4 ms·

How can you "make inroads" into a market, when you're giving away your product in a non-sustainable way. Sure, tablet makers will take Intel's "just as good" 0$

How can you "make inroads" into a market, when you're giving away your product in a non-sustainable way. Sure, tablet makers will take Intel's "just as good" 0$ Atom chip. But will they take it when it's "just as good" for $30 or $40?

beagle3 12y ago
They might be trying to get some "lock-in" back, though I have no idea how. Ballmer's Microsoft apparently missed the Mobile/Tablet revolution assuming that the desktop lock-in they still have could be leveraged. That didn't work for years, but seems to have been ignored until Nadella came in. Intel might be trying to gain a lock-in by somehow putting the familiar x86 into mobiles/tablets, in the hope that developers would release x86 binaries that would make ARM undesirable. But that's an 80 degree inclination uphill battle. They either have a crazy card up their sleeve, or are unable to respond properly (and the $0 cost + $50 subsidy) is the best they can do at present while trying to craft that crazy card.
- personZ 12y ago
  Quite the opposite: It's eliminating lock-out, which is where Intel was in an ARM-only mobile world. Intel has the most advanced fabs in the world, and the limits of their own devices has primarily been their concern about competing with themselves (which I'm sure is still the case. With each new chip they probably have internal negotiations about how to ensure it doesn't threaten their desktop and server chips). If Intel isn't disadvantaged in mobile, only a fool would count them out.
personZ 12y ago
To reiterate, given that I apparently failed to communicate this well- -The mobile space was essentially locked down by ARM. All of the OS', tools, and apps targeted ARM. -Intel was on the outside looking in, so they starting giving away chips, offering their own engineering to bring Android (and other OS') to x86, and making it a compelling target for the makers. -Intel x86 OS images for Android became available and production quality (originally only deployed in developing markets as essentially a beta). Intel x86 toolsets were available. Still, though, it didn't matter much because there was no market. -So Intel gave away their chips. By the tens of millions. These chips are actually quite excellent (great performance, 64-bit, great graphics, low power consumption), but knowing that they were on the outside looking in, they gave them away. The Android ecosystem now is one where x86 (and soon x86-64) is as supported as ARM is. There are tens of millions of x86 devices, and it's only accelerating. No one can ignore it. Intel gave away chips because they were at a disadvantage, but they're quickly getting to a position where if they make a very compelling chip they no longer are sabotaged by being an outsider.

beagle3 12y ago

They might be trying to get some "lock-in" back, though I have no idea how. Ballmer's Microsoft apparently missed the Mobile/Tablet revolution assuming that the desktop lock-in they still have could be leveraged. That didn't work for years, but seems to have been ignored until Nadella came in. Intel might be trying to gain a lock-in by somehow putting the familiar x86 into mobiles/tablets, in the hope that developers would release x86 binaries that would make ARM undesirable. But that's an 80 degree inclination uphill battle. They either have a crazy card up their sleeve, or are unable to respond properly (and the $0 cost + $50 subsidy) is the best they can do at present while trying to craft that crazy card.

personZ 12y ago
Quite the opposite: It's eliminating lock-out, which is where Intel was in an ARM-only mobile world. Intel has the most advanced fabs in the world, and the limits of their own devices has primarily been their concern about competing with themselves (which I'm sure is still the case. With each new chip they probably have internal negotiations about how to ensure it doesn't threaten their desktop and server chips). If Intel isn't disadvantaged in mobile, only a fool would count them out.

personZ 12y ago

To reiterate, given that I apparently failed to communicate this well- -The mobile space was essentially locked down by ARM. All of the OS', tools, and apps targeted ARM. -Intel was on the outside looking in, so they starting giving away chips, offering their own engineering to bring Android (and other OS') to x86, and making it a compelling target for the makers. -Intel x86 OS images for Android became available and production quality (originally only deployed in developing markets as essentially a beta). Intel x86 toolsets were available. Still, though, it didn't matter much because there was no market. -So Intel gave away their chips. By the tens of millions. These chips are actually quite excellent (great performance, 64-bit, great graphics, low power consumption), but knowing that they were on the outside looking in, they gave them away. The Android ecosystem now is one where x86 (and soon x86-64) is as supported as ARM is. There are tens of millions of x86 devices, and it's only accelerating. No one can ignore it. Intel gave away chips because they were at a disadvantage, but they're quickly getting to a position where if they make a very compelling chip they no longer are sabotaged by being an outsider.