I don't use Hulu for the simple fact that I go to Hulu to find something to watch vs. going to Hulu because there is something in mind that I'd like to see (which they almost never have)

and I record my content on my DVR with the occasional purchase on iTunes now that I have uVerse

but either way...flash isn't required because its not a needed technology to stream video, Hulu just choses to only use flash because how else are they going to stuff advertising down its viewers throats?

[Edited on January 29, 2010 at 1:40 AM. Reason : .]

1/29/2010 1:39:20 AM

Quote :

" I think flash is overrated and bloated. Yeah I think it would be better in the short term if it supported flash since so much of the web is flash, but in the long term getting rid of flash is in everyones best interest. In a few years html 5 will make flash obsolete anyhow."

Yes, and in a few years the 3rd generation iPad won't need Flash support. But for now, it does. Overrated and bloated doesn't mean it isn't still used on a hojillion websites to deliver a lot of desirable content.

1/29/2010 2:22:11 AM

The Flash argument is a stupid one. The damn thing has to support flash. This isn't a multi-function device where web browsing is a subset of functionality. This is a rich internet appliance. I will be absolutely shocked if there is no Flash support by the time it actually launches.

The typing is a non-issue. Handwriting recognition is a great feature to have, but it's one of those "people say they will use it, but they don't" features. Even on a touch keyboard, you can type 2-3x faster than you can write. With better accuracy. And this isn't a device that people are going to write novels on, so having a less than optimal keyboard isn't a deal breaker at all.

Getting back to Prospero's post:

Even with all your reductions, you are still saying that you would want a Watch, a Laptop, a Smartphone, a HTPC and a Digital Camera. Which is still 5 devices. Which still reinforces my point. There is no magical all-in-one device to deliver all technology. Different activities need different form factors.

1/29/2010 4:41:28 AM

Quote :

"lol. So you are making up an imaginary situation, then drawing broad, obviously flawed conclusions based on that? nice."

An imaginary situation? I claimed that if OSX was able to be installed on any hardware, not just apple, that I could have bought a much more powerful machine, put it on it, and had the same experience that I get from my iMac.

You cant currently do that, legally, you are correct. But its a relevant argument to the premium you pay for apple computers. I can't say I'm surprised you're too dense and not competent enough to actually respond to it though.

Quote :

"haha i don't know if I should be creeped out or flattered that you are so conscious of me...?"

You're the one that started with the personal attacks against me. To answer, you should be embarrassed at your inability to discuss the topic without starting with a personal attack on someone.

[Edited on January 29, 2010 at 7:34 AM. Reason : *]

1/29/2010 7:30:35 AM

Quote :

""wait, it doesn't have handwriting recognition? something that EVERY OTHER TABLET ON THE MARKET HAS? what the fuck, dude. yep, this looks like an iPod all over again. Twice the price, half the features, ten times the marketing. ""

I don't think Apple, you, me or anyone else would be disappointed if this device did as well as the iPod. The digital music landscape as we know it was pretty much shaped and defined by the iTunes / iPod experience. Over time it has been refined more by others, but iTunes / iPod was a huge turning point, and the start of what we know today.

If this iPad has the same effect on mobile computing, then that would be a success in anyone's book. Stubborn fools insisting it's all about marketing not withstanding.

Quote :

"I want one of those devices they have at the apple store that do all that shit. when i bought my 3G, i signed with my finger."

That was an iPod touch, and that's why this thing has such great potential too.

1/29/2010 8:00:47 AM

Why Does Apple Own The CPU In The iPad??

In the Macbook the use a processor from Intel. In the iPhone they use a processor from Samsung.

So why, for the iPad, did they use their own chip?????

I am actually very interested in this question and might make a separate thread if I am getting to this thread too late.

1/29/2010 10:23:11 AM

Quote :

"the A4 runs at a 1GHz frequency, which by mobile CPU standards, is quite high. Considering that Qualcomm's 1GHz Snapdragon powers Google's Nexus One, the Apple A4 could power the next wave of super-smartphones. In fact, at its current spec and frequency, the Apple A4 can play back HD video for 10 hours before requiring a full battery charge."

Source

Pretty sure they'll be using the A4 in the next iPhone.

