“Apple says it bought P.A. Semi to get its hands on some patents and a bunch of very bright engineers who are already used to working together. I’m sure that’s true – but they also got an irresistible opportunity to shake the money tree while doing something good for the country,” Paul Murphy blogs for ZDNet.
“P.A. Semi designs PPC chips primarily for advanced military and robotics applications and the one they talk about in public, the PA6T-1682M, has had an unprecedented uptake in the industry – so much so that major defense contractors include Lockheed Martin and Curtis-Wright have locked in ten year supply contracts on it,” Murphy writes. “The chip itself is impressive: it’s a 15 watt, 2+Ghz, dual core, dual Altivec, 64bit PPC “system on a chip” with 2MB of level 2 cache per core, hardware packet management (including cryptology), on board memory busing, and eight concurrent PCI/E channels.”
“Why would Apple use it in a laptop? Because Apple has been facing pressure from U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) customers for more secure (i.e. non x86) gear that’s made in America and because all of P.A. Semi’s big customers are long term experts at selling to the DOD. In other words, what Apple really wanted here was technical expertise, but what they got along with it was specific market expertise and a golden opportunity to sell from three to five hundred thousand American made, PPC based, MacOS X machines to the DOD every year,” Murphy writes.
Paul Murphy is betting that Apple will make PPC laptops again. Read the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
MacDailyNews Take: 3Ghz within a year!
I thought Steve Jobs said, flat out, that they are not going to make PPC computers in an interview the other day…
What would prevent Apple from creating specific hardware for the military that wouldn’t be open to the public?
That the military is involved just adds another layer of secrecy and deception on top of Apple’s already uber-secretive approach to product development.
They ARE continuing to develop PPC distros of OSX, but I think its more likely they will take the tech and cross develop it into an x86 chip; we’ll see.. either way this is just another logical step
They are not going to make PPC laptops again. Period.
Govt to apple: “We want some of that gui awsomeness in r apps and osses yo!”
apple to govt: “ok, but we need this ship company to do it right”
govt to apple: “kai”
Intel cannot get much higher Ghz out of its chips – too hot.
Apple needs to be planning for an alternative….
2gig dual core PPC? It sure would be fun to run some performance tests against my MacBook with a 2gig dual core x86 intel, with all other specs equal. If the pre intel arguments for PPC’s being more capable at slower clock speeds is true, then that dual core PPC should kick ass.
Sure is cool the way OSX is written such that the processor architecture is not such a big deal. PPC on old macs, Intel on new macs. ARM processors on the iPhone, OSX works ’em all.
Why not make PPC and Intel? Heck, the OS runs on both right now, why not just keep it that way? Why get locked into a particular chip again?
I’m sure that if Apple could make a PPC notebook using some sort of new PPC chip that would make it thinner, lighter, faster and have a battery life a lot longer than the MacBook Air, then people would buy that.
I think that the security aspects of these designs and patents are the major issue here. Hardware based security measures that only a vertically structured tech company can employ easily could be crucial to Apple in the coming years to protect the OS from attack be it in computers or mobile technology.
this is just plain dumb, concluding that they’ll make PPC laptops again. there are many kinds of chips that go into an electronic product, not just CPUs…
http://blogs.wsj.com/biztech/2008/04/24/jobs-still-hearts-intel/?mod=WSJBlog
“Jobs said Apple acquired P.A. Semi mainly for its chip designers and suggested it will rely on P.A. Semi’s expertise primarily for portable electronics devices like the iPod and iPhone for which Intel doesn’t currently supply chips”
“Jobs said Apple, though, has no plans to go back to Power chips.”
Isn’t someone forgetting that it’s not the x86 chip that’s not secure, but the Windows that’s running on it that’s full of holes?
Or is Murphy trying to say that OS X is as vulnerable as Windows because it’s running on an X86 chip?
no way are they moving back to ppc, this chip maker is for the iPhone and future iPods
Resurrection of PPC Macs? Sounds RISCy to me.
