Even if it was an Intel SoC with support for legacy apps it technically still doesn't violate the MS's earlier policy because the experience is not being delivered on the smartphone's screen, it's being delivered on an external monitor much larger than 7". It's essentially does the same thing as an Intel HDMI stick.
Which is why I said MS need to make it clear to consumers to what to expect, or it will be RT all over again. For example, lets image two phones or small tablets, one powered by Intel, one by QCOM. If MS allows legacy access for the Intel SoC (ie, full windows) then they will just confuse consumers as they did with RT. How will consumers know what they are buying if both devices are called "Windows 10"? Call one version, "Real Windows 10" and the other "Pretend Windows 10"?
If the legacy UI is really important to MS, then they really need to stop playing with ARM, and jump into bed with Intel/AMD.
[Everyone is laughing at you. Give it up.]
Oh, really? Want to explain how a QCOM chip was able to run the legacy desktop?
Do you have any idea how IHS determines their estimates and how close they are to being accurate?
No idea, could be random for all I know:) They are a respect source of information, but as with all things that are free...
[Yeah but the problem (if you had read any of the reports) is that Samsung doesn't have enough high-end phone sales. It's the low end that's killing Samsung. Why does the low end kill them? Because their costs are too high.]
So, when you are talking about expensive fabrication what do you mean? The silicon, or the whole device?
But, but, but what about the Microsoft policy you referred us to fifty times that prevented this from ever happening?
I think you'll find that the device shown doesn't break that policy...The policy was to do with the legacy desktop...
[No, it wasn't. The conversation was on whether ARM's increasingly expensive fabrication is having an economic impact on profitability. Clearly it is.]
Ok, lets go back to that. According to IHS, the cost of the Galaxy S4’s processor is estimated at $30.00 (28nm, Exynos 5), while for the S6 the processor is estimated at $29.50 (14nm, Exynos 7).
Yeah, it's not that clear. From the look of things, it seems to be Universal apps. If this can run traditional desktop apps, then MS needs to be crystal clear to consumers, or it'll be RT all over again.
[All I said was consider the source - which is numerous reports in the financial/tech press. Instead of consulting any of them you prefer to hurl insults and dodge the issue. I'll consider your unwillingness to review any of what has been written recently as conceding this issue.]
Our discussion is whether the S6 will change Samsung's profitably. The S6 wasn't launched in Q1. Financial analysts are increasing sales forecasts for the S6 (by 20%) and they are also changing their split forecast between the S6 and S6 Edge (increasing the Edge numbers, thus increasing Samsung's margins, as the Edge retails for $100 more).
Has been discussed on this forum a lot, and it's coming with Windows 10. From anandtech:
"During the keynote a Windows 10 smartphone was shown connected to a large display via HDMI, as well as to a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse. This allowed the phone to essentially act as though it were a Windows 10 computer, with applications like PowerPoint and Excel scaling to use the same layout that you would see when running them on a normal desktop computer. This type of dynamic behavior extends from interface changes to input paradigm changes as well. Devices may change their preferred input mode or interface to suit the peripherals that are or are not attached to a device."
[Don't take my word for it, just go read all the reports on Samsung's quarterly results. And don't forget to leave each author a comment saying "If you say so."]
Given your delusions, I wont take your word for it. Shall we revisit it this again next quarter?
I suggest you check out the difference between the S6 and this $100 device. As a side, you don't have to buy Apples latest and greatest, you can get and older, cheaper model.
Do you know an iPhone?
Why do people buy expensive laptops, when you can get a cheap one for $200?
Lots of Intel positives while ARM, Apple, Qualcomm, TSMC and Samsung look not taped out but tapped out.
Yeah, ARM, Apple, Qualcomm, TSMC and Samsung are just like AMD eh?
[Nobody thinks the S6 is going to save Samsung's profitability. Except you.]
If you say so.
[Big profit plunge in Samsung's mobile business but Monk still doesn't understand ARM's economic struggles as he takes the S6 victory lap a little too soon. D'oh.]
I can't know the fantasies going on in your mind. As for the S6, would the S6 numbers be included in the first quarter income numbers?
By the way, Monk. Intel is ordering a minimum of FIFTEEN of the EUV units and ARM is getting, what, 2?
What does that tell you?
Well, it tells me that you don't read up on the things you preach about.
There are 6 other EUV units that will go to the foundries in 2015, 2 of them to TSMC (which brings TSMC's total to 4, once it's existing boxes have been upgraded). It's been suggested that Samsung is getting the other 4, but who knows, perhaps you do? Perhaps there are other orders as well, do you know?
[Oh, it's that simple, right? You just buy it and and it works right out of the box? Quit playing the fool. Quit trying to pull my finger. Quit with your marketing spin. Not everyone is so stupid as to fall for empty words.]
Yeah, it's just like a TV, press the on button on the remote...
If you bothered to read the article, you'de understand (and know) that TSMC has been playing with the predecessors of this 'box' for sometime.
As for marketing spin, it's interesting that you've jumped on this EUV ASML news (shipping boxes to the states) even though Intel isn't even mentioned, yet you rubbish the news that TSMC had also purchased the same box (last year)...
[Read it and weep, Monk. EUV is just going to make it worse for ARM's poor, struggling fabrication efforts. ]
As I said, I don't know when quantum well's will be used (for the foundries), but then it's not exactly clear when Intel will either. From the article you quoted from:
“Everything I saw pointed in this direction,” Kanter told EE Times. “The question is not will Intel do quantum well FETs, the question is will it be at 10 or 7nm,” he said
Perhaps you know when Intel will? 10nm or 7nm?
[All about the implementation though, isn't it? I guess in the marketing department you just have to play with it and don't really have to ever manufacture it. Let me know when ARM stops playing and moves on to the manufacturing stage. The idea that ARM will bring an EUV product to market at the same time as Intel is laughable. I'm not Twink. I'm not going to pull your finger.]
Marketing eh? The FACT is that TSMC will use the same machines for EUV as Intel, or are you suggesting that ASML is committing fraud in it's announcement?
EUV might happen in the 'ARM' world before Intel. Depending on who you listen too. The short story is that TSMC will use EUV at 10nm, Intel at 7nm.