MUST READ: Congress demands answers from Google over Glass privacy concerns

Topic: Processors

Apple A4 is not a CPU, it's a 'system-on-a-chip'

Summary: Details are starting to emerge about the chip powering Apple's iPad - the A4. As it turns out, it's not a CPU but a complete 'system-on-a-chip.'

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

By for Hardware 2.0 |

Details are starting to emerge about the chip powering Apple's iPad - the A4. As it turns out, it's not a CPU but a complete 'system-on-a-chip.'

The A4 represents Apple's entry into fabless semiconductors, and while it's seems like interesting technology, most of it is based on ARM intellectual property. The A4 brings together a CPU (at this point it's unclear how many cores the A4 has) and a GPU, along with other features such as memory controller.

Compared to the Samsung processor in the iPhone that chugs along at 600MHz, the A4 ticks at 1GHz, offering the iPad a fair performance boost. Not only is it fast, but it's energy efficient, allowing the iPad to run for up to 10 hours.

Topics: Processors, Apple, Hardware, iPad, Mobility

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

147 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion

  • it just show how closed apple has become

    this is a real danger for innovation.
    Linux Geek
    Reply Vote

    • Yet

      I see no OSS company doing just that.

      All we get is poor "Me too" software.
      The one and only, Cylon Centurion
      Reply Vote

      • Not quite

        Take a look at the BitTorrent protocol and clients
        on the software side. There are lots of truly
        revolutionary ideas that have come out of the FOSS
        camp (A lot of FOSS software comes out of research
        universities, you know), but uptake for
        revolutionary ideas is pretty small since people
        prefer what's familiar. Heck, even FOSSies prefer
        what's familiar.
        daengbo
        Reply Vote

    • Well, in this case, to be fair, Apple IS using the industry standard Arm

      core at the heart of it. But, Apple would be
      better off in the long run using more open source
      components, like the Linux kernel, and trying to
      do less on their own.
      DonnieBoy
      Reply Vote

      • Why is that?

        Why would they be better off doing less on their own, and using open source components?
        AllKnowingAllSeeing
        Reply Vote

        • All a matter of money and time to market. Apple DOES use a lot of open

          gopen source though. They only have to maintain
          the basic kernal, the rest, they use the same as
          the BSDs and Linux. Of course they have their own
          Window Manager and GUI.
          DonnieBoy
          Reply Vote

          • You're missing the big picture. Apple has no need of Linux

            This is all about vertical intergration, Apple has absolutelly [b]no need[/b] of Linux.
            They appear to be doing [b]quite[/b] well without it, reading their latest earnings report.

            Right now, you can't get anything for this tablet unless it comes thru iTunes. They make alot of money via their 30%, more then any savings on using Linux, and they don't have to release or share one bit of code with anyone.

            They really don't use much of any open source at this point, and it really is a non issue.

            I believe you're viewing this from the angle of yet another opportunity for Linux that has been shut down, and you're not seeing the overall picture

            MS has the lion's share of server, desktop, laptop, netbook installs, Apple at a distant second, Linux far behind Apple. Apple knows they're not going to take over the top spot in server, desktop, laptop, netbook (via MacBook Air) space, but they know they can use their massive place in entertainment media/App store to their advantage.

            Linux offers them nothing they don't allready control.
            AllKnowingAllSeeing
            Reply Vote

          • Actually, Apple uses a ton of open source, and, Windows does NOT rule on

            servers, quite far from it. Of the very biggest,
            ONLY MS uses Windows servers.

            On open source used in Mac OSX, they use a ton
            of open source, that is the same as that used
            for the Linux and BSD platforms:

            http://www.apple.com/opensource/

            Actually, OSX literally would not be possible
            without all the open source pieces. Apple knows
            that.
            DonnieBoy
            Reply Vote

          • The handfull of "big companies" are small.

            the companies you keep talking about are an [i]extreamly[/i] small percentage of overall usage of servers, so that really doesn't enter into the equation at all. You forget about the millions apon millions of small, medium, and large businesses that use MS severs as the backbone of their infrastructure.

            [i]OSX literally would not be possible
            without all the open source pieces. Apple knows that. [/i]

            And so what? I'm sure alot of people understand that, but it doesn't mean anything because Apple owes open source nothing, they're on a roll right now. Their PC division isn't where they're getting the majority of money from, it's their consumer electronics division that's doing that (iPod, iPhone, App Store, iTunes), so open source doesn't help them out in anyway.

            It's clear that the direction they're going is the best model for them. It's clear that open source is a non factor for Apple, seeing that using Linux and open source won't add a thing to their bottom line, infact, it may actually take away from it.
            AllKnowingAllSeeing
            Reply Vote

          • Piny: There are a ton of large internet companies, almost all use Linux

            for the back-end because it is the best. Sure, a
            lot of small companies that have no idea what they
            are doing buy Windows servers that have very low
            utilization, so what?

            Open source is extremely important to Apple, it is
            all through their products. Maybe some open source
            people do not like the way Apple does it, but, it
            is Apples life blood.
            DonnieBoy
            Reply Vote

          • Still doesn't answer why you think it would be beter

            for Apple to go open source and Linux.

            Keeping it closed keeps the money pouring in thru iTunes and the App store.
            AllKnowingAllSeeing
            Reply Vote

          • Different licensing though. GPL vs BSD

            Apple wants proprietary and BSD allows them to do that. Switching to GPL would force them to make the proprietary parts non-proprietary.