“The chip itself is impressive: it’s a 15 watt, 2+Ghz, dual core, dual Altivec, 64bit PPC “system on a chip” with 2MB of level 2 cache per core, hardware packet management (including cryptology), on board memory busing, and eight concurrent PCI/E channels.”
All this techie talk is giving me a stiffie.
You speculating diddlysquat fools, who cares why they bought it. Apple makes money and money is honey. End of story.
can you imagine how pissed the developers would be? Adobe and the like? Spending all that time moving millions of lines of code over for Intel processors? Uff-da!
geez this has gotten my attention…
There’s going to be devices from Apple with leopard that doesn’t have bootcamp or theres no option to put windows on it.
Can someone possibly point this to mac tablet?
Apple will have DEVICES that use PPC. The main PUBLICLY AVAILABLE device will be iPhone, but some proprietary devices for mil and gov use only will be in the pipeline.
EricDano said, “Why not make PPC and Intel? Heck, the OS runs on both right now, why not just keep it that way? Why get locked into a particular chip again?”
I agree. Apple’s Xcode, etc. can compile Universal apps (think about this for a second), so why not make both and offer a choice to the consumer?
With regards to the MacBook and MacBook Pro – do it! Lower heat and longer battery time as a result. Go for it, Apple!
I think that is great! Helping out the DOD and putting some more money in their pockets, More power to them!
Well, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say we’ll see PPC laptops soon, but one should never say never. PA Semi with 150 engineers & designers was a steal at $278M and the worth the investment for the speculation and industry confusion alone. There’s little chance anyone will know what these guys will really be working on for Apple until the product(s) are released because this group has the potential to create anything from human interface chips and hardware accelerators all the way up to major Intel killing CPU’s
WTG Apple – The Company I Love to Watch!
I can see how this would make sense. The DoD would value doing business with a company which has a proven track record of keeping secrets.
And even though x86 CPUs aren’t “insecure” on their own, the fact is that pretty much all of today’s malware runs on x86, either directly under Windows or indirectly via Wine. So, to the paranoid mind, closing even that small loophole by using computers with PowerPC CPUs instead would make sense.
Forget about it. There’s a reason that the DOD wants something diff than x86….they wont allow Apple to sell the same chip in a consumer product. It protects them from all kinds of crap. I work for one of the companies mentioned and can say with confidence that it wont happen. And PPC in a laptop??! Don’t you people remember why the PowerBook G5 never happened? cmon now…..
This clown doesn’t know what he’s talking about
Mac OS X has the best solution for multiplatform apps, so it would not be a big deal to offer both PPC and Intel. Processing power and battery life are the main consern for most buyers so if PPC offers more than Intel, why not use it?
RoboJobs: “Dead or alive Mikey, you’re coming with me.”
Ballmer: “I’d buy that for a dollar.”
Because Apple has been facing pressure from U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) customers for more secure (i.e. non x86) gear that’s made in America
Isn’t all of Apple’s hardware assembled in China, or at least outside of the U.S. and Canada?
I’d love to see stateside manufacturing again, but isn’t it unlikely at this point?
I can see Apple continueing to sell intel x86 processors that can run windows, just like every other PC maker, and introducing PowerPC options at a premium price, with superior processing power. This way apple will be able to sell hardware that is significantly better than PC makers, while still serving the people who have to run x86 operating systems.
Mac OS X is already made to run on both PPC and x86
Jobs ALWAYS says opposite, so if he says that Apple will not make PPC laptops, you can be sure they will, you can bet on it.
Plus, this is like a gold mine, diamond mine, all those DoD contracts!
Special issue MacBook, MacMil Private, MacMil Desert…
$$$$$$$$$$$
@Afib
Good one! Too bad others didn’t catch it.
