3 ms·

It doesn’t matter why Intel products are worse in every dimension, the fact is that they are and looking at Intel’s most recently quarterly results, customers a

It doesn’t matter why Intel products are worse in every dimension, the fact is that they are and looking at Intel’s most recently quarterly results, customers and the market agree. They lost over $800 million last quarter.

bigyabai 2y ago
I agree that Intel is now reaping precisely what they've sowed. But if making money is the goal, buying an ARM architectural license would have put Intel in an early grave. The rest of the industry agrees - nobody without direct leverage over Softbank is able turn a profit designing and shipping ARM hardware. I understand how Mac users would argue that sacrificing ARM to Moloch makes great PCs. But it also hamstrings the rest of the industry, prevents direct competition, slows down ARM proliferation and accelerates the development of foreign replacements like RISC-V. As a fan of ARM, I cannot say I'm happy with the stewardship Softbank exercises over the IP.
- scarface_74 2y ago
  How is ARM proliferation being slowed down? Amazon, Microsoft, Meta and Google are all designing their own ARM based server chips. Apple has been making money hand over fist designing ARM based hardware since 2010 with the A4. Amazon is saving billions using its own custom chips for both servers and specialized networking chips. But the fact is that Intel has to figure out something. Right now x86 may not be dead. But it is smelling funny. They are selling fewer desktops, servers and are non existent in mobile.
- hakfoo 2y ago
  Insane idea: Intel releases a big RISC-V product, even if it's just an existing Lake with a new decoder on the front. I could imagine it sucking a lot of air out of the competitive ecosystem. Anyone working on with fiddly little Rasperry Pi class products to help get the platform bootstrapped to full desktop performance suddenly has to compete with a much heavier opponent.
  - scarface_74 2y ago
    And does that serve any real market? Mobile? Low end laptops (Chrome)? laptops? Desktops (a small part of the market)? Servers?
    - hakfoo 2y ago
      It torpedoes an emerging threat.

bigyabai 2y ago

I agree that Intel is now reaping precisely what they've sowed. But if making money is the goal, buying an ARM architectural license would have put Intel in an early grave. The rest of the industry agrees - nobody without direct leverage over Softbank is able turn a profit designing and shipping ARM hardware. I understand how Mac users would argue that sacrificing ARM to Moloch makes great PCs. But it also hamstrings the rest of the industry, prevents direct competition, slows down ARM proliferation and accelerates the development of foreign replacements like RISC-V. As a fan of ARM, I cannot say I'm happy with the stewardship Softbank exercises over the IP.

scarface_74 2y ago
How is ARM proliferation being slowed down? Amazon, Microsoft, Meta and Google are all designing their own ARM based server chips. Apple has been making money hand over fist designing ARM based hardware since 2010 with the A4. Amazon is saving billions using its own custom chips for both servers and specialized networking chips. But the fact is that Intel has to figure out something. Right now x86 may not be dead. But it is smelling funny. They are selling fewer desktops, servers and are non existent in mobile.
hakfoo 2y ago
Insane idea: Intel releases a big RISC-V product, even if it's just an existing Lake with a new decoder on the front. I could imagine it sucking a lot of air out of the competitive ecosystem. Anyone working on with fiddly little Rasperry Pi class products to help get the platform bootstrapped to full desktop performance suddenly has to compete with a much heavier opponent.
- scarface_74 2y ago
  And does that serve any real market? Mobile? Low end laptops (Chrome)? laptops? Desktops (a small part of the market)? Servers?
  - hakfoo 2y ago
    It torpedoes an emerging threat.