Diarrhea, very good point that Intel may be sidelined. Hardware is not like software that end users can interact with. If one day Google decides to buy ARM and opensource the ARM architecutre together with Andriod, it would not be hard to imagine the sideline of X86.
"14 million developers"!
Most of these 'developers' write in high-level languages and never see an 8x86 opcode. Those High-level language compilers/interpreters can work on any processor architecture.
I used to write DataBASIC on Pick database (D3) that just happened to run on an Intel/Windows server. Does that mean I count as one of the 14 million?
Beyond the quality of implementation of silicon or architecture (as Otellini points out), what matters is the total experience and productivity which is now invariably provided by innovation be it in software, application use, user interface (read end-user experience through software applications). Hardware/processors will ultimatley be a commodity (for Intel and ARM products alike) with the value proposition moving upward in systems and software. Other than the fact that silicon performance will be limited by physics and affordability of manufacturing at the deep submicron feature sizes (I am waiting for the 0nm device at $1B per WAFER :-)), distributed computing on multiple processors, and 3D TSV multi die packaging will become the way processors and memories will be stacked, which will keep hardware affordable with thousands of compute servers doing specialized tasks. Related to the margins discourse, users will pay for performance and assuming no alternatives exist, but the opposite is also true: users will not pay for so-so performance or when affordbale alternatives exist. Strong competition and reasonable margin for value-given is always good for the eco-system as it sharpens the edge and the incentives for everyone. If you are still reading, thanks for listening to my long winded response.
ARM's value proposition is that it lets itself be integrated into others' designs, so you can do SoC with it. That's where people are heading with mobile electronics.
Intel can defend its high-margin, high-value IP position for now, but if ARM becomes popular, its architecture and supporting electronics will grow because ARM adopters will be trying to outdo not just Intel, but each other.
Intel risks being left on the sidelines during this race, and by the time they realize it, their products will be viewed as too different and weird to get into the game.
Intel should know this. It's how DEC lost to them.
From the article:
"Today we have the most popular architecture in terms of the installed base of cores and the best silicon in the world," said Otellini.
Otellini said that over its entire history Intel had shipped 3.3 billion processor cores by the end of Q1 2010. By the end of this year that number will be closer to four billion cores, he said.
< end of quote >
In contrast, according to ARM's corporate website http://www.arm.com/about/company-profile/index.php,
over 15 Billion ARMs have been shipped to date. From what I've read, ARM is on a faster growth curve, so this difference will only increase.
Intel does indeed produce outstanding silicon from a performance point of view, but in terms of numbers of cores the published numbers say ARM is way ahead.
You think the competition is not enough? Why not making your own processor ARM or not-ARM based and beat Intel?
In your bossiness model You seem to need help of Feds or EU to succeed.
You don't represent all the honest companies competing with Intel/Microsoft with ARM, Android etc.
Intel is not in competition with ARM ...
but All semiconductor company are using ARM : STM, TI, NXP, SAMSUNG ....
now we are see new concept of IP licenses -> Integrator -> Foundry
and it will work because it give better price !
Good points John787. When these CEOs are talking to investors and wall street, they reveal how their business model makes them money hand over fist. To the consumer, that translates to "we make lots of money at your expense". Its the same way with Microsoft. The people holding Microsoft stock have always cheered for Microsoft's over-priced, under-performing, bloated and buggy software sales. But for the end user the experience is very bad. I hope that Intel and Microsoft both are reigned in by the U.S. Justice Dept and Federal Trade Commission. If not them then maybe the EU can slow them down. They're like octopuses with tentacles into every market, slowing down innovation and new product adoption with the power of their monopolies.