Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Decides To Let Go Of Broxton

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    So bad. I was considering buy a phone that can be plugged on tv, with x86 inside for compatibility and do usual stuff like videos, gaming, web surfing etc...

    Game over.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
      I guess it was inevitable seeing how even them spending billions on just giving away the predecessors to the Broxton chips wasn't enough to create a market for the damn things. However with the stranglehold they currently have on the laptop, desktop and server markets they could have kept this up almost indefinitely.

      Then again the decision to kill the Broxton chips their successors could also have to do with the fact that the markets they're aimed at have actually begun to decline ever so slightly. Intel may be hedging their bets on the market heading for a collapse of sorts the same way the market for desktops and servers has been subject for a fairly big collapse when compared to a decade or so ago.
      Originally posted by devius
      Originally posted by schmidtbag
      I worry for companies like ARM and Atmel, but at least this news helps ease the problem a little bit. ARM is really starting to make something of itself and I'm glad to see the progress they've made in the past 5 years, and I'm glad they're actually doing well enough to make Intel back off.
      I don't think you need to worry, considering that ARM shipments have been greater than x86 shipments since about 2002, so it's not something that happened just in the past 5 years. The only thing that changed recently was the press paying more attention to it.
      IOW, too little, too late? It is a bit unfortunate--I think a low power ARM chip with an x86 (or some subset) co-processor that could be powered down when not in use (something Intel definitely could pull off) would've been an interesting combination. As much as I prefer AMD, I'm not against Intel where it makes sense.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Passso View Post
        So bad. I was considering buy a phone that can be plugged on tv, with x86 inside for compatibility and do usual stuff like videos, gaming, web surfing etc...

        Game over.
        Or... yknow... just get a normal smartphone and a separate HTPC? It's an incredibly unwise decision to have a single device that does everything and is with you at all times, because in the relatively high probability that something goes wrong, you're screwed. Anyway, if you have a decent smart TV and new-ish version of Android you can always do Mirrorlink.

        Comment


        • #14
          The problem with Intel on Smartphones and Tablets is most software is compiled for ARM architecture. Unless the developer specifically spends (often a lot) time getting his code to compile and run on the Intel platform, the Intel phones and chips have to resort to a binary emulation layer which results in massively reduced performance. Since the marketshare of Intel smartphones is so low, very few developers bother optimizing for their platform and you end up with nice CPU's crippled by the emulation layer required to run ARM binary code.

          Intel was in an uphill battle. Unlike the desktop, where they have a monopoly, the mobile space has moved to ARM leaving intel as just another competitor. Its probably for the best, imagine if Intel owned both the desktop and mobile space. Their monopoly on the desktop space allows them to charge whatever prices they want.

          Comment


          • #15
            gururise, thankfully, they don't have a monopoly in the desktop space, and I can choose to not pay whatever prices they want to charge me for their tech. AMD and VIA still exist--though VIA's not really a competitor in the desktop arena, AMD certainly is (albeit not currently a very strong one).

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by trifud View Post
              This means no x86 Microsoft smartphones and tablets. Nice.
              I'd say it's nasty. Intel were the only hope to get decent FOSS drivers for mobile devices...

              Comment


              • #17
                A bit off topic but.. Is there any plans for a Power9 mobile chip? ARM surely needs some competition in the mobile market.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by davidbepo View Post
                  noooooooooooooooooo

                  i have a asus zenfone 2 with intel atom z3560 and its great
                  i was hoping to buy a zenfone 3/4 with broxton, i think this is really bad news
                  I feel the same way too. I was so looking forward to buying a phone with Intel CPU, GPU and proper open source drivers. The only kind of device on which alternative OS like Ubuntu, Meego etc. can work really well (without having to deal with closed source Android focused device drivers).

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by gururise View Post
                    The problem with Intel on Smartphones and Tablets is most software is compiled for ARM architecture. Unless the developer specifically spends (often a lot) time getting his code to compile and run on the Intel platform, the Intel phones and chips have to resort to a binary emulation layer which results in massively reduced performance. Since the marketshare of Intel smartphones is so low, very few developers bother optimizing for their platform and you end up with nice CPU's crippled by the emulation layer required to run ARM binary code.

                    Intel was in an uphill battle. Unlike the desktop, where they have a monopoly, the mobile space has moved to ARM leaving intel as just another competitor. Its probably for the best, imagine if Intel owned both the desktop and mobile space. Their monopoly on the desktop space allows them to charge whatever prices they want.
                    This is a non-factor for Android apps written in Java only - the Android OS will use JIT/compiler to convert the bytecode into machine code at install time/run time. Of course, some Android apps will include C/C++ libraries, and this matters for them.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      This was rather expected. Intel never went all in with Atom, instead releasing rather dated technology that often appeared to be minimal effort designs. As a builder of cell phones or tablets why would you even consider Intel when here are other vendors giving their all to get into your product?

                      As a side note it looks like the economy is coming up in a hard recession. I really doubt that Intel's layoffs are only about mobile. Many companies involved in capital equipment are being hit hard, a good sign things are in rough shape. Expect the bad news to build all summer long.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X