Slashdot Mirror


Intel Cuts Atom Chips, Basically Giving Up On Smartphone and Tablet Market (pcworld.com)

Intel, the marquee PC chipmaker, has long struggled to get a foothold in the smartphone market. The company, which was late in joining the mobile platform, is still playing catchup with Qualcomm and MediaTek. And it appears it's finally giving up on this ambition. The company is "immediately canceling" Atom chips, code-named Sofia and Broxton, for mobile devices, reports PCWorld, citing a company's spokesperson. The publication reports:Intel's mobile chip roadmap now has a giant hole after the cancellation of the chips. Intel's existing smartphone and tablet-only chips are aging and due for upgrades, and no major replacements are in sight. Sofia is already shipping, and Broxton was due to ship this year but had been delayed. Intel is also discontinuing its Atom X5 line of tablet chips code-named Cherry Trail, which is being replaced by Pentium and Celeron chips code-named Apollo Lake, aimed more at hybrids than pure tablets. Many PC makers are already choosing Intel's Skylake Core M processors over Cherry Trail for hybrids and PC-like tablets.The announcement comes days after its CEO outlined the company's future vision, and a week after the chipmaker let go 12,000 people.

107 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Steve1952 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My first impression is that this does not look like a good day for Microsoft. Is this back to Windows RT? That worked so well last time.

    1. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Kjella · · Score: 1

      My first impression is that this does not look like a good day for Microsoft. Is this back to Windows RT? That worked so well last time.

      Well it war terms, D-day is cancelled as Intel won't be invading the mobile space. That doesn't mean ARM is about to invade the desktop/workstation/server market. That said, WinTel's grip on the customer is certainly weakening. but the mobile/tablet apps are still often seen as second fiddle to the "real" apps. That might change though, maybe not today or tomorrow but in a year or five things could look very different.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      There is a pretty decent UWP Arm/x86 app catalogue now.

      Also there is still Core-M which is what effectively every Windows Tablet maker is using anyway. It does mean the death of the $100 Windows Tablet though for a while.

    3. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Daemonik · · Score: 2

      Windows RT lost out mostly due to the spectacularly crappy Microsoft App Store, and they didn't push enough units out to justify developers investing in creating Windows Apps. Even with all the desktops using Windows 10 on PCs, their app store is pretty lame still.

      If Microsoft can get some energy into Windows app development, they could put Windows 10 on any CPU.

    4. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      If Microsoft can get some energy into Windows app development, they could put Windows 10 on any CPU.

      Windows 10 IoT runs pretty good on my RaspberryPI 2. I was pretty stunned Kodi performed better on that than it did under OpenElec (go figure).

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    5. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well there are some problems with that. Because Microsoft is in such a bad market position for mobile, they literally give it away, and sell their handsets at a loss. And with as much shit as MS fans give Android OEMs, the top 15 of them do make a profit off of their Android handsets, but as Huawei once said, "nobody made any money on windows phone", which has held true for every OEM so far, including Samsung, Nokia, and Microsoft themselves. Huawei is doing really well with Android, by the way; they're presently the #3 smartphone vendor by volume, only below Samsung at #1 and Apple at #2. The only OEM that might do anything is HP, but I really don't think their newly spun off consumer and business electronics division has any idea what the hell it's doing. Every mobile device they've created, every single one, has flopped, and even the area they were once doing well at, namely printers, has lost a fair bit of market share over the years.

      No, Windows 10 Mobile is and always has been DOA.

      I think the future of Microsoft isn't going to be in platforms for very long. They've made too many stupid mistakes to salvage that future. That doesn't mean they have no future, mind you, they still do really well in terms business logistics (i.e. Active Directory, which comes in the form of Windows Server sales, but even then, Windows Server doesn't run on bare metal anymore, it runs on the VMware hypervisor platform) and their Azure platform is doing well and will probably continue to do well, and in that role, Microsoft will still do very well for a long time to come.

    6. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think it will take over Desktop, but Server is quite a distinct possibility. Microsoft is in fact making Windows Server for ARM, and probably won't do the stupid shit they did with what was supposed to be Windows on ARM. If ARM servers can show dramatically reduced cost for energy and cooling, you bet your ass it will replace x86.

      But that's not where Intel is going wrong. I think Intel is making a mistake in throwing their eggs into the IoT basket. In fact, a lot of tech companies are. I fully expect IoT to flop after a generation because nobody has solved or even attempted to solve the fundamental IT security problems it presents. The solution I hear from the talking heads when I've asked them is "well, after a device is EOL, you'll need to buy a new one to avoid future threats" which is really dumb. Nobody, anywhere, is going to replace shit when it still works and does what they need it to do. They'll only do that once when they realize the problems inherent in IoT, after which they'll just forgo it completely because it's more trouble than it's worth.

      Besides, I still have yet to figure out exactly what kind of business problem IoT is intended to solve, and I really don't think consumers have enough money to buy on the scale that Intel needs.

    7. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      There is a pretty decent UWP Arm/x86 app catalogue now.

      Not really. I've yet to see anything in UWP that you can't do with a web browser, and consumers and businesses both seem to prefer that.

    8. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Well, I mean that's a pretty high bar to achieve since these days nearly anything can be done in a browser. :D

      But we've now got VLC (huge), Office, real Xbox Games, Instagram (only able to post through an app), Uber, Waze and Starbucks.

      We won't start to see win32 apps showing up though for a couple months when the summer update adds win32 package support.

    9. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      How do you get Kodi to run on Windows 10 IoT? I thought it doesn't include a graphics compositor? Furthermore, does Kodi even compile for Windows ARM?

    10. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      But we've now got VLC (huge), Office, real Xbox Games, Instagram (only able to post through an app), Uber, Waze and Starbucks.

      I'm looking through it now and I don't see instagram, starbucks, or waze (not that I use any of them.) Also the reviewers don't seem to care for uber or vlc on UWP, whereas they have solid ratings on iOS and Android.

