As Intel readies its most potent chip yet for small devices, Apple may already be using competing technology.
Apple iPhone 3GS processor
(Credit: iFixit)One of the themes of the upcoming Intel Developer Forum (starting Tuesday) will be the chip giant's foray into the smartphone and mobile Internet device (MID) markets. Intel's current Atom chip is fine for Netbooks but has had little impact on MIDs and zero impact on smartphones, where it is simply too power hungry to be usable.
Enter Moorestown. A much more power efficient Atom chip, due by 2010, that should find its way into high-end LG smartphones, MIDs from Asian device makers, and tablets (from HP? Dell?).
Just so happens that Apple is doing analogous chip development. When Apple acquired chip design firm P.A. Semi in March 2008 it got a team of very capable engineers that, almost certainly, are designing silicon for future iPhones, iPods, and tablets.
But it's really not even necessary to speculate about the future. The Apple chip has already arrived (see photo). Some analysts believe that the Apple-branded chip in the iPhone is a fairly unique design and that Apple is simply using Samsung as a chip "foundry" or manufacturer. That would mean Apple is already competing with Intel's Atom, not to mention the host of ARM chip suppliers such as Texas Instruments and Qualcomm.
And where might Apple supply its own silicon in the future? Beyond the iPhone--where Intel clearly has nothing to offer currently--there's the expected emerging tablet and MID markets. Make the iPod touch's screen a few inches bigger diagonally, add a few more features and you theoretically have a MID. (Some, of course, will argue that the iPod is already a MID/media player.) Make the screen even bigger (8 to 10 inches), give it more compute and graphics horsepower, and add a few more software and hardware bells and whistles, and you theoretically have a next-generation Apple tablet.
Those are all markets where Intel's Moorestown (and, later, Medfield) will compete.
Apple has a current market capitalization of about $165 billion (Intel's is about $110 billion). Two heavyweights with two competing visions of small devices. Will one of the big battlegrounds of the future be Apple tablets versus Intel-based tablets? Or--perish the thought--an Apple Netbook using an Apple chip instead of an Intel Atom? It's tantalizing to speculate.
And 2010 is just around the corner. It should be an interesting year for fresh new device designs and equally interesting competition between two computer industry Goliaths.
Note: Here's the official Intel description of Moorestown: "Intel's second-generation MID platform, which consists of a System on Chip (codenamed 'Lincroft') that integrates a 45nm Intel Atom processor core, graphics, video and memory controller. The platform also includes an input/output (I/O) hub, codenamed 'Langwell,' that includes a range of I/O blocks and supports wireless solutions.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Microsoft hopes to turn it around with Zune HD
After three years and untold millions spent on the line, Microsoft's hopes of cutting into iPod's big lead are now on the Zune HD, with its 3.3-inch multitouch screen, streaming-music feature, and the ability to playback video, with the help of an HDTV, in 720p. A 16GB Zune HD is available at retailers for $219.99 and a 32GB will cost $289.99.
But at this point in Zune's evolution there's plenty of skepticism that the Zune can close the gap on Apple. A Zune-iPod comparison has for too long resembled a late-round prize fight, the kind where the challenger is cut, swollen-eyed and wobbly legged but refuses to go to the canvas. Zune sales are falling, a top manager has moved on and what's perhaps most worrisome is that the category is becoming passe.
While Apple also tries to kick-start lackluster iPod sales--upgrading Nanos with such features as a video camera and voice recording--CEO Steve Jobs has steered consumer interest away from straight digital music players and into smartphones. Apple has sold more than 30 million iPhones over the past two years and seen more than 1.8 billion iPhone applications downloaded.
Nonetheless, this is still Microsoft, one of the biggest technology companies in the world and well known for its patience.
"You can make the argument this is Microsoft's first real shot to getting it right," said Stephen Baker, vice president of industry analysis for The NPD Group. "Remember, the bar doesn't have to be set all that high for them to be successful. Nobody is supposed to unseat iPod...and Microsoft now has a product that they seem to be more confident in."
That confidence may come in part from an upgrade that some have called the best Zune yet.
Zune HD features a new OLED (organic light emitting diode) screen and will send high-def video to a HDTV using a new Zune AV dock, sold separately.
