Thomas Ricker, you kind of did it wrong this time. It is not cool to claim a title hinting that Voodoo is using a chip "created" by Apple or for Apple, which is absolutely not true whatsoever!
For the love of god, it will not hurt you to change that annoying title.
And if that is true, clak, then obviously the Voodoo is not using the same CPU as the Air. But wait? The specification are exactly the same? Therefor it seems pretty clear that it was not specifically for Apple; As Voodoo is now using it.
Likely Apple paid enough to help fund the development of the chip, and an exclusive on release, but not enough to make it an Apple-only chip. Makes sense to me.
Otellini's words are pretty clear in the video link posted by clak above. Referring to the CPU he says to Jobs, "the product that we ended up building for you." It was then likely an exclusive proc for Apple for a set period of time.
The whole "custom CPU built for Apple!" stuff was always a bit of an exaggeration. The SFF packaging was part of Intel's roadmap long before the MBA was announced. But they were planned to be 45nm chips as part of the Montevina line of products. The MBA (and probably Envy) chip is "custom" in the sense that they're making a 65nm version when they previously didn't have any intention to do so. It's not like Apple told them to come up with a smaller CPU package and Intel went "Of course! Why didn't WE think of that?!"
You are one of the writers of Engadget that I respect as all the others, and I have a true belief that you do a good job in reading, analyzing, then publishing news the right way and form, having said that, I do really believe that you are wrong on this.
As an article writer you should not claim things based on a word told on video that has no absolute proof in its meaning nor in its grammar usage. Mr. Otellini said that this product was built for Apple, but he never mentioned it was exclusively for Apple, and he never also said it was named after Apple too.
When Intel comes up and says "we built this for you", it doesn't show any figure of exclusivity for Apple, it just gives us a little understanding on how Apple helped with the making of that chip, which lead to Intel, bringing that chip "for Apple" and showing their gratitude to Apple, which I totally understand, but it is never exclusively for Apple, nor named after Apple and will not share any money or credits with Apple.
I really believe that it is just wrong to see what you are doing there Thomas, and we are not asking you to say that Apple wasn't involved in the making of that chip, but you also can't claim or hint that voodoo, is using a chip made exclusively for Apple.
I'm not a good writer, and I'm sure that you know better words to use than what I can give you or what you wrote in that title.
Awwww, I am so sorry, clak, that we are ruining your experience here at Engadget. I now see that this site exists solely for you, and that everybody else should leave so you can have it all to yourself. I ask that all the Engadget writers only write pro-Apple/anti-every one else stories and all comments should follow the same rules to make sure that you can be happy at all times. On behalf of every one here, let me take the time to apologize for the hardships that we have put you through. I will immediately start a fund to make reparations, so that we can make it up to you at once. You speak the full, un-biased, wholesome truith about everything. While we roam about, scratching our balls, drooling, foolishly worshipping that demon Bill Gates.
The video says it all. In fact, I remember watching that right after it was posted by Apple and it's quite clear that the chip was designed for Apple and even alongside Apple's own engineers. I believe Thomas is right. I also believe that Intel always intended to bring the chip to a wider market.
Wow you people are in denial...it IS a CUSTOM CPU built by intel specifically for Apple, if you watched Macworld 08 you would know, "Jobs asked Intel a year ago to design the package, Otellini said, and Intel wasn't totally sure it could be done at the time. Otellini thanks Jobs for allowing Apple and Intel's engineering teams to work so closely together, and Jobs returns the love." Out of intels Ceos mouth and you idiots are denying it...wow http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-9850085-37.html
Thomas Ricker, "The title is correct in that it is a "custom MacBook Air CPU" and it first appeared in the MacBook Air."
I'm sorry but that makes no sense. Where is your proof that this _is_ a custom processor for the MacBook Air and why would it matter if it appeared first in the MacBook Air?
I'm sorry but you'll never go any further in a journalism career if you're going to take criticism like that.
@ef15e, you quoted something regarding creating a package (which would include a chipset) and you're stating that it is a custom CPU? That makes no sense. This process may have been developed with Apple and possibly with Apple's support but it's still an OEM processor that others are [obviously] using.
What happens if 50 more computers end up using this process. Are you _still_ going to call it a custom MacBook Air CPU? Even if it was specific designed and custom built for the MacBook Air that still wouldn't make sense because it's obviously gone into OEM and is no longer a custom built CPU for a specific type of computer.
Just because other companies are using the CUSTOM CPU ORIGINALLY MADE FOR THE MACBOOK AIR....SO SAYS OTELLINI INTELS CEO, DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACTS that it is and will always be intel and apples cpu designed FOR the Macbook Air.