1/29/2010 10:33:09 AM

^ haha that was actually the article that got me wondering about this. That and this post from Daring Fireball:
http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/ipad_big_picture

But I wonder why Apple had to purchase PA Semiconductor. Why couldn't just place an order with the specs they wanted?

[Edited on January 29, 2010 at 10:40 AM. Reason : forgot link]

1/29/2010 10:40:01 AM

I thought i read that the A4 was based on the Cortex A9 system


which is similar powre and speed specs from what i can tell.

1/29/2010 10:45:56 AM

Quote :

"One of the small surprises of the iPad announcement was that it was running on Apple’s own custom silicon. Well, that’s true to an extent, but it’s not like Apple actually invented the processor in-house. It’s just not OEM hardware. In fact, other guys are running with many of the same parts. The A4 is a custom implementation of the ARM A9 processor, also found in Snapdragon (running the Nexus One) and Tegra (running the Zune HD). The difference is there is a GPU mated with the A9 in Apple’s design, probably to help offload the graphics work and keep the interface smooth. Beyond this (ARM licensing the CPU and GPU to Apple), it’s mostly speculation. But there’s room for processor shrinks and even overclocking; the A9 has been clocked to 1GHz by everyone because it stays cool, but if Apple (or anyone) were to apply some better cooling, they could take it all the way up to 1.3GHz. The chip itself, which contains other components not yet revealed, is supposed by many to be manufactured by Samsung, like the one in the 3GS, which incidentally contains the A9’s predecessor, the A8, clocked to 600MHz."

http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/01/28/apples-a4-processor-is-in-same-family-tree-as-snapdragon-tegra/

The whole thing seems really curious to me. Stuff like this makes it sound like the chip itself is not that special. So I don't understand why Apple wanted to bring it all in house.

Maybe they don't want IP to leak out? But if the CPU is not that different form others on the market, that couldn't be it. Who knows. Just something I was curious about. Guess there are no answers yet.

1/29/2010 11:07:15 AM

Quote :

"Different activities need different form factors."

well yes, he's saying exactly that, he also specified travel where you want fewer items to tote around. more specialized products do their localized jobs much better of course but there is a use/place/demand for multifunction devices as well.

it won't ever be one or 2 devices as some specialists perform their roles so much better than other form factors (DSLR and HTPC for example).


though i would like to see the ipad be used as a remote for a smart home system (remote lights, theater controls, alarm, etc.) though i think there are smart phones that can do part of that already.

1/29/2010 11:12:35 AM

^thats in the hands of 3rd party developers. Remote and PocketBlu are examples that its possible to do. Remote is a fuck ton better than PocketBlu...PocketBlu sounds awesome and all but it really does suck.

1/29/2010 11:15:16 AM

fair amount of potential, should be interesting to see what gets developed....

1/29/2010 11:20:28 AM

I've had the idea of a software+hardware package where you could have a wi-fi base station that has infrared connectors attached to it (like you get with some audio receivers) that you would stick on the fronts of all your devices infra red ports thus enabling them with wifi.

then the software side would run on your iPhone/laptop and allow you to control all your devices via wifi.

Wasn't there a company that was developing something similar?

1/29/2010 11:23:47 AM

https://thinkflood.com/products/redeye/what-is-redeye/

1/29/2010 11:59:27 AM

you guys could make one of those yourself.

1/29/2010 12:23:04 PM

Link with instructions? I'm interested.

1/29/2010 1:09:05 PM

^^^$188?? *cough*

Better off buying the best Logitech Harmony.

1/29/2010 1:48:28 PM

^the best logitech harmony is a hell of a lot more than $188 AND it doesn't do what that does. A harmony is still going to be line of site based with the exception of the RF models which would still require another piece of hardware that can translate RF into IR

1/29/2010 2:02:54 PM

Quote :

"http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/01/28/apples-a4-processor-is-in-same-family-tree-as-snapdragon-tegra/ The whole thing seems really curious to me. Stuff like this makes it sound like the chip itself is not that special. So I don't understand why Apple wanted to bring it all in house. Maybe they don't want IP to leak out? But if the CPU is not that different form others on the market, that couldn't be it. Who knows. Just something I was curious about. Guess there are no answers yet. "

It’s not that special, but considering the volume Apple does, and how particular they are about applications, having their PA Semi guys do the design gives them the most flexibility to do updates on their own timelines.

