According to numbers published by CNET and sourced from Intel, on a 50WHr battery, the Haswell system gets about 8.3 Hrs under typical usage (running MobileMark 2012). If we adjust for the fact that the iPad4 runs a 42.5WHr battery, that means an iPad powered by a Haswell chip would give roughly 6.5 Hrs of battery life under typical usage.
If you get all of them from Apple or all of them from Samsung, they will speak the same language. Or you can wait for the standards to evolve.
Haswell is doomed to failure with the fading PC market and the inability of Microsoft to provide a usable tablet experience. Merrifield is going to sell a few million units in Intel reference designs through operators like Orange only to obsoleted soon after by Apple's A7. Baytrail is going to beg Samsung to replace Exynos in their flagship tablets. Beyond that its going to join Merrifield and Intel's reference designs. If you cut through the hype, there not much change here, it's business as usual.
The convertible is a cool idea from an Engineering standpoint but not from a usability standpoint. On that front, it brings nothing to the table except additional complexity. It will fail in the market. The only place Haswell can try to make an impact is in Android tablets where it will compete with BayTrail and all the NVidia and Qualcomm chips so very little hope there. Doomed to fail in the market.
Windows-based tablets haven’t been big successes so far, whether they use the desktop-centric Windows 8 or the tablet-centric Windows RT. iMore’s Rene Ritchie does some sharp analysis of Microsoft’s latest marketing campaign and concludes that the company simply does not understand why people are buying tablets in the first place. Essentially, Microsoft doesn’t get that its central criticism of the iPad — that is, that it’s more of a toy that can’t be used for doing serious work — is precisely why consumers are drawn to it in the first place. Simply put, consumers have PCs at their offices if they want to do work. When they’re at home, they want to play around with their tablets instead; they like having toys.
When you take this into consideration, says Ritchie, it’s clear that any attempt to bring core Windows functionality to tablets is doomed to failure.
“For years mainstream customers have felt alienated by desktop operating systems,” Ritchie writes. “They’ve struggled with their archaic file systems and confusing windows management, their intermediated control schemes and their sheer complexity. And those frustrations are the last thing those mainstream customers want on mobile. They want to pick up a device that they can understand… They want their apps, they want their media, and they want it without all the inhuman bulls*** traditional computing platforms like Windows (and OS X for that matter) have been forcing on them for decades. They want iPads.”
But all is not lost in the tablet space for Microsoft: Ritchie says that the company already has experience in creating a popular, intuitive operating system with its Xbox gaming console. If Microsoft were to make a tablet that took more cues from the Xbox and had gaming capabilities that put the iPad to shame, then it could have a winner on its hands
No-one wants to run PC apps on tablets or smartphones. The way you design an app for these form factors is completely different. For starters, you target the installed base which is mostly iOS or Android running ARM. It's going to be very difficult to suddenly change the installed base.
Apple just needs to make their products incrementally better to stay in business which they are slotted to do without needing to change their underlying microprocessor.
Apple is likely tweaking their own Swift core for 16nm FinFET on TSMC. It's a lot cheaper to design your own CPU and get it fabricated than to buy one from Intel and their last design was class-leading in power/performance so they're likely not losing out on specs by going in-house.
ARM is strongly rooted in mobile and at the low power end of the microprocessor market. That means its got all its weight on on foot in the paint and it can pivot from here if needed. Intel will likely challenge it in low power, but it can equally make inroads at the higher power end of the market. It's not going away anytime soon. It's staying power is what gives Intel nightmares. None of Intel's previous competitors had this vantage point when looking at Intel.
As a company, Intel has a lousy bureaucratic engineering process whereas ARM has one of the best. They also attract the best engineers which Intel no longer does. I would bet on ARM to deliver the innovation.
That's probably because I'm Indian. In fact Khitchdee is a popular Indian dish made using rice and lentils cooked together in a pot. See Wikipedia.