    11. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      Makes sense. I think the cleverer people will foresee exactly this outcome, and steer clear of appliances that need to be online.

    12. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Facebook announced an Instagram app in the past day or two.

    13. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Teckla · · Score: 2

      That doesn't mean ARM is about to invade the desktop/workstation/server market.

      Regarding the desktop market, what I really want, and what I think a lot of other people really want (but don't realize it yet), is the ability to attach their smartphone to an external (full size) display, keyboard, and mouse [1], and run "full screen" applications.

      I think smartphones are already fast enough for this to work (if they aren't yet, they soon will be). Smartphones are already pushing tons of pixels (often far more pixels than your typical "full size" 1920x1080 display). A smartphone driving a full screen display shouldn't be a problem at all.

      Bonus points if: (1) your phone is being charged while attached, (2) there's only one cable from your phone to this set up, and (3) you can continue to use your phone while also using "full screen" applications (this may require smartphones with more RAM).

      Sync everything to the cloud, and Bob's your uncle. I think people would love this. Instead of having to constantly maintain a needy desktop OS like Windows or OS X (sorry, but for non-geeks, "traditional" desktop OS's are still way too "needy"), you'd have one computing device that's far easier to maintain.

      Now, I know /. is home to chest-thumping uber-geeks that are about to tell me how terrible and under-powered this would be. I'm not necessarily talking about making you happy. I'm talking about making the other 98% of the market happy.

      Besides, as a long-time software developer myself, I think it's almost shameful and ridiculous how much computing power is utterly wasted on really lazy and inefficient implementations of software. Even most chest-thumping uber-geeks could be perfectly happy with smartphone level computing power, it just requires a little more thought and careful software development.

      And I think this can and will happen, because what I'm describing above is what 98% of the market wants (imo), and I really think it'll happen in the next 10 years. Even Microsoft has time to win this huge war, if they're the first to market with a good implementation of what I've described above. I think Google and Apple are the others big players that have a chance, but we'll see which company is forward-thinking enough to be the first to do it right.

      We live in interesting times!

      [1] And maybe speakers too.

    14. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Teckla · · Score: 1

      That doesn't mean ARM is about to invade the desktop/workstation/server market.

      Regarding the desktop market, what I really want, and what I think a lot of other people really want (but don't realize it yet), is the ability to attach their smartphone to an external (full size) display, keyboard, and mouse [1], and run "full screen" applications.

      I think smartphones are already fast enough for this to work (if they aren't yet, they soon will be). Smartphones are already pushing tons of pixels (often far more pixels than your typical "full size" 1920x1080 display). A smartphone driving a full screen display shouldn't be a problem at all.

      Bonus points if: (1) your phone is being charged while attached, (2) there's only one cable from your phone to this set up, and (3) you can continue to use your phone while also using "full screen" applications (this may require smartphones with more RAM).

      Sync everything to the cloud, and Bob's your uncle. I think people would love this. Instead of having to constantly maintain a needy desktop OS like Windows or OS X (sorry, but for non-geeks, "traditional" desktop OS's are still way too "needy"), you'd have one computing device that's far easier to maintain.

      Now, I know /. is home to chest-thumping uber-geeks that are about to tell me how terrible and under-powered this would be. I'm not necessarily talking about making you happy. I'm talking about making the other 98% of the market happy.

      Besides, as a long-time software developer myself, I think it's almost shameful and ridiculous how much computing power is utterly wasted on really lazy and inefficient implementations of software. Even most chest-thumping uber-geeks could be perfectly happy with smartphone level computing power, it just requires a little more thought and careful software development.

      And I think this can and will happen, because what I'm describing above is what 98% of the market wants (imo), and I really think it'll happen in the next 10 years. Even Microsoft has time to win this huge war, if they're the first to market with a good implementation of what I've described above. I think Google and Apple are the others big players that have a chance, but we'll see which company is forward-thinking enough to be the first to do it right.

      We live in interesting times!

      [1] And maybe speakers too.

    15. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu convergence, Windows Continuum.

      The tech is here, just not on Android and iOS that have the smartphone business sown-up.

    16. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      How do you get Kodi to run on Windows 10 IoT? I thought it doesn't include a graphics compositor? Furthermore, does Kodi even compile for Windows ARM?

      Right, it only runs the headless version, for controlling content libraries, etc.

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    17. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by dryeo · · Score: 1

      If given the choice. We already see with things like automobiles where most all models are online and I can imagine a future where most all appliances are connected though hopefully easily disabled.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    18. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Compuser · · Score: 2

      LibreOffice? Photoshop? Matlab? VirtualDub? Illustrator? Draftsight? Comsol? Netfabb? Visual Studio? Handbrake? As soon as these and a few other apps can be run on a phone, I will be impressed. If the phone can also run at least 3 external independent 1080p screens then I will switch.

    19. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      My first impression is that this does not look like a good day for Microsoft. Is this back to Windows RT? That worked so well last time.

      Nope - You just go knock on AMD's door.

    20. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Well it war terms, D-day is cancelled as Intel won't be invading the mobile space. That doesn't mean ARM is about to invade the desktop/workstation/server market.

      But it is already! If you are either just shoveling bytes or doing all your work with the GPU, then some ARM cores can save you a substantial pile of money — both up front, and over time in power consumption savings. ARM servers are rapidly becoming a thing.

      I got my pine 64, statistically nobody is going to replace their desktop with it any time soon, but they seem to have enough grunt to actually do the vast majority of what people are actually doing with their PC. I am getting a much faster uSDHC card (going from Sandisk Ultra 32GB to Samsung Evo+ 32GB) before I start to really make declarative statements, though. It seems like an octocore 64-bit ARM with a halfway decent GPU (unlike the one on pine... it is not adequate at 1080p for anything halfway serious, and this thing is supposed to do 4k eventually) could come in at a couple hundred bucks or less and actually do some moderately serious computing.

