The ARM camp has twice invaded Intel's traditional markets, servers and Windows tablets. They were thrown out of Windows tablets and they continued to be ignored by the server crowd. In contrast, Intel has captured a meaningful share of the tablet market and is beginning to introduce fully capable smartphones, both which are core markets for ARM. Newer, more capable and affordable tablets continues Intel's advance in ARM's core businesses and leaves ARM no market unchallenged.
The ARM server story has years yet to run, and you shouldn't dismiss this threat so lightly - Intel certainly isn't (Paypal has recently deployed ARM based servers). Yes, Intel has done well in tablets, but without contra revenue, would it have done so well? We shall see how well Intel's based smartphones go this time round...:)
[Want to explain Qualcomm's huge continuous negative press on the issue? Your approach is to pretend the problem doesn't exist? Denial is thy name.]
No. I am not denying anything. You claimed the problem was with the A57. I just asked you to explain why Samsungs 20nm and 14nm processes (which use the exact same core) don't have these issues?
[Want to explain Samsung's plummeting profitability? Intel's fabrication superiority will allow them to discontinue Atom in favor of the better performing line. What will you offer up then? More marketing mantra? ]
So, are you suggesting that Intel is going to start selling Core for Atom prices? The ARMy is already moving forward, it's not marketing. In terms of high end CPU cores, from ARM, you'll have the A72 , Ares and Prometheus. From Qualcomm Kryo, from Samsung you'll have 'mongoose' and Apple you'll have the A9.
[A while back you would have said why doesn't Intel have significant tablet share. A while back you would have said why did Microsoft choose to offer RT. A while back you would have said Intel will never match ARM in power efficiency. A while back you did say that there would never be an Intel based Windows phone. Things change, dufus. You are on the wrong side of the prediction curve.]
lol - me on the wrong side of the prediction curve, yeah right!
[What is this? Your new marketing mantra?]
Yes, do you like it?
[Except Qualcomm has more problems than you can imagine with overheating and lack of performance as a result of using ARM's reference designs.]
Want to explain why Samsung didn't have an issue with the same ARM's reference design at 20nm and at 14nm? Want to explain why Qualcomm is using ARM's latest core (the A72) as well as designing its own high end one?
[Intel is now killing ARM at the low end. The WinTel alliance is coming back and ARM has no where to run and no place to hide.]
Intel has just launched a product. Let's wait until we see some sales numbers. Want to explain the rockchip relationship and why Intel are using ARM's GPU ? The WinTel alliance is coming back? Really? Want to explain why Microsoft is still using Qualcomm for its Windows 10 phones?
[ARM's fabrication continues in crisis with new nodes that cost too much and offer mitigated performance improvements.]
Want to explain how Samsung's Exynos 7 is smaller in die than Intel's latest 14nm Atom, yet it still offers more CPU and GPU performance?
[The ARM world is looking pretty AMD-ish to me.]
[You must be buying #$%$ TV's.]
How much do you think an Apple phone actually costs?
So, basically you're saying that Intel can't compete in this market given their business model v ARMs.
Short, honest answer. No. That said, you never say never in tech...
Also, while I'm a 'bear' on Intel's mobile ambitions, I am a 'bull' for other parts of Intel's business (servers) and if Windows 10 is good (from a consumer point of view) there might be a nice uplift for PC's as well.
As a side, while the SoC in Apple's devices are 'cheap' ($20), the phones themselves aren't and can certainly cost more than a TV.
Who knows? It may not be very much as the Fabs that do business with end users based on ARM designs may have to either charge end users less, or reduce ARM royalties. Even a 10% reduction may hurt. Every little bit helps.
How about QCOM, Apple and now (supposedly) Samsung who do their own CPU designs? Is Intel going to be able to "diminish their capacity" as well?
With the above 'top' end designs, along with the various ARM CPU designs you have a variety of CPU designs across processes all hitting different feature and price points. It's going to be hard for Intel to hit the right "target" year after year to enable this reduction in R&D capacity that was suggested by ideal_invst. As a shareholder, how much are you prepared for Intel to lose year on year in this endeavor? The ARMy isn't AMD:)
FYI, ARM earns (typically) between 1 and 2% of the SoC's selling price.
(3) Increase their competitive position by reducing ARM-vendor revenues - which will diminish their capacity to invest into R&D and move up the performance chain into PCs and servers.
(3) is the key benefit, but the other two are also very valuable.
How much of the market do you think Intel will have to take to "diminish their capacity to invest into R&D"?
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.