digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

Steve Jobs: it's time we design our own iPhone and iPod chip

appleinsider.com — Industry heavyweights Samsung Electronics and Intel Corp. were dealt a considerable blow earlier this week when Apple chief executive Steve Jobs revealed that his company will start developing its own chips to power the next-generation of Multi-Touch devices.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • geogeer, on 06/11/2008, -23/+3So much for anybody's ability to "clone" the iPhone.
    • HOTM, on 06/12/2008, -2/+4Cause that has been happening for the past few years.
      • geogeer, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1True, but it WON'T happen now, will it?
  • rexcom, on 06/11/2008, -50/+13Steve Jobs is the devil, but I will continue to line up and get raped by him because I love apple products.
    • DillonHinson, on 06/12/2008, -1/+8Dude, that's just gross.
    • Sanalisnail, on 06/12/2008, -4/+3Tis tru tho
    • rabidbob, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Good thing for you he's not a komodo dragon.
    • ikd34, on 06/16/2008, -0/+1Y are u so... gross? You realize that steve jobs is a GOOD MAN. Right?
  • vinod1978, on 06/11/2008, -21/+42We've already seen other companies quickly come up with their copy cat iPhones and have started to do things like multi touch, so now that that the price of the iPhone is pretty cheap, and it has 3G capabilities, other copy cat companies will try to make their phones cheaper with some of the same capabilities as the iPhone. The only way to get rid of those companies is to eliminate the hardware that will power their devices. I think it would take at least 4-5 years before we see any device powered by Apple itself instead of Intel, Samsung, or similar companies. I believe that Apple might buy up smaller chip companies to help them develop their own product, or will co-design with smaller companies with an exclusive contract that will not allow the company to sell their chips to anyone else.
    It is not as surprising to me as apparently it was to Intel or Samsung - but they have about 5 years to rake in the money with Apple. Unless they decide to come up with technology that can only be purchased by Apple (which they might propose), they'll be SOL.
    • bittermang, on 06/12/2008, -1/+36They already did buy up chip companies.

      Remember the big rumble about Palo Alto Semi Conductors months ago that made everyone go "OK, wtf?"

      This is the answer to that "Seriously, wtf?"
    • ericdano, on 06/12/2008, -14/+2Wrong. The next iPhone, probably out next year, will be the first one that has some new chips in it. Perhaps a faster CPU, perhaps a custom designed, ultra low power consumption CPU.
      Never bet against Steve Jobs and Apple. People lose......big........
      • sexybobo, on 06/12/2008, -6/+6Yeah we can all see how microsoft's bet that apple wouldn't be the dominate computer on the market screwed them over.

        Also what makes you think apple with very little chip building history will be better at making chips then companies like ibm nvidia amd intel or samsung?
        • mrBitch, on 06/12/2008, -1/+5RE : " what makes you think apple with very little chip building history will be better at making chips then companies like ibm nvidia amd intel or samsung? "

          This is very similar to what Palm were saying when Apple announced the iPhone :

          "We've been doing this for quite a few years now, I don't think Apple is going to come in and do anything special with their FIRST EVER phone in a market as mature as the hand set phone market is currently."

        • arctic, on 06/12/2008, -2/+5Because they have the people who can.
        • sexybobo, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1"This is very similar to what Palm were saying when Apple announced the iPhone"
          They have been developing portable devices for many years and have been making awesome intuitive UI for decades on desktop devices.

          They have not been making high end portable processors for long periods of time. They bough "Palo Alto Semi Conductors recently which will take years off the process of developing their own chip but Palo Alto Semi Conductors isn't know for making great smart phone processors.
    • rpgmaker, on 06/12/2008, -6/+25What an idiotic comment. Do you seriously think that Apple will get rid of those companies or stop them from copycatting by making their own mobile hardware? The average consumer wont even notice the difference.

      Except for their Mac hardware I see little to no point for this on a cellphone. Companies like Samsung invest big amounts of money on R&D a year, specially on making technologies we already have smaller and less energy consumer.

      Your comment was full of fanboyism *****.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 06/12/2008, -1/+9Dude there's no way they are going to "get rid of those copy cat companies". There's no way you'd want them to anyway.

      Since when does Apple have a monopoly on hand held devices?

      Companies were already making mp3 players when the iPod came out and people act like anyone making an mp3 player now is ripping off the iPod.

      There's like a trillion phones sold world wide every year and Apple sells only a couple million of them. There are companies making mobile phones, pocket PC's, tablets, and all manner of electronics.

