Nanotech - The Circuits Blog

Firefox has a CPU usage issue and, consequently, can cause overheating problems in some laptops, particularly ultraportables. That's what I've found over the last couple of years.

But don't take my word for it. This is documented on a Mozilla support page entitled "Firefox consumes a lot of CPU resources." The page states: "At times, Firefox may require significant CPU [central processing unit] resources in order to download, process, and display Web content." And forum postings like this one about a Dell Netbook are not uncommon: "Mini9 would get way too hot."

The Mozilla support page goes on to say that "you can review and monitor CPU usage through specific tools" and describes ways to limit CPU usage, such as: "A Firefox add-on, called Flashblock, allows you to selectively enable and disable Flash content on Web sites."

Let me describe my experience. I find that tab for tab, Firefox uses decidedly more resources than other browsers--Safari, for example. And in the past (when I was actively using a Windows Vista-based machine) Firefox also compared unfavorably with Microsoft's Internet Explorer for CPU usage.

More specifically, here's the behavior as I see it. When I'm accessing sites with multimedia content such as the CNET front door, Firefox CPU usage will bounce around between 30 and 60 percent, and sometimes spike higher (80 percent and above), as indicated by the Mac OS 10.6.2 Activity Monitor.

On the other hand, the Safari CPU usage with the same pages open is much lower--typically between 2 percent and 10 percent.

My theory is that most users don't notice this because in mainstream laptops, this isn't an issue. But it can become an issue in ultraportables--typically under an inch thick--which are more sensitive to heat because of the design constraints. The ultrathin Apple MacBook Air, which I use as my main machine, is a good example.

The fan is usually an audible indicator of CPU usage issues. When I'm using Firefox and I have tabs open on multimedia-rich sites (which is par for the course these days), the Air's fan will almost invariably kick on and stay on until I close the tabs. As I write this, the fan has finally shut down after I closed the Firefox tabs (e.g, CNET front door). Those same tabs in Safari are still open and not causing any significant spike in CPU usage or fan activity.

When I contacted Mozilla, a technical support person guessed that Safari is possibly better at optimizing Flash-based sites compared to Firefox. And that may be true. However, I had similar issues before when I was using a Hewlett-Packard business ultraportable (also very thin like the Air) that were not necessarily tied to Flash usage. In short, Firefox was less efficient with CPU usage compared to Microsoft's IE 8. And the behavior was similar. The HP laptop would quickly heat up and the fan would kick on.

Finally, let me reemphasize that I'm guessing that most users don't notice this because heat dissipation is not a big issue for mainstream laptops that are not necessarily thermally-challenged when accessing multimedia-rich Web pages. That said, this has been a steady problem for me because I use ultraportables almost exclusively and has forced me to limit my use of Firefox.

If the iPhone didn't finish off Windows Mobile in the smartphone market, the Motorola Droid may.

Windows Mobile is losing the last vestiges of its mojo--if it really had any to begin with--as the Droid and other phones based on the Android 2.0 operating system push the buzz meter needle into the red zone. Many in the media--which can play a big role in steering users to one technology platform or another--sense that Windows Mobile has now been relegated resolutely to has-been status.

The Motorola Droid's high-resolution screen.

(Credit: Verizon)

Let's do a quick canvas of what some in the press are saying now that we're at the start of the Droid era. A post on SFGate.com (the Web site of the San Francisco Chronicle) is, like other commentary out there, clearly dismissive of Windows Mobile. "Curiously, Microsoft is nowhere to be seen in this battle royal," the author states, referring to the iPhone and Android.

And there's this more damning comment from a blog at SeattlePI.com. "Rarely mentioned, however, is another player in the mobile OS market--Microsoft. Why not? Because not many people in the smartphone world seem to really give a hoot about Windows Mobile anymore."

The litany of like articles is long. This post on PC World asks: "Has Microsoft Placed Its Last Mobile Bet?" The article cites research from Canalys showing Windows Mobile slipping from 13.9 percent of the worldwide smartphone market in 2002 to 9 percent in the second quarter of 2009.

The numbers are even less favorable in an accounting by ad service Admob, which compiles data on which operating systems are in use on mobile devices that access online ads. In August, according to AdMob, Windows Mobile had only a 4 percent share of the mobile OS market worldwide, down from 7 percent in February.