      It's always hilarious to think of how much processing power and memory you have to have nowadays to be considered even in the game when one comes from single-digit MHz speeds, and sub-megabyte memory sizes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    21. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You can already run most of that stuff on a phone, but it's a bit funky-chunky actually using it. If you have an Android device with a decent amount of RAM you can install a complete Linux environment inside of it, and run it in a chroot. Inside of it, you run the VNC X server, and then you use a VNC client to connect to that. I suppose you could use SPICE instead, but I haven't tried. You're going to need a really pissed-off phone with a crapload of RAM for it to run well, and some of that stuff obviously isn't going to run well no matter what phone you've got, but the time is fast approaching.

      In addition, you have extra-special needs. Most people run none of that software, ever.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    22. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not using the SoC graphics on the Pi is a complete waste of that system. If running headless there are a plethora of boards out there with more grunt. The Pi SoC has hardware video decompression and can push 1080p. That's why it's good as a media center.

    23. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Windows Server doesn't run on bare metal? Are you sure about that?

    24. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      The majority of corporate desktops are Windows with many Win32 legacy apps. There is no way to run any of these on Android or iOS. An Atom phone running full Windows would be the ideal choice for this but no one seems to be interested in making one.

    25. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      Think you are going to need a citation for the no bare metal for servers anymore. Will come as a major shock to a lot of people as even with 2012 R2 it certainly does and I haven't seen any announcements for this to change. I also seriously doubt they would ever use VMWare as a hypervisor even if they did.

    26. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      That ignores all the bespoke software where the latest version is required, not to mention new features that people need or changed file formats on off the shelf stuff. That's not going to fly with too many organisations. It might be with a try running Win 7 with Bochs on Android but something tells me that isn't good enough yet, especially for people wanting more than one screen.

    27. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Teckla · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu convergence, Windows Continuum.

      The tech is here, just not on Android and iOS that have the smartphone business sown-up.

      Perhaps what scares me the most is if Apple and Google fail in this area, Microsoft might win by default. Then Microsoft might end up with yet another monopoly...

    28. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by lgw · · Score: 1

      You are the "geek hobbyist niche" market. As am I. Sucks for us, as the mainstream has no use for any of that, and so it's only a matter of time before platforms designed for hard use are rare and expensive.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    29. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

      I would've thought there'd at least be a market for Surface Pro clones running low-power chips. Apparently not.

      I guess SP is really just a high-priced 'status' laptop for executives, and will never invade the true mobile market. Still, even cheap convertible laptops might do well with a processor that gives them decent battery life in 'tablet' mode. If even that market is not worth pursuing, then forget the strategy of 'free' Windows 10 in order to seed the Windows app store. Windows will be a long-lived WIN32 legacy platform for business desktops - and some home users who aren't ready to go full Chromebook (many of whom are probably using their Windows laptops as de-facto Chrombooks anyway).

      I do see an opening for somebody to commercialize an ARM version of WINE, though - either as a porting tool, or configured to run .exe's via X86 emulation (with all the library calls native - that approach can be pretty fast anyway). Of course, Microsoft could always (and still could, I suppose) start supporting WIN32 on ARM...

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    30. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Windows Server doesn't run on bare metal? Are you sure about that?

      Oh, it CAN, but no one does... I have even virtualized single server installations because it makes backups and snapshots easy.

    31. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      The majority of corporate desktops are Windows with many Win32 legacy apps. There is no way to run any of these on Android or iOS. An Atom phone running full Windows would be the ideal choice for this but no one seems to be interested in making one.

      A lot of them won't run On Win7 or WinX either... Hence a lot of companies with Virtual XP desktops for them, or old Windows Terminal Servers... And a smart phone does RDP just fine.

    32. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Funny enough, 16.04 was the first Ubuntu release I have looked forward to since 10.04. And I had a lot less trouble and bugs then I expected. (And I run Gnome Flashback, not Unity) And so much less trouble then installing and updating Windows!

    33. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      The reason why I asked is because I've got a Windows Server 2012 R2 box under my desk for my test VMs and it's running on bare metal. I wondered if this was some architectural thing I wasn't aware of.

    34. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by beanpoppa · · Score: 1

      I used to think that's what I wanted, too. But I think what is actually happening is that our data is moving to the cloud. As it does, you can basically go to any terminal and essentially have a roaming profile (without the 10 minute initial login delay that you have for Windows AD roaming profiles) for any computing device you go to. As it is now, when I'm on my desktop, I use my Chrome browser that has all my bookmarks and history. When I go to a phone, the same information is there. My documents are in Google Drive (or OneDrive, or Box, etc).The disk of the device becomes less important. It's moved a lot in this direction in just the last few years, and in 10 more years, I think it will essentially be seamless.

    35. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by interstellarsurfer · · Score: 1

      Microsoft: We gave you Win10 for free. We neglected to tell you it was ad supported. Pray we don't alter the deal any further.

    36. Re: Think of the children! (Microsoft) by interstellarsurfer · · Score: 1

      You're right mate. The problem with IoT is that it's supposed to interface with a lot of durable household goods - lighting, AC, refrigeration, kitchen appliances. Durable goods are only replaced when they're worn out and irreparable. We still live in a world where a 1950's appliance is competitive with a modern one, because the ROI of a new one isn't competitive. IMO, IoT is supposed to break that, by creating forced obsolescence, and I don't think the majority of consumers are going to buy into that bullshit.

    37. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Teckla · · Score: 1

      I think storing user data in the cloud is fine, but many applications should be local. For example, Minecraft.

    38. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by Pyramid · · Score: 1

      Nobody was running those (except perhaps LibreOffice) on a low powered machine to begin with. For the 95% of users to browse the web, get email, open attachments and watch cat videos, a modern phone or tablet has plenty of horsepower. ...if the developer isn't lazy.

      --
      ~Any apparent grammatical or typographic errors are caused by defects in your display device.
    39. Re:Think of the children! (Microsoft) by samwichse · · Score: 1

      "Besides, I still have yet to figure out exactly what kind of business problem IoT is intended to solve, and I really don't think consumers have enough money to buy on the scale that Intel needs."

      The problem of locking in customers to your proprietary version of something formerly universal. Duh!

