http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/...Platforms.html
sounds like it to me?
they are only hinting at porting it, but what else would they want to port it to if not x86? sounds like apple might go for the next gen atom soc?
Printable View
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/...Platforms.html
sounds like it to me?
they are only hinting at porting it, but what else would they want to port it to if not x86? sounds like apple might go for the next gen atom soc?
moorestown based iPhone :)
I don't think "platforms" refer to x86, PPC, ARM etc in this context. Notebooks, desktop, smartphone, consoles... These are different platforms as well, aren't they?
Why would Apple port iPhone OS to x86? This would only make sense if they want to increase their market share (of the OS!) and licence iPhone OS to other manufacturers. Not gonna happen.
Apple owns PA Semi which developed the SoC in the iPad. Why would Apple use Intel's chips for the iPhone?Quote:
Originally Posted by Helloworld_98
well not for the iphone maybe, but for their ipad? :)
in the tablet/netbook form factor atoms next gen atom should be pretty competitive...
when it comes to phones im pretty sure even the next gen atom will be too power hungry...
I thought the SoC in the iPad was based on ARM cortex A9 and made by samsung.Quote:
Originally Posted by FischOderAal
therefore SoC wasn't developed, just refined and created.
PA Semi did work with the PowerPC too so it might be a Power based architecture. No one really knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Helloworld_98
Maybe there are language barriers here. The A4 is said to be based on licenced IP (Cortex and the GPU, dunno where they got that from) but they had to put everything together. What would you call that if not developing? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Helloworld_98
The manufacturing of the chip itself might be at Samsung.
It won't be based on PPC. There's no reasonable argument to do so if you can get you hands on good and performant ARM-cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by therightway
So what? Windows NT 3.1 was initially developed using non-x86 development systems and then ported to the x86 architecture. This work was initially based on the Intel i860-based Dazzle system and, later, the MIPS R4000-based Jazz platform. Switching platforms and ISAs isn't a big deal if the code is well written.
Hopefully for All-in one desktop!
I just used MS Wind for a while and while cool it is seriously hindered by W7.
Feels kinda like working on win mobile a year ago.
Now full familiar touch interface lots of people already know... that might be a winner!
:)
yes... it would be odd for apple to sell its iphone os for other phones and even laptops... but i wouldnt rule it out... if they can charge enough for it, that would be a very profitable move...Quote:
Originally Posted by XS Janus
I doubt apple will ever try that. They are a hardware company, software is only there to sell the hardware. And I believe that an horizontal strategy (ig WinMo/Android) doesn't work well for consumer grade products. By integrating your own software you gain many advantages : control, time to market, exclusive features and easier support).
What works so well for businesses makes a lot less sense for consumers. Consumers don't care if their devices are closed or not provided they get what they feel as good value from it.
Considering that the iPhone OS is just a port of MacOSX, this entire topic is ancient history, not news.
Apple is going to push their iPhone non multitasking os on your netbook and then call it the menstrual absorber with an i
gives them the freedom of having next gen ipads with atom cpu's
I don't see that happening, there's no reason to move to x86 from ARM for mobile devices and iPhone OS.
Apple want to control everything, they've got P.A. Semi now, iPhone OS is a success on ARM etc.
Sounds more like development for new A4 based products to me. Refresh of the apple tv perhaps?
beat me to it, just about to post some speculation about an atom based iTv.... maybe with a few large hard drives for home server functions.... :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Darakian
oh wait, that last bit would make the device useful... nevermind. :rofl:
Add on xbmc and the apple tv is a nice, if not underpowered, little guy :)
Why would you want to run that piece of trash on a platform that can run a full-featured OS?
stupidity, pride, arrogance, hubris...Quote:
Originally Posted by urgrandpasdog
Any of which are highly likely....
Where did you read that?Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
The article says no such thing.
I think this is either: a) they are planning to adopt it to some new, faster hardware (GPUs?), which is very different from what they are using at the moment (notice that the current hardware is too slow for flash, for example, and is lagging behind the other top-end phones and smartbooks) or b) they are trying to move all of their devices (but actual Macs) to the 'unified' iPhone OS.
well they said:Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
gpu definately doesnt sound like new platform to me...Quote:
“The Core Platform team within Apple’s Core OS organization is looking for a talented and inspired manager to lead a team focused on bring-up of iPhone OS on new platforms."
they want to port the iphone os to a new platform...
they already have an x86 os, but thats the full blown thing... and cutting that down might be more work than porting the already optimized iphone os to x86 i guess?
idk, it doesnt make that much sense... cutting down their x86 os sounds more reasonable than porting their cut down arm os to x86...
they already have an os for x86 and one for arm...
x86 is full features... arm is spcialized for mobile...
now they want to port the mobilized os to something other than arm... porting it back to x86 actually doesnt make sense...
but what other platform could they mean then? :confused:
maybe PA semi cooked up something new which isnt based on arm?
there were rumors about that before...
because their "full featured" os has support for flash, java, python..... things for watching tv, movies, and playing games on line for free. apple would rather you paid for them through the app store and itunes.Quote:
Originally Posted by urgrandpasdog
hey, thats a good point... i never thought about that... maybe thats why apple is not supporting flash?
because there is lots of free content, video games and audio on the internet, available through flash? :eek:
This is exctly what apple is affraid of. iPhone 3gs can run 3d games with emulated physics why the he'll would it not be able to run vector animation with simple ool? Well the answer is it can. But apple is affraid of opening a can of worms with flash support. 1) it's a direct competitor to their app store because iPhone is not a smart phone as apple claims it's a gaming device. Ask your self when was the last time you played a paid for flash game? 2)with flash they will have no excuse not to allow competition to mobile safari.
Maybe apple plans to one up the ipad :p lol