>> I'll stop waisting time on this. It's not my bussiness to tell Intel what to do. Since, it's not like they don't know already
Absolutely. Yet, you are not wasting your time on this. Journalists, blogs, newspapers can build and destroy empires. Intel may know what to do but they continue to lose market share. Qualcomm commands more than 80% market share in the chipsets that power phones in U.S. I think honestly that Intel may not have a roadmap on this. If they have a plan, they would have shown us for the last 6 years. Recall that Qualcomm is in the 4th generation of their chipset and Intel is yet to launch one.
Finally, that is all we got. Just talk, write and comment. It does not change anything but that is life anyway.
Agreed. The problem is not one of comparison between products, it is a comparison of business models. That is a much bigger problem for Intel. If they cannot find a way to justify growth within their vertically-oriented, high-margin business model then they need to find a different one. The question is whether this is a 'shrink to grow' situation where they move to a new model or if it is just cutting costs to try to wring out a few more years on the old path.
Agree that ARM's business model provides a new challenge to Intel's. Though, for Intel to reclaim the market share (mobile space) from ARM is not impossible or far rearch. It just needs to play it right and leverage the advantages from their vertically integrated business.
And it's obvious, you don't attack just it's product (like Intel did to AMD). It's got to go after something more fundamental in this market. Collabration with other industry leader that is relevent in the entire system is the key.
Product means nothing without a strong and established eco-system.
I'll stop waisting time on this. It's not my bussiness to tell Intel what to do. Since, it's not like they don't know already. It's a matter of time for their plans to unfold.
@Zewde: "Is anyone else not particularly surprised by this move?"
Well, consdering that Intel has been shifting to foundry business too --Altera, Achronix...--, it was clear that they were becoming aware of their productive capacity was already oversized for just building their own processors...
>> How exactly does this free up Intel to defeat ARM?
It will be hard for Intel to defeat ARM. Amr is amorphous and you can easily beat it. It is not like AMD that you can attack its products directly. The business model of ARM makes it more challenging for attack just as Android in the mobile space will be hard for anyone to attack with its "open" source model.
Intel does not need to build 14nm fab to compete. They simply need to make chips that combine processing speed with excellent power management. They can claim they are cutting capital investment, the fact is that Intel has a new leader who wants to pilot the firm to new business models
I am happy that Intel has realized that the future is not just about the feature size of transistors but what the processor does. With its fixation on keeping the Moore's law alive, it got blinded and missed opportunities. I care not if the size of the transistor is 14nm if it can deliver excellently on mobile in power consumption.
How exactly does this free up Intel to defeat ARM? It seems they are competing as much in their traditional PC space as they are in the lower-power and server segments where ARM is now moving with its 64-bit architecture.
Is anyone else not particularly surprised by this move? It seems like Intel is doing what's encessary given the evolution of the market since they began their construction plans--but it's still a pretty signifcant indicator of the direction of that market nonetheless.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.