"Consumers can buy or rent HD content from the Zune Marketplace," Microsoft said in a statement, "sync that content to a Zune HD and take it with them to play back on a large screen HD TV in the home or on the road."
The 16GB is available in black and the 32GB is available in "platinum" at retail locations. Customers can purchase Zune in red, green, or blue in both capacities from Zuneoriginals.net.
Zune HD will also play games, HD Radio, and offers music-recommendation software, called Smart DJ.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Apple iPod Touch 3G (64GB)
Apple iPod Touch (third generation, 64GB)
Editors' rating: 4.5 out of 5
The good: The third generation of Apple's iPod Touch is still the king of the hill, when it comes to portable, Wi-Fi-wielding media players. New additions such as Voice Control, graphics enhancements, improved accessibility, higher capacity, and a faster processor help refine and already-excellent product.
The bad: The video cameras found on the iPhone 3GS and iPod Nano remain conspicuously absent. The lack of refinements to its audio quality, hardware design, and video playback leave us feeling just a little uninspired.
The bottom line: Although the updates are subtle, the third-generation iPod Touch still leaves its competitors in the dust.
Price range: $399.00 - $399.99
The 8GB iPod Touch got a slightly lower score than this model because of slight differences in processor speed and features. See that review here.
Samsung's 'Apple' chip rides iPhone market gains
Query: Who makes the Apple-branded chip in the iPhone? Answer: Samsung. This nontrivial detail translated into smartphone chip market share gains for Samsung in the second quarter, according to iSuppli.
Apple iPhone market share gains drove Samsung chip rise.
(Credit: Apple)The iPhone, largely due to the popularity of the 3GS model, accounted for 13.9 percent of global smartphone shipments in the second quarter, up from 10.1 percent in the first quarter, according to iSuppli. As a result, Samsung accounted for 15.9 percent of global revenue from sales of standalone applications processors. An applications processor is roughly analogous to the main Intel or Advanced Micro Devices processor in a PC: it is basically the brains of a smartphone.
Samsung's market share was up nearly 1 percent from the first quarter, iSuppli said, though it still trailed No. 1 supplier Texas Instruments. iSuppli defines a "standalone" applications processor as digital signal- or logic-based processors not integrated with the digital baseband function.
"Since the introduction of the first (iPhone) in January 2007, Samsung has occupied the key applications processor slot in Apple's iPhone line," Francis Sideco, principal analyst of wireless communications for iSuppli, said in a statement. "With the new 3GS model allowing the iPhone to gain share in the smartphone market, Samsung also is claiming a larger portion of standalone applications processor shipments."
As with previous iPhone models, the 3GS--introduced in June--integrates a Samsung processor based on the ARM architecture. The processor accounted for $14.46, or 8.4 percent, of the materials cost of the iPhone 3GS based on pricing in late June, iSuppli said.
"The partnership between Apple and Samsung on the applications processor in the iPhone has been a major coup for Samsung, establishing it as a player in the market and allowing it to challenge the incumbent leader, Texas Instruments," Sideco said.
The big question, however, is how long a good thing will last for Samsung. Sideco added that "there is a lot of speculation as to whether Apple's acquisition of PA Semi will change the parameters of this partnership." Apple announced its purchase of PA Semi in March 2008.
One of the most rapidly circulating rumors has Apple using a PA Semi design in the upcoming Apple tablet. The latest word is that the screen size is about 10 inches diagonally, meaning that a tablet will require more processor and graphics horsepower than a smaller device like the iPhone.
Although Texas Instruments lost some share to Samsung in the second quarter, the U.S. chip giant retained its dominant position in the market, with a share of 24.4 percent. "Texas Instruments continues to lead the market on the strength of its Open Multimedia Application Platform (OMAP) line of applications processors," Sideco said.
Apple iPhone market share gains drove Samsung chip rise.
(Credit: Apple)The iPhone, largely due to the popularity of the 3GS model, accounted for 13.9 percent of global smartphone shipments in the second quarter, up from 10.1 percent in the first quarter, according to iSuppli. As a result, Samsung accounted for 15.9 percent of global revenue from sales of standalone applications processors. An applications processor is roughly analogous to the main Intel or Advanced Micro Devices processor in a PC: it is basically the brains of a smartphone.