      I agree the parent made an idiotic fanboy filled comment.
    • jamesdew, on 06/12/2008, -8/+2ye because nokia sony erricson really need to 'catch up' with the capabilities of the iphone, to name a few

      video calling
      playing divx
      recording video
      flash
      java
      GPS
      • akhomerun, on 06/12/2008, -1/+4***** video calling. you really want to just hold your phone oustretched in front of your face just to see the other person and for the other person to see you? seriously, is it convenient ever in your real day to day life to have to do that?

        video calling has been in europe and japan and nobody uses it because it's stupid as *****.

        but yeah, the iphone could use java, flash, and video recording (although there are apps for that coming out...)

        i disagree with divx, there's no advantage to it over H.264. I disagree with GPS, i really think GPS is better left to a dedicated unit.
        • jamesdew, on 06/13/2008, -1/+0I mostly agree with you about video calling. I have a video phone and I did use it once I think ;).
          I have an LG Viewty which does all that stuff except for GPS which I really would like to have in my phone.

          As for divx support the main reason I want it is that most torrents I download are in that format and I wouldn't want to have to convert them all if I wanted to watch them on my phone.

          Anyway the point I was trying to make was that the poster was saying that other companies are trying to 'catch up' with the capabilities iPhone. I was pointing out that many modern cell phones have a far greater feature set than the iPhone regardless of whether or not you personally find them useful.
      • Pittance, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1Just for comparison, the $90 entry level phone Sony Ericsson just came out with has all of those features except divx. It also has 3G and the same camera size. But really, how do you make a 2.0 MP camera and not have it record video? Especially with a screen as big as the iPhones. Thats just asinine.
        • jamesdew, on 06/13/2008, -0/+0it has GPS? Whats the model called?
    • wTheOnew, on 06/12/2008, -2/+4I don't understand how this is a considerable blow to either company, especially Intel. Apple is such a small percentage of Intel hardware it's not going to affect them much, if at all. It's too bad that Apple is going away from, without a doubt, the best chip designer and producer in the world to something built in house that may or may not be engineered as well. It is definitely not going to be as cheap to produce, even if they are fabless.
    • megamod, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Idk if you're right about the other points in your article but i hope you're right about how long it will take for them to make it. If i buy the new iphone and there is a new kick ass, totally renovated iphone by apple i'm gonna slap myself in the face
    • flipmeat, on 06/12/2008, -1/+4Five years? Apparently you have never worked for Mr. Jobs. :-)

      The inverse property of the Reality Distortion Field, which only affects Apple employees, is that they will kill themselves to make whatever he wants happen.
  • jabberwolf, on 06/11/2008, -32/+22The smaller comapnies usually make inferiror products.
    WTF is jobs thinking? the larger companies make the better and smaller products.

    Apple simply wants to lock down their OS to hardware thats proprietary. Jobs trying to make as much money off a product as possible. Jobs gives a new definition to the word greed!
    • Dumbledorito, on 06/12/2008, -6/+10That's not entirely true. Having the money and capacity to roll out products is one thing, being able to make ones of quality is quite another.

      After all, Sony gave us exploding batteries, Apple gave us the puck mouse, DLink gave us routers that doubled as portable campfires, etc.
    • deadnoob, on 06/12/2008, -1/+9Every company starts out small at one point.
    • dustinhoffman, on 06/12/2008, -1/+7Well said Dumbledorito... but jabberwolf... the point of a business is to make money.... I hate to break it to you... but the Apple is here to make money (like any other business)... they have found their identity in cultivating high-tech, high-quality technology that people are willing to pay for... the 3G iPhone is cheaper... but it's still more expensive than other phones.... and people are willing to pay that premium because of the "gee-whiz" factor and because they know that it is a quality product...
    • DillonHinson, on 06/12/2008, -1/+5 Saying that smaller companies only make inferior products is an entirely wrong and uninformed comment. Just because they're small doesn't mean they're not good. Maybe the company's business model is to stay small or maybe they haven't quite raked in enough profits to expand and grow their name. A company's size does not reflect the quality of products. And on the flip side, yes, larger, well-known companies can be trusted because they didn't get that large if they didn't in have the money to expand, and money comes from good business. But that doesn't mean they're the only companies out there.

      On another note, for such a highly respected company like Apple, do you think they'd buyout or partner with a company that they presumed to be of poor quality and standards? No, Apple wouldn't. You can trust that small company just as much as you can Apple.

