Why the iPad is Intel’s worst nightmare
Posted on 12th Feb 2010 at 09:50 by Alex Watson with 44 comments
Whereas most people were only too keen to talk and talk about the pros and cons of the iPad, I think there’s probably one set of people who, more than any other, wish the iPad would just go away: Intel’s senior executives.
The iPad is close to Intel’s worst nightmare because it’s a ‘proper’ computer - it’s certainly not a smartphone - that doesn’t use an Intel x86 CPU. It’s also a machine that doesn’t face any of the demand-killing limitations non Intel laptops have done before. It’s not from a no-name company that people won’t trust, or whose products you can’t actually find in the shops. It’s not running Linux or an OS that’s difficult to understand. It’s not unfamiliar – millions of people know how to use the iPhone – and once the Apple marketing juggernaut gets up and running, you’re not going to be unaware it exists.
Plenty of netbook manufacturers have expressed an interest in getting away from x86, and this time last year we were hearing rumours of ARM-powered netbooks. There were even a few on show at Computex 2009, but none of the manufacturers have been confident enough in these machines to actually release them.
The main problem is that Windows is currently x86 only, so switching to ARM involves finding a new OS. Manufacturers tried and failed with Linux in the early days of netbooks and so are understandably wary of it. Chrome OS isn’t ready yet – and no-one knows if it will be ARM-compatible or not – leaving the manufacturers with no real option, unless they were to write their own system. The x86 CPUs in netbooks have a problem, too, because as they’re scaled down chips, and yet still run a full-fat OS, netbooks can end up as slow, poky and frustrating to use, promising to be a proper computer and not being able to deliver.
The A4 CPU at the heart of the iPad uses an ARM core
By taking the opposite approach – upsizing a phone, rather than downsizing a laptop – Apple has a far better strategy in terms of getting the necessary hardware power in the form factor it wants. The iPad is running an OS that (at least as far as we know) is very similar to the iPhone’s. This is a piece of software that runs fairly well on the 412MHz CPU in the original iPhone, and really well on the 600MHz CPU in the 3GS. No surprises that from the video evidence we’ve seen, it positively flies on the iPad – it’s got a 1GHz CPU after all.
Yet while it will seem fast to the user, a 1GHz CPU is actually fairly slow in terms of clockspeed, even for a netbook. Most use Atoms clocked at 1.6GHz. This is why the iPad can be extremely slim – and why its battery life (at least in terms of what’s promised), at 10 hours, is a lot higher than competing netbooks.
Even better, the success of the App Store means Apple gets round the other problem of moving away from x86 – it has a large software library for people to use, in addition, of course, to the web, which is what many people will use most on the iPad.
You can bet that Intel tried its best to convince Apple to make a netbook or small PC with an x86 CPU. Maybe it even offered to make a custom chip or give Apple first dibs on a new design as it did for the Macbook Air – but it’s impossible to imagine the iPad being as thin, light and power efficient as it appears if was based on x86. Using x86 would also have forced Apple to either give people OS X – and likely have it run as slowly as Windows does on a netbook – and not allow them to expand the iPhone platform.
For Intel, the problem is clear, especially if the iPad is the kind of runaway success the iPhone is: it proves that x86 is no longer the only choice for a mobile computer – in fact, it proves x86 is not even the best choice. Meanwhile, it makes Apple’s hardware design for the iPad look like a stroke of genius, a classic of 'under promise, over deliver,' which all but guarantees a level of delight in the hardware performance.
The iPad is close to Intel’s worst nightmare because it’s a ‘proper’ computer - it’s certainly not a smartphone - that doesn’t use an Intel x86 CPU. It’s also a machine that doesn’t face any of the demand-killing limitations non Intel laptops have done before. It’s not from a no-name company that people won’t trust, or whose products you can’t actually find in the shops. It’s not running Linux or an OS that’s difficult to understand. It’s not unfamiliar – millions of people know how to use the iPhone – and once the Apple marketing juggernaut gets up and running, you’re not going to be unaware it exists.
Plenty of netbook manufacturers have expressed an interest in getting away from x86, and this time last year we were hearing rumours of ARM-powered netbooks. There were even a few on show at Computex 2009, but none of the manufacturers have been confident enough in these machines to actually release them.