  2. Here comes the ARM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Intel not Inside

    1. Re: Here comes the ARM by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      I thought the "fat binary" file format made it trivial to distribute programs that ran on multiple architectures (PPC/Intel). Check a box within Xcode and you're done? There's no Classic/Carbon legacy this time around.

    2. Re:Here comes the ARM by VVelox · · Score: 1

      Not really. ARM really leaves a lot to be desired tool wise and the like. For embedded boards, Atom was a fucking godsend. Also for small low power servers there is nothing that even comes close to it.

    3. Re:Here comes the ARM by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      For embedded boards, Atom was a fucking godsend. Also for small low power servers there is nothing that even comes close to it.

      This right here! I am going to miss the small, cheap, and fanless Mini-ITX boards I used for storage servers and firewalls, and I doubt I am alone.

    4. Re: Here comes the ARM by interstellarsurfer · · Score: 1

      I look forward to AMD powered Apples. They are far from marooned. AMD was doing low power before it was trendy, and now they have the IP-locked technology they have been needing to deliver.

  3. The End is Near! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Time to stock up on prepper basics: food, water, ammo, and silicon.

  4. IBM by sexconker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My prediction of Intel becoming IBM is coming true much faster than I expected.

    1. Re:IBM by Kjella · · Score: 1

      I think it's easier to have been IBM than it is to be Intel. IBM used to deliver the whole package, hardware & software & applications & consulting so they just loosened up a bit. Intel on the other hand doesn't have any other business than hardware that I know of. Really anything that doesn't comply with x86_64 or ARM is dead in the water. Show me the benchmars...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:IBM by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that networking thing never went anywhere... :)

  5. Re:IBM [they are like...] by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Oligopolies and monopolies typically lose their competitive edge once they reach the top of the hill.

    They get fat, happy, and entrenched in their ways and cannot undo the bad habits until things are so bad that they have no other choice but to change. By that time the company is usually too deep to be saved.

    It's kind of like somebody not changing their bad diet until they have a debilitating stroke. However, the equivalent of a stroke in Big Co-ville is bankruptcy.

    Rinse, die, repeat.

    IBM was very lucky to have a decent second life in the late 90's. But it was largely because their consulting side was a mostly a new team, who were still fresh and hungry. Whether they'll get a 3rd chance will be interesting to see...

  6. Competition from within? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I got an Atom 330 back in 2009 and actually used it for about 5 years (until in 2014 I replaced it with an Athlon II from 2010). It was "good enough" once you got used to it, but obviously very low-end.

    What became impressive later, was in 2013 when Haswell processors started getting into the same wattage ballpark, but needless to say, with way awesomer performance. And that's a couple generations ago: I bet Intel's own Skylake (not just ARM) is what really put the squeeze on Atom.

    Maybe Intel is really getting out of mobiles, but I think it's more believable that they're going to use their much better cores in that market.

    1. Re:Competition from within? by BenJeremy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, saying Skylake and Apollo Lake are not aimed at the tablet market (I'm sorry, "pure tablet market") is kind of silly - and they were never in the phone market at all, for all practical purposes.

      They trimmed a growing, obfuscated product line because there was redundancy, and worse, redundancy with inferior parts. Intel is going for the high-end of the market, focusing efforts on money makers, which also allows them to downsize staff

      It's not a bad strategy, the only question is why they didn't to it sooner.

  7. What if Intel is right? by tomhath · · Score: 2
    FTFA:

    Intel doesn't view tablets as a standalone market any longer, with form factors quickly merging.

    Maybe Intel is right. The market for phones is saturated (Apple knows this) and low profit margin. Tablets are a passing fad. The future is somewhere else.

    1. Re:What if Intel is right? by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure tablets are a passing fad. It might be more that everybody who wants one, has one, and most of them still work fine. My 1st gen Nexus 7 still does everything it needs to do. Why should I buy another one?

      Still, you're right, the future is somewhere else. Tablets are becoming a commodity.

  8. I'm not a fan of Intel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I use AMD in my desktops as they're much cheaper for not much loss in performance.

    I do have a Bay Trail tablet, and this news saddens me. It is the death of mobile x86. Sure x86 tablets did not have the battery life as ARM but it had one major advantage. The ability to use real desktop programs. In a closed source environment such as Windows, this was extremely important. Especially when your work involves software which requires desktop computing and does not come with source code. Likewise you never had to deal with crappy mobile ports.

    (And before someone quips about touch screen, touchpointermouse turns the entire tablet screen into a giant track pad. )

  9. atom fanless mini-itx boxes are (were?) great.. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Informative

    for some things, at least.

    for audio, it was great. an x86 platform with a proper network interface, proper sata interface, expandable memory to reasonable mounts (for its application) and often there was onboard atx psu parts so you gave it a laptop 18v dc brick and that was your whole psu. totally silent, with an ssd.

    otoh, the recent (last year or 2) of i3 has been so cool running, you can just use the fanless i3 variant on an itx board and have more fun.

    still, the atom on the board was low cost, often fanless (more than the i3 was) and good enough for some video and any audio you could throw at it. it could be a nas server, as well.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    1. Re:atom fanless mini-itx boxes are (were?) great.. by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Core-M should serve this market well:
      http://ark.intel.com/products/...

      Several of the chips in the 2ghz range are passively cooled.

    2. Re:atom fanless mini-itx boxes are (were?) great.. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Not at the price.

      TRAY: $281.

      The whole computer used to cost less than that.

    3. Re:atom fanless mini-itx boxes are (were?) great.. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

      Apollo Lake, as mentioned in the summary, is still around. That's the codename for the desktop Atom architecture, which they brand as Pentium/Celeron just to confuse customers.

      So, at this stage, it's only the SoC chips for a non-existent phone market they're cutting (which the Chinese tablet makers bought en masse).

