I still run into a few people that are planning to install Windows on their iSlate. I do have to break it to them that it's more than like ARM and no good comes from me telling them.
Let Steve do that for you. He'll make sure they understand.
I still run into a few people that are planning to install Windows on their iSlate. I do have to break it to them that it's more than like ARM and no good comes from me telling them.
Windows on a tablet form factor exists. You can buy this today.
arn
Yes you're right. I was a bit over-enthusiastic about Cortex A9's potential against CULV Core 2 Duos.Maybe. Out of order compared to in order is faster on the same ISA and given the same number of pipes, registers, etc. Given that x86 instructions generally carry a much bigger payload than ARM instructions, unless you have some specific data I wouldn't reach that conclusion.
Yes you're right. I was a bit over-enthusiastic about Cortex A9's potential against CULV Core 2 Duos.
At least in theoretical performance, Cortex A9 is rated at 2.5 DMIPS/MHz per core (http://www.arm.com/pdfs/ARMCortexA-9Processors.pdf), Atom gets about 2.4 DMIPS/MHz per core (http://www.ocworkbench.com/2008/gigabyte/M912/g4.htm) , while Cortex A8 is rated at 2.0 DMIPS/Mhz per core (http://www.arm.com/pdfs/Cortex-A8_data_brief_FINAL_2_.pdf). So Cortex A9 and Atom have the potential to perform similarly at the same clock speed, but of course real world results will no doubt be quite different than the limited conditions that Dhrystone tests.
IF they are building a SoC for the iPhone then on a Mac it could run all the I/O including multitouch input driver for the track pad, wifi, bluetooth, cellnetwork data, ...
I think it switches to the linux mode immediately. There is a seamless transfer when browsing the web on Win7 docked, to Linux as a tablet. So it was actually the linux OS browser looking at the same page when it was removed.
I read it on Gizmodo (I think) that describes all other apps have that 2-second delay in the switch from Win7 laptop to linux tablet.
Total waste of money if I can't run OS X.
No way Apple is building a fab. That costs billions of dollars, and there are plenty of contract fabs (TSMC, Charter, Global Foundries, UMC, IBM) that are a much better solution.
I think the problem isn't the OS... I think the nagging issue here is going to be Flash or a Flash alternative. Flash, as it exists today, on that reference Atom design, in Windows, is capable of running full-screen flash video, but it does so at marginal levels.
Flash itself is marginally relevant in terms of the overall web experience, but once the issue of streaming video comes up, I think it's a different story, as Hulu, Netflix, Unbox, and the in-house websites of the major US broadcast and cable networks all use Flash as their content delivery mechanism.
I would consider full screen video to be a fairly important component of the pitch, so I'll be curious to see what Apple has in mind. I'm hoping the answer is, "Sorry, you can't use all the providers that offer high-quality, free or inexpensive TV/movie video over the internet, but you can use our $3.99 rental system."
Intel should move to 11 nm now and offer Apple an amazing Atom chip with a competitive TDP that runs Mac OS X. That would be the real killer device.
Yep. Take into account on-chip memory controllers, caches, and the fact that compilers are still far more optimized to x86 than on ARM, and I don't think it would be very close except for benchmark code.
I think the problem isn't the OS... I think the nagging issue here is going to be Flash or a Flash alternative. Flash, as it exists today, on that reference Atom design, in Windows, is capable of running full-screen flash video, but it does so at marginal levels.
Flash itself is marginally relevant in terms of the overall web experience, but once the issue of streaming video comes up, I think it's a different story, as Hulu, Netflix, Unbox, and the in-house websites of the major US broadcast and cable networks all use Flash as their content delivery mechanism.
I would consider full screen video to be a fairly important component of the pitch, so I'll be curious to see what Apple has in mind. I'm hoping the answer is, "Sorry, you can't use all the providers that offer high-quality, free or inexpensive TV/movie video over the internet, but you can use our $3.99 rental system."
You're forgetting the fact that Flash will be gone soon. Once HTML 5.0 hits, everything will be embedded in a <video> using h.264.
Does that really matter? I don't think anyone's expecting to run Mac/PC apps on their iSlate.
arn
What's the point of the tablet then? Bespoke apps?
Although we should not be fooled by the "Mhz Myth". I am hoping for smarter processor designs. If it happens to be clocked faster than Atom, to boot, I have nothing to be unhappy about. Well, the lack of x86 might be a problem but I will reserve the right to comment on that until we hear more than rumors.
I guess many would love to have full Mac OS X on the tablet instead of a slightly more real-estate consuming iPhone based OS X (me included).
Frankly I don't want either. What I want (and what I'm reasonably sure Apple will deliver) is an OS tailored to the tablet form factor. Something that takes advantage of the screen size, works perfectly with finger control and offers the usual high quality Apple applications.
Not saying that's enough to get me to buy (that's a whole other argument) but there's a reason that Windows-based tablets haven't taken off, and that's largely the fault of trying to cram an OS designed for large screens and keyboard/mouse combinations into tablet hardware. If a tablet is going to work it needs to be a consumer-level device and frankly I'd argue that Apple is so far ahead in that area it's not even funny. Of course the geeks will scream blue murder but that seems to be standard practice these days.
If there is one notebook Apple wants to be extremely power efficient, it is the MacBook Air, so sign me up for a dual-processor, dual-core, 2GHz Cortex 9 model. Who needs super-fast processors when you have an OS that is focused on using what you have more efficiently?The Cortex A9 can run up to 2GHz and eat nearly 10x less battery than an X86.
OS X projects are designed to be processor-independant to facilitate porting to another architecture when it's relevant.