Slashdot Mirror
Intel to Take Online Suggestions for New Chips
hhavensteincw writes "Intel has quietly launched a new online community that it plans to use to take feedback and suggestions from OEMs and end users for new features in its vPro chips and management software. Intel envisions that the community will grow to allow users to get answers from other community members faster than Intel's support group can answer questions."
Perhaps rather than hoping the community can outpace their support division, Intel should strive to improve their support division so they can always provide timely assistance to their customers?
I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
"Robert Duffy, Intel's online communities strategist, added that some of the impetus behind creating the community was to boost online traffic to Intel."
How about a 1Thz CPU with on board 1TB cache that only needs 1mw of power
Has anyone else noticed how great the AMD-Intel marketshare battle has been for consumers? Intel, in particular, seems to have woken up and begun providing really good CPU's, as well as trying to reach out to the community through things like this.
AMD/Intel should stand as a primary example of why honest competition is great for a market.
- Scott
The chip would have it's own personality.
Then, when I boot up Chippy, I'd hear "How may I serve you master?" I'd then boot Windows, open Word and begin typing. I suppose Chippy may interrupt and say "Do you really need me to handle this? It's rather simple." I'd then open seventy five applications and begin decoding the genome.
Chippy would interject "This is a lot for me to handle master. Can you not have me work so hard? It's getting hot in here!"
I'd then open up the interface and change it's name to "Pinky". Sure, Pinky may protest, but unless he kept quiet, I'd open 30 pages of Flash.
*(Cores are process-shrinked versions of the Intel 8088) I'd like to see Intel try making some massively multicore CPU, even if it's just a 64XScale. A joint venture with a company whose name sounds like it comes out of superhero comics would have to be called Super-Duper-Threading.
Intel has nothing to lose by documenting all the instruction sets, architecture designs etc. They have such a big brand name - it doesn't really matter if their designs became public.
It is quite sad that despite their chips being 100s of times faster than a few years ago, so-called 'partners' and OEMs like Microsoft have given the x86 series a bad name - resulting in little or no incremental performance gains for the user community.
Like HP made winprinters and some vendors made winmodems to the customer's ire... and the perennial problems faced by video and audio device mfrs. including big names like Creative... it is clear that the biggest OEM, namely Microsoft determines what customers get to see of "Intel Inside".
The recent thrust towards Open Source drivers for wireless cards from Intel is a very small and incomplete step. Recently at my firm, we talked to Intel for sourcing a 1000 laptops for students joining our colleges. Intel said they would share roadmaps and plans under NDA!!
This is a far cry from 20 years ago when Intel gave out the complete instruction sets and architecture layouts for their 8080; I sort-of remember the Zilog Z-80 did a better job of implementing them. Unless Intel come clean in favour of the truly Open source model, they risk small time players making it big in niche segments - including the biggest niche of them all - the PC market. If not Negroponte, someone else will come out with a non-Intel platform for under $100 and Intel will go down pulling others like Microsoft behind them.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
I'd like to see something like an FPGA onboard with a compiler (or device driver model) that can allow us to take some time consuming things such as CODECs and push them off into hardware.
Amen to that. On the bright side though, if chip growth stagnates for too long, software developers will have to start optimizing and writing streamlined code. That's never a bad thing.
I think we're long overdue for an architecture change, by the way. Can't we just start transitioning out of x86? It's well past its limits -- a Core 2 Duo generates a TON of heat, compared to an equivalent POWER chip. I mean, sure, it's way better than a Pentium 4, but it's still a kW hungry beast. Its FP performance is great -- compared to other x86 chips. Compared to other architectures though, it needs work.
POWER's not that alien either -- it's got a lot of the "improvements" that Intel/AMD have been trying to bolt onto the x86 architecture. Difference is, these improvements already exist, are well tested, and well-performing. Want multi-core? SPARC and POWER have got it. Want high-speed multithreading? Look to the Niagra II. Want virtualization? Look to POWER.
Geek fantasy: IBM open-sources the POWER architecture, Intel licenses it and starts producing a high-end chip, AMD competes. Intel and AMD start to use the improvements on their x86 chips, and, in an effort to one-up one another, start producing high-end desktop POWER-based chips. This trickles down, and soon, the x86 and POWER architectures are in competition. POWER, being a better, more modern design, eventually overtakes x86 (starting with high-end desktop usage, and trickling down to the lower-end.) Multi-core POWER chips (or SPARC, depending on the fantasy) often run with one or two cores dedicated to x86 emulation for backwards compatibility. Microsoft, having just released Blackcomb, finds their target chip slowly relegated to emulation, concurrent with the development of their next OS. Unable to use the existing codebase (which is, by this time, highly x86-centric), Microsoft is forced to roll out a new OS, built from scratch. Using some of the lessons learned from Microsoft Research, a new OS is built, embracing the core values of security, modularity, and portability. While the OS is good, the lost development time provides the boost that *nix needed. Linux takes marketshare, as does Mac OS X. During Microsoft's transition period, Apple seizes the opportunity, and releases Mac OS X for all x86 boxes. The driver situation is a little rocky at first, but open source helps ease the pain. By wholeheartedly supporting open source development, Apple leverages their work, soon gaining support across the board. Already having years of experience with the POWER chips, their dual-platform OS development allows them to provide compatible OS's for POWER and x86 computers -- and translation software (already written) helps unify the two.
Well... that's my dream anyways.
The real litigious bastards...
I would be happy if they released a motherboard with a user programmable TPM chip. In particular, I am looking for a chip that can be used for general purpose cryptographic functions, that can be reprogrammed with a different (user known) endorsement keys, and that can permanently disable remote attestation and other chip dependent remote and/or configuration based DRM functions.
-Valen