MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Intel graphics suck. Phlegm at 11.

I wonder what will Apple use?

Good question.

I'm all for dumping Intel's crappy integrated graphics, but what choice does Apple have? If Intel says no to dropping the integrated graphics, that means Apple doesn't get to use the latest processors. Then what? Intel is the only game in town. AMD is a non-factor.

Apple won't be commoditized by anyone!

Why is AMD a non factor?

Apple's business is too big and too prestigeous for Intel pass up on. They'll accommodate an important customer.

Dec 05, 09 - 02:30 pm Comment from: kenh

Develop your own processors. Vertical Integration is the way to go!

If you build a product, control it throughout the process!

For the life of me, I do not get the idea of buying any more components or elements from an outside party. Everyone imagines that there is some advantage to this.

Show confidence in the abilities of your own people, and you can get it. Outside supplier? You may or may not get what you want, and you may never know if or why you are or are not getting it.

I know this is theoretical. But I do know this. I am no longer in the auto business but was there on the manufacturer level. I have been out of it for about 20 years now.

But at that time, only about 5 manufacturers built all of their own engines. They did buy components, but were solely responsible for the final product. Mercedes, BMW, Nissan, Honda, Toyota. that I know of. There may have been others. Maybe Subaru now, but at the time they bought a lot of drivetrain stuff from Nissan.

Who still has the best quality engines in general? Guess who, it is the same list.

Hmmmmmm.........maybe something to that idea?

Dec 05, 09 - 02:31 pm Comment from: kenh

"For the life of me, I do not get the idea of buying any more components or elements from an outside party. " should have added: "than absolutely necessary"

My proofreading department is asleep.

Dec 05, 09 - 02:50 pm Comment from: DogGone

@kenh

Are you kidding me? Do you how much it would cost Apple to develop their own processors? Far more than they get in revenue each year for sure.

Apple's recent success has been largely due to adopting the Intel processors and motherboards. They significantly lower their costs by using industry standard components. They have experience no delay in obtaining materials and have been able to keep up with all the advances in multicore processors.

Compare that with the PowerPC days where production issues produced delay after delay in product releases.

Apple have not adopted the integrated graphics option for some products and chosen alternative graphics chips instead.

Dec 05, 09 - 03:07 pm Comment from: DLMeyer

So ... Apple tells Intel "Integrated Graphics are unacceptable on Pro machines, and on higher-end consumer machines as well". What's Intel gonna do? There are really three choices: a) design the chip sets Apple wants, b) tell Apple to use the chip sets they sell and add in their own graphics cards, or c) tell the biggest purchasers of their high-end models to go suck eggs. OK, there's little difference between b and c, mostly the attitude thing.
Now, if Apple went back to designing their own chips, that might be a great solution. Or (G5) not. Not that the G5 was terrible, but where was the G5 laptop? Or Apple could chose to do business with AMD. Might propel that maker ahead of Intel ... but not for a year or two. No great solutions here. I'm expecting the "b" option.

Dec 05, 09 - 03:21 pm Comment from: Hg Wells

Do I misremember or did Apple not too long back already buy a chip company?

Dec 05, 09 - 03:28 pm Comment from: Sir Gill Bates

Apparently Apple wants the ability to pick and choose the integrated graphics they deem optimal in price and performance.

I wonder if it is an issue of Intel's integrated not working well with NVIDIA's discreet graphics, such as in the scenario of the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M integrated and NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT discrete graphics in the MacBook Pro models.

Or, maybe it's just a control kind of thing.

Dec 05, 09 - 04:13 pm Comment from: MediaXYZ

Apple did buy a chip company, PA Semi, buy they currently make only ARM variants for mobile devices. Any idea what they might use those for?

Dec 05, 09 - 04:14 pm Comment from: mackle

apple is is a sound financial position and can demand concessions from Intel. suspect this is not even newsworthy.

@HGWells: PA Semi is a semiconductor design company. is does not fab.

agree w/DogGone, except it's way more trouble than even that. why don't we suggest apple buy a lumber company so they can make the paper for their boxes?

apple today is about doing smart things way ahead of others. "others" is chosen because using "competitors" would be inaccurate. they are transforming markets. there are no competitors in that space. Intel has a few smart people as well, they will not allow apple to drift too far away from them.

as processors become more powerful, they need a company like apple to figure out requirements for all that excess power, or they will have invested R&D;for nothing.

