or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › ARM CEO not worried about Intel tablet PC threat
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ARM CEO not worried about Intel tablet PC threat

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
The chief executive at ARM, whose CPU designs are used in Apple's iPad, affirmed the continued growth of the tablet PC market, while dismissing concerns that Intel tablets will pose a competitive threat to the company.

Warren East told the Financial Times that sales of tablet PCs next year could jump to as many as 60 million units, most of which will contain ARM chips.

East conceded that a few models would use Intel's Atom processor, but doubted that they would be successful. Atom designs are just not good enough in terms of power consumption [right now]. Intel knows this, said East.

Apple's iPad, which uses an ARM-based CPU, is currently dominating the tablet market. Recent data from research firm Strategy Analytics suggests that the iPad made up a massive 95 percent of tablet sales last quarter.

According to East, the Consumer Electronics Show early next year will see a "raft of new devices" as the nascent tablet market begins to take off. Companies have rushed to develop competing tablets after seeing the runaway success of the iPad. Last month, one analyst calculated that the iPad has the fastest adoption rate of any consumer electronics device ever.

East wasn't completely optimistic about next years' sales, though, admitting concerns that consumer spending on electronics may weaken in the coming months.

You cant avoid that, its like the weather. Were concerned that it might rain. There are clouds up there," said East. "But what weve experienced in 2009 was that Arm still outperformed the industry in a down year."
post #2 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The chief executive at ARM, which makes the CPU for Apple's iPad,

I really wish you'd bother to get at least the most basic facts right.

ARM doesn't make the iPad's CPU. ARM is a licensor of designs.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #3 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I really wish you'd bother to get at least the most basic facts right.

ARM doesn't make the iPad's CPU. ARM is a licensor of designs.

Thanks for the correction.
post #4 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

According to East, the Consumer Electronics Show early next year will see a "raft of new devices" as the nascent tablet market begins to take off.

Nascent? I keep seeing this word, every time people talk about the tablet market. I feel like the Spaniard from Princess Bride. You all know the line.

Forgive me for being pedantic here, but this bothers me. Tablets have been around for frikken ages. Remember the Newton? Don't wanna call that a tablet? Okay, then remember the Go tablet? Windows was in version 3.1 when that thing came out. Microsoft later made a whole version of Windows specifically for tablets. There were tons of tablets out there.

That's not to minimize the iPad. Exactly the opposite. These things have been around forever. They've appealed only to niches. They didn't set the world on its ear.

This year, Apple stepped in and showed everyone how to do it right, got 95% of that market. It has everyone scrambling to copy them. And so we have to recast the market as being nascent to explain it? Nascent brings with it the connotations of youth and future vitality. Just meeting the last criteria shouldn't be enough to use the term, because it then implies the first criteria and is thereby misleading.

Part of why this bothers me is that it minimizes Apple's contribution here. It's like a lot of things that came before. The iPod was not the first MP3 player; but after it came out, people acted like Apple succeeded because of some first-mover advantage it hadn't actually had. When the iPhone was announced, tons of people scoffed because the smart phone market had already matured to the point than no one could reasonably be expected to step in and make a splash. Now everyone is copying the iPhone and acting like it was an immature market that Apple got an early break with. And here we are now, talking about the iPad like tablets are some new thing. Be fair here. They've been around for ages, they sucked, Apple recast them in a way that took everyone off guard, and the market is exploding. But it's an ancient market. It simply sucked up until 2010.
post #5 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

Nascent? I keep seeing this word, every time people talk about the tablet market. I feel like the Spaniard from Princess Bride. You all know the line.

Forgive me for being pedantic here, but this bothers me. []

You are being pedantic, but thats okay. The definition can be defined as its emergence and showing evidence of future growth and popularity. It really depends on how you define the tablet market.

Apple has redefined and re-imagined the tablet market, so we can consider it as being reborn. Also, in todays society we can easily regard something that has become popular as its start. For instance, we could define an unknown actors nascent career that gets a lead role and becomes a household name seemingly overnight, regardless of how long theyve been working at their craft. In the grand scheme of things this is still the beginning of the personal computer industry.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #6 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

You are being pedantic, but thats okay. The definition can be defined as its emergence and showing evidence of future growth and popularity. It really depends on how you define the tablet market.

