Business Tech

It's too tempting not to pose that question as the monthly Apple tablet rumors fly.

The Apple 'media pad' could look like this--just bigger with ad copy that says '4x faster.'

Conjecture about future Apple products is always an interesting exercise because it requires a lot of imagination to make up for the copious lack of hard data. This is especially the case for the rumored Apple tablet, despite analyst claims about product specifications, such as the oft-repeated 10.1-inch screen.

But there is one theme that keeps popping up that is highly plausible: it will be a device to view media and book content (rumor: 30/70 revenue split between Apple/publisher) in a "better" way. Hmm...let me think for a minute: the same way many people now use their iPhone? (Certainly, the media part.) So--though not a phone per se--basically an iPhone (or iPod) with a bigger screen, faster graphics, and better interface (and/or subscription model) to view content.

Does that about cover it? That doesn't sound like a tablet to me, with all the negative connotations that the word "tablet" has in the PC industry: fat, heavy, kludgey, boring.

Which is why "media pad" sounds a lot better. That, to me at least, connotes thin, light, modern, exciting. But I'll leave the branding to Apple. So far, they have a pretty good track record.

Industry insiders are accusing Apple of manipulating the price of NAND flash memory chips used in its popular iPhone and iPod products, according to a report in The Korea Times on Monday.

Citing unnamed sources, the article says Apple asks manufacturers to produce more chips than it eventually buys from Samsung Electronics and Hynix Semiconductor. The sources said Apple waits for the price of the chips to fall before making its purchase.

(Credit: Apple)

The practice of not buying all of the product originally ordered, semiconductor analyst Jim Handy told CNET, is "not uncommon in the industry."

Handy, of market research firm Objective Analysis, explained that these contracts are normally negotiated with a cancellation clause, with provisions to protect the supplier and buyer. He said companies usually work closely with the buyers, so changes to orders are normally small and don't cause many problems.

Supply and demand in the NAND market are currently about even, Handy said, adding that with the popularity of the iPhone and iPod, he's heard estimates that 20 percent to 30 percent of the worldwide NAND flash memory goes to Apple. In its fiscal fourth-quarter results, the company reported selling 10.2 million iPods and 7.4 million iPhones for the three months ended September 26.

Chipmakers Samsung Electronics and Hynix Semiconductor declined to comment for The Korea Times, as did Apple's Korean office. Contacted by CNET, representatives of Apple in the United States also declined to comment for the story.

The iPhone sales numbers continue to increase, as does the number of applications available for the device. Apps are one reason the iPhone has become as popular as it is among so many different categories of users in such a short time on the market.

Apple currently has more than 100,000 apps available for download, with users having downloaded more than 2 billion apps as of November 4.

The "smartbook" aspires to put the smartphone into the laptop. Will it be able to elevate an Apple iPhone or Motorola Droid-like experience to a larger device, or is it just more marketing mumbo-jumbo?

Two companies are hoping that the smartbook will turn out to be more than just another quickly-forgotten device sales pitch. Qualcomm and Freescale, which are both supplying key silicon technology for the devices, are pushing to make smartbooks different enough from laptops--and Netbooks--that consumers will take notice.

Qualcomm CEO Paul Jacobs holds the Lenovo smartbook, which will appear at CES in January.

(Credit: Qualcomm)

The first tangible evidence of smartbooks to come will be seen at the Consumer Electronics Show in January, where Lenovo, among others, is expected to show, if not roll out, smartbook designs.

One pesky question won't go away, however. Why go out of the way to call it a smartbook? Doesn't Netbook suffice? (And it can potentially be very confusing for consumers since both terms have "book" in them.) On one level, the nomenclature choice is simply to counter the Microsoft-Intel Netbook juggernaut: Another Netbook among dozens already on the market won't draw much attention.

But at a deeper level, the two companies are trying to make the smartbook substantively different from a Netbook. Qualcomm sees it, in essence, as a large smartphone, which leaves the outdated Windows desktop experience in the dust. "A Netbook in our view is just a cheap laptop that runs Windows. We see the smartbook cannibalizing the Netbook. ... Read more

ARM on Tuesday announced the launch an alliance of 35 tech companies to support development of Android-based products using its widely used chips.

ARM-based chips power the world's most popular smartphones, including--in the U.S.--the Apple iPhone, Blackberry Storm, Palm Pre, and Motorola Droid.

The Solution Center for Android alliance will serve as a resource for designers and developers of ARM technology-based products running on the Android operating system, which is the software on the popular Motorola Droid smartphone and Acer Liquid.