Dec 05, 09 - 04:24 pm Comment from: Connor MacBook

Actually the divide between Apple and Intel isn't wider than ever. There was a time when Apple didn't even use Intel processors (remember?)

Intel graphics sucks! It doesn't worth my bucks!

Intel CPU + NVidia GPU = AWESOME MBP

Maybe there will be a Arrandale-based CPU
but with replaced integrated graphics and cutted (!) price

I hate integrated graphics. Good for Apple for not using it.

Dec 05, 09 - 05:23 pm Comment from: Macdoc

"integrated graphics" ....sharing memory is a poor design!

Dec 05, 09 - 05:25 pm Comment from: jocknerd

Apple to Intel: "We don't want your crappy integrated graphics in our Pro line. These are professional machines and our customers expect more."

Apple to customers: "The Mac Pro comes standard with the powerful NVIDIA GeForce GT 120."

Ha-ha.

Perhaps it has to do with Grand Central.

Dec 05, 09 - 05:53 pm Comment from: kenh

"Are you kidding me? Do you how much it would cost Apple to develop their own processors? Far more than they get in revenue each year for sure."

You design them, and either contract with a builder, or a better option: buy a processor plant. The infrastructure is there, and can be bought for a lot less than Apple's cash position, I'll bet.

"Compare that with the PowerPC days where production issues produced delay after delay in product releases.:

Exactly the reason that they should think about finding a way to build their own.

Henry Ford had the right idea. Go so far as to own the iron ore that makes your steel.

I do agree that Apple should have the strong position when it comes to asking for concessions for Intel.

Yes, I am a control freak. If you treat your employees well and make them part of the picture, I don't need to actually control them. They do it themselves if they agree we are doing the right thing.

Again; never put yourself in a position where you are overly dependent on someone else for something that you need for survival. True 20,000 years ago, true today.

@jocknerd:

Good point. In fact, since the March '09 refresh, the top iMac is the fastest Apple computer you can buy at the Apple store.

Dec 05, 09 - 06:15 pm Comment from: DogGone

@ Ken

I really have to disagree. Apple have got a good balance between leveraging their own skill set (OS, software and design) and implementing them into current hardware.

They still modify the motherboards and implement independent GPUs when they need to but their goal is to provide products that can increase their share steadily without sacrificing too much margin.

They have done this very successfully and in recent years tripled their sales of Macs in doing so.

Sure Apple can build a plant, make processors but really do they have the right skill set for that. The acquisition of SemiPA was clearly for the mobile market and will probably be used for iPods, iPhones and similar devices.

Ten years ago, Apple built their own machines and had a hard time managing production. They have since transferred production elsewhere and have managed demand very well. They have been able to focus on designing and planning for new products which is what they should be doing rather than waste their time controlling every aspect of the product.

I don't think the car industry is a good example of success since they have been struggling to survive in recent years. Having to control every part of the process takes up a lot of resources and slows down the rate of innovation. This is why the US car industry can never make a modern, reliable advanced car. They spend forever churning out the same old crap that only old men or muscle freaks go for.

Apple need to stay focused on what they are good at so that they can stay ahead of the competition.

It will be interesting to see what happens anyway. The situation is not easy because Apple is in the middle of a legal dispute between Intel and Nvidia.

But AMD is on the same tendency (an integrated GPU inside consumer CPU processors. That was the idea behind ATI acquisition). But their first incarnation may not be that great, its still behind schedule and it will mean Apple going to the AMD side?. The industry is going to the integrated CPUs/GPUs anyway.

NVIDIA cancelled their new chipset designs (because of legal battles with Intel), so no life after the N9400 inside manny Macs. Unless NVIDIA will provide a last generation of chipsets with improved performance (?). I don't know if this is possible. Consider the 9400 NVIDIA chipset a fortunate exception in Apple Macs. But what's next? No more NVIDIAs integrated GPUs! in the future.

So. Apple may not be willing to go with Intel integrated GPUs until they catch up in performance. The integrated Intel GPUs in the Arrandale processors may be just an improved 4500 GPU. Thats going to be an involution for Apple products.