      Oh, and the point of business is to make money. Steve Jobs happens to be really good at that.
  • superhobo2, on 06/11/2008, -15/+4Typical
  • MrHairy2005, on 06/11/2008, -17/+2Long live the iPhone!
  • Falor42, on 06/11/2008, -9/+54of course now they can't blame any flaws on the manufacturing company...
    • chillypacman, on 06/12/2008, -2/+11Don't worry, they'll find someone to blame.
    • Vidd, on 06/12/2008, -2/+5When do they do this?
      Or are you basing this on the explosive Sony batteries?
      • raptordrew, on 06/12/2008, -2/+3He's talking about the batteries, the defective logic boards that a majority of Apple desktops have that Apple has to do a Repair Extension Program on, the iBook logic boards that had faulty video chip soldering... the list goes on. But it's not Apple's fault.
  • McDavies, on 06/11/2008, -26/+18You know, Apple is just more interesting than Dell or HP. I'm not saying better or worse. Just different in a good way.
    • bipolarruledout, on 06/12/2008, -2/+5Maybe becuase Dell is not a technology company, they are a distribution company. They have mastered the supply chain but they are last on the list when it comes to industrial design. Dell has never done anything that wasn't second rate even compared to other PC companies.... but they are CHEAP and thats why they sell.
      • jo21, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4you seriously havent lookt XPS range, and tough books.
    • TheSuperunknown, on 06/12/2008, -1/+6"I'm not saying better or worse. Just different in a good way."

      ...What?
  • zackella, on 06/11/2008, -2/+109Bringing Fabless semiconductor chip design in-house is a great idea for Apple if they can commit to semiconductor research in addition to development. They will be competing with 3rd party semi houses that "do this for a living" across billions of devices per year... compared with the 10-20 million mobile devices per year that Apple is planning. We brought chip design in-house at US Robotics in the 90's and were able to out-perform the competition with our own designs in the short term. However, it was easy to get behind the "research" curve in hardware and focus resources instead on the next project in the pipeline. Its a nice idea, but very difficult strategy to win with in the long term because it requires such business discipline to stay competitive.
    • Lane, on 06/12/2008, -6/+44Someone on digg with a relative and insightful comment? Why this should be a ASCII, OM NOM NOM, but will it blend, or link to a rickroll.... What's this place going back to?
    • bipolarruledout, on 06/12/2008, -3/+6Bad idea. In the 90's you still NEEDED to do a lot in hardware becuase it just wasn't practical to do it in software. Now chips are so fast and so cheap your stupid not to. Why spend all that R&D reinventing the wheel? Oh and what exactly is US Robotics doing these days? Been a while since any of their products have graced a glossy full page.
      • bjornski, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4The last thing I even remember them doing was dial-up modems.
      • jeffclark, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4I'm pretty sure that's the point of the comment.
    • roodammy44, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1This move will spell those device's doom, just like using powerpc chips for their computers.
      By getting more and more proprietry, you're limiting your developer base and increasing prices (as costs are higher)
      They would do better sticking with chip firms with billions of dollars to spend purely on chip R&D.
    • SiliconRain, on 06/12/2008, -1/+3You're right; bringing in fabless semiconductor design in-house is the right move for a lot of big companies now. The way forward for most embedded chips is high degrees of specialization/customization - big, general purpose or semi-customized chips just aren't keeping up with the power/performance ratio needed for mobile and handheld devices these days.

      The only way to get chips to give us more performance and keep within the tiny power budgets these things have is to be extremely conservative with the amount of logic put on the die. If apple can design a chip that can do exactly what they need it to and *only* what they need it to, they will be streaks ahead of their competitors who are still using off-the-shelf GPPs or ASIPs.