Plus, PA Semi stayed in business by knowing how to keep processors power efficient (a lot of their engineers are ex Alpha guys). This type of expertise is always going to give them an edge when it comes to optimizing for battery life.

And considering their supply/demand cycles aren’t at the whims of other buyers getting the same chips, I would imagine it allows them to predict margins better too.

1/29/2010 8:26:01 PM

Quote :

"http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/01/28/apples-a4-processor-is-in-same-family-tree-as-snapdragon-tegra/ The whole thing seems really curious to me. Stuff like this makes it sound like the chip itself is not that special. So I don't understand why Apple wanted to bring it all in house. Maybe they don't want IP to leak out? But if the CPU is not that different form others on the market, that couldn't be it. Who knows. Just something I was curious about. Guess there are no answers yet. "

It’s not that special, but considering the volume Apple does, and how particular they are about applications, having their PA Semi guys do the design gives them the most flexibility to do updates on their own timelines.

Plus, PA Semi stayed in business by knowing how to keep processors power efficient (a lot of their engineers are ex Alpha guys). This type of expertise is always going to give them an edge when it comes to optimizing for battery life.

And considering their supply/demand cycles aren’t at the whims of other buyers getting the same chips, I would imagine it allows them to predict margins better too.

Quote :

"But I wonder why Apple had to purchase PA Semiconductor. Why couldn't just place an order with the specs they wanted? "

PA, IIRC, didn’t really focus on ARM designs, now they do. And it stops other manufacturers from benefitting for power optimizations Apple asks for.

[Edited on January 29, 2010 at 8:27 PM. Reason : ]

1/29/2010 8:26:01 PM

Quote :

"The whole thing seems really curious to me. Stuff like this makes it sound like the chip itself is not that special. So I don't understand why Apple wanted to bring it all in house. "

I would imagine it's for many of the same reasons that Apple did their own OS in house, even though it's really just a "custom implementation of the " UNIX operating system. Or put another way "If you want something done right, you've got to do it yourself."

1/29/2010 10:30:20 PM

moron,

I can buy that. Good explaination.

PS* Actually, thanks a lot for the point on production schedule. I had not even considered that.

[Edited on January 29, 2010 at 10:37 PM. Reason : ``]

1/29/2010 10:30:49 PM

I just realized I doubled posted… I bet an iPad wouldn’t have double posted

1/29/2010 10:34:29 PM

Quote :

"I would imagine it's for many of the same reasons that Apple did their own OS in house, even though it's really just a "custom implementation of the " UNIX operating system. Or put another way "If you want something done right, you've got to do it yourself.""

One of the worst analogies I've ever heard.

1/29/2010 11:06:06 PM

Quote :

"And it stops other manufacturers from benefitting for power optimizations Apple asks for."

You're assuming that Apple is asking for something special that other companies aren't already trying to do?

[Edited on January 29, 2010 at 11:28 PM. Reason : s]

1/29/2010 11:14:31 PM

Quote :

"I would imagine it's for many of the same reasons that Apple did their own OS in house"

lol? They were the first OS of its kind so I'd say they did it because nobody else had.

1/29/2010 11:41:56 PM

Quote :

"One of the worst analogies I've ever heard."

Why, do you not think a large part of it is about control? Especially when we're talking about a company who's entire business model is about controlling the whole experience from beginning to end? Between the disaster that was the G5 chip and the fact that Apple is a control freak of a company, being able to control all of the hardware is a dream come true for them.

Quote :

"You're assuming that Apple is asking for something special that other companies aren't already trying to do? "

Nope, but if your competitors have to spend 6 months trying to figure out a problem you already solved, that's a great advantage.

Quote :

"lol? They were the first OS of its kind so I'd say they did it because nobody else had."

I was talking about OS X not the classic OS.

1/30/2010 12:04:33 AM

^I know but what I'm saying is they were already in the OS business so there reasonings haven't changed all of a sudden. Its always been in house.

1/30/2010 12:13:02 AM

Quote :

"Nope, but if your competitors have to spend 6 months trying to figure out a problem you already solved, that's a great advantage."