            Apple survives on proprietary HW and Software. True they are taking advantage of open source software but the package as a whole (HW & SW) is anything but.
            DevGuy_z
            Reply Vote

          • @DonnieBoy: The number of Linux internet hosters ...

            Are utterly dwarfed by the number of other businesses in the world, almost all of which use Windows Servers for file-sharing, printer-sharing, databases, email servers, software distribution, etc., and Windows on the desktop.

            While *N*X may well own the title for hosting the most websites, the VAST majority of websites hosted today are small, inconsequential, rarely visited and pointless.

            Of course, plenty of HUGE websites are hosted successfully on *N*X, but a number of HUGE websites are also very successfully hosted on Windows. And in this space, y'know what? The cost of Windows licensing vs. Linux's $ cost is a rounding error on the company's balance sheets.
            de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023
            Reply Vote

          • obfuscation

            It matters not what the "biggest" use. What matters to the statement made is total servers using a particular NOS, and Windows has owned that market for about five years now. If the biggest server farms are using something other than Windows, and Windows still rules the total, it just reinforces the point of the popularity of Windows Server among the masses. The average power user can set up and run a Windows Server system. Only the geekiest of the geeky can run Unix/Linux. (yes, there are intentional generalities included in the above statement)
            Dr. John
            Reply Vote

          • @de-void & Dr.John

            Guess we all need to root for our particular favorite team.
            And would even hazard a guess (as there is no empirical evidence) that as a particular "product" that MS may have the most recuring "sales" or "licenses" (which is only added too by all their server products, WHS, SMB, WSUS etc), for any individual company.

            But if you then consider all the others. Commercial/enterprise; Red hat, Novel/Suse, Oracle/Sun, IBM etc. In total MS might even surpass them sometimes but not by that much.

            Then consider all the rest, Google, Akami, Yahoo, hosting companies, various other specialised or smaller concerns, whether or not they use Unix, BSD, Linux or something else.

            Again I would hazard a guess that in total, as an "individual company" MS could possibly be in the majority with 25~40% of total sales/installations.

            But in the larger world it is not only MS, & Linux if not all *nix has more server installations.
            LazLong
            Reply Vote

          • Apple has chosen Open Source - that is what OS X is - mostly

            OS X is a FreeBSD variant.

            OS X is also available open source as Darwin, you want a Unix OS for
            free, just download courtesy of Apple.

            What OS X offers is a user interface layer and some applications, all
            designed to make the operating system usable by real world users,
            rather than tinkering IT folks.

            Otherwise it's open source all the way.

            Apple promotes open source, depends on open source, and promotes
            the creation of open standards.

            Ask MS for a command line version of Windows for free cause you
            want to run a server - watch them laugh at you.

            The amount of disinformation on blogs about Apple being proprietary
            and therefore evil is just insane.

            Nowhere does my Mac lock me into anything, I use it cause I am fairly
            stingy about spending on software, I like my computer to work
            without shelling out for extra crap.

            I signed up for the iTunes store the other day, I have only been using
            Macs since 1985, but I got a free download so I signed up. I probably
            won't spend money there - and I will not be in any way prevented
            from using my computer or doing anything I might want to do.

            I have downloaded software from Apple before, and will do so again
            this week probably, but that will not even take me near the iTunes
            store.

            I am developing websites at the moment on my Mac, and these will
            follow the Apple way, which means I will be able to deploy them on
            either OS X or Linux with nothing other than a normal Linux server, no
            proprietary stuff.

            I had the choice of doing this the Apple way or the MS way, MS meant
            proprietary server technology, Apple meant freedom.
            richardw66
            Reply Vote

        • Money

          Programmers cost money. Apple dropped OS-9 because it cost too much to maintain the core of that code. To add everything they wanted, would have required them to build a software department roughly the size of Microsoft's Windows department.

          OS-X is built around FreeBSD and MACH, two BSD-derived kernels. As such, the code was readily available and Apple only had to do minimal work bringing the bits and pieces they wanted from each together. This dramatically reduced the number of programmers they needed and allowed them to spend more time and money concentrating on the hardware.

          Even now, Apple takes appropriately licensed code, modifies it to suit their needs, and then packages it and sells it. But don't ever expect them to use anything with a GPL, Eclipse, Apache, or Mozilla license. They prefer BSD, MIT, and Artistic licenses which allow them to use the code anyway they want with out needing to publish their modifications or return anything back to the community which created them.

          By keeping things open source, they reduce their overhead greatly.
          mheartwood
          Reply Vote

          • Doesn't seem to be much of a problem to them

            they own a CPU design company, they have competent programmers, and they can use them to keep Linux out.

            This isn't about open source and standards, this is about Apple funneling money thru the App store.
            John Zern
            Reply Vote

          • The CPU is based on Arm, they did not design it from scratch. OSX would NOT

            be possible without all of the open source code,
            from the kernel to the webkit rendering engine, to
            the compiler to OpenSSH, etc.
            DonnieBoy
            Reply Vote

          • Who Cares?

            You guys have turned this topic about Apple's A4 chip into an Apple should chuck OSX and run straight Linux or which OS runs on more servers (also immaterial)

            Is it possible for the fanboys to curb their zeal and stick to the thread topic??!!!
            archangel9999
            Reply Vote
CNET Join | Log In | Privacy | Cookies Close