The main problem is that Windows is currently x86 only, so switching to ARM involves finding a new OS. Manufacturers tried and failed with Linux in the early days of netbooks and so are understandably wary of it. Chrome OS isn’t ready yet – and no-one knows if it will be ARM-compatible or not – leaving the manufacturers with no real option, unless they were to write their own system. The x86 CPUs in netbooks have a problem, too, because as they’re scaled down chips, and yet still run a full-fat OS, netbooks can end up as slow, poky and frustrating to use, promising to be a proper computer and not being able to deliver.
The A4 CPU at the heart of the iPad uses an ARM core
By taking the opposite approach – upsizing a phone, rather than downsizing a laptop – Apple has a far better strategy in terms of getting the necessary hardware power in the form factor it wants. The iPad is running an OS that (at least as far as we know) is very similar to the iPhone’s. This is a piece of software that runs fairly well on the 412MHz CPU in the original iPhone, and really well on the 600MHz CPU in the 3GS. No surprises that from the video evidence we’ve seen, it positively flies on the iPad – it’s got a 1GHz CPU after all.
Yet while it will seem fast to the user, a 1GHz CPU is actually fairly slow in terms of clockspeed, even for a netbook. Most use Atoms clocked at 1.6GHz. This is why the iPad can be extremely slim – and why its battery life (at least in terms of what’s promised), at 10 hours, is a lot higher than competing netbooks.
Even better, the success of the App Store means Apple gets round the other problem of moving away from x86 – it has a large software library for people to use, in addition, of course, to the web, which is what many people will use most on the iPad.
You can bet that Intel tried its best to convince Apple to make a netbook or small PC with an x86 CPU. Maybe it even offered to make a custom chip or give Apple first dibs on a new design as it did for the Macbook Air – but it’s impossible to imagine the iPad being as thin, light and power efficient as it appears if was based on x86. Using x86 would also have forced Apple to either give people OS X – and likely have it run as slowly as Windows does on a netbook – and not allow them to expand the iPhone platform.
For Intel, the problem is clear, especially if the iPad is the kind of runaway success the iPhone is: it proves that x86 is no longer the only choice for a mobile computer – in fact, it proves x86 is not even the best choice. Meanwhile, it makes Apple’s hardware design for the iPad look like a stroke of genius, a classic of 'under promise, over deliver,' which all but guarantees a level of delight in the hardware performance.
44 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyThe Atom has never really produced a totally friendly device. The Linux-equipped ones are very unfamiliar to your casual pc user, the ones with Windows are a bit slow.
Even though I wouldn't call it a "proper" computer it's still a big leap forward in this sense, and hopefully we'll see something a bit more Atom-friendly soon.
Does anyone know what OS MS are supposed to be using for the Courier?
My conclusion - the iPad isn't going to be a runaway success and Intel aren't going to be running scared. Much like a Liberal Democrat manifesto, the iPad offers a couple of interesting ideas that competitors will no doubt pinch, but is otherwise a non-event.
That having been said, given Apple's track record, I may be being stupid and missing something, and will be eating my words in twelve months when the iPad has sold 100m units. Maybe.
This is the thing. The iPad is not really competing with anything major. It's just like a bigger and more powerful iphone - with the same limitations of the iphone.
The iPhone currently competes with Windows Mobile. In my opinion, Windows Mobile provides me with so much more usefulness and greater freedom than the iphone environment.
Intel knows this and even though they really want a slice of the mobile computing cake, their best effort is the Atom that used to power slow netbooks.
i think the only way for Intel to dominate and establish itself in mobile computing, is to port Moblin OS (a fantastic Linux distro by Intel) into RISC. take a new approach by creating a RISC chip, with x86 decoder that is turned off and only power up when needed. x86 performance may be slower, but it will be competitive with ARM on the power domain while having backwards compatibility.
Should be looking forward at 128 bit new cpu's?
It's running Unix...
User interface =/= Operating system.
Operating systems are like icebergs, the UI is just the tip of the iceberg, you can't see most of it, but the UI is a miniscule part. MacOSX is proof that 'nix isn't complicated, the crappy environments developed by volunteers for free are what suck.