As much as I have trouble seeing SJ helping hawks I must admit that I like the idea of the US military running a super-duper locked down and limited version of OS X on PPC hardware. If security through obscurity has any merit that combination would do much to limit exposure and maximize overall security and stability.
major defense contractors include Lockheed Martin and Curtis-Wright have locked in ten year supply contracts on it,” Murphy writes. “The chip itself is impressive
So what if the chip is impressive. Isn’t a ten YEAR contract extremely naive, technology-wise?
What if in 1998 Lockheed decided the 233mhz G3 was “impressive” and signed a ten-year supply contract? Would we really want our defenses based on such outdated tech today?
Is this guy on drugs? Apple will never again produce PowerPC-based Macs. It would be kind of cool if it did, but it won’t.
” . . . Isn’t a ten YEAR contract extremely naive, technology-wise?”
Wouldn’t that depend on the wording and terms of the contract which could include flexibility provisions and required annual terms amendments to accommodate technological advancements?
Or not. Either way.
Cool. Bring on my Super Mac Pro
1 Quad-core Xeon
1 Quad-core PWR-whatever chip
1 x-core Cell
All connected with the Krack-Bridge.
sorry had to say it
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
Cool new newton osx touch wifi 3g ppc power to the pocket bye bye every other pda
It only makes sense for them to buy the company for the engineering team in and by itself. The fact that Apple has other systems using that architecture and OS X works fine with either build is only another plus.
However if the DOD wants something like that for security reasons it only makes more sense that Apple does it having a Unix based OS. More secure and more resistant to anything Win based naturally. The more diversity of systems the DOD has the less chances they can be compromised.
If anything has shown recently that the Chinese have been getting into our systems (if you followed that story) recently then you know being diverse is a good thing.
I’d agree with almost every positive post here on this one! It can only help Apple Inc. and the DOD too! Wasn’t the Navy or Air Force looking for something recently besides M$ stuff?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Anyway, I’m sure they need some “specific” computing hardware and some that would be loosely based on iPhone, iTouch MBA & whatever else you can throw at it! A useable & portable touch device would be way more useful than a BAT(Big Ass Table) from M$! Having OSX on all CPU platforms is a boon & no brainer advantage to Apple in the extreme run! Proprietary hardware plus security through obscurity and the ability to run on anything pretty much? No question that would be a great deal for the DOD & us consumers. Most new or evolutionary tech comes passed down from defense contracts on R&D;. Now if NASA can get in on the deal things might be lookin’ up. (No Pun Intended!)
Hmm, just a thought: “I wonder what Mr. Jonathan Ives & company come up with for the military?! That would have to be the most kick arse and user friendly to us and the most un-user friendly devices known to man! Dang! I won’t be around long enough to see that documentation under the Freedom of Information Act! LOL Then, if NASA was next wOw!! 😀
@ sourced again Here’s a clip from The New York Times 12.24.1999 and here’s what the gov got from the Intel guys to upgrade the older CPU:
”The Hubble not only has new brains, it’s thinking,” said Steven Robinson, mission communicator at the Johnson Space Center here. While the new computer is a big improvement for Hubble, having 20 times the speed and 6 times the memory of the old one, it is hardly state-of-the-art by current personal computer standards. Hubble’s new brain is powered by an Intel 486 DX2 chip running at a speed of 25 megahertz, a processor long obsolete in desktop computers now driven by newer Pentium chips. NASA officials said computer chips used in space must be specially manufactured and tested to work in that harsh environment, which keeps them generations behind what is used on Earth. ”You have to keep in mind that we don’t do Windows, we don’t have disks and we don’t do the Internet,” Mr. Campbell explained, jokingly.
A RAD750 (133-166mhz) chip used in the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter which BTW are still going. It was available in 2K1, too bad the Hubble didn’t get one back in the day. In ’98-99 the PPC750 was out and the generation before that outperformed the Pentium IIs, running up to 500mhz I believe. So the DOD, Apple & us will benefit no question.
