOS Devices" (as well as the current A5) will be build by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSMC) (at least some of them), and that Intel may want to build the Gen after that.

Re:But the source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010790)

How does Windows / MS 'obsession' make it 'unreliable'? Not enough neckbeard [chronicle.com] ?

Pattern (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010612)

This seems to be an ongoing pattern for them...

Compatible? (2, Interesting)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010622)

I thought Intel only did x86/64 and Samsung didn't do either. Is this another PowerPC->Intel type move from Apple or am I missing something (quite likely)?

Re:Compatible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010752)

It seems likely that Apple will continue to design the chip in house and use Intel purely for fabrication. Also Intel once dipped its toes into the ARM pool with their XScale processors back in the PDA days.

Re:Compatible? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010844)

I had one and it sucked, I wasn't ever sure whether it was that terribly Windows implementation or if the chip itself wasn't as fast as advertised, but the thing wasn't particularly responsive.

Re:Compatible? (2)

Necroman (61604) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010892)

XScale wasn't all that bad, it was a standard ARM processor. We used it for a SAN box for our low end systems. It got the job done, but with all the fun of the ARM instruction set.

Re:Compatible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010842)

Intel will produce ARM based SoCs for Apple, not x86 nor Atom or other crap. They(Intel) will act like a foundry. Think of TSMC. Or just like Samsung. It will still be an A5 or A6. Just produced by Intel instead of Samsung. Makes no difference for the product.

Re:Compatible? (3)

xswl0931 (562013) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010868)

This is about using Intel as a fab producing Apple's A5 chips, not Apple switching to an Intel based chip

Re:Compatible? (4, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010882)

Intel used to do ARM (the StrongARM, which was sold to Marvell). Samsung manufactures the A4 and A5 chips, which Apple designed. The EE times article claimed intel was interested in manufacturing the A4/A5/An+1 chips for Apple, not that Apple is switching to x86.

Re:Compatible? (2)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010890)

FTFA:

''Based on a number of inputs, we believe Intel is also vying for Apple's foundry business,'' said Gus Richard, an analyst with Piper Jaffray & Co., in a new report.

Intel may not be necessarily designing the chips. Apple could have gone with any other foundry such as TSMC, GlobalFoundries, etc.

process (5, Interesting)

Gary W. Longsine (124661) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011020)

It appears from casual googling, that Intel could make the A5 using a smaller process size than the current ARM manufacturers are able to produce.

Re:Compatible? (4, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010996)

Intel does what ever you pay them to make. The have a ton of fab shops. I'm sure if you had enough leverage and handed them a chip spec, you could get them to build PPC RISC processors too.

Apple comes in, says "We're going to want X millon of these A5s, and BTW I'm sure AMD would be more than glad to supply us with these chips AND the chips for our next laptops & desktops, your call."

Re:Compatible? (5, Interesting)

Pinky's Brain (1158667) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011034)

Intel has roughly 2 years head start on the rest of the industry, process wise. Especially with computational lithography they are light years ahead of everyone else, and this is a critical technology to keep scaling immersion lithography ... which is necessary because EUV is very late. Because of patents they will probably not lose this lead up till EUV breaks through.

It would be foolish not to convert that lead into foundry business if they have spare capacity, or given just how fucking late EUV is they might even build extra fabs and take everyone's lunch. Not healthy for the industry ...

Re:Compatible? (1)

kangsterizer (1698322) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011136)

We will see when the iphone 5 is out. Intel has promised super low power x86 for a while but didnt really deliver so far.
They might also just make some ARM cpus based on Apple's specs.

That said the x86 way would be of course more interesting. Especially if it's actually more efficient than arm somehow. Magic. ;-)

Not a surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010630)

And patent war gains heavier weapons...