      I'm actually posting this from DAC'08 in Anaheim; it's a pretty big theme of the conference this year.
  • ThreeDee912, on 06/12/2008, -8/+58Maybe this is why Apple bought out PA Semiconductor...?
  • badwithcomputer, on 06/12/2008, -9/+22A group of high Apple designers quickly announced that if Apple was making chips they'd have a dev team get cracking on overpriced guacamole in different colors by the end of the day.
    • Rekutyn, on 06/12/2008, -5/+1Black tax. Then white tax. Now Green tax? I guess that's what happens when Al Gore is on your board of directors.
  • ChemiosMurphy, on 06/12/2008, -15/+17Didn't Micro$oft do this with the 360 to save "tens of millions" but cost them billions?
    • DimensionalPunk, on 06/12/2008, -2/+6I came here to say the same thing.
    • RyeBrye, on 06/12/2008, -3/+18No. They did not design the chip themselves, nor did they buy out the company that made the chip (perhaps you've heard of them? IBM?)
    • HookmasterCH47, on 06/12/2008, -9/+8And when has Microsoft ever been a hardware company? That's why the 360 was flawed. They just lack the hardware and physical expertise that Apple has. That's what happens when you're an integrated consumer electronics company.
      • jo21, on 06/12/2008, -9/+4apple its not good at hardware either,
        theirs ipods are so flawed... before year they are dead.
        same for first gen macbooks pro good thats improve now.
      • Gimpyfuzznut, on 06/12/2008, -1/+5What hardware does Apple make? Fancy computer cases are not hardware... and those aren't even manufactured by Apple anyway! If anything they DESIGN hardware. You get the difference? Apple's guts are made by Intel (and IBM before that) and every other run of the mill hardware company that you find manufacturing parts for a PC. Same goes for their laptops. Same goes for the iPhone!

        Microsoft does the same thing - they design hardware and maybe manufacture some of their peripherals line. IMO they do a pretty good job at it. However, its obvious they did make mistakes with the 360... but Apple hasn't?
        • wTheOnew, on 06/12/2008, -2/+2I'll agree with you that Apple doesn't make most of what it sells and what it does make is just a shiny case to make people buy everything every time something changes because it looks cooler now. But if you don't think that a case is hardware I'm worried as to what you think it is.
        • SumYungGuy, on 06/12/2008, -0/+0Sorry Gimpy, you dont know what your talking about. Apple designs their hardware. That make's them a hardware company. Sure they dont manufacturer it, its cheaper to have the Chinese do it.
      • mattbatt77, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1In the beginning, we all know Jobs and Wozniak built their own hardware with their software (well, mainly Steve Wozniak), but the ideology of Apple was always proprietary systems to combat "Big Blue." Gates just wrote software code, and a variety of hardware from a variety of manufactures (outside of Microsoft's influence) always made PC's up. Thus driver issues are a reality with PC's but not necessarily mac's.

        I'd say Apple has more influence over manufacturing standards than Microsoft (i.e. getting Intel to custom develop a Core2Duo for the Air or having Intel serve Apple with their latest 3.0 ghz woodcrest and after that, the latest 3.2 ghz Penryn's . . . before they were released to PC manufacturers). Microsoft has no need to have influence within hardware manufacturing. They wanted world wide access to their OS and achieved that.

        Yes, Apple has used Motorola, IBM and now Intel for the CPU, obviously ATI/NVIDIA for graphics cards, and all the different accessories that go into the computer. But, the fact remains that Apple designs their hardware and hardware configurations very efficiently and tests them thoroughly. I have heard that the manufacturing process is done through Foxconn.

        The results are still unique because of the motherboard engineering: faster bus speeds, different routing of bus/RAM fetching, GPU, audio interfaces are different. Even AV shielding and A/D signal processing is different in macs than PC's (that is why many audio engineers can tell you that mac's have less noise in their audio signal processing, ect ect). And unfortunately, that is also why Mac's can't use SLI yet (though Apple first developed and engineered SLI for graphic cards back in the day before it was practical -- go figure!)

        Thus I'd say the motherboard is still a unique design for Apple when comparing to PC's equipped with virtually the same hardware. And I also conclude that yes, Apple is a design company that designs more than aesthetic-- but also hardware interfacing.
    • byronne, on 06/12/2008, -8/+4Apple has and will always be a hardware company - seems to me they just needed to catch their breath with a nod towards Intel.
      They have the ways and means (and recent chip fab acquisitions) to make this a reality and carry on as they always have - Apple's very singular way that people seem to like, and with good reason. Nice stuff.
      I was always disappointed with the various places I've worked and their reluctance to embrace Apple, despite my recommendations. I can't count how many times I've heard a DSP engineer sigh and say, "Wish this was an Apple. Would have been 10 times easier."
      And he wasn't talking about his lunchbox.

      • LordRedSnake, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3How is Apple a hardware company? They use readily available PC components in computers that are made by a manufacturer in China that makes computers for a number of other manufacturers in the same exact plant. What makes Apple different is their OS and aesthetic design. The iPhone also follows this mold; it's not a special piece of hardware by any means, but the software interface, features, and ease of use are arguably the major factors behind its success.
        • MtheoryX, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1"How is Apple a hardware company?"