Maybe Apple will ask Intel to at least deactivate the integrated GPU inside Arradale, so it wont consume any additional energy (at what cost in money?). And it will be up to Apple to talk to ATI or NVIDIA for discrete GPUs for all the Macs lines. Or Apple itself will need to somehow bypass the Intel integrated GPUs. But this solution will mean discrete GPUs for every Mac. Yoohoo!!. We will have additional performance. But it will be more expensive and will consume more battery life (yikes).

If I where in Apple strong position (yeah! of course) I will put pressure on Intel for custom chips (remember the MacBook Air custom chip). Now is that really possible?. Will Intel let Apple go away again as a customer with custom processors. For sure Intel doesn't want another N9400 in their history where they lost completely the MacBooks chipset to NVIDIA. But what solution in Intel's current position could Intel provide to Apple?. Larrabe is not ready.

Apple may be fighting with Intel right now to keep the NVIDIA N9400 chipset inside their Macs until Intel produces a powerful enough integrated GPU to replace them. And that is embarrassing for Intel. How come they will reach an agreement where everybody wins?. And How will Apple sell their next MacBooks, Pros, Minis and iMacs: 2 or 3 times less powerful graphics for the next generation???

"Apple to Intel: "We don't want your crappy integrated graphics in our Pro line. These are professional machines and our customers expect more."

Apple to customers: "The Mac Pro comes standard with the powerful NVIDIA GeForce GT 120."

Ha-ha."


Ironic, isn't it? Six in one, half a dozen in the other.

"You design them, and either contract with a builder, or a better option: buy a processor plant. The infrastructure is there, and can be bought for a lot less than Apple's cash position, I'll bet."

Why would Apple lay out $4 billion to build a plant for a comparatively low-yield component, where they can't even achieve cost-effective economies of scale for their own products? There's zero reason for Apple to distract themselves with getting into the semiconductor business when they can contract it out to Intel, TSMC, GF, et al.

Say what you will about Apple and contract manufacturing, but they've tweaked the process pretty well to their own ends.

Dec 05, 09 - 10:05 pm Comment from: kenh

"I don't think the car industry is a good example of success since they have been struggling to survive in recent years. Having to control every part of the process takes up a lot of resources and slows down the rate of innovation. This is why the US car industry can never make a modern, reliable advanced car. They spend forever churning out the same old crap that only old men or muscle freaks go for.
"
Depends on who we are talking about. The successful ones who I listed control a higher degree of all their operations from design to manufacturing to sales (as far as sales practices in the US can be with our laws, less control than in other countries, and I am not suggesting that manufacturers own dealerships as they do in many other countries)

In reality, they are more like Apple in terms of having more control of what happens. So I don't think we really disagree. With other regulations to deal with, the auto business is FAR more complex than computers.

I would like to see Apple apply their expertise, improved in most areas compared to when they did it before, and take another shot of some types of manufacturing.

There is a production facility 5 miles away from my home, ready to go back to work. In a down market, Apple could buy it cheaply and run it. It ran for nearly 30 years, building all kinds of boards for international corporations, including some medical equipment boards that sold for $25,000 each. I know because I tested many of them.

I'm betting there are others, although that specific thing is not my area. I just hope someone looks at that, given the unemployment rate in the country. Including those who are no longer looking and those who are no longer eligible for jobless benefits, the real unemployment number is around 17%. 30% in Modesto California where they have shut off the irrigation water for enviro reasons. For those who don't know, that is where a huge percentage of our fruit and vegetables come from. I know that has nothing to do with computers. Well, I would not wanting to be selling them in Modesto.

That cannot go on, and printing Monopoly money, thereby diluting the value of whatever real dollar we still have, cannot continue. If it does, we will have much larger problems than where our computers are made. They won't matter.

Dec 05, 09 - 10:47 pm Comment from: Mac-nugget

@Another IT Guy...
The Mac Pro does not come with a NVIDIA GeForce GT 120, it comes with whatever GPU Apple offers for your Mac Pro. Why the hell would a sound engineer care what GPU ships on there Macs. Not everybody needs OpenGL, so why stick it to every one of your customers. If you are doing 3D or gaming, then you know the GT 120 will not cut it. So no, I don't think its ironic at all. It is a lot more common for a prosumer to need Open GL than a Pro user that works on a field where a robust GPU may or may not be necessary.

bottomline, i would never buy a computer with integrated graphics. that tech ALWAYS slows the machine to a grinding halt.