Samsung's market share was up nearly 1 percent from the first quarter, iSuppli said, though it still trailed No. 1 supplier Texas Instruments. iSuppli defines a "standalone" applications processor as digital signal- or logic-based processors not integrated with the digital baseband function.
"Since the introduction of the first (iPhone) in January 2007, Samsung has occupied the key applications processor slot in Apple's iPhone line," Francis Sideco, principal analyst of wireless communications for iSuppli, said in a statement. "With the new 3GS model allowing the iPhone to gain share in the smartphone market, Samsung also is claiming a larger portion of standalone applications processor shipments."
As with previous iPhone models, the 3GS--introduced in June--integrates a Samsung processor based on the ARM architecture. The processor accounted for $14.46, or 8.4 percent, of the materials cost of the iPhone 3GS based on pricing in late June, iSuppli said.
"The partnership between Apple and Samsung on the applications processor in the iPhone has been a major coup for Samsung, establishing it as a player in the market and allowing it to challenge the incumbent leader, Texas Instruments," Sideco said.
The big question, however, is how long a good thing will last for Samsung. Sideco added that "there is a lot of speculation as to whether Apple's acquisition of PA Semi will change the parameters of this partnership." Apple announced its purchase of PA Semi in March 2008.
One of the most rapidly circulating rumors has Apple using a PA Semi design in the upcoming Apple tablet. The latest word is that the screen size is about 10 inches diagonally, meaning that a tablet will require more processor and graphics horsepower than a smaller device like the iPhone.
Although Texas Instruments lost some share to Samsung in the second quarter, the U.S. chip giant retained its dominant position in the market, with a share of 24.4 percent. "Texas Instruments continues to lead the market on the strength of its Open Multimedia Application Platform (OMAP) line of applications processors," Sideco said.
Google vs. Apple: Who's telling the truth?
First it was Steve Jobs' health. Then it was the layoffs earlier this year. Now the Google Voice rejection. Apple's credibility is being questioned yet again.
Anyone who deals with Apple on a regular basis knows it is a company that gives information on its own terms. But now even the federal government is having problems getting a clear answer regarding Apple's rejection of the Google Voice application for the iPhone.
On July 28, Google announced that the calling and message service application had been rejected from Apple's App Store. Three days later, Google, Apple, and AT&T, the iPhone's exclusive carrier in the U.S., received inquiries from the Federal Communications Commission regarding the app's rejection. In its answer to the FCC, Apple said that the application was not rejected, but was still "under review." In Google's response--the most interesting parts redacted until Friday--it told the FCC that a series of conversations took place between Apple Senior Vice President of Marketing Phil Schiller and Google Senior Vice President of Engineering Alan Eustace during the month of July, including one on July 7, where Schiller told Eustace that Google Voice was being rejected for duplicating the phone dialing function of the iPhone.
The discrepancy between what Google said and what Apple said in their answers to the FCC, of course, leads to many more questions. In response, Apple released the following statement Friday:
"We do not agree with all of the statements made by Google in their FCC letter. Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application and we continue to discuss it with Google."
So basically we have a classic he said, she said situation between two companies known to (formerly?) enjoy a close relationship: Google says it was told the application was rejected, by one of the highest-ranking people at Apple. Apple says the app wasn't rejected. So Apple is either: a) insinuating that Eustace somehow misunderstood what Schiller said, or b) suggesting that Google is lying, or c) being picky about how it's parsing words.
Perhaps "rejected" doesn't mean the same thing to Apple as it does to everyone else. While that sounds kind of silly, quite frankly, it's not outside the realm of possibility of how Apple is thinking. Perhaps Apple is planning to formalize such a category of App Store approval status where applications are neither approved nor rejected. Other applications have languished for months, but their developers have been unclear on what has caused the delay.
It's not impossible, of course, that Google misunderstood, or is itself misleading the FCC, though it's unclear why that would be. Especially since at the point when Google initially said Google Voice was rejected by Apple, Google CEO Eric Schmidt was still sitting on Apple's board of directors. (He has since resigned.) But this is also not the first time there's been the perception that Apple has been less than forthcoming on important matters.