Cool, so I can get one and encode some video while surfing the net and listening to music?
Ummm, no.
This maybe the "start" of a new arcitecture, and nothing lasts forever, but I bet we don't see a revolution in the next 5 years, and during that time intel will be able to come up with something that will keep them in the marketplace.
Can i stream video from my media server and watch them in bed?
Can i multitask and surf the net while doing other things?
Can install anything i want on it?
Can i play flash games and videos?
Can i do proper work on it if i need to? (ie on the train)
It is basically a big iPod, and i didnt get one of those either. Far too limited in what it can do (especially for the crowd that frequent these forums anyway).
With a Netbook?
I would say:
Low resolution maybe
At a snails pace...just
anything? I wouldn't want photoshop on it. Or Crysis.
Again, as long as you don't mind it at a snails pace.
Yes! (Providing you have small fingers)
Having said that, if I had to choose I would go for a netbook every time!
At least it "can" do them, albeit not very well. The ipad won't even try.
First: The last line of your post is not true :-) I have used MacOS X on a 1,6 Ghz single core Intel Atom (a friend asked me to build him an OS X powered nettop) and it runs very well (no, it doesn't run Crysis, lol), and i have two more Hackintosh's to compare (core i7-920 and pentium dual core). Mac OS X is just more efficient than Windows (all of them :-) )
Second: Using an x86 cpu wouldn't make Apple use a standard desktop OS because iPhone OS does run on x86 quiet nicely (it runs in a iphone simulator app from the iphone sdk), as OS X is easily portable to any cpu architecture (it's predecessor NeXTStep/OpenStep worked on four architectures without any problems), but that would require iphone developers to recompile their apps for the iPad's new cpu (it's would be easy, but what's the point of doing it when you can use a cpu with the same ARM architecture as in the iPhone?).
^^^ This.
And yes, you can play music while surfing the web on an iPad. You can on an iPhone. You cannot encode video on top of that (possibly, although it is already making a mean photoshopping tool), because it was not meant for power-applications like that. Personally, I have a desktop rig with a 30" TFT for heavy crunching. I use my Tablet PC for light browsing and basic Office suite tasks.
Windows Mobile, meanwhile, is a joke. It totally fails at being geared to small mobile applications.
Sorry, but the iPad is the beginning of the future. It may not be as fully-featured as people want, but it is the shape of things to come. Y'all just still stuck in the old stand-alone laptop paradigm.
low resolution yes, but then again thats the screen a netbook has. it would be pointless to lug around a big monitor then whine about how the netbook cant play 1080p.
a netbook can browse the web while playing music, and have my mail app in the background - its all about choosing which programs to use (ie go for the lightweight option everytime).
why would i need photoshop or crysis when i can install Paint.net and GTA: vice city?
Flash doesnt run half badly on the netbook - better than on the mac i use at work anyway (piece of crap struggles playing normal res flash video).
You get used to the keyboard. unless you have sausage fingers.
Perhaps im just not getting this, but what is the iPad for? People keep saying its the next big thing but why? I dont want to stare at a bright screen for hours reading a book. I dont want to have to pay Apple to watch/listen to media. I can see all those early-adopters be dead pleased with their new iPads, but not having a clue what to do with it. They will force themselves to use it to get their moneys worth.
People with more money than common sense, and more fingers than brain cells.
I honestly don't see what it is meant to be either; it has all the downsides of a netbook and a phone, and yet none of the advantages of either. It literally is just a large iPhone. You would have to be mad to buy it as an eBook reader, and you would have to be mad to buy it as a replacement phone or netbook.
The difference between a standard iPhone and a jailbroken one is like night and day.
The point of this blog post is that it's Apple's approach to the hardware that is key not the iPad itself!!
Some people have already mentioned that this is the way forward for this particular market and I would put money on ARM being the future for both tablets & netbooks.
The original point that Intel should be worried I think very much stands!!
While I'm not sold on one myself (yet), I'll be purchasing it on day one for my mother. She's approaching 60 and has always intended to learn how to use a computer but never got around to it.
