Humpty was priced at 25 at the time of this post. It's now at 50. Make no mistake, only a complete whack-job would keep up a charade for 2 years and running when he was DEAD wrong 2 years ago. Dead wrong. LOL at this idiot. He has no humility, no intelligence and no friends.
wallisweaver • Nov 19, 2011 5:05 PM Flag
Oh, like that last graph I posted up? The one that showed how ARM lost ground every day last week.
Which part of that graph do you think I made up? LOL
Thank you once again for the opportunity to focus on ARM's declining fabrication capabilities and excessive P/E ratio...
I guess it's the graphic part that Intel missing....should get NVDIA instead of Antivirus in the first place....then you can X86 & ARM base processor with better graphic and then Bang XBOX & PS4 WITH INTEL & NIVDIA INSIDE???
The Titan rises
If Intel delivers on this roadmap, one thing is absolutely certain — it’s going to have no problem maintaining high margins. If Intel chips on 14nm are nearly half the size of what TSMC can offer, then Intel’s nascent foundry business will be able to command very preferential prices. It won’t put TSMC or GlobalFoundries out of business, but it will attract those customers willing to pay top dollar for the latest and greatest in foundry capability.
I don’t see either of the other two foundries catching much of a break here. By every reasonable metric, Intel leads the foundry world. If it can continue pushing smaller nodes and providing greater benefits than its competitors, than the companies that want to compete with Intel will have to build cheaper, hotter, slower products to do so. This inevitably impacts selling price, which impacts income, which reduces the amount of money companies can afford to pay to their foundry partners.
The long term trend in the foundry business, meanwhile, is towards merciless consolidation. Ten years ago, nearly twenty firms still maintained cutting-edge fabs built on 130nm. Today, we’re down to four — Intel, TSMC, Samsung, and GlobalFoundries. STMicroelectronics’ 20nm work is done in partnership with GlobalFoundries. Intel doesn’t have to convince everyone to buy x86 parts — if it captures enough of the high-end ARM business at some future date to deprive TSMC of the revenue it needs to push forward, it eventually wins by default.
Ramos, is one of the CHinese tablet manufacturers is now already release the Ramos i10 pro tablet device, this tablet is powered by Intel Bay Trail and running Android + Windows 8.1 operating system.
According to reports, the Ramos i10 pro equipped with Intel Atom Bay Trail Z3770D processor, 22nm technology, quad-core 2.4GHz clock speed, processor performance is very strong. Which uses 2GB LPDDR3 RAM + 32GB built-in storage (basic version), on-screen information has not been disclosed, but most likely it should be 10.1-inch 1920 x 1200 resolution.
This tablet is ready to compete with popular tablet device such as Lenovo, Dell, Hawlett-Packard. But Some people is predicted that the Ramos i10 pro will be offers with more affordable price.
(Um, I think this is a translation based on the rough English)
"Good post, theblueredmonk. There is much more to the ARMH story than potentially losing share in handsets and tablets."
[And what a shame that you two aren't able to articulate it in a way that someone might be boil your hearsay, anecdotal ramblings and sprinkling of metrics into some conclusions.]
"Down from here next week once the new buyers realize they got manipulated AGAIN"
[Says the master of attempted manipulation and boss of the paid shill pool.]
"We could end up with a natural monopoly if the public-at-large believes that the pursuit of Moore's Law is more important than a competitive environment."
[The public is going to go with the cheapest and best products - and those are going to be Intel. That will produce the natural monopoly. Most may not and none will need to conclude that it is because only Intel can stay on the Moore's Law curve.]
"Add in other 'hype' stories, such as wearable computing (almost all released designs are ARMH based), Apples 'smart' TV rumours, which has driven an upgrade cycle in SoC's for TV's (many of which now contain ARM's CPU's and GPU's), the selection of ARMv8 by most of the networking guys, and the biggie in hype - servers."
[The Internet of Things is the big deal and not wearable computing. And no, ARM definitely doesn't have all of the released designs in the IoT sphere. And for the millionth time, all this anecdotal information is completely worthless. You don't have any numbers to indicate that any of this isn't already baked into the stock price and the astronomical P/E ratio.
I admit that ARM will have a lot of the bottom of the market (think AMD). But that isn't going to justify the big stock price and P/E ratio.
The funny thing is listening to Ashraf simultaneously say that Intel is going to be doing huge ARM fabrication and that TSMC isn't going to be affected by Intel doing a huge level of ARM fabrication. I bet he internally hemorrhages every time he says this. ]
"ASPs mean nothing unless you know *what* components are causing the falling prices. Is it the screen, the battery, the flash memory - all expensive items in the BoM? If so, ARMH's royalties don't change! Also, even if (or when) Intel takes 20% of the tablet market, ARMH *only* looses the royalty for the CPU SoC - many of the other chips in the tablet still generate royalty to ARMH."
[What total and complete hogwash. Components aren't causing the falling prices. Where did you get that idea? Competition and a maturing market are causing the falling prices. And you can't tell me that a 50 percent drop in ASP's isn't going to have some impact on what ARM can charge. If the price is too high the customer can go somewhere else - like Intel instead of ARM.
And saying that ARM isn't going to be significantly affected by a loss of 20 percent of the tablet processors is patently ridiculous. Not to mention that once again that you don't have ANY numbers on this with which to make any conclusions.
If this is all the proof for your position that you and Ashraf have, you shouldn't even have bothered.]
"Nope. It doesn't necessarily work like that. You remember the licencing deal between TSMC and Intel a few years ago? Intel were quite open about the fact that TSMC could make Atom cheaper than they could.
Intel's fabs last a cycle or two before being sold on. In the IP model, those same lines can last for a long time - *many* years. The cost of the silicon drops really quickly. Clearly this only works if you don't need a new design, but in the deeply embedded world, designs are built to last a long time. In other words, when you take the full costs into account of designing a chip, it can be much cheaper to stay on an old node such as 65nm for example."
[Oh, yeah - I really want to pay a lot of attention to the economics of several years ago. LOL. So, just in case you haven't heard, just about everything has changed in the last several years. You have nothing on this. No prices, no comparison, nothing. So, don't bother me with an argument based on pricing from several years ago and a conclusion that things might be different but you don't really have any details. This is exactly what I mean when I say that you and Ashraf throw out a couple of sentences and think that has proved something.
It maybe didn't used to work like that but it sure doesn now.]
Your broker sounds stupider than you. Blind leading the blind. Why would anyone want to enter your world of dumbness? Please no more comments. Reading your #$%$ lowers everyone's intelligence.
I think this is clear evidence of the re-kindling of Intel's relationship with Microsoft as they push the Dell/Intel product instead of their own product and especially ahead of the RT's that they probably need to dump. This deal will definitely get people in the stores. An RT deal might not even if they gave them away.
Francois Piednoel @FPiednoel 4 Dec
When Intel gets focused on something and there is a fire burning underneath them, they are a lot more motivated and a lot more successful