  10. Re:IBM [they are like...] by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

    There was also a dot-com boom and this penguin guy to help them along in the 90's. I hope IBM had a "plan B" and I hope they adopt some stable and sane HR policies... I think that would go a long ways towards a "3rd chance"

    --
    C|N>K
  11. Is it that difficult? by fozzy1015 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is it that difficult to make a low-power 80x86 ISA chip to compete with ARM manufacturers? I know the legacy instruction decoding is always going to take space, but I thought at this point the transistor count compared to the rest of the chip was small. I figured Intel with their leading edge fabs would be able to pull it off.

    1. Re:Is it that difficult? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It isn't too "hard" to make a low-power 80x86 ISA chip with their process technology, it's just not easy for Intel to make a *low-price*, low-power chip, so it's hard for them justifying the "A" team R&D resources to do so. Thus Intel take their "B" team and resource constrain them to make a chip that is a derivative of all the IP they have in house, make some chips and wrap $1B around them with a bow and sell them into the market as a *low-price* (rather than low-cost) and hope to gain enough market share to justify them spending even more R&D money on it in the future on a low-cost chip.

      As you might imagine this strategy has a few holes in and in retrospect it probably wasn't the recipe for success. Fortunately for intel, because the mobile market collapsed (Qualcomm SoC revenues down and Apple sales flatline) to keep them from burning another $1B in a shrinking market.

    2. Re:Is it that difficult? by imgod2u · · Score: 5, Informative

      When looking at the technical merits of Atom, it was actually quite competitive with the latest and greatest offerings from the ARM camp (with the exception of Apple's offerings, but Apple has advantages others don't).

      In this case, the bullet to the head was, ironically, software compatibility. To this day, you can't just put an x86 chip in a phone/tablet and expect *everything* to work right that would've if running an ARM chip. Not to mention Intel charges way too damn much for those things and doesn't have anywhere close to a decent connectivity (WIFI/LTE/GSM) pairing solution.

      Their SoC design was also shit. Codecs and DSP algorithms that others have baked in for generations are still missing from the latest and greatest Atom.

    3. Re:Is it that difficult? by Koen+Lefever · · Score: 4, Informative

      Intel hasn't made an 80x86 chip in a couple decades.

      80586 / i586 was named "Pentium" because Intel could not trademark a number but still wanted to distinguish itself from AMD Am86 and Cyrix Cx486.

      "80x86" has since then become a de facto generic name for all descendants of the 8086, including the x86-64 / AMD64 / EM64T / Intel64 / x64 architecture.

      --
      /. refugees on Usenet: news:comp.misc
    4. Re:Is it that difficult? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Is it that difficult to make a low-power 80x86 ISA chip to compete with ARM manufacturers?

      actually, Atom was sufficiently low-power to compete with ARM phones. the real problem is they were many times more expensive and took more power.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    5. Re:Is it that difficult? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Skylake is down to 10W... that's the direction I'd develop. Atom sucked, no loss there.

    6. Re:Is it that difficult? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "80x86" has since then become a de facto generic name for all descendants of the 8086, including the x86-64 / AMD64 / EM64T / Intel64 / x64 architecture.

      Agreed except for everything after the comma. Those are not 80x86 platforms.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Is it that difficult? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Apparently a 486 derivative supporting the Pentium's instruction set, complete with a PCI Express bus and DDR3 memory, and supports the XD Bit but not much else.

      Though technically it's not a 80x86 processor, in the sense it's named the Quark X1000.

  12. A return to the Wild West? by brwski · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Having seen the bloom of CPU architectures in the 80s and 90s, and the effective monoculture we have now on the performance end of things, it would be interesting to see competing models and new attempts start popping up here and there. Everyone points to Apple's A-series as possibly moving to the desktop, but why just them? The world worked just fine when there was competition â" x86 vs 68k, PPC vs Alpha vs x86, etc. etc. Good things could grow if Intel would no longer be the 500-lb beast.

    --

    brwski
    "Because without beer, things do not seem to go as well''

  13. Windows 10 Mobile? by Kenshin · · Score: 1

    I wonder what this means for Windows 10 Mobile.

    The tiny but dedicated fanbase kept insisting that an x86-based "Surface Phone" was on the way "any time now", and was going to be the platform's saviour. But now there's no Atom, and I doubt a Core M is going to fit in there anytime soon.

    --

    Does it make you happy you're so strange?

  14. Re:Too many products by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    Intel Celeron processor N2840 works fine in tablets, so why does this make it sound like they are dropping out of tablets? It is just too expensive? I haven't priced the parts, just the systems they come in.

  15. Re:Too many products by mattventura · · Score: 1

    From TFA (I know, I know), it doesn't mention the fate of the server-oriented atoms, so those might still continue. Although those themselves seem a bit redundant with the Xeon D line.

  16. Mobile Atom was a dead-end anyway by steveha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Intel was caught napping by the mobile revolution, and they were late to the party. Thanks to iPhone and Android devices, ARM is the standard for mobile.

    Now, that by itself doesn't force out Intel. But ARM is very inexpensive, and available from multiple vendors. Intel's business model is to make chips that you need, that you can only get from Intel, and then charge a very profitable margin on those chips. Intel does not want to compete on price in a commodity market; that's not what they do.

    So now Intel was trying to carve out a share of the mobile chip market, and it was competing against a chip design that is available from roughly six different companies. Their desired end game would be for the mobile companies to buy Intel chips, get locked in so they depended on Intel chips, and pay a profitable margin to Intel for those chips. But none of the mobile manufacturers wanted that... why would they? Why not just keep using ARM, which is getting more and more powerful anyway?

    Intel basically had to pay companies to use the Atom. A few took Intel up on it, but those devices did not shake up the market at all. Basically a mobile device with an Atom was about as good as a mobile device with an ARM chip.

    The only way this could possibly have worked would have been for Atom to be better than ARM, and not just a little better; it had to be so much better that it was a clear slam-dunk win, such an amazing chip that it would be worth the risk of entering into an entangling agreement with Intel (and being on the hook for Intel raising the prices on the chips). I see no evidence that Atom was really better at all than the ARM chips, let alone that much better.