I just don't see the point of her learning our convoluted methods of PC use at this point in her life. Devoting hours in front of a screen to learn 'the basics' (which are actually far from basic) just so she can one day browse the web, send emails and look at photos?
I think what we need to realise is that, for a lot of people, computers are insanely daunting. Just putting aside the time to use one can feel like an event, one that will get done 'tomorrow'.
I think what will really sell the iPad is just how unintimidating it looks. It's more of an electronic device than a computer.
Seriously, I live with a guy who loves mac's, he said he's going to get one, and couldn't answer the simple question "what for?". He just wants one, it looks cool, it makes the vegans in starbucks envy him.
Personally I hate it, its pointless, but everything apple does right now is golden, and it will sell in stupid amounts.
They aren't filling a gap in the market, they're creating one.
I would bet that every single person who is too afraid to even touch a computer would also be too afraid to touch any laptop, tablet or any 100 percent touch screen phone. Especially if the touch screen phone requires a PC for its setup.
These people couldn't really tell the difference in usability - unless of course, they are already familiar with each operating system to be able to make a comparison. But if they already know the differences between them, then they can't now be too afraid to use them.
People don't buy iPads, iPhones or iTablets because they may look more friendly than a PC. They buy them because they are mobile and have their desired name, logo, gimmick, shape, size and flashy looks.
is the ipod the best mp3player? no.
is the ipad the best thing between phone and computer? no.
Yet the iphone and ipod sell like cheesecake that comes with free porn...
Point being, the ipad does not even have to be the best device out there in order to sell well.
Personally I think the ipad is too restrictive in use, but I think it will still end up as a success.
Alex, i think you are absolutely right, apart from one point: the Ipad isn't particularly good as far as i can tell. Intel wont truely be worried by this.
The company i'm still hoping to nail this is nVidia. their tegra platform could be the dogs dangly bits for low-power tablet computing.
Too bad nVidia hasn't announced anything in that direction, and they usually announce things years ahead of time, so it's going to be a long wait...
Or Intel can just wait for Microsoft to copy Apple with the eventual Windows 7
MobileLite for netbooksI even had it mouse macro 18 tabs to vote bomb a site and it was only 2 seconds slower per vote than my oc'd rig.. I swear if there were competent people bundling software for xp on these netbooks, you'd see alot of business there
just they come with antivirus from hell and a bunch of slow proprietary bs.. the services aren't even tweaked (like the themes service is slow as hell).. if they go with something like stardocks blinds you see the windows draw time is almost perfect.. take out all the unnecessary services and the thing doesn't bog on any software, including photoshop with 2 gig of ram.. I dunno, it's almost sabotage really when you look at it- how hard is it to hire someone to optimize the software end of things?
netbooks running a simple intel atom are pretty awesome from a productivity pov and last all day on a 6 cell (that can be replaced).. just cause they come out the box configured by some monkey doesn't make them worse than a ipad.. I wouldn't touch that thing with a 10 foot pole, it's for saddle poppers least on x86 you have choices and can shuffle work across with flash sticks too
Plus, as someone who takes a lot of photo's....
A wedding photographer could make good use of it, showing their past work to potential clients.
People who do a lot of presentations at work...
It isn't something I'd buy regardless of price though. I have a feeling it is going to suffer from the usual exchange rate trick - $=£, but if I was offered one I'd have it.
Now Apple comes show their most unimpressive tablet PC of this year, and everyone has complete attention to it, while it really has nothing special.. at ALL!
And companies, like Intel are not worried by Nvidia Tegra, but instead with the iPad, which in reality,m no one is supposed to care about?! I am lost.