          Because their primary means of revenue is in hardware sales. How is that difficult to understand?

          Apple makes a nice OS and software...to sell their hardware. That's it. They sell hardware. That is also why they will never, ever, ever open their OS to another hardware platform.
        • LordRedSnake, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1OK troll. Did you read my comment? Saying they have "and will always be a hardware company" is a gross oversimplification and overlooks the major element that sets them apart from other companies. They only arguably design hardware in the iphone, ipod, and apple tv realm (although the ipod has been the key to their recent success). The rest is commodity hardware which is sold mostly because of the OS (software) that runs on it. Nobody buys a Mac for its hardware because it's nothing out of the ordinary, and it's usually quite a bit more expensive than the same exact configuration from another manufacturer. The only concrete difference is the software. That is what people pay a premium for.
        • byronne, on 06/23/2008, -0/+1Not trying to be a troll here. Apple started as a hardware company. I still have my Apple II+, which was manufactured by Apple in a hardware manufacturing facility. Sure the 6502 was outsourced, but the motherboard assembly etc. was all Apple. You're not getting the point - apple is a computer and technology manufacturer - both hardware and software.
          I think a LOT of people buy Mac for its hardware - along with the software.
    • TheSuperunknown, on 06/12/2008, -2/+12Whenever somebody writes Microsoft with a $ I just cannot do anything to convince myself they're not an idiot. I'm sorry.
      • SSUK, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2I wanted to Digg him up, but the $ just made it un-diggable. Thus, buried.
  • wukillabee, on 06/12/2008, -18/+3haha all they ever do is make things smaller and shiny,

    ***** LAME!
  • afallucco, on 06/12/2008, -17/+8Just another way to make apple products completely overpriced..
    • gllopc, on 06/12/2008, -6/+6No - a larger profit margin means cheaper prices for the buyer.
      • ptravis, on 06/12/2008, -5/+9That was sarcasm, right? *****' Apple fanboys.
  • cdawzrd, on 06/12/2008, -27/+16***** IT! WE'RE DOING IT LIVE!
    • appleseed1234, on 06/12/2008, -2/+7Dugg because this is semi-warranted.
    • Kappa00, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1Is that from something?
    • TheSuperunknown, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2It's funny because it's a meme and it doesn't fit here at all!
    • iJump, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2UR DOIN IT WRONG!
    • MtheoryX, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Old, uncalled-for meme is old and uncalled-for.

      Oh...crap, nm.
  • bipolarruledout, on 06/12/2008, -5/+28Remember why you went with Intel Steve? Stick with what your good at. Chips are fast enough these days that it's much cheaper just to design some software to run on them. This isn't the 80's.... you can afford a slight speed hit.

    /Yes I know it was Moterola/IBM but the point still stands.
    • TheSnuffster, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3They'll get the Woz to make 'em, he can do it!
    • jsebrech, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2He went with intel not because of cost or complexity, but because of direction. IBM had made it clear it didn't have a PPC roadmap that fit apple's plans, while intel was more ... accomodating. Buying in their own chip design company only continues in the same vein.
      • lharrod, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2The move to Intel aligned with their increased Windows involvement. Using Windows and Win apps native on a Mac, designing new Apple software to run on Windows, etc.
        • bipolarruledout, on 06/16/2008, -1/+0Just how is devoloping for a unix like OS anything like programming on Windows? The two platforms are more or less CPU independant. Never mind the fact that Apple designing any high profile software for Windows nearly completely negates any benifits of moving to a mac. No need for apple applogists to come up with some weird idea that doesn't invalidate the PowerPC platform... the move to intel was made simply because it's cheap, fast, and has a long future ahead of it. None of which apply to the PowerPC RISK platform.... at least on the desktop.
  • ryeland, on 06/12/2008, -7/+2Good old Steve Jobs. Sure Steve, you can compete with companies the likes of intel in terms of processing capabilities. Don't get me wrong, i love innovation and think that this could give them radically different designs, however sony just did this with the cell. And we have all seen how much programmers have liked that. But i guess if you own the programmers too what does it matter? Well apple hopefully you pigeonhole yourself into the right area.
    • wazzledoozle2, on 06/12/2008, -0/+5Cell is a Sony/IBM joint project. It's mostly based on the power architecture (IBM). Even Sony has more experience in chip design than Apple... (The PS2/PSP "emotion" chip etc....)
    • MtheoryX, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Didn't a story just hit the front page of digg a few days ago about a new supercomputer that uses Sony/IBM's cell processors?