How many generations out is this? (1, Interesting)

Lluc (703772) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010638)

Either: 1. Intel is going to build a non-x86 cpu with their fab -- highly unlikely. or 2. Apple is going to lose a tremendous amount of battery life -- highly unlikely. Maybe several generations down the line we'll see a x86 chip with acceptable power characteristics for a cell phone or tablet, but not next year.

Re:How many generations out is this? (0)

Arlet (29997) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010712)

Intel has made ARM chips before (StrongARM and XScale) so it's not impossible.

Re:How many generations out is this? (1)

Skuto (171945) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010910)

They sold off all of that to Marvell, so it's still unlikely.

Re:How many generations out is this? (1)

Arlet (29997) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011078)

Not necessarily. The production for Apple is a very specific IC, by and for Apple, and it wouldn't take any business away from their x86 line. In the meantime, they make some extra money. Makes perfect sense.

Re:How many generations out is this? (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011114)

They did keep the bit that they use for their RAID cards; but the general-purpose processor side went to Marvell.

It would be quite interesting, though, if this was a case of Intel taking a contract fab job. Traditionally, they haven't done that(at least with their leading edge process stuff, I don't know what they do with older fabs). Intel doing an apple-exclusive run of ARM chips on the same process they do their x86s on would be dramatic and probably make a bunch of people rather sad pandas...

Re:How many generations out is this? (1)

Skuto (171945) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011228)

Good point. That would kinda spoil the Samsung/Android party.

OTOH, promoting non-x86 is very contrary to past Intel strategy. That's why they sold off their old ARM business, for starters.

Re:How many generations out is this? (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010766)

Either: 1. Intel is going to build a non-x86 cpu with their fab -- highly unlikely.

Why is that highly unlikely? Intel has produced ARM chips for years and years. What is all that highly unlikely about it?

Re:How many generations out is this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011068)

Exactly why is this unlikely? Intel has a huge amount of capacity. They do custom stuff all the time...

Apple sounds miffed at Samsung. Intel probably gave Apple a sweatheart deal...

Re:How many generations out is this? (0)

adam.dorsey (957024) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010784)

Intel used to have StrongARM as spoils from a lawsuit, and XScale which was their own ARM implementation. I think your point 1 is far more likely than it seems.

Re:How many generations out is this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010796)

If Apple is migrating to a while different architecture, and they plan a moving within a year then it's safe to say this has quietly been in the works for quite some time. It's safe to say that Apple is not so stupid as you suggest.

- Lurking since 97

Re:How many generations out is this? (1)

Idbar (1034346) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011126)

I don't know what the linked article says, but a quick Google search returned this page [padgadget.com]

It says that Samsung manufactures an Apple designed processor, and Intel may start a business of manufacturing non-Intel designed processors. So, at this point is very simple: Apple can take advantage of the manufacturing process of Intel to mass produce their own processors. I.e. none of your options.

Doubtful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010672)

Article was thoroughly slashdotted, but this sounds like complete BS to me. Is apple going to ditch their A[insert number] architecture? is intel going to manufacture and ARM chip for them? this makes no sense.

Re:Doubtful (4, Informative)

Zcar (756484) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010800)

The report from EETimes [eetimes.com] suggests Intel is only going after foundry business to produce the A-series processors for Apple, not that Apple is looking to change architectures.

It could be Apple leaving Samsung, or it could be they've decided to go with multiple suppliers for everything to reduce potential impacts from future disasters.

Hmm (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010696)

Meanwhile MS has just started chasing ARM. Well, good for Apple for being able to be so nimble. Wonder what Intel can bring to Apple that MS can't take advantage of? Maybe MS is just chasing tail lights? Or does Apple just get uneasy in exclusive relationships?

Re:Hmm (4, Insightful)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010798)

Meanwhile MS has just started chasing ARM.

And by "just started" you mean they've had versions of Windows on ARM for going on near 15 years?

PA Semi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010706)

Doesn't Apple own PA Semiconductor? Why don't they use them?