Thomas also happens to be one of the most stubborn writers, often refusing to change or edit posts which are misleading or partially incorrect.
I agree with the others - it is not a Custom MacBook Air CPU. It is a custom Intel CPU, which was produced first for Apple but was always intended to be used in other devices. Therefore it is not custom to the Air, but custom to Intel's normal processor line. A small distinction, but an important one in the perception of biases.
Hey guys, look! Macbook Pro is using a Dell Latitude CPU. It's a Dell Latitude CPU because it was used there first and therefore it should always and forever be referred to as the Dell Latitude CPU, no matter that it was made by Intel or that is in another OEM's PC. Makes perfect sense, right Thomas?
Hmm...I guess the Macs must be using custom made PC CPUs. This blogger is an idiot/apple fanboy. You know, I switched from reading engadget and gizmodo depending on how fanboyish and stupid they get. I first read engadget til they became too much of little fangirls for apple, then I went to gizmodo, and then that changed to bunch of apple fangirls too while engadget was less of that. Now I think I'm going to switch back, you are making an article about a CPU to relate back to apple product you stupid fanboy.
It's fair enough that Thomas Ricker used this title: the CPU did first appear in the MacBook Air, hence it can be called the "MacBook Air CPU" while it is only present in that device alone.
In this context - and regardless of whether it really was exclusive for Apple or not - the term "MacBook Air CPU" should just be taken lightly as "the CPU that was first put into the MacBook Air".
If we take it too seriously, we'll just end up being the extreme opposite of clak.
Regarding the video: I agree with Saad that the video is not a good proof for the argument, since the conversation did not specifically say if Apple had actually made a deal with Intel on designing that CPU, in contrast to the possibility that they could have meant Jobs casually challenged Otellini on making the CPU smaller.
If we were to argue that the title is inappropriate because Apple didn't take part in designing the CPU, or that Intel never made the CPU exclusive to Apple, then we would need:
1. the patent with the list of engineers that took part in the design 2. an official statement (addressed by an officer to the press) saying that there was never contract signed by Apple and Intel on any exclusivity
Point 1 might not help unless we can spot who works for Apple (I doubt they would put another company's name on the list, just human names), and Point 2 would never happen unless Intel and Apple unexpectedly get sour over some misunderstood terms & conditions / PR mishap regarding the CPU.
Hence me saying: if you're anti-"MBA CPU" then the title should just be taken lightly - no point in arguing about something that neither side can show proof.
Wow, I thought those went out in the 80's. If your gonna do a "your mamma" joke, at least make it funny and not sound like some despirate 12 year olds attempt at a harse insult. There is no way you are older than 15 (at least mentally) with that kind of comeback.
Coincidentally, Fortune just published an article titled, Apple and Intel: Best buddies. In it, they say:
"Months earlier, Apple had come to Intel looking for a special order: a small, thin chip package %u2013 the sort of component you would need to build an uncommonly slender computer. Apple didn%u2019t say exactly what it needed the package for, and Intel engineers at first thought they couldn%u2019t help. %u201CInitially we either said, %u2018We don%u2019t have that,%u2019 or %u2018We have that on a roadmap 3-4 years from now,%u2019 %u201D Rattner says.
In fact, Intel soon discovered it had the requested technology close at hand. Years earlier, researchers had dreamed up a similar chip in a tiny package, but the idea had been put on the back burner after PC makers gave it a ho-hum reception. The concept just had to be dusted off. %u201CWe had that small chip package pretty much sitting on the shelf,%u201D Rattner recalls. Within a year, Intel had updated it to meet Apple%u2019s needs and delivered it in volume."
Justin Rattner is Intel's CTO
Bottom line: Intel customized a chip specifically for Apple's MacBook Air. In other words, a custom MacBook Air CPU
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
"Custom MacBook Air CPU?"
No. It's simply a CPU made by Intel that is available to OEMs.
If Voodoo were to first to use it would people call it the "Custom Voodoo Envy CPU"?
A better title would have been "Voodoo's Enzy 133 using same CPU as MacBook Air?"
Totally agree with you, LC.
Thomas Ricker, you kind of did it wrong this time. It is not cool to claim a title hinting that Voodoo is using a chip "created" by Apple or for Apple, which is absolutely not true whatsoever!
For the love of god, it will not hurt you to change that annoying title.
And if that is true, clak, then obviously the Voodoo is not using the same CPU as the Air. But wait? The specification are exactly the same? Therefor it seems pretty clear that it was not specifically for Apple; As Voodoo is now using it.