      Yep, sure as ***** did...

      http://digg.com/hardware/Roadrunner_is_fastest_com ...
  • marcushe, on 06/12/2008, -5/+20Business students - a classic make or buy decision.
    Over time, after the initial costly purchase of PA Semi, it will be cheaper to design the chips in house. It will give Apple a competitive advantage in the industry, being able to design chips for their specific technology needs and future features. Since they won't be buying from Samsung, Intel, etc, anymore - it will raise the price for other firms buying from those companies - further increasing Apple's competitive advantage.
    I think Apple's making the right decisions all around to make the iPhone what the iPod is in it's market today - dominant.
    • chuckDontSurf, on 06/12/2008, -0/+8But don't forget that Apple will still need Intel or Samsung to fab the chips, so Intel/Samsung won't be losing out completely. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
      • digitalarcanum, on 06/12/2008, -4/+3I'd love to see intel give them the finger and tell them to go ***** themselves.
    • tito184, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2I'm not so sure. Typically once companies get away from the core of their busines or 'what they are good at' they tend to lose focus on what has made them successful.

      They will have to dump money constantly into R&D which will divert money from other areas of the company that should have it instead.
      • MtheoryX, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1In case you haven't noticed...Apple has a stockpile of cash that it HASN'T been investing in R&D type things.

        In fact, it's this hoarding of money and not investing that has many financial types worried, or at least talking, about it as a mistake for Apple and its shareholders.

        This seems like the perfect thing for them to get into at this time.
  • gannondork, on 06/12/2008, -9/+3It's nice to see that Steve Jobs is following Jack Tramiel's business plan he had for CBM. But perhaps Steve didn't finish reading "On the edge" I've included a link so that he can buy a copy instead of reading it at the local library.

    http://www.variantpress.com/books/on-the-edge

  • elister, on 06/12/2008, -15/+6GREAT NEWS. This will make Apple products even more expensive! And since they'll be making the chips, they get to drop all support much faster! Seriously, half of you zealots buy a new ipod when a new one is released (every 10-12 months). I personally cant wait for a portable gaming unit from Apple, with game cartridges that you have to mail to Apple in order to change. Don't worry, they wont charge you to swap them out, just a $50 S&H fee.
    • telekid, on 06/12/2008, -2/+5I find it somewhat funny that many people, upon hearing news of an Apple innovation, do nothing but complain about unfair prices and business practices of the same company. Do people really see "Apple" in the description of articles and immediately think to themselves, "let's see what those fanboy-sheep are talking about this time?" It seems there are more productive ways for one to spend unused time...
  • teabagginz, on 06/12/2008, -6/+5I say bring it on -- I wanna see what they do with it.
  • Alex2, on 06/12/2008, -12/+81In the Apple design labs...

    So.. why is is black? Can you make the chip white?
    K.

    And what's with the lead and tin? Got anything shinier? How about chrome.. ya, chrome pins.

    um... K.

    And.. we need a light, can you have the sides light up?
    .. sure.

    Too many pins.. too square.. lets make it a 'pod'.. round.. yeah.
    uh..
    And those pins.. how bout five.. five round fingers on the pod.

    uhhhh...

    And glossy, we so need glossy. OH yeah..
    • Vidd, on 06/12/2008, -13/+3Considering Apple generally get the balance between design and function better than a lot of companies, I don't see where you're coming from.
  • clickwir, on 06/12/2008, -33/+27I hope apple dies in a fireball.
    • bjornski, on 06/12/2008, -1/+3Nah. The competition they give MS is a good thing.

      I still wouldn't BUY one, but I don't want to see them go.
    • wTheOnew, on 06/12/2008, -1/+4I don't want to see them go because the competition they create in the multimedia segment gets me cheaper and sleeker products. I like Apple products, there I've said it, but I hate their business practices and their monopolistic policies.
  • HookmasterCH47, on 06/12/2008, -5/+13Apple bought PA semiconductor for their new iMissile!
  • awesometastic1, on 06/12/2008, -4/+85if they call it the iChip i'm going to have to shoot somebody...
  • Amazetbm, on 06/12/2008, -2/+23Samsung and Intell will probably just throw more weight behind the Google's Open Handset Alliance as a precaution.
  • wazzledoozle2, on 06/12/2008, -13/+7This will be the end of Apple.
  • qbthemc, on 06/12/2008, -7/+4GREAT SCOTT.
  • MonumentMan, on 06/12/2008, -6/+18designing a chip is far different than designing a consumer product

    why on earth would they want to do this? do they think they will be able to invest more money into R&D than the huge chip companies, or keep up with continual and rapid advances in technology? if they are talking about designing a custom asic or fpga or whatever, ok that's fine.

