I think the problem isn't horsepower, it's efficiency... specifically, the code needs to be more efficient - Example: i'm typing in this script window just a bit faster than it's able to be displayed... that's poor code / interface, not a slow PC. (XP machine with IE8)
And optimizing for sub 10 second sleep mode? Why?, my XP netbook running on a little atom processor does sleep & recover from sleep in 5 sec or less - this doesn't need any improvement.
Intel risks pissing off Apple, whom its working with for the Macbook Air. Will Apple move to ARM once Windows 8 launches?
- If Windows 8 runs on ARM, we Mac users can still run Windows as a VM.
- Apple can potentially get higher battery life with ARM for the same performance.
- Having similar hardware architecture (ARM) for its phones, tablets and laptops makes life easier and allows greater interoperability.
- One of the reasons why Apple designs its own chips, according to an Apple engineer I know, is this: it allows Apple to build in custom features into their chips which are not available from chip vendors like TI, nVIDIA and Intel. If Apple goes ARM, it could build custom features into its Macbooks, just like it does with its iPhones.
- ARM chips designed in-house by Apple could make Apple's bill of materials for its Macbooks lower (Intel's chips are costly, with 55% gross margin!). Macbook prices could come down.
- Apple could differentiate itself from the PC based cheap "Macbook Air clones" Intel is giving birth to.
I've used PCs since 1981 however now I own a MacBook Pro simply because it lets me run: Mac OS X, WIndows 7, Google Chrome and Linux. Any new laptop or ultrabook will also have to run all four OSes, which means that I'm tied to Apple for the foreseeable future.
Intel's hype on Ultrabook is really a follower strategy of the MacBook Air, not a leadership strategy.