    So Intel is now going to stop paying companies to build with Atom, and is giving up on that whole market.

    P.S. I would love a small form-factor PC running a 64-bit ARM chip with completely passive cooling and running Linux. I'd buy that. I might even buy it if it was called a "ChromeBox" and came with Chrome OS pre-installed, but it would be an easier sell if I could get drivers for plain Linux for all the hardware.

    x86 looks pretty safe on the desktop for now, but give it a few years and we'll see if that's still true.

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    1. Re:Mobile Atom was a dead-end anyway by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      The big selling point for Atom is that it's almost as efficient as ARM but it runs REAL WINDOWS with all those x86 programs we love. What killed the market for Atom is that people aren't that eager to have Windows on portable devices. Intel went through contortions to implement all the x86 instructions on low-power chip, to support all the legacy software that's written for x86. But with iOS and Android, ARM seems to have all the apps that people want, and they just don't pine for the legacy stuff.

    2. Re:Mobile Atom was a dead-end anyway by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

      There's this. Or you could always jailbreak an Amazon Fire.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    3. Re: Mobile Atom was a dead-end anyway by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      Raspberry Pi 3 has 64-bit ARM and runs Debian.

    4. Re:Mobile Atom was a dead-end anyway by marovada · · Score: 1

      "P.S. I would love a small form-factor PC running a 64-bit ARM chip with completely passive cooling and running Linux." Try a Pyra when available: https://pyra-handheld.com/boar...

    5. Re:Mobile Atom was a dead-end anyway by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      The big selling point for Atom is that it's almost as efficient as ARM but it runs REAL WINDOWS with all those x86 programs we love. What killed the market for Atom is that people aren't that eager to have Windows on portable devices.

      You know, people have been trying to get Windows on portable devices since time was time, and paying a pretty penny for the privilege as well. The problem is that Windows has always been crap on portable devices, and now there are finally credible alternatives.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Mobile Atom was a dead-end anyway by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      The big selling point for Atom is that it's almost as efficient as ARM but it runs REAL WINDOWS with all those x86 programs we love. What killed the market for Atom is that people aren't that eager to have Windows on portable devices. Intel went through contortions to implement all the x86 instructions on low-power chip, to support all the legacy software that's written for x86. But with iOS and Android, ARM seems to have all the apps that people want, and they just don't pine for the legacy stuff.

      Well, I love my atom-based tablet that came with Windows 8.1 and upgraded to Windows 10. For $100, it does a lot more than a $100 Android tablet (I use an iPad), and being able to just run Win32 stuff (or even Win16 stuff!) is a dream.

      What was surprising is how peppy that little chip is - it won't beat my i7 desktop, but for on the go stuff, it works surprisingly well. The only downsides is that 1GB of RAM and limited storage (yes, it has an SD slot, but SD is sloowwww)

      Heck, I bought a couple more Atom based PCs - a Lenovo Think Stick and a Kangaroo mobile desktop, both of which were obtained for $100 and $150. Cheap micro desktop PCs.

      And yes, I love the ability to run old software on it - I mean, you can play MP3s on any device, but you can't run WinAmp and all the plugins on just any tablet. I wonder how BlueStacks would run on it for the quick Android fix ...

  17. Windows Tablets by GrBear · · Score: 1

    After owning a Surface Pro 3 for a few months, and subsequently selling it, I often wonder how people can stand using Windows as a tablet.

    I mean, Windows doesn't have very good tablet integration still, even with Windows 10... ever try to close those tiny close buttons for your non-metro programs?

    Secondly, battery life is complete shit.. 3 hours or less I got out of my Surface.

    Thirdly, you still have to run anti-virus, and all that other crap just like a desktop or laptop computer.

    And lastly, you pretty much still need a keyboard with Windows.. which makes you think, why didn't I just buy a laptop instead?

    If you want or need a tablet for the portability, you're still better off with an iPad or Android tablet.

    1. Re:Windows Tablets by vux984 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I mean, Windows doesn't have very good tablet integration still, even with Windows 10

      Ok... Ill bite. I gave my daughter an Asus T100Chi with an Atom CPU as an ultraportable for school (she has access to a regular deskop, and laptop as well.)

      She spends literally oodles of time with it, in tablet mode.

      ... ever try to close those tiny close buttons for your non-metro programs?

      She doesn't much use those when she's using it as a tablet. And the detachable bluetooth keyboard and trackpad are right there when she needs desktop features.

      Secondly, battery life is complete shit.. 3 hours or less I got out of my Surface.

      That's the main reason we went with the t100chi for a school portable she gets 10+ hrs easily on the battery doing basic web browsing and ms office etc.

      Thirdly, you still have to run anti-virus, and all that other crap just like a desktop or laptop computer.

      We use windows 10 built in A/V which is pretty lightweight. And her documents are sync'd to a cloud service. If it were to get infected, deleting the user profile or even an OS wipe would be a fairly minor inconvenience.

      And lastly, you pretty much still need a keyboard with Windows.. which makes you think, why didn't I just buy a laptop instead?

      It has one. Its there if she needs it. For chatting on skype (video) or watching various streaming services, she doesn't need it. I was surprised at how often she elected to use the onscreen keyboard in tablet mode vs using the bluetooth one.

      If you want or need a tablet for the portability, you're still better off with an iPad or Android tablet.

      If you want a tablet sure, get a tablet. This is for people who want an ultraportable laptop, that can also do double duty as a tablet.

      The surface pro is going gangbusters at work. Our outbound sales teams and managers love it. Its smaller and lighter than the laptops they used to carry around. It runs our point-of-sale/retail software which is windows only. They can do presentations in powerpoint etc with it at client sites. Its connected to our domain; they can run reports, they can save them as PDF, or print them because the company network printers are all setup same as any other computer, they can send them as email attachments -- with none of the usual tablet weirdness about hiding the file system or making printing funky etc.

      A tablet, by comparison is worthless. Even Windows RT tablets were worthless. There IS a lot of value to the surface series stuff. It seems to fill a real niche.

