SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Technology StocksApple Inc.


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: clochard who wrote (209209)7/24/2020 8:12:11 AM
From: Zen Dollar Round
   of 212274
 
Intel's x86 was always the VHS of processor architecture
LOL. A very apt analogy, thank you.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: clochard who wrote (209209)7/24/2020 8:34:50 AM
From: OrionX
1 Recommendation   of 212274
 
Agree with the VHS analogy however isn't Intel's problem more to do with manufacturing process, 7nm etc, rather than the processor? Or are the two linked?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: OrionX who wrote (209212)7/24/2020 9:46:51 AM
From: clochard
5 Recommendations   of 212274
 
Intel's x86 is a complex and ugly architecture that infested the personal computer market only because they could produce them in large quantities and sell them well, in contrast to other companies with better ideas but poor execution. Intel's problems with 5mm are likely due to the Rube Goldberg complexity being too error-prone at these dimensions and speeds.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: clochard who wrote (209213)7/24/2020 1:02:38 PM
From: Stock Puppy
   of 212274
 
Yup - remember way back in the good old days of Motorola 68xxx vs - Intel;
68xxx was far far superior, but Moto dropped the ball and Intel leapfrogged away.

Heh heh - "68xxx - supercomputer"

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: clochard who wrote (209213)7/24/2020 2:14:53 PM
From: Jeff Hayden
3 Recommendations   of 212274
 
The "complex and ugly architecture" is likely more important than Intel's flailing around in chip geometry. I think Apple is tired of trying to get x86 chips to do what it needs. They really want to merge iOS, iPadOS and macOS, and find they can't do it with x86. Intel's geometry problem just helped them to start the conversion earlier.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: handyman who wrote (209208)7/24/2020 2:49:25 PM
From: handyman
2 Recommendations   of 212274
 
Just when I thought I was out they brought me back in. Doubled down on Apple shares. They appear to be uniquely positioned to explode once the pandemic is controlled. People are flush with cash as another trillion plus is about to be helicoptered down. Super cycle looks like a real possibility.

China, lawsuits, and of course the raging virus are headwinds. I don’t need the money for years so it’s worth the risk. Funny how much money remains on the sidelines.

Somewhat off topic the seashore town I summer in shows no sign of the virus interfering as everything is open except indoor dining. Masks are few and people are out and about in great numbers. I am not one of them but I ride around like a voyeur in a strange land.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: handyman7/24/2020 3:19:46 PM
   of 212274
 
Dam Apple just went green. Maybe I should be a day trader. On second thought I had my head handed to me when I did that back in the day.

One thing I see everywhere is that people love their smartphones and most of them in this country are iPhones. It is the one thing that people of all stripes have in common.Its become an extension of self.

Sad tp admit but it is the last thing I look at and the first thing every day and I’m an old dude. In case you think that’s disrespectful to my wife it’s the same with her.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Stock Puppy who wrote (209214)7/24/2020 4:13:31 PM
From: clochard
1 Recommendation   of 212274
 
Back in the day many successful and promising names dropped the ball. Burroughs, DEC, Motorola, TI, Commodore, Atari, and others failed their customers because they were full of themselves.

IBM, Intel and Microsoft won the wars through shrewd sales and reliable hardware but they cost the world billions by wasting their customers time with their inferior software ecosystems. I did software development in these environments because that's where the money was.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: handyman who wrote ()7/24/2020 4:37:08 PM
From: clean86
2 Recommendations   of 212274
 
Next one of these and you're out.

No Politics on this thread.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Stock Puppy who wrote (209214)7/24/2020 7:00:56 PM
From: Doren
   of 212274
 
It was my impression that PPC/RISC chips Apple just ran too damn hot. I melted one in my dual gig, part of that was apple's stone stupid cooling design (exhaust on the bottom, chip on the top, video card blocking any cool air from getting to the daughter card) but they were hot enough to cook eggs. I'd avoid using it on very hot days. Speeds had gotten high enough Apple traded performance for cooler chips, particularly in notebooks which were replacing desktops in large numbers.

But my 2.8 i7 runs damn hot too, I worry about that a lot, and Apple under Ive seemed to be too obsessed with thinness to address the heat issue. I worry that dust bunnies inside my iMac block air flow.

It seems to me heat is still an issue, and I believe its a function of the size of the etchings so less nm means cooler. Plus its obviously going to be better for Apple to write code for one chip than two.

I would think that it had to be Intel's architecture that is holding them back. The chip foundries buy their machines from 3rd parties don't they? If so one foundry should be able to make the same sized channels as another unless there are just too many channels, zig zags and what ever lives at the nanometer level.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)
Previous 10 Next 10