Funny stuff.
It’s true–the RISC architecture was faster at lower clock speeds . . . for some things. It would be insanity for Apple to abandon x86 at this point, and I’m sure they’re aware of it.
I doubt this resurrection is in any way imminent. Remember all of the obstacles getting the PPC 970 to run cool enough to use in laptops? How the heck would they get one in an iPhone? I think something else entirely is afoot. . . .
@ericdano
That would be pointless, because it would alienate the big software makers who can’t seem to make universal applications. In an ideal world, that would be a great plan, but unfortunately we don’e live in an ideal world….we inhabit one in which Microsoft and Adobe exist.
I don’t believe a word of this. This is nothing but conjecture on the writer’s part.
I’ll tell you, I do enjoy the security I get on my PowerPC Mac. Seriously, no one is coding a virus for my platform…no one.
Apple’s not going to release another PowerPC based computer. The intel line has caused a massive sales boom with the ability to run windoze, why would they go back to their old ways? They wont! They’ll just use the talent to improve on what they have currently.
I’ve worked for the Navy for 19 years and we are still using Windows 2000 Professional on Crappy Dells. That is why you hear soooooo many cuss words in the offices. My 17″MBP isn’t allowed to connect to the server. Mega-Frustration going on. Ohhh, but we just got all new 20″ widescreens to make everyone think they got a new cpu. I hope I get to see the day Mac’s take over.
Maybe Apple’s switch to Intel is just a part of the Master Plan.
Go in, and as is happening, everyone is switching to Mac’s.
Then make the move back to PPC. Nah…………….?
@sorry
You don’ tknow Shit!
“major defense contractors include Lockheed Martin and Curtis-Wright have locked in ten year supply contracts on it,” Murphy writes. “The chip itself is impressive
So what if the chip is impressive. Isn’t a ten YEAR contract extremely naive, technology-wise?”
No, it is not. You need to have reserve parts and production of those weapons takes years. You dont change chips every month you get newer one. The design has to stay the same as long as possible. Instead it would be ridiculous to change the parts and the desing all the time.
Steve wants to keep all the doors open.
With Mac Os X Apple can run whatever program in whatever processor in whatever device whenever they want. I think it is a marvelous idea
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
The simple fact of the matter is that PA does not have a fab plant. Dreams of Apple made processors are quite simply, fvcking stupid. PA sent a warning to it’s clients that it would be able to meet future orders and that current products will be end-of-lifed.
You watch how badly the other idiot so-called analysts will twist this. The doom and gloom factory will ramp up to exploit the potential future failure of imaginary hardware based on a fantasy of Apple made chips.
Magic Word: “full”, as in “analysts are full of sh!t”.
The hardware security issue in this article is BS, plain and simple. Murphy could do a quick check with any military clients and find that the Panasonic ToughBook is ubiquitous in the field. It may be heavy, but the thing can take a beating and work in hostile conditions.
The PA Semi purchase isn’t about PPC laptops–that train has left the station. It’s about talent and IP. By getting these great innovators and engineers, Apple can make its own chipsets more energy efficient so that a MB or MBP goes from 5 to 7 hours on a charge. That sort of market differentiator is important in a business where becoming an also-ran would certainly hurt Apple.
For the best take on Apple’s purchase of PA Semi and what it means for Apple, check out this Roughly Drafted article.
I hope Apple does utilize PPC chips again. The PPC version of OS X is way better than the Intel version. Just look at the flakiness of Address Book as an example. It is so buggy on Intel. My 400 MHz PowerMac G4 is still working great, at 8 years old.
LOL That was MDN in 03….this is MDN 08 and their nothing but Apple cheerleaders.
” This is why I like MDN. They are not Apple cheerleaders (all the time) and will call them on mistakes when Apple makes them (yes, even Apple makes mistakes). I agree Jobs should shut his yap. What’s he going to predict next, that Kerry will win the U.S. Presidency?”