Who is to say that Apple's not gonna spend 6 mo trying to figure out a problem that a competitor solved? I am not buying this argument that PA Semi has some kind of monopoly on low power strategies that Apple just had to buy... and here's why - if you read the admittedly skimpy discussion about the A4, it looks like they just plopped an ARM processor into an ASIC and called it a day.

1/30/2010 12:25:21 AM

Quote :

"You're assuming that Apple is asking for something special that other companies aren't already trying to do? "

I’m assuming the PA Semi guys are living up to their expectations.

1/30/2010 1:06:20 AM

It's hard to say that without examining the technical specs of the A4

1/30/2010 3:12:07 PM

http://valleywag.gawker.com/5459205/steve-jobs-entourage-forbids-pictures-of-his-labored-old-man-shuffle?skyline=true&s=i&autoplay=true


Check it out. Jobs looks almost dead, now. Looked so much better in 2005

1/30/2010 6:05:49 PM

If by almost dead you mean looks like a guy in his 50's who dealt with cancer and a liver transplant within the last 6 years.

1/30/2010 6:16:34 PM

Quote :

"It's hard to say that without examining the technical specs of the A4 "

Are there any other 1.5 lb devices with 9.7” IPS screens that have 10 hours of battery life?

1/30/2010 7:15:48 PM

^^^ that entire post seems to be focused on two aspects
1) at some point he walked across stage more slowly this year than he did in 2003 and 2005. wow. whoop-de-doo. I suspect going through the entire keynotes from the previous years, you could find several places where he walked slowly instead of hurried across the stage.
2) in his "old man shuffle" out of the building, he was walking and conversing with someone, wrapping up a conversation before he got to his car. seems like a pretty normal thing to do.


That being said, yes, he does look like hell, but not really any worse (or better) than he did all of last year. which could have something to do with fighting and surviving two bouts of one of the most deadly cancers around, and receiving a new liver (and, likely, his stupid hippy stubbornness in avoiding "Western medicine" whenever possible in lieu of "alternative treatments")

[Edited on January 30, 2010 at 7:17 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2010 7:17:20 PM

none of those excuses change the fact that he looks like he is about to die. If he busted his ass on this tablet, his near-term health is a serious concern.

1/30/2010 8:21:27 PM

Quote :

"If he busted his ass on this tablet, his near-term health is a serious concern."

i'm not sure what this means.... i.e. what does one have to do with the other

are you suggesting that by "bustin his ass" on this tablet, he may be putting his health further in danger, thereby speeding up his impending death?

1/30/2010 9:00:22 PM

Quote :

"We’re really excited about Apple’s iPad, and we want to make all of our products available for it as soon as we can. Yes, we already had a big year planned for 2010, with several long-anticipated major product releases—but we think iPad is really important: important enough to spend some time juggling our plans to figure out how we can introduce five new iPad apps. Yes. Five. We want to bring all five of our productivity apps to iPad: OmniGraffle, OmniOutliner, OmniPlan, OmniFocus, and OmniGraphSketcher."

The Omni group does some of the best UIs, so i'm interested in seeing what they do with the iPad.

I wouldn't be surprised if the paradigms they come up with set the pace for future iPad developers.

http://blog.omnigroup.com/2010/01/29/ipad-or-bust/

1/30/2010 9:42:01 PM

Solinari,

Well, like any other profit-maximizing business, Apple probably had a good reason to purchased PA Semi. I think moron's idea about protecting some sort of power optimizing IP sounds like a good enough answer at this point.

Another potential reason for the purchase is that vertical integrations are typically explained by the fact end-product manufacturers are afraid manufacturers of specialized inputs will hold out on them later to try and get a better price for their input products. For example, a car company might not mind buying paint from a separate company because if the paint company tried to hold out on them for a better price the car company could go someplace else. However, they may not be as comfortable outsource the car's engine because it might be harder to buy an engine from someplace else without totally re-designing the automobile.

I was originally thinking this might be the answer. That the logic board was designed so specially for the PA Semi CPU that they had to merge with the company to avoid extortion down the road.