Who could forget the uproar over Jobs' physical appearance last summer and his top spokesperson's response that he was "suffering from a common bug"? It came out later that he was having serious medical problems that resulted in a liver transplant earlier this year.
In March, when rumors swirled that some sales employees got laid off, Apple representatives denied the reports. The people who lost their jobs later came forward to confirm the reports.
And just last week, observers of the company wondered if Jobs purposely misled The New York Times when he told them they did not put a camera in the iPod Touch because it didn't make sense for customers--speculation that heightened after a tear-down revealed space for a camera sensor in the updated design.
Apple has a lot of sway in several industries and makes products that people like. But customer confidence in your ability to be forthcoming is important, especially when it comes to making a successful sales pitch for, say, an iPod Touch sans camera, when there could be a new model with a camera coming soon that's just been delayed because of manufacturing problems.
But there's also the reality that a lot of customers just flat out don't care. Apple has a particularly loyal fan base, and to date the company's bottom line hasn't shown distaste for deception or misleading information.
Anyone who deals with Apple on a regular basis knows it is a company that gives information on its own terms. But now even the federal government is having problems getting a clear answer regarding Apple's rejection of the Google Voice application for the iPhone.
On July 28, Google announced that the calling and message service application had been rejected from Apple's App Store. Three days later, Google, Apple, and AT&T, the iPhone's exclusive carrier in the U.S., received inquiries from the Federal Communications Commission regarding the app's rejection. In its answer to the FCC, Apple said that the application was not rejected, but was still "under review." In Google's response--the most interesting parts redacted until Friday--it told the FCC that a series of conversations took place between Apple Senior Vice President of Marketing Phil Schiller and Google Senior Vice President of Engineering Alan Eustace during the month of July, including one on July 7, where Schiller told Eustace that Google Voice was being rejected for duplicating the phone dialing function of the iPhone.
The discrepancy between what Google said and what Apple said in their answers to the FCC, of course, leads to many more questions. In response, Apple released the following statement Friday:
"We do not agree with all of the statements made by Google in their FCC letter. Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application and we continue to discuss it with Google."
So basically we have a classic he said, she said situation between two companies known to (formerly?) enjoy a close relationship: Google says it was told the application was rejected, by one of the highest-ranking people at Apple. Apple says the app wasn't rejected. So Apple is either: a) insinuating that Eustace somehow misunderstood what Schiller said, or b) suggesting that Google is lying, or c) being picky about how it's parsing words.
Perhaps "rejected" doesn't mean the same thing to Apple as it does to everyone else. While that sounds kind of silly, quite frankly, it's not outside the realm of possibility of how Apple is thinking. Perhaps Apple is planning to formalize such a category of App Store approval status where applications are neither approved nor rejected. Other applications have languished for months, but their developers have been unclear on what has caused the delay.
It's not impossible, of course, that Google misunderstood, or is itself misleading the FCC, though it's unclear why that would be. Especially since at the point when Google initially said Google Voice was rejected by Apple, Google CEO Eric Schmidt was still sitting on Apple's board of directors. (He has since resigned.) But this is also not the first time there's been the perception that Apple has been less than forthcoming on important matters.
Who could forget the uproar over Jobs' physical appearance last summer and his top spokesperson's response that he was "suffering from a common bug"? It came out later that he was having serious medical problems that resulted in a liver transplant earlier this year.
In March, when rumors swirled that some sales employees got laid off, Apple representatives denied the reports. The people who lost their jobs later came forward to confirm the reports.
And just last week, observers of the company wondered if Jobs purposely misled The New York Times when he told them they did not put a camera in the iPod Touch because it didn't make sense for customers--speculation that heightened after a tear-down revealed space for a camera sensor in the updated design.
Apple has a lot of sway in several industries and makes products that people like. But customer confidence in your ability to be forthcoming is important, especially when it comes to making a successful sales pitch for, say, an iPod Touch sans camera, when there could be a new model with a camera coming soon that's just been delayed because of manufacturing problems.
But there's also the reality that a lot of customers just flat out don't care. Apple has a particularly loyal fan base, and to date the company's bottom line hasn't shown distaste for deception or misleading information.
The Windows 7 upgrade survival guide
Want to make the Windows 7 upgrade experience as short and painless as possible? Follow these seven suggestions to make the process easier. (For details on what to expect, see How long should a Windows 7 upgrade really take?)
