Wasn't that flummoxed character the guy who couldn't hold a rational discussion with AE over on ihub? Wasn't he warned about his irrational emotional outbursts, so much so that his credibility was shot to pieces in the end? You remember, he claimed he sold 50K shares of Intel...prior to this run up...
Actually, wasn't flummoxed you?:)
It's not a case of limiting the discussion, it's about the TAM (Total addressable market). When ARM is mentioned in the context of severs, it seems that people think that the target is *any* server. It's not the case, nor has it ever been. It'll be years (if ever) before the ARMy can target 'general servers', we're talking edge use cases and very specific workloads - but could still be a sizeable chunk of the market.
I think you misunderstand the target that the ARMy are going after (BTW, just because I am discussing this, it doesn't mean I think the ARMy will win any meaningful share). When you buy gear for a new deployment, you always test it. You don't buy 10 million worth of severs and suddenly go 'oops', xyz doesn't work.
Perhaps, it's the organisations I've worked in, but the second hand value of the gear was never factored into a ToC cost as it was always scrapped:)
If your workload is CPU bound or need low latency, you wont go ARM.
If you are a typical corporate data centre, you wont go ARM.
If you workload is generalized (ie, a mix of workloads), you wont go ARM.
If you are typically IO bound, and running a specific large scale workload, then ARM could be for you. We're talking things like Amazon AWS, S3, Cloudfront and ElastiCache.
The second statement is a gross misrepresentation of reality. In 2015 Intel based phones would support LTE which is the most advanced 4G technology all carriers are moving to and both Verizon and Sprint heavily promote. CDMA is a dying technology far less popular globally than GSM and is used only on the older legacy networks those carriers operate until CDMA is phased out completely.
It's more complicated than that, even ignoring the differences between the various LTE standards and implementations, It's about ensuring your baseband is certified for be used with that carrier. Even if your baseband is technically compatible, if it's not certified you can't sell your device. QCOM has a good relationship with the carriers, especially in the US.
That said, there is nothing stopping MS dropping QCOM for the app processor (going to Intel, for a full x86 code base) and use a separate QCOM baseband SoC. While more expensive than a fully integrated solution, it's a common approach for all high end devices.
We've gone slightly off point, but to answer you questions specifically on software:
Yes, you do see Google sorting out x86 compatibility (and MIPS), on several levels. The explicit support for x86 in the VM runtime (java) and the support for x86 in native applications in the Android toolchain (compiled by the developer, ie, right click, target x86), support in the play store, and finally Intel has provided the emulation later for a fall back when the developer hasn't produced a native application.
Contrast this with MS, they provide a full Windows 8 environment with RT which is locked down so it can only run their windows applications (office). While you can jail break RT, to run other windows applications, legally the ARMy can't 'fix' this, even if it wanted to.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that there is a porting software issue for ARM on servers (Linux)? While I work in a 100% x86 shop, I can tell you categorically there isn't a problem running the workloads that the ARMy are touting for. Yes, you wont be able to run MS SQL server, but the LAMP stack, no problem. Even some of the edge cases were there is a dependence on x86 assembly (ie, compilers or SIMD intrinsics) I've seen explicit support for the ARM ISA.
That's not for the ARMy to sort out, but for MS. The legacy windows environment will be forever x86, RT was doomed the moment they allowed office in 'classic' mode.
It does have huge implications IF this is x86 only, but we don't know yet. They could still be supporting both ISA's...
Technically, this isn't true. You can jailbreak a windows RT tablet and have 'full' windows. Clearly there aren't many native apps and any emulation of x86 would be really bad...:)
Microsoft has a clear choice. Get in bed with Intel, and kill ARM asap, or support two ISA's.
You can buy a Samsung mobile phone with a 20nm baseband. You'll have to order one online. As for the FinFET product, it's an Intel made, 14nm part.
[Hmmm. Well, I see that you have no support for that opinion. ]
We've discussed both in the past, you've acknowledged both points...
Licensing is non-recurring, but the backlog numbers are the ones to look at. Still plenty to recognize going forward.
Even, with the 'loss' of 40 million tablets, we're only talking of a hit of 4 to 8 million (USD) annually. When Intel is shipping in the hundreds of millions, then it'll hit ARM.
Total dollar revenues in Q2 2014 were $309.6 million, up 17% versus Q2 2013. Q2 sterling revenues of £187.1 million were up 9% year-on-year.
An example of the effect on the strong pound rate. As for licensing, perhaps, but this report mentioned the next gen for the first time (post A57) and the Mali cores seem to be strong as well.
Wow, we continue to see article after article these days on how ARM has closed the technology gap on Intel. In spite of the fact that ARM hasn't shipped a single FinFET processor EVER. Nor have we even seen any 20nm products shipping.
Wrong on both points.
Perhaps, you are right. However, it's still a 20nm SoC in a shipping device.
I still haven't seen any 20nm ARM or modem products.
Google is your friend, they are there.