But getting back to my original premise of no mobile mojo for Windows. The fact is that consumers don't care about Windows on smartphones. In other words, while Windows seems to be a prerequisite for many consumers when buying a PC, it just doesn't come into play in a big way in a smartphone purchase.

This will have ramifications beyond Microsoft of course. Companies like Toshiba (and its attractive TG01 smartphone) will probably not be as successful on Windows Mobile as they would (will) be on Android 2.0. Or, at the very least, will not get the necessary buzz.

Then there's the Intel factor. Intel also wants to be a player, eventually, in the smartphone space. If it is indeed able to beat back Texas Instruments (whose chip is used in the Droid), Samsung (iPhone), Qualcomm (BlackBerry), and Marvell, it probably won't do it by sticking to the tried-and-true "WinTel" combination that's been so outrageously successful in the PC space.

And Intel is chasing a fast-moving target. TI, and all the other ARM-based chip suppliers cited above, are slated to bring out dual-core designs that can hit speeds as high as 2GHz (think next-generation tablets and media pads). In other words, they'll also be able claim the coveted speed mantle on phones, such as the Droid, where Windows Mobile is no where in sight.

So the Droid may not be the iPhone killer but rather the Windows Mobile slayer. Microsoft, of course, will always have the unassailable PC franchise. But, wait, isn't Android coming to Netbooks next year? Maybe the real battle royal for Microsoft is yet to come.

Intel on Monday said it is investigating a glitch that prevents an Apple iPhone from synching with certain PCs that use a new Intel chipset.

"Our leading theory is a BIOS or system configuration issue, but we are still investigating," Intel said Monday. The BIOS, or basic input/output system, is the initial code that runs when a PC is powered on. The BIOS identifies and initializes system devices such as the chipset, graphics card, and hard disk drive. Makers of PC circuit boards, aka motherboards, typically offer their own BIOS.

The problem is thought to be tied to the Intel P55 chipset and desktop motherboards from certain manufacturers, according to a report in The Register.

The Intel P55 Express chipset supports the Intel Core i7-800 and Core i5-700 series processors, according to Intel. The chipset is new and has only been available since summer.

As depicted in an "Apple Discussions" thread, on certain PCs or motherboards with the P55 chipset, Apple iTunes 9 for Windows will recognize the iPhone, but when a sync is attempted, an "error 0xE8000065" is generated, indicating an iPhone connection failure. Windows 7 is also cited as a common problem, particularly the 64-bit version of Windows 7.

"Microsoft has not seen this particular question posed in the Microsoft Answers for Windows 7 community forum, nor in any of our call centers," Microsoft told the The Register on Friday. "If we determine this to be a problem specific to Windows 7, we will post an update on the Microsoft Answers site."

The Apple Discussions thread proposes a number of possible solutions.

Apple could not immediately be reached for comment.

Though the Motorola Droid and Apple iPhone have different chassis, their high-octane engines are similar.

The internal similarities begin with performance: both devices are fast. The iPhone 3GS is already distinguished for its speed. And the Droid is quickly garnering similar accolades.

The Motorola Droid has a radically different exterior compared with the iPhone but uses a speedy Cortex-A8 ARM chip like the Apple phone.

(Credit: CNET Reviews)

"The Droid makes a big leap in internal performance. Compared with its rather sluggish Android predecessors," CNET Reviews said, citing the speed at which the Droid opens applications and menus and scrolls through lists and switches display screens.

"We're really pumped to see all the industry excitement it's created," said Jeff Dougan, the OMAP 3 product marketing manager at Texas Instruments, which supplies the OMAP 3430 processor that powers the Droid. "This is the first handset that truly realizes the full potential of Android," he said, referring to Google's Android 2.0 operating system that runs on the Droid phone.

The TI processor, like the one in the iPhone, is based on an a new architecture called Cortex-A8 from U.K.-based chip design house ARM, whose wide variety of chips populate most of the world's cell phones. Dougan says most smartphones currently on the market use an older, lower-performance ARM architecture than the Cortex-A8--with the exception of the Palm Pre, which opted for the newer TI chip. The Cortex-A8 provides a "two to three times performance boost" over older architectures, according to Dougan.