    if you develop your own chip, you can get something that is precisely designed for your application. no extra anything chomping up extra power, cost, etc. but in the age of moore's law and ridiculous and continual chip advancements, why lock down a custom chip design when off the shelf stuff will be significnatly better several months down the road?

    i dont get it.

    • mrBitch, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3You need to do a bit of background on Apple. Did you know that the ARM based CPU that drives the iPhone (ARM based chip built by Samsung) was designed by Apple and a UK based company known as Acorn ?

      The above joint venture was spun off as a separate company known as ARM :

      " The company, founded in 1990 and known as ARM, is mainly a joint venture between Apple and Acorn, each of which own 46 percent. "
      http://www.iht.com/articles/1992/06/20/arm_.php
    • jackmaninov, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Device size could be another big motivator. If Apple is getting pushed by the market to add new features, it could be much better for the device's innards to have custom silicon. That way they don't need to try to squeeze in a new GPS chip, or a video encoding chip, etc, etc.
  • wocheck, on 06/12/2008, -5/+11Bad idea, this is what happen when the pc and mac were being introduced into the market, mac used much of its own in house hardware to make mac's while pc used different manufacturers hardware to build pc which kept the price down and kept competition high in market. If Apple does this then they will lose everything they gain in past few years..
    • pmilkman, on 06/12/2008, -1/+7You may very well be right, but a) Apple has never actually made their own CPUs, they had Motorola and IBM before Intel. b) TFA says this is just for the iPods and iPhones where interoperability isn't nearly as crucial as it is on the desktop/server computing side of things.
    • wocheck, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3yes you are right about apple never actually make their cpus for the mac's, though the amount of R&D expenses this type venture would take is going to be immense, not to mention its going to take at least a couple of years for then to make chips that are going to be able to at least compete with what Samsung and Intel could do. and since intel and samsung won't be making chips for them they can just go off an sell to the competition.
  • vrbanabanana, on 06/12/2008, -9/+8Oh gosh!!! Bad idea!
    It'll raise the cost of the products even higher than they already are. Also, they don't know jack about making chips. They are going to have to invest tons of money just to get the darn thing working. Plus, it will really sucks for us developers.

    It's a shame, I thought Steve Jobs was smarter than this.
  • tian2992, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Sadly AIM ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM_alliance ) is gone for ever :'(
  • delirium, on 06/12/2008, -3/+9This is one of the worst ideas for Apple. There's a reason Intel and Samsung dominate the semiconductor business. They spend billions in R&D that Apple can't compete in.
  • ZenMojo, on 06/12/2008, -5/+4We saw how that whole "let's make our own chips" ***** worked for Microsoft. Red Apple of Death, here we come.
  • SenorGeltabz, on 06/12/2008, -1/+3Well at least we know now what is the next IPhone killer . Competing technology is what drives competion and if apple makes there chips, (which will be inferior to say AMD or Intel) then of course another company will swoop in and take the technology somewhere better. Come to think of it, kind of sounds like the "personal computer" market. Sounds like apple didn't learn there lesson before, shame to cause I like my Iphone.
  • th3wiz4rd, on 06/12/2008, -1/+5"Build our own iPhone and iPod chip.."

    Um, ok. Plenty of comments here on why that's not a good move... either they're morons or they know something we don't.

    Anyway, here's a suggestion: How about fixing Active Directory integration for 10.5.x first?
    • Sairynn, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2"either they're morons or they know something we don't"