Mac OS-X is all fleshed out on PPC, why not leverage their knowledge base and produce some low power devices that just run OS-X and most apps without too much engineering? It could happen? It’s not likely but it could happen.
This is all nonsense.
They need Wintel compatibility for the foreseeable future.
Chips or expertise could find its way into future portable devices that aren’t considered true laptops. However, it is highly doubtful the chip will end up in a core laptop line where the need to run windows is still high for grabbing market share.
As a PowerBook owner, I’m happy to hear this rumor. I’m not sure that I believe this, but I’m happy to hear it, especially with the future of Mac OS X and PPC. I do remember Steve Jobs speech about dumping PPC and going with Intel processors. The main reason was obvious, that Motorola wasn’t delivering the faster chips that Apple needed to stay competitive with the Intel versions of computers.
I do remember Steve Jobs saying that they would go back to PPC if it was advantageous for them to do so. And, this purchase of P.A. Semi is a good way of Apple to keep their hands on their hardware, which they have always preferred doing.
But, frankly, 2 GHz dual processors isn’t that fast a speed in todays computers. Intel will surpass that in a few months. What is more valuable is the knowledgeable employees and the built-in defense contracts that the company has to offer.
From the article:
“We don’t know much about its performance because the actual benchmarks have not been published – reasonable estimates, however, put it at about 50% over the IBM 970Fx at 2Ghz – roughly comparable to Intel’s top end dual cores for simple character pushing, about twice as fast as high end Xeon based systems for unencrypted network and graphics I/O, and about an order of magnitude faster than dual core x86 for floating point.”
Longtime readers of this site may remember, when the Switch was made I said that it wasn’t made for performance reasons, or cost, or chip availability, or Windows compatibility – and I had to deal with quite a bit of fanboism as a result. But facts are facts:
* As PASemi has shown, Apple had more than enough performance and chips available (Freescale’s e600 core G4s would have been Yonah-class transiition chips, until the PASemi CPUs came online).
* Costs with Intel are actually higher – still! All Macintel prices went up about $100, and except for the extremely high margin MacPros and servers, have never come down. Apple used to sell iBooks for under a grand – when was the MacBook ever sold for less than $1100?
* Sales of PPC Macs were ALREADY OUT PACING THE INDUSTRY before the Switch was announced. They slowed as people waited for the new kit, and have since taken off again. If the goal is simply more sales, Intel was/is not needed, Windows was/is not needed (only a minority of Mac buyers use Windows on the Mac, and the numbers are getting smaller all the time). OSX was converting people all on it’s own.
There was only one thing that Intel offered that Apple (Jobs) needed. Integrated hardware DRM on every MoBo they produced. Jobs needed it b/c the movie and TV studios, at the time, would not give him content unless software-only Fairplay was augmented, and Intel’s TPMs were what they had been involved with developing, and thus favored. The ultimatum was made – transition to Intel or no content – and Jobs blinked.
Since then, events have overtaken the original plan and intentions, perhaps on both sides, but certainly for the studios. Video online went viral, Apple’s iTunes Store is the only consistently popular and profitable place to sell video downloads, and thus Jobs was able to drag his feet on the draconian ‘lock-down’ methods he initially signed-off on, while the studios had to suck it up and provide the content anyway. The TPMs, so far, have not been lit up. But make no mistake – they, and Intel’s closely collaborated hardware DRM ‘total solution’, were the real impetus for the Switch.
Now that dropping DRM on audio tracks is a fact of life (and the world hasn’t come to an end fr the record labels), it’s certain that DRM for video will … eventually … follow the same path to oblivion. In which case, why stick with Intel? Especially when PASemi can and does make a better PPC CPU, and Universal Binary coding makes any future transitions – of any single product, or the entire lineup – an academic exercise?
THAT’s why Apple bought their own PPC chip designer. Bank on it.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cool smirk” style=”border:0;” />