If that's the case, it might not be the CPU that is specifically delivering the power savings. Instead, it might be something about the entire logic board design that they could not have implemented with any other CPU? If this is the case, this could mean that other manufacturers won't be able to replicate the same power usage stats without either opening themselves up to a "hold out" problem or without merging with another company.

Of course that's just a guess and maybe a bad one. I didn't suggest it at first because I really can't imagine how a logic board could be so specifically designed to a CPU. Of course, I've never had to design a logic board.

[Edited on January 30, 2010 at 10:03 PM. Reason : ``]

1/30/2010 9:58:07 PM

1/30/2010 11:48:09 PM

Socks, that is an interesting theory... But it overlooks the huge expense and risk that is associated with manufacturing a processor. All other phone manufacturers have no problems buying chips from vendors. Apple buys it's processors from intel... I have a really hard time trying to think of a specific low power tech on a mainboard that would require pa semi only.... Just doesn't compute so to speak...

Not saying you're wrong, I just don't really understand why apple bought pa semi.

Ask IBM how well vertical integration has worked for them. They're trying to get out of that model asap

1/31/2010 12:36:10 AM

Quote :

" All other phone manufacturers have no problems buying chips from vendors. "

And APple has been embarrassing all other phone manufacturers.

They came into a market they've never been in, and have become the dominant player for consumer smart phones.

I don't see what's so hard to understand though. Typically, any successful company exists based on something they do better. PA Semi's niche was the PWFicient processor, a very low power PPC embedded processor (of which the military was a main customer). Having your own very talented design team doing SoC designs gives you a leg up on HTC, for example, who may not have the resources or margins to pay for a custom SoC with only the features they want. Or compared to the Tegra 2, if Apple wanted to go with a design that wasn't as good as Nvidia's 3D engine in the Tegra, but used a little less power, but also did decent video decoding (and the Tegra 2 does 1080p, where the iPad doesn't which is going to save some battery for Apple there...), they have that flexibility.

Apple could probably tell Nvidia to make a Tegra with a different video decoder, or to custom tune a GPU, and nvidia would probably do it. But it would on Nvidia's time, and giving Nvidia extra money. With apple raking in billions a quarter, the best thing to do would be to just roll their own.

[Edited on January 31, 2010 at 1:25 AM. Reason : ]

[Edited on January 31, 2010 at 1:38 AM. Reason : ]

1/31/2010 1:23:35 AM

yeah, i don't see what's so hard to understand about Apple wanting to be completely in charge of the chips that will run their phones and portables, instead of being reliant on someone else's technology and release schedules.

and they bought PA Semi for $278 million..... that's chump change. That's 38 hours worth of revenue from last quarter. Apple as $40 Billion in the bank. Even if this somehow doesn't work out, it's hardly going to bring them down

1/31/2010 1:53:08 AM

Sollinari,

I agree that there are definitely costs to vertical integration. And really no other company understands that more than Apple. When Apple first started, Steve Jobs said that he wanted the company to own 100% of its supply chain. "Sand would enter one end of the company and out the other end would come silicon art" or something like that. And that worked out so well Apple started using Intel processors in 2006.

That's why I figure they must have a good business reason for this integration. They know the dangers of integrating too far.

1/31/2010 3:56:01 AM

this thread is clown shoes

1/31/2010 9:08:41 AM

^^ I don't think the move to intel processors was a result of integrating too far. That seems to me to be more of the result of the dangers of relying on someone else to keep you competitive. When apple introduced the G5, Jobs stood up on stage and said in one year we will be at 3Ghz. In one year, they had just broken 2.5, mostly because IBM over promised and under delivered. In fact, the entire Gx processor time period was often plagued with supplier problems. With x86, apple can buy from multiple suppliers if they need to, and with the iPad and presumably in the next iPhones, they wont have have to do that much.

1/31/2010 11:23:02 AM

1/31/2010 11:26:09 AM

^icwydt

1/31/2010 11:40:10 AM

Quote :

"They came into a market they've never been in, and have become the dominant player for consumer smart phones."

actually, they're 3rd place (17%) behind Nokia (39%) and RIM (21% - their highest share total ever) based on the latest sales reports

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1224645

[Edited on January 31, 2010 at 12:11 PM. Reason : .]

1/31/2010 12:06:45 PM