Likely Apple paid enough to help fund the development of the chip, and an exclusive on release, but not enough to make it an Apple-only chip. Makes sense to me.
Saad and LC,
Otellini's words are pretty clear in the video link posted by clak above. Referring to the CPU he says to Jobs, "the product that we ended up building for you." It was then likely an exclusive proc for Apple for a set period of time.
Thomas
Hey clak, you made a good point but don't blow it with your emotive comments. Bring the love, son, not the flames.
Thomas
The whole "custom CPU built for Apple!" stuff was always a bit of an exaggeration. The SFF packaging was part of Intel's roadmap long before the MBA was announced. But they were planned to be 45nm chips as part of the Montevina line of products. The MBA (and probably Envy) chip is "custom" in the sense that they're making a 65nm version when they previously didn't have any intention to do so. It's not like Apple told them to come up with a smaller CPU package and Intel went "Of course! Why didn't WE think of that?!"
Thomas Ricker,
You are one of the writers of Engadget that I respect as all the others, and I have a true belief that you do a good job in reading, analyzing, then publishing news the right way and form, having said that, I do really believe that you are wrong on this.
As an article writer you should not claim things based on a word told on video that has no absolute proof in its meaning nor in its grammar usage. Mr. Otellini said that this product was built for Apple, but he never mentioned it was exclusively for Apple, and he never also said it was named after Apple too.
When Intel comes up and says "we built this for you", it doesn't show any figure of exclusivity for Apple, it just gives us a little understanding on how Apple helped with the making of that chip, which lead to Intel, bringing that chip "for Apple" and showing their gratitude to Apple, which I totally understand, but it is never exclusively for Apple, nor named after Apple and will not share any money or credits with Apple.
I really believe that it is just wrong to see what you are doing there Thomas, and we are not asking you to say that Apple wasn't involved in the making of that chip, but you also can't claim or hint that voodoo, is using a chip made exclusively for Apple.
I'm not a good writer, and I'm sure that you know better words to use than what I can give you or what you wrote in that title.
Thank you.
clak, take a lesson from Saad on how to argue your case with intelligence. Don't stoop to the level of the mindless haters, you look just as bad.
Saad, we'll just have to disagree on this. The title is correct in that it is a "custom MacBook Air CPU" and it first appeared in the MacBook Air.
Thomas
Does anyone have a link to a whitepaper or press release where Apple and/or Intel are claiming this is a custom chip? That could possibly settle this.
OT: lol at Reid being both an Apple & BMW fan.
Awwww, I am so sorry, clak, that we are ruining your experience here at Engadget. I now see that this site exists solely for you, and that everybody else should leave so you can have it all to yourself. I ask that all the Engadget writers only write pro-Apple/anti-every one else stories and all comments should follow the same rules to make sure that you can be happy at all times. On behalf of every one here, let me take the time to apologize for the hardships that we have put you through. I will immediately start a fund to make reparations, so that we can make it up to you at once. You speak the full, un-biased, wholesome truith about everything. While we roam about, scratching our balls, drooling, foolishly worshipping that demon Bill Gates.
Again, accept our sincerest apology.
The video says it all. In fact, I remember watching that right after it was posted by Apple and it's quite clear that the chip was designed for Apple and even alongside Apple's own engineers. I believe Thomas is right. I also believe that Intel always intended to bring the chip to a wider market.
Wow you people are in denial...it IS a CUSTOM CPU built by intel specifically for Apple, if you watched Macworld 08 you would know,
"Jobs asked Intel a year ago to design the package, Otellini said, and Intel wasn't totally sure it could be done at the time. Otellini thanks Jobs for allowing Apple and Intel's engineering teams to work so closely together, and Jobs returns the love."
Out of intels Ceos mouth and you idiots are denying it...wow
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-9850085-37.html
Thomas Ricker, "The title is correct in that it is a "custom MacBook Air CPU" and it first appeared in the MacBook Air."
I'm sorry but that makes no sense. Where is your proof that this _is_ a custom processor for the MacBook Air and why would it matter if it appeared first in the MacBook Air?
I'm sorry but you'll never go any further in a journalism career if you're going to take criticism like that.
"The title is wrong and here's why..."
"We'll just have to disagree. The title is right"
SENSE IT MAKE NOT
@ef15e, you quoted something regarding creating a package (which would include a chipset) and you're stating that it is a custom CPU? That makes no sense. This process may have been developed with Apple and possibly with Apple's support but it's still an OEM processor that others are [obviously] using.
