4 ms·
They've tried a lot of "reimagining." It never works. No one wants Intel on mobile, despite Intel's mobile chips being absolutely great when they were actually
by metagame 5y ago
They've tried a lot of "reimagining." It never works. No one wants Intel on mobile, despite Intel's mobile chips being absolutely great when they were actually releasing them, and no one wants a genuinely high-performance chip if it means they have to make alterations to how their software is written.
I have a lot of criticisms of Intel, but held back from reimagining isn't quite a great one.
- imwillofficial 5y agoTheir low power stuff was garbage. And itanium went unsupported and was half baked. Intel knew where their money makers were, x86 servers. Their attention and investment showed a lack of foresight, combined with their famous bloated engineering teams, is a story as old as time itself.
- genmud 5y agoWhen has intel reimagined products that have low power and low price? Intel has been notorious for having power hungry and overpriced stuff.
- wmf 5y agoDidn't Pouslbo and friends have negative prices ("contra-revenue") yet still nobody wanted them?
- nuerow 5y agoFor those who, like me, never heard of Poulsbo, it's a chipset for Intel's first generation of Atom processors. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/chipsets/poulsbo https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/chipsets/poulsbo
- baybal2 5y agoPoulsbo was disastrously bad, quirky, and impractical. It took all x86 platform warts, and replaced it with even harder to get right "Poulsbo warts" like SFI, and etc.
- FreezingKeeper 5y agoAnd to think they had it in their hands in 1997 with StrongARM