http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/ Engadget Comments for Apple considered small chip startup over Intel? http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
I bet intel persuaded apple with money. They like to push aorund the small companies that are trying to gain momentum.

http://www.generationplay.com/ ]]>May 22nd 2006 5:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 22nd 2006 5:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
Money talks, but we knew that already, didnt we?]]>May 22nd 2006 5:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 22nd 2006 5:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 22nd 2006 5:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 22nd 2006 5:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
Also, Apple's premium pricing would be compromised if there wasn't a renowned chip manufacturer to equip, let's say their next gen PowerMac Pro desktop.
]]>May 22nd 2006 6:00PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
"PA Semi secured a large amount of venture funding due in part to the stellar technical reputation of its staff. Former Digital alumni include VP of architecture Peter Bannon - aka Mr. Tanglewood - Leo Joseph, the COO and Jim Keller, the VP of engineering. Several of these engineers did much of the key work behind DEC's Alpha chip, which for much of the 1990s was consistently the fastest microprocessor on the market. Apple and PA also shared some heritage: PA Semi's Wayne Meretsky was formerly the technical lead for Mac OS at Apple during the company's transition to PowerPC."]]>May 22nd 2006 6:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
On the Disney buy-out, just an FYI. Lasseter was made head of Disney animation. And he claims it was a phone call from the then-new CEO (on said CEO's first day on the job!) that promised no creative interference in Pixar that sent them over the edge to Disney. Whether that's true or not, I have no idea, but Lasseter said so.

Oh and that great Disney film "Gnomeo and Juliet" we were all looking forward to? John Lasseter killed it by asking the simple question "why are we making this film?" Head of Disney animation who actually cares about quality!

-Pie]]>May 22nd 2006 8:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 22nd 2006 8:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
That doesn't really mean much, frankly, because being able to compete in the microprocessor field requires a whole lot more than the ability to make a single nice design on paper or in sample quantities.

The test of a microprocessor company is how well it can compete over multiple processor generations. This tiny outfit may have come up with a nice design, but it could be a one-off. They may hit a wall next year or the year after when they try to push it farther to keep up with Intel and AMD. And where would Apple be then?

Just look at IBM/Moto's inability to improve the PowerPC platform quickly and reliably enough. ]]>May 22nd 2006 8:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
But in all seriousness, what worries me is what I believe is that Intel is the one who has electromagnetic processors patent. This could prove of something fierce later on don't you think?]]>May 22nd 2006 8:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 22nd 2006 8:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
This is off topic to the article, but Wine (WIn32 API) could prove to be the downfall of Windows as one can run Windows apps natively on OSX without a perfromance hit or a need for Bootcamp. In other words, no need to purchase MS' crappy OS ever again.]]>May 22nd 2006 9:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
1. production capabilities
2. cost per unit ( if Apple is the only/main customer it's not going to be cheap)
3. Long term Roadmap
4. Timescales for full production
5. Intel offers virtualisation and native abilities to run x86 code.
5. decreased cost.
6. definite future


the list goes on. The only reason to choose PA would have been continued binary compatibility with existing apps. It's a good reason but in the face of everything else and the chance to further the business by allowing the running of XP/Vista on Macs, it's not even a contest. ]]>May 22nd 2006 9:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
Paybacks a bitch. Apple screwed Motorola when it licensed it's OS to it and others. Motorola invested big bucks in computers and Apple pulled the plug on the licensing. No one could sell the clones.

As I understood it, Motorola wrote off a lot of money on this deal. Motorola had to wait until the contract ran out but did as little as possible in terms of r&d.

]]>May 22nd 2006 9:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
It's "would have" not "would of." Sheesh, good luck hiring people.


]]>May 22nd 2006 10:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/"He told Pixar employees he'd never sell out, that quality will always be number one...whoops, sorry guys...."

Um, dude, please stick to tech talk.
It's obvious you don't see what's going on in the animation industry.

Between Fox Animation and Dreamworks Animation and others, Pixar was finally facing some real competition. From all that has been reported about the Pixar-Disney deal, Pixar executives have control over the animation dept. From the shareholder viewpoint, Pixar was sold while the company was trading at a relatively high valuation. The inevitable bad movie would have sent the share price plummeting.

]]>May 22nd 2006 11:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
Wine won't cause the downfall of anything; its compatibility is pretty terrible. What will cause Windows' downfall will be a combination of factors. Namely, Microsoft's failure to release an OS upgrade that people care about in a timely manner and Apple releasing a consumer line of products that is reasonably affordable.

BootCamp isn't an encouragement to run Windows or Windows apps. It's made to make people feel safe in converting to Apple because they'll know they'll have the Windows apps to fall back on, when in actuality most people who get acquainted with OSX won't bother (mission critical apps excepted).]]>May 23rd 2006 12:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
Right. That strategy definitely worked for OS/2.
Oh wait...]]>May 23rd 2006 2:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 23rd 2006 3:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 23rd 2006 4:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
btw this comments system is crap and blacklists certain mailhosts.]]>May 23rd 2006 6:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 23rd 2006 6:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/May 23rd 2006 10:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
I jus have to ask, what the fuck is a mac-brained idiot consumer going to do with a bleeding edge piece of technology like a PA Semi chip? These chips are gods of connectivity; but mac's really just need what most consumer cpu's need, couple thousand mhz of number crunching, not onboard XOR processors, 32 lanes PCI, 10Gbe and massive crossbars underneath.

I really wonder how this is going to affect the rest of the markets availability of the PA Semi. Apple could have either monolopized the supply and technologies, or it might've indirectly spread support and provided cash flow for the company.

Also, seems like the breaking of the story is end of game. These chips would've made wonderful pocket aces in Apple's server hand, sometime down the road.]]>May 23rd 2006 11:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/
Faster Garage Band? :/]]>May 23rd 2006 3:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/22/apple-considered-small-chip-startup-over-intel-sez-el-reg/http://ppczone.org/]]>May 24th 2006 12:18AM