      Perhaps not mutually exclusive.
  • surfer144, on 06/12/2008, -7/+2iAgree
  • KentDiego, on 06/12/2008, -1/+9I worked for two companies that tried to develope a CDMA chip set. Sony and Nokia. They both lost near a hundred million trying and had to give it up. TI just layed off everyone developing a UMTS chipset. There is no way Jobs will be able to make it in the phone chipset market. He needs to stick to personal electronics and just pick and choose the best/cheapest chips available. Why doesen't he try to make a x86 chip instead? Time to dump your Apple stock.
    • wocheck, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2sell it short :)
    • Gimpyfuzznut, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4Seriously, I don't understand how Apple thinks it would be better for their bottom line to dump millions into buying a chip maker and then spend millions more on R&D, design, and manufacturing than to just buy the best available chips on the market? There are already A LOT of big players in the semiconductor market and several have been around for 25+ years. Is Jobs really thinking he can now do a better job than Intel, Sony, Nokia, NVidia, etc? I mean even freakin' AMD + ATI has gotten trounced in semiconductor arena lately and they've been doing what they do since 1969! O no, Apple is going to start pumping out the chips with PA Semiconductor on their side! I'm pretty sure there aren't going to be any Apple chips in anything for at least another 3 years.
      • AVigorVermin, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1I'm pretty sure Apple knows what it is doing. They probably aren't trying to make traditional chip designs faster, but rather custom designed chips for specific purposes. This they could do relatively easy and come out with a better product in the end.
  • nedy78, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2Just use what works for you. Somebody always thinks that their way is better. To each his own.
  • InfiniteNothing, on 06/12/2008, -0/+5I'm a disappointed mac fanboy. I was pretty excited about the intel atom processors.
  • ArchAngel21x, on 06/12/2008, -0/+5Something tells me this is a terrible idea. Steve jobs said one time that "it's all about the software." His company need to focus on making great software and forming partnerships with companies that already makes great hardware.
  • iamnobody8614, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1Apple dealt Intel a considerable blow by deciding that they are not going use their mobile chips anymore? They're ***** Intel. Losing Dell maybe would be a considerable blow, but not losing Apple's mobile market. I don't know if it is just this writer being a fanboy, but someone needs to get over themselves.
  • SuperFarStucker, on 06/12/2008, -0/+6The market is pretty flush as it is. It'll require some crafty maneuvering to beat out the industry by taking up a small fabrication company. I suppose they were finding that what was out there didn't suit their needs and that was the driving factor behind this, not cost savings. That's a surprising statement to make in this day and age though.
  • ChunkerMunker, on 06/12/2008, -2/+2I'm sure Steve, Apple's board of directors, Apple's engineers and R&D dept, just decide one day out of the blue... "hey, lets make our own chips!"

    No planning, exploring negatives and the positives..... nope, none of that.

    Its not as if Apple didn't learn from their own mistakes or other companies mistakes.

    Will it work? who knows, nobody's for sure,

    But to jump up and shout "Apple is gonna lose, they don't know what they're doing" is premature.
  • niyam, on 06/12/2008, -3/+0Well, I hope they call it Adam's Apple.
  • tomis, on 06/12/2008, -2/+6* Apple making their own portable music player? The market is already saturated! It'll kill them!
    * Apple make their own smart phone? The market is already saturated! No one will buy one! It'll kill them!
    * Apple making their own chips?

    So far they've been hitting home runs, and as long as they keep the talented team they have now, and keep hiring others like them, Apple will be fine long after Jobs leaves.
  • pinchduck, on 06/12/2008, -4/+2Deja Vu all over again. Apple's previous incarnation, under Jobs, decided that they could write a real, modern operating system. The result of that clusterfark was Copeland. Jobs got wise and went with Unix for OS X, allowing Apple to do what they do best. That was an excellent decision. Now he decides that since Apple is great at designing UI's, they can design a chip? Say goodbye to several billion in development. Wasting resources on this blunder will also allow competitors to catch up. It's a bad decision, don't do it, Steve.
    • DelMonte, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Uh... Déjà-vu? Jobs didn't have anything to do with Copland, he wasn't even with Apple at the time, he was then working at NeXT which was bought by Apple and the NeXT OS became OS X...
  • kirado4, on 06/12/2008, -4/+2another fap fap fap apple article.. enough allready..
  • n8f8, on 06/12/2008, -1/+4Mr. jobs, my advice: Stick to what you do best.
  • ncianca, on 06/12/2008, -2/+3Apple has been designing chips since the beginning of the company usually in the form of ASIC or Application Specific Integrated Circuits and has a very capable group doing this.

    One of the first chips Apple made was the innovative and capable IWM or "Integrated WOZ machine" which was really a state machine. The IWM handled the I/O and allowed the floppy drive to work at variable speeds storing more data then a normal controller. Apple was also involved in the PowerPC chip. Apple's weakness in this area has been that it has relied on others to actually make the chips and the PA Semi acquisition will help them here.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.