What happens if 50 more computers end up using this process. Are you _still_ going to call it a custom MacBook Air CPU? Even if it was specific designed and custom built for the MacBook Air that still wouldn't make sense because it's obviously gone into OEM and is no longer a custom built CPU for a specific type of computer.
Just because other companies are using the CUSTOM CPU ORIGINALLY MADE FOR THE MACBOOK AIR....SO SAYS OTELLINI INTELS CEO, DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACTS that it is and will always be intel and apples cpu designed FOR the Macbook Air.
Thomas also happens to be one of the most stubborn writers, often refusing to change or edit posts which are misleading or partially incorrect.
I agree with the others - it is not a Custom MacBook Air CPU. It is a custom Intel CPU, which was produced first for Apple but was always intended to be used in other devices. Therefore it is not custom to the Air, but custom to Intel's normal processor line. A small distinction, but an important one in the perception of biases.
So its exclusivity is kinda like how Core2Duo was "exclusive" to PCs?
Hey guys, look! Macbook Pro is using a Dell Latitude CPU. It's a Dell Latitude CPU because it was used there first and therefore it should always and forever be referred to as the Dell Latitude CPU, no matter that it was made by Intel or that is in another OEM's PC. Makes perfect sense, right Thomas?
One things for sure. It's not PowerPC. Har har har.
Hmm...I guess the Macs must be using custom made PC CPUs. This blogger is an idiot/apple fanboy. You know, I switched from reading engadget and gizmodo depending on how fanboyish and stupid they get. I first read engadget til they became too much of little fangirls for apple, then I went to gizmodo, and then that changed to bunch of apple fangirls too while engadget was less of that. Now I think I'm going to switch back, you are making an article about a CPU to relate back to apple product you stupid fanboy.
Oh I read your post just now jagster, beat me to it.
clak, how do you reply so fast with only one hand?
Guys,
It's fair enough that Thomas Ricker used this title: the CPU did first appear in the MacBook Air, hence it can be called the "MacBook Air CPU" while it is only present in that device alone.
In this context - and regardless of whether it really was exclusive for Apple or not - the term "MacBook Air CPU" should just be taken lightly as "the CPU that was first put into the MacBook Air".
If we take it too seriously, we'll just end up being the extreme opposite of clak.
Regarding the video: I agree with Saad that the video is not a good proof for the argument, since the conversation did not specifically say if Apple had actually made a deal with Intel on designing that CPU, in contrast to the possibility that they could have meant Jobs casually challenged Otellini on making the CPU smaller.
If we were to argue that the title is inappropriate because Apple didn't take part in designing the CPU, or that Intel never made the CPU exclusive to Apple, then we would need:
1. the patent with the list of engineers that took part in the design
2. an official statement (addressed by an officer to the press) saying that there was never contract signed by Apple and Intel on any exclusivity
Point 1 might not help unless we can spot who works for Apple (I doubt they would put another company's name on the list, just human names), and Point 2 would never happen unless Intel and Apple unexpectedly get sour over some misunderstood terms & conditions / PR mishap regarding the CPU.
Hence me saying: if you're anti-"MBA CPU" then the title should just be taken lightly - no point in arguing about something that neither side can show proof.
@ clak
LOL.. your "your mamma" joke is soooo witty.. LOL
Wow, I thought those went out in the 80's. If your gonna do a "your mamma" joke, at least make it funny and not sound like some despirate 12 year olds attempt at a harse insult. There is no way you are older than 15 (at least mentally) with that kind of comeback.
Coincidentally, Fortune just published an article titled, Apple and Intel: Best buddies. In it, they say:
"Months earlier, Apple had come to Intel looking for a special order: a small, thin chip package %u2013 the sort of component you would need to build an uncommonly slender computer. Apple didn%u2019t say exactly what it needed the package for, and Intel engineers at first thought they couldn%u2019t help. %u201CInitially we either said, %u2018We don%u2019t have that,%u2019 or %u2018We have that on a roadmap 3-4 years from now,%u2019 %u201D Rattner says.
In fact, Intel soon discovered it had the requested technology close at hand. Years earlier, researchers had dreamed up a similar chip in a tiny package, but the idea had been put on the back burner after PC makers gave it a ho-hum reception. The concept just had to be dusted off. %u201CWe had that small chip package pretty much sitting on the shelf,%u201D Rattner recalls. Within a year, Intel had updated it to meet Apple%u2019s needs and delivered it in volume."
Justin Rattner is Intel's CTO
Bottom line: Intel customized a chip specifically for Apple's MacBook Air. In other words, a custom MacBook Air CPU
http://bigtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/06/13/apple-and-intel-best-buddies/
Thomas