I am just speculating here, but could the reason Apple is using a PA Semi chip instead of the Atom is to help foil HackinTablets? The OS would be written so that it wouldn’t work on the Atom.

I am just speculating here, but could the reason Apple is using a PA Semi chip instead of the Atom is to help foil HackinTablets?

Good point Sir; if the iTab OS is significantly unique for handheld computing, preventing others from moving it to another computer would be a wise move (regardless of any other new technologies that would be integrated into the iTab product).

There’s also the battery-life issue. PA Semi was known for low-power so this could be the reason. Apple is more likely to make a decision such as this on positive benefits (battery life) rather than negative things (prevent hacking).

There’s also the battery-life issue. PA Semi was known for low-power so this could be the reason. Apple is more likely to make a decision such as this on positive benefits (battery life) rather than negative things (prevent hacking).

You are probably correct there. As with the Psystar case Apple doesn’t go after the individual hacker, just someone doing it as a business and now a precedent has been set.

I decline to speculate on information that Scott Moritz developed. Has he been right about anything Apple yet?

Here’s a more obvious answer. PA Semi would more likely build an ARM chip than an x86 chip. So if Apple is making a tablet and it is going to basically run iPhone OS and iPhone apps, it makes more sense to use the iPhone’s CPU architecture than the Mac’s.

This will be interesting. Apple can get away with NIH (“not invented here”) in the smartphone space because there isn’t a standard reference platform used by multiple manufacturers and suppliers. In the netbook space, however, the Atom is already established. Tablets demoed at CES seem to be splitting about 75% Wintel and 25% ARM/Android. Price points seem to be about $500-$700 for multi-touch and pen capabilities.

Perhaps the most interesting question about the Apple tablet, assuming it goes with ARM and an iPhone OS derivative, is how long it will take before Android gets ported to it, not whether anyone cares to port iPhone OS to other devices.

Here’s a more obvious answer. PA Semi would more likely build an ARM chip than an x86 chip. So if Apple is making a tablet and it is going to basically run iPhone OS and iPhone apps, it makes more sense to use the iPhone’s CPU architecture than the Mac’s.

Depends on the ultimate function of the iTab is supposed to be (more portable PC, or more iPhone), but given the work invested into the iPhone OS, your answer is the more likely possibility.

Qualcomm was also chosen for its Nexus One smartphone

There is a big difference here that’s not always made clear in articles I’ve read. The Nexus One uses a Qualcomm Snapdragon CPU, while the Verizon-compatible iPhone is expected to use a Qualcomm CDMA comm chip, not CPU. Apparently Qualcomm’s “world” chipset (GSM + CDMA) will not be ready for a summer iPhone update, which will result in separate products for AT&T (and most of the world) and Verizon. Bummer.