      The surface pro series isn't going to be affected as they're already further upmarket than the atom. The surface (non-pro) and asus transformer books etc that are atom based... I'm guessing will move into the m3 stuff.

      Its really the phone to 8" tablet market that might be screwed by intel's exit... but i don't think anybody but windows phone fans care.

      It does raise some questions though; a lot of people think that maybe our computer will 'become' our phone... we'll just set out phone next to our desk and our dual monitors, and desktop keyboard light up and we use the phone as the processor. That "dream" seems a bit further away if intel isn't going to be there.

      Maybe ARM will go there... but I wouldn't discount the amount of influence intel and windows have.

    2. Re:Windows Tablets by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

      Thirdly, you still have to run anti-virus, and all that other crap just like a desktop or laptop computer.

      AV and Malware protection are desperately needed in the mobile space these days. Though it might not as be self evident since we blithely let apps suck up so much information anyways. Just imagine if software on a desktop tried to gather that much data and ship it off to shady developers and companies, it would be quickly derided as malware and removed.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
  18. Apparently by KalvinB · · Score: 2

    x86 requires more power than ARM which requires bigger batteries and produces more heat.

    It's a fundamentally different architecture. ARM will never be able to compete with x86 in terms of computing power and x86 can't compete with ARM in terms of efficiency and low power.

    You can never do more for the same cost of doing less.

    Intel is making a good decision to just focus on what they're good at. If they want to compete in the mobile market they need to try to come up with a better ARM chip.

    1. Re:Apparently by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      check out their curie chip.

      time will tell if its going to be anything important. right now, its an arduino-101 engine. it has its roots in x86 land, clearly (quark chip).

      but the atoms were in a different league. I could feel ok running fast sata drives on intel NB chipsets and atom cpus. I would never think to put 'heavy' work on a quark ;)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:Apparently by raftpeople · · Score: 1

      An additional reason for ARM's success is willingness to license IP, which the major players want so they can customize/optimize, but Intel for obvious reasons would not do.

    3. Re:Apparently by Koen+Lefever · · Score: 1

      ARM will never be able to compete with x86 in terms of computing power and x86 can't compete with ARM in terms of efficiency and low power.

      Be careful with words like "never", I remember very well when ARM was running circles around 80x86 in terms of computing power: back in 1987, ARM's selling point was speed rather than low power.

      --
      /. refugees on Usenet: news:comp.misc
    4. Re:Apparently by boa · · Score: 1

      ARM will never be able to compete with x86 in terms of computing power and x86 can't compete with ARM in terms of efficiency and low power.

      Be careful with words like "never", I remember very well when ARM was running circles around 80x86 in terms of computing power: back in 1987, ARM's selling point was speed rather than low power.

      AFAICT: The Wikipedia article you link to doesn't mention x86 processors at all...

    5. Re:Apparently by Koen+Lefever · · Score: 1

      ARM will never be able to compete with x86 in terms of computing power and x86 can't compete with ARM in terms of efficiency and low power.

      Be careful with words like "never", I remember very well when ARM was running circles around 80x86 in terms of computing power: back in 1987, ARM's selling point was speed rather than low power.

      AFAICT: The Wikipedia article you link to doesn't mention x86 processors at all...

      I used to run a software PC Emulator on Archimedes(1) in 1987, ARM (around 4 to 8 Mips (2)) was at that time emulating 8086 at the speed of an IBM PC/XT or AT (both below 1 Mips (3)).

      While calculating a screen-sized Mandelbrot fractal at the time took minutes (up to half an hour) on IBM PC, the Archimedes did it in seconds.

      (1) The 80186 co-processor card mentioned at the end of the linked article was unfortunately never released, the emulation was 100% in software.
      (2) Acorn Archimedes speed
      (3) IBM PC/XT and AT speed

      --
      /. refugees on Usenet: news:comp.misc
  19. Atom's death is probably a good thing by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    Atom didn't have the power of a desktop CPU and didn't have low enough power consumption to unseat ARM. Atom also had an awkward position in SOHO NAS devices. My Atom based Synology can't transcode 1080p video. I'm sure Synology picked Atom for price/power consumption reasons - but in a box with 5 spinning discs, does power consumption really matter all that much?

    I'm hoping that with the death of Atom, SOHO NAS vendors will migrate to more capable CPUs.

    1. Re:Atom's death is probably a good thing by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Atom now have Quicksync (in Braswell and later). What a future NAS may have is an Atom that uses hardware acceleration to transcode that video.
      Also, before you had that weird requirement Atom was an upgrade over embedded ARM that was too slow just to push files over gigabit.

  20. Re:As an AMD fanboy.. let me say... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, they haven't lost them yet. 3 of my neighbors are Intel employees (some at Intel's flagship semiconductor plant) and one of them told me yesterday that they haven't yet decided who all they are going to let go, but the ones they do let go will get a pretty good severance. They set a benchmark goal of 10% of the workforce, and the specifics are still being sorted. Some they've immediately let go (business segments that they're closing completely) and in business segments that they want to downsize, they're notifying teams that their members can voluntarily get laid off or retire early (with full severance.) After that, if they don't get enough volunteers, they're going to do forced layoffs.

  21. iPads faster than Core i5 laptops by 2ms · · Score: 1

    Considering that the average iPads sold today is faster than the average laptop (i.e. Intel Core), the answer would appear to be yes.

    http://wccftech.com/apple-a9xi...

    1. Re:iPads faster than Core i5 laptops by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      That link shows nothing of the kind. It shows gimped Apple products not being able to keep up with another Apple product. The one gimped non-Apple product still performs better than the Apple tablet in the limited set of artificial benchmarks.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:iPads faster than Core i5 laptops by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      Considering that the average iPads sold today is faster than the average laptop (i.e. Intel Core), the answer would appear to be yes.

      http://wccftech.com/apple-a9xi...

      bullshit, you need to learn to read. What the results show is the pro is on par with low end mobility specced tablets and other mac's.