In addition to smartphones, Android powers digital picture frames and smartbooks--what the Windows-Intel camp prefers to call Netbooks. ARM-based smartbooks packing processors from Qualcomm, Freescale Semiconductor, and Texas Instruments should begin to emerge in force at the Consumer Electronics Show in January, where Lenovo, among others, will debut its first-ever smartbook design. The Lenovo smartbook is expected to be sold by AT&T.

"Developers require assurance that the components they are using are up to the task," ARM said in a statement. "Android was written for the ARM architecture and Android 2.0 was launched on high-performance (ARM) Cortex-A processor designs."

ARM says the launch of popular products is putting new pressure on the ecosystem that supports ARM. "As we have seen through the recent launches of handsets such as Motorola's Droid and Acer's Liquid, the Android platform represents a fundamental change in the open source ecosystem," Kevin Smith, VP of segment marketing at ARM, said in a statement.

Smith says that ARM now needs to ensure that development solutions are world-class. "ARM is in a position to foster an innovative ecosystem to ensure that device manufacturers have the best development solutions at their disposal," he said.

Analysts agree. "Consumer adoption of smartbooks, smartphones and other 'always on' connected devices is forecast to increase significantly in the next few years," Jeff Orr, a senior analyst at ABI Research, said in a statement provided by ARM. "Manufacturers of these devices need a support structure that enables them to develop cutting-edge devices quickly and affordably."

ARM said that in addition to the support of major device makers, silicon partners and solution providers, the Solution Center for Android comprises more than 35 members of the ARM community, including Texas Instruments, Mentor Graphics, and Archos.

Updated at 9:30 a.m. PST: Clarifying that "Netbook" is the name that the Windows-Intel camp gives to the small laptops and "smartbook" is the moniker applied by the ARM camp of device makers.

I'm going to break from the well-established tradition of comparing Netbooks to notebooks. This time my yardstick is going to be the smartphone. And no better yardstick than the Apple iPhone.

Verizon is selling Netbooks as kind of an upscale smartphone

(Credit: Verizon)

This post updates a year-old piece (which, by the way, at least one writer took exception to).

As the holiday-shopping season approaches, many consumers face an ostensible choice between an inexpensive Netbook or more expensive notebook. I personally face that choice (or, at least, I thought I did).

Let me state up front that though I have used Netbooks on a temporary basis, I have never owned one.

I (now) believe that Netbook comparisons to mainstream laptops (which will always disappoint because Netbooks are slower, screens smaller, keyboards more cramped--and this list of comparative shortcomings is long) is really the wrong way to look at it. Let me illustrate.

I recently interviewed the chief technology officer for a large school district in Louisiana that had purchased a lot of Netbooks. And I asked what I thought was the most pertinent question: weren't performance and screen size a concern? She quickly pointed out that my perspective was all wrong.

In short, students in K through 12 are accustomed to iPhone-size screens and performance. So moving to a Netbook is a big step up. From this perspective, the screens are large, the keyboards expansive, and the performance more than adequate.

This suddenly made a lot of sense to me because of my personal experience. Take the iPhone 3GS (or Motorola Droid or BlackBerry Storm, take your pick ). To state the obvious, in many respects, this is a personal computer platform for e-mail, texting, Web surfing, music, navigation, YouTube, and the list goes on.

In other words, the iPhone is for consuming data and media as well as light production. Like the Netbook. But the Netbook, obviously, takes this to the next level. It adds a keyboard and a larger screen, which also makes it potentially a better production platform. So, it's an iPhone Plus, if you will.

And here's the real proof in the pudding. Where do you see Netbooks being sold these days (think Nokia Booklet)? At phone carriers, like Verizon. The last time I visited a Verizon store, it had 3G Netbooks prominently displayed right next to the Motorola Droid.

The point seems obvious to me now. Want to be more productive? Step up to a Netbook. And this follows the same logic of the CTO at the Louisiana school district. And upcoming tablets and media pads from Apple and others will also be marketed as a high-end iPhone-like device, in my opinion.

So, in the next month or so when I try to sort out which Netbook to buy (This CNET review says the HP Mini 5101 is one of the best Netbooks on the market now), I'll be shopping for an upscale smartphone not a stripped-down notebook.

NOTE: I'm not suggesting that anyone replace their iPhone with a Netbook. My point is that a Netbook can be used as an inexpensive adjunct to an iPhone or Droid for people who need to be more productive than an iPhone (or Droid) would allow.

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.

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.

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.