For me, it's like if we all have our Core i7's with 6-cores, super fast 64-bit, then some company comes with some CPU that is equivalent to a P4 and consumes more power then the Core i7, and everyone wants to jump on it and get it, to a point that it makes Intel worried. This simply doesn't compute in my head. :(
In fact, although CES 2010 is full of really tasty tablets (the MSI dualscreen looks like beating MS Courier to it) they are all still only pre-production prototypes. Which makes me wonder: would any of these devices, including the HP Slate even exist if it wasn't for the expectation that Apple would launch its tablet soon? For a device that has no real use or niche, that is neither one thing nor the other, it sure has spawned a lot of competitors. :)
Spawned competitiors? What planet are you on? Tablets have been around for years, and they have been heading towards this point for years. It was simply a matter of timing. APPLE DID NOT INVENT THE TABLET AND THE IPAD IS NOT THE SECOND COMING.
all other company showcase their prototype, then people will forget about it until a couple month later, where most people have forgotten about it.
the Asus stealth-fighter-inspired gaming laptop in CES is shipping, and it's a very good follow up to the CES stories, that's how to do business. same with Alienware's gaming netbook, Dell U2711 monitor, they all able to put a date during their keynotes, and thus manage to stay in news.
However that doesn't mean Arm computers won't be good in the future. Though I doubt they'd ever go mainstream unless MS did an Arm version of Windows.
Some great points in the discussion, but this really stood out. So true.
Ipod touch is not the best mp3 player
iphone isnt the best phone
but both have sold + 20million units.
People who are on this forum are not apples intended customers thats a fact.
There intended target is joe blog in the street who just wants something he can browse the net with and listen to some music. Maybe even play the odd game that has been released. ( 100k apps on store and still rising most of htem very cheap and easy to just say lets try that)
I expect the ipad to sell and sell fast. Dont know how many users this forum now has that are active. But if 0 dont purchase the ipad it will be less than 0.1% of the total sales. If its priced correctly in the uk it will sell
x86 is a pile of crap in light laptops. your 1.6ghz atom wont power windows 7 correctly. If you photoshop on 1.6ghz i feel sorry for you. As you either have the paitence of a saint or have no choice in the matter. As the speed is terible.
Crysis on a netbook did somebody say id love to see that. The flash games are fun for the odd minute but get put down pretty fast.
I know a few people with the ebook reader and they love it.
Apple shows a product most of its targeted customers will buy.
These customers dont read this site. Dont own media servers. Dont care for photoshop or crysis. They want something that will allow them to go onto the internet and use the least available space and fit in the with there lifestyle. Which will play films music and maybe the odd game. And even some word processing.
If you ask the average joe what is multitasking on a computer they will laugh at you and say your a geek.
Apple knows most of its users dont care for anything but an easy to use device that does what it says when it says. They dont care its locked to one format and they dont care it wont connect to things they dont own.
Thats why this will sell and its why intel are worried
OMG netbooks wont run Photoshop or Crysis! they must be crap!
Hve you actually used a netbook before? this is being written on a netbook running windows 7 ultimate and its fine. once you tweak it (like has been said before) it flys.
Ok maybe Photoshop and Crysis wont run well (or at all in crysis' case), but at least i can try, without apple telling me no. or i could use one of the many alternatives out there, which didnt need to be vetted by apple. If you think all PCs should be able to run crysis then you really are a fool. You say flash games get put down quickly, imagine how quickly iphone/ipod owners put down their crappy little games and fart apps.
I have steam installed on this netbook, I have GTA 3/VC/SA which run great, HL1, Rome:TW, Civ3. more than varied enough for me. which brings me to the point. on a pc i have choice, on an iphone/ipod/maxipad apple chooses for me. once the sheep pick up on this they will go for android or something else.
as a netbook costs around £200 and has onboard graphics
you have a laptop and they are entirely diffrent
I still can't consider it a "proper" computer only a souped up phone. The lack of missing camera and mic prevents the possibility of video conferencing via a skype style app, lack of a stylus is going to make handwriting tasks less effective (even if you can use your finger) which limits the whole "pad" idea. Not to mention a serious lack of usb and memory card ports seriously limits expandability options.
All the current "features" for the ipad are things I can already do on my 2 year old mobile, I can do all that and more with my laptop, which may not be a sleek or lightweight as the ipad, but I'd rather have function over form any day.
I'm not an apple fan and PC's have kept me captivated by their versatility for years, but if the ipad had a decent enough feature set I would have seriously considered buying one but the sheer limitation keeps me away and safely at the keyboard of my PC and Laptop.
Then Apple shows signs of developing one, and whoosh! The market is suddenly flooded with prototypes.