Max Baron, an analyst at Microprocessor Report, says the chips in the Droid and the iPhone (see not below) are so alike that differences are more dependent on the operating systems the two chips use and how successfully each phone maker optimizes the OS. "With chips that have near-similar specs, the optimum OS and the look-and-feel of the user interface may make or break the product," Baron said.

The core of TI's OMAP3 processor.

(Credit: Texas Instruments)

"The caveat, however, is that even small differences in chips will surface and become important differentiators as soon as the market forces you to increase the screen size or add more pixels per screen, or execute more power-consuming applications," he added.

The raw MHz ratings on the chips are slightly different. The processor in the iPhone 3GS--which is believed to be based on the Samsung S5PC100 processor--runs at 600MHz, according to most accounts. The Motorola Droid's TI chip is rated at 550MHz though theoretically it can be run as fast as 600MHz, according to TI's Dougan.

Both phones also use PowerVR graphics from Imagination Technologies--a company that both Apple and Intel have invested in, testifying to how hot its ultramobile graphics technology is. The PowerVR SGX is renowned for its ability to process several million triangles-per-second--a key indicator of graphics chip performance--blowing away other phones and the previous version of the iPhone.

Other internal specifications are similar between the two phones, including memory capacity (either 16GB or 32GB) and communications chips that offer 3G, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth connections.

So, internally the Droid is every bit the iPhone's equal. And future versions of TI OMAP 3 chips that may appear in upcoming Droids will be backed by formidable ecosystems, according to Baron. "Investments in application software may lean more toward the TI components," said Baron, given TI's strong support of the entire chip ecosystem, including auxiliary chips and software development tools.

Note:: Apple's and Samsung's reluctance to release information about the processor used in the iPhone 3GS has made it difficult to determine if the chip is based on the Samsung S5PC100, according to the Microprocessor Report's Baron. Many iPhone 3GS reviews and teardowns, however, state explicitly that the iPhone's processor is essentially the Samsung S5PC100 processor.

If the speculation about a new MacBook Pro is on the money, the step up to Intel's quad-core mobile technology would have a profound impact on this vaunted line of Apple laptops.

Is a Core i series Apple laptop on the way?

(Credit: Apple)

So, why would Apple adopt a Core i processor in a laptop? The short answer is OS X Snow Leopard. The new operating system is designed to be better at wringing more performance out of multicore processors--and the Core i chips pack four cores.

The long answer is the Core "i" chips themselves. The Core i, a.k.a. "Nehalem," is a brand new Intel microarchitecture brimming with performance improvements over the current Core 2 design.

For starters, the recently announced mobile i7-820QM processor integrates a hefty 8MB of cache memory--compared with the 6MB in the fastest Core 2 Duo that Apple currently offers on the MacBook Pro. Generally, the larger the cache memory, the better the performance.

But Intel has done a lot more than just up the transistor count via a larger cache. While the quad-core i7-820QM is rated at 1.73GHz, a single core can be "overclocked" to 3.06 GHz. Intel does this with a technology dubbed Turbo Boost, which speeds up and slows down individual cores to meet processing and power-efficiency needs, respectively.

Need more convincing? The Core i7 also comes with Hyper-Threading, which can double the number of tasks--or threads--a processor can execute. You won't find that in the Core 2 chips.

Digital media creation also gets a boost. Intel claims up to 81 percent faster video encoding.

And the mobile Core i7 is not a power hog--relatively speaking. The i7-820QM is rated at 45 watts, less than a third of the power envelope of the desktop Core i7. With such a powerful processor, heat would be an issue of course but the 45-watt power envelope is manageable.

That said, there are reports that Apple is not bringing out any more products this year. So, along these lines, alternatively, Apple could opt initially for the upcoming "Arrandale" Core i chips--due by the beginning of next year--that are based on a more advanced 32-nanometer manufacturing process. (Current Core i processors use a 45-nanometer process.)

Arrandale integrates graphics silicon into the same chip package as the main processor--a first for Intel. Because of this high level of integration, Arrandale, however, is a dual-core chip.

But probably the closest thing to a rumored MacBook Pro refresh is the iMac, which has the same space-constrained characteristics of a laptop. The quad-core Core i7 in the new iMac "boosts application performance up to 2x over the previous-generation iMac," according to Apple--and that's what consumers can expect with a Core i series laptop.

By not coughing up a low-cost MacBook, as some had expected, Apple has ceded a potentially huge market to PC makers. But is this just all part of Apple's marketing genius?

