[Marf]

Flagrant speculation. It's so simple. Apple's forthcoming product transition could be to a new Apple-brand processor.

Apple's recent purchase of chip technology company PA Semiconductor suggests that they're going to be making a lot of custom chips in the near future. That could mean a new, low power, low speed, high throughput, general processor unit (GPU). Put two of these chips in an iPhone, put sixteen of them in a MacBook. Forget multiple cores. Use multiple non-dedicated GPUs that handle different parts of the system, but which can be used for general processing tasks when they're not doing I/O, video, or WiFi communication, et cetera.

Many small processors used in parallel could do more work than a single high-performance mono- or duo-core processor.

That is what I think Apple could be referring to when they say that they're about to go through another product transition. Apple is going to make a leap in the PC industry that would put them as far ahead in PC industry as they now are in the mobile phone industry. It would also solve the minor problem of start-up companies trying to sell generic PC hardware that will run Apple software, and further increase the performance differential between Vista and Mac OS X.

Apple has always found itself at the mercy of the companies that made its processors. Motorola and IBM could not deliver with the PowerPC, and perhaps Apple now sees its interests diverging from those of Intel. With a mountain of cash in the bank (fifteen billion at the start of 2008) and PA Semiconductor, Apple has the resources to make a leap on its own.

It may also signal the end of the Macintosh line of products, with Mac OS X becoming Apple OS X, starting with Snow Leopard. End flagrant speculation.

[Simon]

Nice idea. But in short Steve would say "been there, done that, not making that mistake again."

[Big Mac]

Perhaps a custom chip design for the handhelds, but otherwise I agree with Simon. Although I can always hope for a new generation of super Power Macs.

[mduell]

So Apple bought the IP and hired a few folks from PA Semi (who's desktop processor was what again? oh that's right they did embedded chips) and they're going to use them to make a fabless assault on Intel? No; Apple's going to stick with Intel for Nehalem and Larrabee in their personal computers.

I expect to see Apple use the PA Semi acquisition to design their own SoC for the iPhone and similar devices. Consolidate from the ~5 ARM and other chips they're using now to 1 or 2, add specialized hardware for a few things, drive power consumption down, etc.

[lenox]

This is similar to the 'flagrant speculation' that's been floating around in my head lately...!

Here's what I think:

Apple will create a general purpose/codec chip to be included in every new mac (as well as iPods and iPhones) and maybe brand it with a name related to Quicktime. Why, you ask?

1. Psystar (the infamous unsanctioned mac 'clone' maker) is talking about counter-suing Apple for antitrust, citing the 'related products' clause...basically, the idea is "if it CAN be done, it shouldn't be ACTIVELY prevented" i.e. running OS X on generic Intel PC hardware. If you can run OS X on a PC, then Apple might not be allowed to prevent it, if Psystar's lawyers have any idea what they are talking about.

If apple were to have an Apple-branded codec/general purpose chip, and base OS X's core functions to be accelerated by it, and require it...well then, problem solved...you CAN'T run OS X on a PC. Multiple birds, one stone: prevent use of OS X on any old PC, don't get sued by Psystar or other clone makers, don't get forced to open OS X and support the gajillions of PC hardware configurations out there.

2. If it's a codec chip, streaming/transcoding between various Apple products (AppleTV, iPhone, iPod, etc) would be a realtime affair, and they could make sure their DRM (sigh) is upheld in the process. Imagine a codec chip that could be told the capabilities of the target device and the transmission medium, and intelligently transcode the resolution and bitrate, all transparently to the user.... It'd also save battery life in iPods, iPhones, and Macbooks.

3. OS X has always attempted to use the hardware available to it in a much fuller sense than other desktop OSes..this has so far mostly been true for the graphics card/GPU...but I am sure they could think of more uses for this 'QuickChip' than just codec duties. I can think of a few myself...

4. Intel wouldn't go anywhere (unless maybe AMD kicks it up a notch). Apple and Intel are a great match...Intel will still be supplying the CPU and various bridge on the motherboard...but this additional coprocessor/codec/whatever chip would allow Apple's hardware to truly be as unique as it looks externally, and acts on the OS level. All Mac users know there's something extra that makes the experience awesome...this would just be a tangible something extra