Dec 06, 09 - 12:56 am Comment from: DogGone

Hmm..I get what you're saying but look for a second what Apple have done in the last decade:

1. In 2000 when the bubble burst. Apple stock got hammered, then everyone felt the economic downturn. What did Apple do when everyone else got negative. They innovated, spent more on R&D;than ever and rolled out OSX and started building their mac platform again.
2. By 2002 they have released the iPod, opened it up to windows, opened Apple Stores and rapidly evolved OSX.
3. In 2006 they made the bold switch to Intel.
4. Even in this last downturn they are not holding back.

These are the signs of a company that knows what they are doing. Are so far ahead of the competitions that it is almost laughable. Whilst others in their industry are struggling to make money selling low cost cheap crap, Apple are showing everyone how to operate the business.

Apple employ more people now than ever. Granted a lot of those are in retail, but they are definitely expanding their R&D;and operations. The tickle dow n effect with the iPod and IPhone accessory industry also offers opportunities.

So guess what...Apple charge a reasonable price for a good product, haven't had to resort to cutting margins for market share (like the rest of the PC and car industry), they haven't taken bad risks to increase profits (like the banking industry), and have been willing to innovate to produce sellable products (unlike the PC and car industry).

If you want to increase employment in the US then maybe think of ways to increase innovation. Clinton did it in the 90s by pouring money into basic research and it paid off with 10 years of benefits.

Unfortunately we are in a syndrome of fast profits and ridiculous bonuses for executives who don't care for their business.

Apple have clearly demonstrated a successful model for business with double digit growth, zero debt, large cash holding and sustainable profit margin:
Innovate, balance your books, invest when you need it regardless of the economic environment and most important know your business.

Apple IS not Apple ARE

Germany ARE?

Germany IS!

Japan ARE?

Japan IS!

"Apple is the company that is known for always going on their own way and now it seems that the divide between Apple and Intel is wider than ever," Theo Valich reports for Bright Side Of New.

Wider than ever? Even wider than when they used Motorola processors?

What all this article means is that intel will supply the CPU and Nvidia the Graphic card

Dec 06, 09 - 01:51 pm Comment from: m159

What a shock for Intel to have a customer who doesn't just take whatever is set in front of them. Can you imagine dell or hp quibbling over anything but cost?

Dec 06, 09 - 02:25 pm Comment from: kenh

"If you want to increase employment in the US then maybe think of ways to increase innovation. Clinton did it in the 90s by pouring money into basic research and it paid off with 10 years of benefits."

Innovation that actually creates jobs comes from private business, not from government. Government typically funds thing that are economically shaky but politically correct. Recipe for disaster.

And it does it using printed money that was taken (albeit legally) from someone who created the value that it supposedly represents.

Analogy: I am watching the Denver Broncos right now. They just scored a touchdown against 3-8 Kansas City. If you apply our tax code to it, Denver should give 3 of the 6 points to Kansas City in the form of a tax payment.

It won't help Kansas City to solve its problems, and will just cause Denver to say "to hell with it" and not play as hard.

Exactly what is happening in our economy. Companies are not hiring because they know their taxes and expenses will rise dramatically if things continue as they are now. Time to lay low, glad I don't own a company now. But it still affects me because I would like to be hired for something better. Not likely to happen until government (which produces NO profit, it only consumes those created by others) gets out of the way. Not in as you suggest.

Some are making an conclusion based on two separate facts. An erroneous conclusion because there is no evidencethat one fact resulted in the other... except that the two facts somewhat overlap in time.

Apple's shift to Intel and Apple's success are those two facts.

The erroneous conclusion is that the shift to Intel is the reason for Apple's success.

Unfortunately, this conclusion ignores a third fact... that Apple's success was already well underway prior to the Intel switch.

Besides, Apple's success was and is in the consumer market where the vast majority of buyers don't know (let alone care) about the processor used.

If there is one single factor... that all evidence supports as being responsible for Apple's success...

it's Steve Jobs return to Apple.

(And that's no reality distortion.)

Which is not to say that Jobs did it singlehandedly.