$999 is as low as Apple will go.

(Credit: Apple)

The announcement Tuesday of the $999 white polycarbonate MacBook was pretty ho-hum as product refreshes go (same price, same color as before) but the implication was important: Apple is surrendering a large, emerging laptop market to Microsoft and its coterie of PC makers.

Not that it's necessarily a bad strategy. Market researcher Gartner said recently that Apple's shipments in the U.S. grew year-over-year by 6.8 percent to total 1.57 million during the third quarter, putting it right behind Hewlett-Packard, Dell, and Acer. Comparatively, overall PC shipments in the U.S. grew by 3.5 percent from a year earlier.

But among those unimpressive overall PC numbers (HP's third-quarter shipments grew only 2.7 percent), was an impressive statistic for Acer: buoyed by Netbooks, Acer's shipments grew by 61.4 percent year-over-year, and it blew past Dell to become the No. 2 PC maker worldwide based on this growth.

Granted, Netbooks are a relatively low-profit segment (i.e., profit on a $400 Netbook is going to be a lot less than that on a $999 laptop). Nevertheless, they're a hot market. Intel CEO Paul Otellini has stated numerous times that Intel was able to create a market that grew faster than either the iPhone or Nintendo Wii. Case in point: Windows 7-based Acer Netbooks are now big on the Home Shopping Network--which claims to have sold more than 5,000 in one segment on Saturday.

And that's not the only market Apple is punting on. A new category of inexpensive, thin laptops has emerged with the roll-out of Windows 7 on Thursday. Like Netbooks, these laptops are light (typically 4 pounds) and don't include an optical drive. But they are relatively powerful and full featured. The 15.6-inch Acer Aspire Timeline, for example, with a 320GB hard disk drive and dual-core Intel processor is fairly well-endowed at only $500.

Apple is not receiving a lot kudos in the mainstream business press ... Read more

Drop the word "Apple" into any discussion with any company and the effect is nothing short of remarkable.

This innocuous logo can evoke fear

Over the last year, I have talked to middle-level and high-ranking executives at enough companies to know exactly what to expect when the topic of Apple is broached: fear.

A recent interview with a fairly big company provides an example as good as any. (But I could cite a much bigger company too, it's doesn't seem to matter.)

The way this interview proceeded was typical. Most of it was devoted to questions about the company's product plans (unrelated to Apple)--and the interviewee divulged plenty of information. A smaller slice of the interview was about customers or companies related to the interviewee (again, unrelated to Apple). Here, queries were answered with differing levels of transparency. Though less was revealed, nothing was a conversation stopper.

Then, toward the end, the conversation turned to Apple--which is not unusual as Apple's tentacles are everywhere, particularly in the case of hardware. My question began something like: "So, I understand Apple is..." The response was remarkably consistent with past interviews. I quote from the mid-level manager: "I don't want to lose my job." I've heard variations on this job security (I-have-absolutely-nothing-to-say) theme related to Apple during the last 12 months or so.

The angst is always palpable. When the interviewees clam up, then quip something like "I like getting a paycheck every month," with a wry smile, they aren't joking. And these people don't even work for Apple.

I haven't written about the Apple gag-order syndrome until now because it hadn't struck me as that surprising, i.e., the stock phrase "I can't comment on another company's product plans" is used often--not to mention the legal weight of nondisclosure agreements.

But this changed a few months ago when I realized how the Apple question consistently evokes fear (or call it distinct unease) in many interviewees.

A sensational claim? Maybe it sounds that way. But I'm calling it as I see it.

Why Apple? It's not a stretch to say that Apple is probably one of the most secretive companies in Silicon Valley. But it's also one of the most influential and, consequently, most powerful. How do I know this? This middle-level manager at this fairly big, independent, and successful company felt compelled to comment on his job security twice. And the second time he said it, the smile had clearly left his face.

LOS ANGELES--Adobe Systems' announcement of tools to create applications for the Apple iPhone comes with some restrictions.

Adobe announced on Monday at Adobe MAX, the company's worldwide developer conference, that its Flash Professional CS5 developer tool will enable developers to create interactive applications for the iPhone and iPod Touch. A public beta of Flash Professional CS5 is expected to be available later this year.

