Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Blog

Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones

NO RATINGS
View Comments: Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 5   >   >>
Sanjib.A
User Rank
CEO
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
Sanjib.A   10/24/2011 4:06:40 PM
NO RATINGS
Taking bold decisions in scraping a bad decision early is good for a company. But doing the same too many times doesn't indicate a good sign for an organization. Is it because of not so capable leadership or is it because of the economic turmoil?

metafor
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
metafor   10/24/2011 4:45:04 PM
NO RATINGS
There are a few things wrong with Intel's approach to smartphones and tablets. Chief among them is that Atom is just a terrible perf/W cpu. Another is that the closed and secretive nature of their SoC architecture means that it takes a lot of effort to port popular OS's over to it. All this leads to the fact that Intel is trying to operate its smartphone push like it did its PC business: try to gain proprietary, exclusive holds. Instead of embracing Android with its full attention, it's tried what, 4 times now to bulldoze another OS? To me, this seems to be a clear attempt at trying to recreate another Wintel environment. It's lucrative to be part of a Wintel ecosystem but it's very difficult in a market where you're the challenger.

caitlinbestler
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
caitlinbestler   10/24/2011 7:54:36 PM
NO RATINGS
Finding a market solution that enabled an x86-derived chip to address the mobile and/or TV markets without cutting profit margins for the server market was probably never an achievable goal. Keeping the server profit margins for as long as the server market insisted on over-paying for x86 compatibility was definitely the right move.

Luis Sanchez
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
Luis Sanchez   10/24/2011 8:39:08 PM
NO RATINGS
Is funny how the behavior of a company can be described with adjetives that belong to a person. What does this mean? Will this mean that a company is controlled by only one person? Or a few? Or is it just the nature of a big organization? Is it that they aren´t aware of their place in the mobile computing world? Interesting way to talk about the relation between Windows and Intel = Wintel. I wonder what will the long term crop be for Intel if it keeps droping development of certain projects and affecting small development companies? Non good I bet.

sharps_eng
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
sharps_eng   10/24/2011 9:16:32 PM
NO RATINGS
It is costly for them, that's all. They have their own internal 'venture capitalists' funding both research and development, and getting customers involved early means that things are more public. They have a track record in pursuing new technology, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but their success doesn't correlate with other companies' experiences: for instance, no-one got bubble memory working either, but I think Intel made a Big Mistake abandoning RAM-based FPGAs especially when they were PCI-bus compliant. They would have had programmable SOCs years before anyone else. (Yes, I got burned on Intel FPGAs but I didn't blame the whole company, it was a separate division [grrr])

old account Frank Eory
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
old account Frank Eory   10/24/2011 10:48:15 PM
NO RATINGS
Indeed it is strange to apply human attributes to a corporation, but I think "hubris" is the perfect word in this case. It's more likely the result of a pervasive corporate culture, a set of shared attitudes and beliefs, rather than control by one or a few individuals.

Robotics Developer
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
Robotics Developer   10/24/2011 11:04:39 PM
NO RATINGS
I wonder if Intel while quick to drop an effort that is not panning out could benefit from getting in earlier on fewer projects? Does anyone know their track record? Wins versus misses? It would be interesting to know if they get it right more times than not and if their "average" was better or worse than the industry. Intel is a large player, but if ARM had got their act together and produced chips with much higher clocking and multi-core cpus earlier Intel would not have been the force it is and ARM would be in a better position.

DrQuine
User Rank
CEO
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
DrQuine   10/24/2011 11:48:50 PM
NO RATINGS
Could there be a more mundane explanation for Intel's emphasis on computers over smartphones? Intel is driven by Moore's "law". What began as an observation has become an obsession. Intel's focus is on doubling computing power in their chipset every two years. Smartphones require exquisite miniaturization and packing efficiency - a different focus.

abrokalakis
User Rank
Rookie
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
abrokalakis   10/25/2011 8:44:02 AM
NO RATINGS
I think it is choice above all. In the PC world, you practically have a monopoly (x86 and Windows) because it is a very low margin business and companies not only have to combat each other, they have to "fight" with anyone not afraid to put a card in a motherboard. However look at the server side of things. Companies are paying very real money to develop their own Unix versions, to support Linux (almost all of the development is now funded) and not let single companies create monopolies (or at least monopolies that are not their own :) ). The same goes for the mobile and embedded markets. OEMs need multiple sources. If they go the Intel route then they only have one choice, one foundry, one supply source. If Intel asks too much they have to bend, if Intel does not execute they have to offer inferior products, if Intel delays, they delay, if Intel cannot allocate enough capacity, then they have no products to sell. ARM is a magnificent solution to this problem and you can see how many companies are using this model of multiple sources. Samsung design its own SoCs but at the same time it offers devices with SoCs from nVidia, TI,... . The same goes for Nokia, LG, Sony Ericsson, whoever else. And I think that this is why even Apple who so dearly loves proprietary solutions, has chosen the ARM architecture because it knows that even it screws with its own chips (for any reason, even if it is capacity) then there could be a relatively easy backup solution. If it had used Power or x86, that would not certainly be the case. Intel hates this choice model and unless AMD (or VIA) dont get their act together and offer solutions for smartphones or tablets, Intel cannot succeed. It needs others on its own court.

rick merritt
User Rank
Author
re: Why Intel is not inside TVs, smartphones
rick merritt   10/25/2011 1:45:39 PM
NO RATINGS
Intel has come up to speed a lot in SoCs recently, something most other chip makers have been doing for a couple decades. It has got religion in low power--and will have the products to show it in about two more years, I think. But it has yet to buy in to the idea of a customer-driven business model. It has had the luxury of leading rather than following customers to date, and can continue that model as long as it wants to operate only in the PC sector.

Page 1 / 5   >   >>
Flash Poll
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week