Least anyone think I'm some Jobsian fanboi... when Steve Jobs returned, I (and some in the Mac tech community I corresponded with) thought he came back to destroy Apple. What better evidence to support such a "conclusion" than his famed "mercurial" temper and (most importantly) the fact that Jobs sold his Apple stock as soon as legally possible after he returned.

Why sell your stock if you intend to stick around? (About a year later, I figured out a good reason for that.)

So be careful when making conclusions.

Dec 06, 09 - 09:00 pm Comment from: derekcurrie

From my POV as a color management professional, Apple have at long bloody last come up with real, actual professional level laptop that can be used for color management. This is NEW with the current generation of MacBooks and MacBook Pros. It NEVER existed before. There are two main factors:

(1) 8-bit color laptop displays, versus the previous 6-bit, merely thousands of colors, laptop color displays with baloney dithering added to fake the millions of missing colors.

2) A 170º viewing angle on laptop color displays, preventing shifting colors and contrast by merely moving your head.

Having achieved this professional level in their laptops, why would Apple want to hobble themselves with crap, unprofessional, integrated graphics from Intel? That's the junk you put in the dirt cheap, short lifespan, POS laptops from those other companies.

Keep pushing that Freidmanite supply side lie. Whenever taxes are cut for corporations they do not hire more workers. They just pocket the money for their CEO's and less tax money goes to basic social services and funding a highly educated populace. This is why states are broke. Government right now is a pawn for the oligarchs. Those with the gold and plenty of it.

Demand for products pushes companies to hire more not extra capital or supply. If there is not a strong middle class with good jobs and good wages that spend 80% of their income, then there is no one to buy there products. And they sure as heck cannot buy it at the current prices. 30 years of Reagonomics has killed the middle class and this country(Bush, Clinton, Bush jr.). If you want a third world country or a banana republic than keep continuing to support anti-labor legislation/propoganda and bending over for billionaires. They love slave labor and sheople.

Oh, and one more thing from George...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI&feature=related

Dec 07, 09 - 03:56 am Comment from: Macrelated

@ A company is singular

Good post.

Dec 07, 09 - 08:02 am Comment from: Daner

I was born in Modesto. My parents were born in Modesto. None of us live there anymore.

Apple and Intel are closer now than they were at any point prior to the move from PowerPC to Intel. No crisis here. Unlike Modesto...

@kenh

Apple doesn't sell enough computers to make developing and producing its own chips feasible. Too many different chips would be needed (Mac Pro, iMac, laptops, etc.), which require different fabrication equipment.

Yes, Apple has PA Semi. But Apple buying a production facility and rolling its own chips will simply start the long road to Apple not being as advanced as Intel chips. Intel does nothing but research how to improve chips. Apple doesn't have that kind of resources to do the same, nor could Apple sell enough chips to pay for the personnel, technology, equipment and facility needed to produce them.

Plus, I doubt Apple wants the headache of chip fabrication. Remember how well IBM's Fishkill factory opening went? It was a couple of years before the facility was producing reasonable numbers of chips without having to throw away a large percentage of production.

Guys,

Everyone here is getting too worked up and are missing a very important fact. Intel is Apple's bitch.

Apple got intel to design a custom low power, small package cpu for the macbook air because they refused to wait another 8 months for the next generation parts.

Apple has been getting new CPU's before any other hardware manufacturers since the intel transition. Heck for the last couple generations apple announces products with chips that aren't even on intel's price list yet.

What Apple wants from intel apple gets and it gets it before HP, Dell and the rest. Apple will have quad core 32nm cpus sans integrated graphics for the macbook pro and they will have parts shipping days or weeks ahead of reference capella designs.

Do not money to buy a house? Worry no more, because that's achievable to take the credit loans to solve such kind of problems. Hence get a sba loan to buy all you want.

When you need rss feed submission, feel free to utilize the rss-feeds-submission.com. I guess, that will aid you very much.

Here is not enough fire impulse in the world to get everybody through a custom thesis. You have to gamble on total force of habit.

I notice that your search just about this good topic will be really great basis for freelance writing and even to common people either.

It’s very important to make the correctly performed music and movies essay and homework help referring to this good post to get the excellent mark at the high school.

Not all things have to be associated with custom research paper I’m having, thence, people however shouldfind essays.