If INTC had spent a fraction of the time and money developing chips for the "mobility market" compared to what they have spent and continue to spend on Itanium, they would have been so further ahead. How many billions have gone into Itanium, and what are the financial results so far? But then Otellini has said he wasn't smart enough to see the potential of the mobility market--and quite frankly he still doesn't get it.
Many of his comments so far regarding the mobility market sound like Olson from Digital Equipment who in 1987 said "Who needs a PC?" and the rest is history--and of course Digital Equipment is no longer. Otellini better wake up from hibernation--otherwise INTC is headed for the scrap heap of has been companies because the mobility train has left the depot without INTC onboard.
"It's just zombie noise designed to avoid discussion of technology or performance."
OK, INtel is gonna release their answer to mobile at 32nm and running as low as 3W on a good day...
The competition is at 40nm using less than 1W...
Agree, Got to be a zombie to ignore !!!!!
It's just zombie noise designed to avoid discussion of technology or performance.
Zombies are terrified of technology and financial discussions.
You would be too if you had a half-rotted brain...
INTC has ignored the gadget and mobility market believing that everyone needs the power of a Super Computer in their hands to perform mass consumption work. Current portable PC's have more Power than Super Computers used to have just a few short years ago. Is all that Power necessary? ARMH Holdings and Apple have demonstrated the falacy of INTC's argument and INTC's vision of the future is now in question.
Doesn't take a lot of brains to know that mobility has been
the way to go for years. Since the late 1990's there has been a large number of analysts who criticized INTC for ignoring the gadget and mobility markets. This was long before the IPhone and IPad. However, when you are joined at the hip with the Windows softwarm platform, the result is predictable. Dr. Barrett once denied that INTC's chip compressions were only to make Windows operate faster--but that apparently is all they have done. Its pretty obvious that you do not need all the horsepower of INTC's current lineup of chips if mass consumption is not creating content--and most mass consumption apparently is not creating content but merely moving to the app world where things are looked up.
Over 50% of Apple's revenues are now coming from the mass consumption side of the house--all INTC has to do is look and see where the world is headed! But they have had their head buried in the sand for at least the last 10 years and counting!