  22. Be carefule of sccope of SoC name by radarskiy · · Score: 3, Informative

    As usual, people see the name of a specific flavor of an SoC and think that the entire line is being spoken about.

    An SoC has a number of process cores of a given types and then a bunch of other units that are specific to the application. A different application may call for a different set of units which will have a different product name.

    The older example of this when people mention the sale of StrongARM as if that were the entirety of ARM development, when in reality is was just a specific ARM-based part that today no one talks about. There are plenty of other ARM products being sold.

    Today we have word-salad about some x86 SOC parts being discontinued/not discontinued. Cherry Trail is being discontinued... because it is old and crappy and its replacement is now ready. The replacement is "Pentium and Celeron chips code-named Apollo Lake"... except the "Pentium and Celeron" cores are actually Atom-based. Pentium and Celeron are currently just brand names that carry no technical detail about the core they are applied to.

  23. Atom tablets will still be available by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    Bay Trail belong to the desktop line of Atom chips, that's right Atom tablets don't use a specific "tablet" version of Atom.
    The reporting is weak, as is now usual.
    What's really killed of is Atom for smartphones. Say good bye to Atom x3/x5 too at least. In other terms, everything that targeted Android is cancelled, what you won't be able to have is an Android x86 tablet, for which there is no market anyway. New 14nm desktop/laptop Atom will be launched in H2 2016 and tablets will simply have to use that.

    In fact, with Android x86 hardware you might have found yourself stuck, only able to run Android variants. I'd say nvidia Tegra makes more sense, as it is rather PC-like.. even though it's using ARM. It wouldn't fit your use case, what it may do instead is to run real linux.
    Tegra is not viable in tablets either, but it does not matter : it's now hardware for car dash, plane cockpit etc. that happens to be thrown together in a tablet as a showcase piece and niche product. x86 tablets may live on as low end netbook/laptop hardware in a tablet, and most ARM tablets are kind of smartphone hardware in a tablet.

    1. Re:Atom tablets will still be available by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      Actually, there's a few Android x86 Bay Trail Atom Tablets. My wife has a 2in1 with such hardware. Identical to Win tablet from same manufacturer. They sell them at Walmart dirt cheap.

    2. Re:Atom tablets will still be available by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected then. Nothing too wrong with these, I suppose they have useful CPU grunt for web browsing.
      True that you can slap Android on most any hardware and move inventory.

    3. Re:Atom tablets will still be available by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      It's actually pretty zippy. Android x86 runs really nicely on Bay Trail. Win8.1 on my Asus VivoTab 8 with similar Bay Trail hardware seems absolutely sluggish by comparison but is still very usable for the most part.

      The newer Atoms support virtualization as well. I can run Android x86 in a VM on my Win tablet for a couple "gotta have it" Android apps like Worms Armageddon and a couple GPS Nav apps I like.

      Yeah, there's a lot of ARM gear that's faster now but Bay Trail is faster than most of the low-end to mid-range ARM stuff. Definitely not a performance leader but far from the bottom.

  24. Re:x86 tablets by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    Nope, a tablet like yours will use Apollo Lake.
    What is dead in the water is chips for Android Atom tabets, which nobody asked for.

  25. Re:As an AMD fanboy.. let me say... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's entirely possible to restructure without laying off. Restructuring and laying off would be orthogonal things is management was competent.

    No, Intel is a pretty big company that is having to deal with a pretty big industry shift. No matter how you slice it, the reduced desktop sales IS a problem that Intel can't fix with the marketing BS it used to pull years back (and believe me, they tried that already.) When you're in Intel's position, you can't just hold on to your existing expenses and expect things to work out. This isn't a management problem, rather it's a changing business landscape that they need to adapt to. The people who lose their jobs over this are dealing with frictional unemployment, which invariably happens at some point.

    It's not all bad though, and this is actually a good time to get laid off because the economy is still in a growth period. I myself just got laid off from a really big tech company (who happens to be an Intel partner, by the way) only two months ago, and I just got hired by another company (in the health care industry, but still doing tech work) for almost twice what I was getting paid before. With the severances that Intel is giving their employees, they shouldn't have any difficulty sustaining themselves while they find new work.

  26. Re:As an AMD fanboy.. let me say... by davester666 · · Score: 1

    But Intel was SO CLOSE to making a chip that was going to take over the mobile device market, tablets and phones, and even watches.

    These chips were scheduled to be released early next year.

    Unfortunately, these chips were scheduled "to be released early next year" every year since the iPhone shipped.

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  27. Re:As an AMD fanboy.. let me say... by lgw · · Score: 1

    you can't just hold on to your existing expenses and expect things to work out. This isn't a management problem

    You seem to have missed GPPs entire point about "hiring like crazy". I've seen this too many times in my career, when companies refuse to admit times are bad and hire like crazy right up to the mass layoffs. Instead, let the workforce fall naturally through normal turnover and hire only in areas you want to focus on after the reorg, and encourage people in areas you need to reduce to transfer if they can.

    But that would require thinking forward, having a plan, caring about your people, and so on: things management seems immune to in most companies.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  28. Re:Too many products by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

    Not surprised really, Atom seems a bit redundant between Core M and Core i3. Interesting to see which one pfSense goes with.

    Since pfSense is software (as well as M0n0wall, SmallWall and t1n1wall) that can run on an x86 CPU, they will "go with" whoever makes a sold and cheap fanless Mini-ITX board. This market used the be the Via Technologies, and seamlessly moved to Atom, and it will seamlessly move again.

  29. Re: As an AMD fanboy.. let me say... by interstellarsurfer · · Score: 1

    Hiring H1B's firing Americans, I'm sure.

  30. Re: As an AMD fanboy.. let me say... by interstellarsurfer · · Score: 1

    If they just sold Atoms using the current process size, instead of giving them sloppy seconds, they would have really had something incredible.

  31. Meh. by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    From what I recall of the Atom it wasn't good for anything. It wasn't low power enough for embedded applications, and not powerful enough for other applications. All, they were used for was cheap netbook type things.