I'm sure it's not as dramatic as all that. The article that was posted on today's EE Times talked about a production test that was inadequate in catching all failures on some spec parameter. After the test was made more rigorous, yields fell.
Why should end customers care what the ppm reject rate is on finished units at the factory? As long as the price of the iPad stays the same, the manufacturing yields and gross margins are problems for Apple and Cirrus, not for the end customer.
Doubtful. If you try to look up the CL part number for the part listed in the iPad2 teardown analysis, you can't find a data sheet or any info about it anywhere. This leads me to believe it was a custom part made specifically for Apple.
For Wolfson or anyone else to start a new design to Apple's specs and get it into production would be quite a long process.
Besdies, Apple designed out Wolfson several generations ago. Hard to imagine them going back in that direction now.
Will apple phones and iPad be on a shortage?
Perhaps this will actually benefit Apple as the scarcity principle might become a good hook to drive public appreciation of the "gizmos".
Looks like this device is a new chip. Isn't using a new chip a little risky? Is apple becoming an early adopter? Well, I guess this is the only way to hit the market with the final frontier of technology. Some are innovators and some like to play it safe. Sometimes you have to make a trade-off don't you think?
Blog Doing Math in FPGAs Tom Burke 7 comments For a recent project, I explored doing "real" (that is, non-integer) math on a Spartan 3 FPGA. FPGAs, by their nature, do integer math. That is, there's no floating-point ...