I've never understood Apple's approach with the iPhone and iPad. They could use PA semi to fab very efficient SOC PPC chipsets, port iOS to PPC and be able to run piles of native PPC programs on these devices.

Re:PA Semi? (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010854)

Volume?

Re:PA Semi? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010916)

I think the pile of existing ARM iOS programs is bigger then the hypothetical list of native PPC programs.

Re:PA Semi? (3, Informative)

Skuto (171945) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010930)

Probably because (quoting Wikipedia): "P. A. Semi (originally "Palo Alto Semiconductor"[1]) was a fabless semiconductor company"

You still need a fab. Apple already knows how to design CPUs.

Re:PA Semi? (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011244)

I strongly suspect that(even if PA semi weren't fabless) lack of backwards compatibility is seen as a feature, not a bug, by Apple. The last thing that they want is to make it easier for people to release warmed-over desktop applications for their precious touch-based platforms. Trying to make a handheld desktop is more or less what made WinCE such a pain in the ass to use. Apple would likely deliberately break compatibility before putting up with that, even if it could be enabled without switching architectures.

More than one type of CPU (1)

Marillion (33728) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010708)

Intel makes more than one kind of CPU. The site appears slashdotted, but I very seriously doubt is will be based upon the x86 series of processors. Plus it could be that Apple is going to use Intel fabrication facilities to make the A6 chip (or whatever it's called). They eat too many amp-hours.

Very quick Slashdotting (-1, Troll)

boogahboogah (310475) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010746)

they must be running a windows server...

Re:Very quick Slashdotting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010810)

More likely iServer on an ARM.

Re:Very quick Slashdotting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010960)

Yes, running an iServer on your ARM would most likely bring it down fast due to the weight of the server.

Re:Very quick Slashdotting (1)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011164)

yup, on samsung made processors... NT-4 for ARM maybe?

Nice! (1)

Issarlk (1429361) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010758)

Maybe the i* will get Intel's on chip graphic card included in the deal. That could be a killer feature.

Re:Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010802)

+1 m line of 2011 so far.

Occam's razor (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36010846)

Considering Apple has recently gone on a company buying spree to bring low power ARM design people and IP in house, put considerable effort into building a software infrastructure on ARM, and that despite their best efforts Intel hasn't been able to demonstrate an x86 processor that matches modern ARMs in consumer electronics power consumption, does this make any sense?

OR is some blog nobody has heard of trying to drive traffic and/or pump Intel's stock?

Re:Occam's razor (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011264)

It won't be an x86 that Intel makes for Apple, it will be apple's own in-house designed A5/A6/A7 processor.

Re:Occam's razor (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011280)

No the context of the article is that there is a rumor that Intel will manufacture the next iOS chip, not that it will be of Intel design.

Can't read the slashdotted article but... (1)

manonthemoon (537690) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010896)

Its likely Intel would be a contract manufacturer in this case, just manufacturing Apple's custom designed processor. Not something Intel would usually embrace, but with their current impotence in the mobile market, it may be the best they can hope for. They keep Apple close and get back in the ARM game (indirectly). Apple gets world class fabs from someone who isn't directly competing with them at retail.

Remember the venom (4, Funny)

boristdog (133725) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010908)

When Apple switched to Intel chips a few years back, I remembered all the venom spewed toward Intel by all my Apple-obsessed friends over the previous 20 years.

Now they cherish their Intel chips. But they still bash MS. Why, I got an Outlook e-mail from one of my Apple friends just yesterday, sending me a Powerpoint presentation he had made on his Mac, with a funny joke about how lame MS is.

I had no problem opening it in OpenOffice on my AMD-powered CentOS box.

Re:Remember the venom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011112)

Ummmmm...they're not switching to "Intel chips". They simply moving their fab contract for their own in-house A5's from Samsung to Intel.

Re:Remember the venom (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011216)

That's somewhat oversimplified.