In an interview at the conference Monday, Anup Murarka, director of technology strategy and partner development in Adobe's platform development unit, spelled out some of the limitations of creating Adobe Flash-style apps for the iPhone. These limitations exist because the Adobe Flash player is not supported on the iPhone.

Murarka clarified that Monday's announcement was not a joint announcement with Apple. "This is an Adobe announcement. This is just something that's related to our tools and what they output, which is a native iPhone app," he said.

"So, we're not running Flash directly on the device. We're actually allowing our tools to output for native iPhone apps," Murarka explained.

He then described some limitations. "Let's take it from the developer's point of view. They have a very rich environment and language. That's in Flash today," he said. "You're not going to get all of the Flash feature set that would normally be there in the run-time."

Murarka continued: "For example, high-quality video, H.264, is not available with this product because Apple does not make available the decoders. They make you use their own UI (user interface) to play back high-quality video." Apple describes the H.264 video codec as delivering "stunning quality at...low data rates."

He also cited synchronization. "Being able to do synchronization between data and video. Those can be built as Flash applications. In sporting events (for example) using flash for data overlay. Those types of things are not going to possible because we don't have access to the APIs (Application Programming Intefaces) that would give us the video decode along with all of the individual frames so we can do synchronization," he said.

And he spoke about graphics effects. "Some of the filter effects. Some of the capabilities that as a programmer you would easily do within Flash are not available as they are not natural APIs that iPhone platform makes available to us."

Murarka concluded by saying that Adobe continues to work with Apple towards getting Flash on the iPhone. "We're not there as quickly as we would like. We're not able to put Flash in the browser. We're not able to put a Flash run-time on the device directly. But this is a good step," he said.

Updated on October 5 at 2:00 p.m. PDT: adding information about support for iPhone

Adobe Systems has garnered the support of mobile heavy hitters such as Google, Motorola, Nvidia, Palm, RIM, and Qualcomm for its new Flash Player 10.1 software for smartphones, Netbooks, and other mobile devices. The company plans to announce the support Monday at its developer conference in Los Angeles.

Adobe's goal is to get Flash Player 10.1 accelerated directly on the chips in smartphones, Netbooks, and small laptops based on the ARM chip architecture, called smartbooks. To date, Flash video acceleration has not been available widely on mobile devices.

"It's critical to support in hardware because (Flash) video is really computationally intensive," Tom Barclay, Adobe senior product marketing manager for Flash Player, said in an interview. "Putting that on the hardware provides the ability to play it back fluidly...so you're not going to drain the battery on these devices."

Though Flash-based video is available on virtually all PCs, "the vast majority of mobile devices have been fundamentally closed," according to Barclay. "This means there is a single (device maker) or carrier or handset manufacturer that can stop technology from getting onto those devices. And that's one of the reasons why the Web as been so slow to be directly accessible from those devices."

Toward the end of getting Flash to run directly on small mobile devices, Adobe created the Open Screen Project. "The Open Screen project is about making more of those devices open. In particular, providing flash player for free in an open manner with the requirement that (device suppliers) make it open for developers," Barclay said.

Adobe also announced on Monday that Google has joined the Open Screen Project initiative. Handset manufacturers such as Motorola will ship Google Android based devices with Flash Player support "early next year," according to a Motorola statement. Companies such as Nvidia, Broadcom, Nokia, RIM, and ARM chip suppliers such as Qualcomm, are all participants in the Open Screen Project.

Conspicuous by its absence was Apple. "Flash is not available on the iPhone at this point," said Adrian Ludwig, group manager, flash platforms at Adobe. "So far, we haven't received the support that we need from Apple." (Note: Adobe announced Monday that programmers will be able to create native iPhone applications using Adobe's Flash Professional CS5 developer tool, currently in beta testing, then offer their programs as an Apple App Store download.)

Apple aside, this is all part of an aggressive push by Adobe to get acceleration on mobile devices. More than 75 percent of video on the Web is delivered through the Flash Player, according to Ludwig. "Having the Flash player on your device means you're able to access all the content out there on the Web," Ludwig said, referring to referring to such sites as YouTube, the video inside MySpace, and Facebook, as well as Fox News and CNN.

Games are also a target. Ludwig pointed to Flash-based games, such as Playfish and FarmVille, played on social-networking sites.

A public developer beta of Flash 10.1 is expected ... Read more