1. Run setup from a flash drive or a USB hard drive. Compared to slow DVDs, you can easily shave 5-10 minutes off install times. For upgrades, you can simply copy the files to the external media; if you plan to do a clean install, you’ll need to make sure the media is bootable.
2. Move massive data collections off your system drive before you start. Copy your big digital media collection to an external hard drive and then delete the original files from your user folders before you run the upgrade. You can copy them back after setup is complete.
3. Check for compatibility problems before you start. The Windows Upgrade Advisor runs at the beginning of the setup process and will identify any programs or devices that have compatibility issues. Resolve those issues before upgrading. (A standalone version of the Upgrade Advisor is available from Microsoft if you want to check a system before starting an upgrade.)
4. Take advantage of this opportunity to ditch old software. Open the Programs window from Control Panel and take inventory of all installed software on the old PC. If you find any programs that need to be replaced or scrapped, uninstall them now and give the setup program one less task to worry about.
5. Upgrade your hard drive along with your OS. If you’re feeling cramped on your current drive, get a new, bigger, probably faster replacement. With a SATA hard drive in a modern desktop or notebook PC, this is usually a very simple upgrade. (The hardest part typically involves physically removing the drive.) Get a SATA-to-USB adapter cable to temporarily connect the new drive to your PC. (Here’s a universal model from a vendor I know), then use Acronis TrueImage or the software that comes with the new drive to “clone” your old drive. Shut the system down, replace the old drive with the new one, and restart. The old drive is a perfect backup: If anything goes wrong, you can swap the old drive back in and you’re right back where you started.
6. Make sure you have needed drivers before you start. At a bare minimum, be certain you’ve downloaded the correct drivers for your wireless or wired network card. Without a network connection, you’ll have a hard time getting any other drivers or essential programs!
7. Create a clean image backup when you’re done. Every edition of Windows 7 includes a Backup program you can use to make a complete image backup on an external hard drive or on DVDs (assuming you have a DVD writer). A reasonably clean Windows 7 image backup will fit on two or three DVDs—another good reason to purge data files before you start.
1. Run setup from a flash drive or a USB hard drive. Compared to slow DVDs, you can easily shave 5-10 minutes off install times. For upgrades, you can simply copy the files to the external media; if you plan to do a clean install, you’ll need to make sure the media is bootable.
2. Move massive data collections off your system drive before you start. Copy your big digital media collection to an external hard drive and then delete the original files from your user folders before you run the upgrade. You can copy them back after setup is complete.
3. Check for compatibility problems before you start. The Windows Upgrade Advisor runs at the beginning of the setup process and will identify any programs or devices that have compatibility issues. Resolve those issues before upgrading. (A standalone version of the Upgrade Advisor is available from Microsoft if you want to check a system before starting an upgrade.)
4. Take advantage of this opportunity to ditch old software. Open the Programs window from Control Panel and take inventory of all installed software on the old PC. If you find any programs that need to be replaced or scrapped, uninstall them now and give the setup program one less task to worry about.
5. Upgrade your hard drive along with your OS. If you’re feeling cramped on your current drive, get a new, bigger, probably faster replacement. With a SATA hard drive in a modern desktop or notebook PC, this is usually a very simple upgrade. (The hardest part typically involves physically removing the drive.) Get a SATA-to-USB adapter cable to temporarily connect the new drive to your PC. (Here’s a universal model from a vendor I know), then use Acronis TrueImage or the software that comes with the new drive to “clone” your old drive. Shut the system down, replace the old drive with the new one, and restart. The old drive is a perfect backup: If anything goes wrong, you can swap the old drive back in and you’re right back where you started.
6. Make sure you have needed drivers before you start. At a bare minimum, be certain you’ve downloaded the correct drivers for your wireless or wired network card. Without a network connection, you’ll have a hard time getting any other drivers or essential programs!
7. Create a clean image backup when you’re done. Every edition of Windows 7 includes a Backup program you can use to make a complete image backup on an external hard drive or on DVDs (assuming you have a DVD writer). A reasonably clean Windows 7 image backup will fit on two or three DVDs—another good reason to purge data files before you start.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)