For years there were a lot of advantages to the PowerPC chips. They were fast, energy efficient, had nice extensions like AltiVec and so forth. RISC was seen as inherently better than older instruction sets like x86. Heck, all the computer architecture classes I taught in school taught MIPS, etc. Given backing by IBM et al, the PowerPC line was believed to be able to quickly scale up.

By the end of the G4 era of PowerMacs and certainly by the G5 era, the writing was on the wall. New processors weren't coming out fast enough. They weren't scaling fast enough. Breakthroughs in x86 chips brought about a renaissance of CISC. It was time to find something else.

None of that negates the fact that for a lot of the run of PowerPC macs, their processors were highly competitive (at worst, if not better) than x86 chips in many ways.

Remember, kids: Samsung is complicated (1)

biglig2 (89374) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010948)

Samsung is a vast conglomerate of many businesses in many sectors. The people who make the phones so not share a cafeteria with the people who make the processors, and more importantly the people who make the phones don't always buy their processors from Samsung.

Re:Remember, kids: Samsung is complicated (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011288)

Yes, you are correct. The company I work for are probably Samsung's biggest SLC customer yet the Samsung SSD's are a direct competitor to ours. On one hand we have a good vendor/customer relationship and on the other hand we are fighting tooth and nail for orders. Different divisions within Samsung are like completely different companies...

First Wintel, now... (1)

Mr_eX9 (800448) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010952)

...Apptel? Inpple?

Re:First Wintel, now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011008)

iLike iNipple. Catchy.

Apple moving to unify their OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011000)

If Apple's iDevices runs on Intel processors, what could stop Apple to unify their OSes into a single, "one OS fits all" model? Input methods may be different, but the base OS is the same -- as they are moving with Lion, front-end is looking very similar to iOS. In the end, there will be a good move, as 3rd party devs could also benefit: Same code running on a portable, on a tablet, on notebooks and desktop, with the portable device being an "extension" to the desk/notebook. This is really getting interesting.

even more 3rd eye/ear hardware/code coming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011088)

just an observation, founded in the truth. good thing we still have the right to remain silent, as almost anything at all that we say, or do, could well be held against us, for eternity, which is what the time seems like when one is being killed slowly by disabling unnatural attacks on the body, mind & spirits of each & every one, excepting many of the babys, so far... the 'atmosphere' of at most fear, is almost here..

what a great time to proceed post haste with the already occurring disarmaments world wide, to avoid that sore thumb appearance we've thoughtlessly acquired. honestly.

Great for Intel and Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011096)

Intel is almost a generation ahead of everyone else in process technology. Apple will be able to roll out faster, bester, lower-power chips faster than competitors who all use TSMC. Also Apple can have more faith that their IP won't be stolen, their designs will stay in the USA rather than going to Korea / Taiwan.

Also good news for America. Apple A7... made AND designed in the USA!

Samsung has (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011120)

just announced that they are also switching to Intel to manufacture their SOC.

Intel is at 22nm and ARM is still 45nm (1)

alen (225700) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011122)

early 2012 Intel is going to release 22nm CPU's. Almost every ARM SoC is 45nm. the power and performance improvements are huge. i bet Intel will just fab the A6 CPU instead of Samsung.

or maybe there is a secret Atom 22nm CPU coming soon that will be a lot more power efficient

Build their processors (1)

hsa (598343) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011230)

They are not switching to Intel processors. They are letting Intel build their processors. Big difference.

They will just probably use Intel's advanced 22nm technology to build processors based on ARM architecture. Something they might also design themselves.

Much like GlobalFoundries is not AMD, they just manufacture AMD products.

When does "wants to" == "going to" (4, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011240)

Who ever posted the story left out the "?" from the original submitter which changes the entire context of the article. The article itself is a speculation based on what Intel is rumored to want to do. There is not a confirmation that they are going to fab Apple's iOS chips.

Windows on iPad (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011302)

Maybe they are planning to switch to Windows like Nokia did?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?