Apple has redefined and re-imagined the tablet market, so we can consider it as being reborn. Also, in todays society we can easily regard something that has become popular as its start. For instance, we could define an unknown actors nascent career that gets a lead role and becomes a household name seemingly overnight, regardless of how long theyve been working at their craft. In the grand scheme of things this is still the beginning of the personal computer industry.

Really... He was right, but you felt you just had to throw your two cents in. The tablet market has been around for a long, long time. They were giving them out to executives like crazy during the .COM craze because it made people feel they were in the LEAD of the industry.

The consumer tablet is however something new. Apparently no one ever thought to include the every day person on their tablet. Now it's .....NEW
post #7 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeolian View Post

Really... He was right, but you felt you just had to throw your two cents in.

Yes he was, and I acknowledged that.

Quote:
The consumer tablet is however something new. Apparently no one ever thought to include the every day person on their tablet. Now it's .....NEW

You just backed up my point with your two cents. Thank you¡
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #8 of 21
I would never dismiss Intel in the processor business.

Apple has been working with ARM processors since the Apple Newton days. Apple was actually instrumental in the design of ARM and owned part of ARM. However, I believe that they would switch to Intel if Intel offered a clear advantage in power and performance.

If Apple switched from the PowerPC to Intel, Apple can switch from ARM as well if there is a good reason to do so. ARM will continue to lead as long as it offers better battery life than Intel and adequate performance for tablet devices.

Apple also has ARM in house talent advantage with with PA Semi and Intrinsity enhancing ARM so...

Time will tell.
post #9 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

Nascent? I keep seeing this word, every time people talk about the tablet market. I feel like the Spaniard from Princess Bride. You all know the line.

Forgive me for being pedantic here, but this bothers me. Tablets have been around for frikken ages. Remember the Newton? Don't wanna call that a tablet? Okay, then remember the Go tablet? Windows was in version 3.1 when that thing came out. Microsoft later made a whole version of Windows specifically for tablets. There were tons of tablets out there.

That's not to minimize the iPad. Exactly the opposite. These things have been around forever. They've appealed only to niches. They didn't set the world on its ear.

This year, Apple stepped in and showed everyone how to do it right, got 95% of that market. It has everyone scrambling to copy them. And so we have to recast the market as being nascent to explain it? Nascent brings with it the connotations of youth and future vitality. Just meeting the last criteria shouldn't be enough to use the term, because it then implies the first criteria and is thereby misleading.

Part of why this bothers me is that it minimizes Apple's contribution here. It's like a lot of things that came before. The iPod was not the first MP3 player; but after it came out, people acted like Apple succeeded because of some first-mover advantage it hadn't actually had. When the iPhone was announced, tons of people scoffed because the smart phone market had already matured to the point than no one could reasonably be expected to step in and make a splash. Now everyone is copying the iPhone and acting like it was an immature market that Apple got an early break with. And here we are now, talking about the iPad like tablets are some new thing. Be fair here. They've been around for ages, they sucked, Apple recast them in a way that took everyone off guard, and the market is exploding. But it's an ancient market. It simply sucked up until 2010.

++ Great analysis!
post #10 of 21
I can see so many possibilities with the iPad. If the 2nd and future generation would be able to ensure
  1. a stand-alone iPad
  2. cheaper MobileMe (or a free basic Mobile Me for average users). The free basic MobileMe perhaps can be subsidixed partly by iAds(???) while the premiun MobileMe would be ad-free.
  3. cloud computing to allow less dependence on local storage
  4. more robust wireless connectivity to peripherals

the iPad would really take off even beyond its current and obvious potential markets.

The list did not include what are already expected with the iOS 4.2 -- front-facing camera for FaceTime (including multiconference use for the enterprise), multi-tasking, etc. And of course, I hope even more powerful CPUs, lighter, improved battery life, etc. in the iPad 2, and succeeding generation.

Initially, I considered a camera at the back to be rather awkward, but in one article such a camera could be useful for many purposes especially in the professional field and the enterprise -- like initial site planning for architects and industrial construction, plus many other potential uses.

For the enterprise, apart from security, internal network, cloud computing, etc., Apple should really spend more research time and money improving the iWorks, including better compatibility with MS Office. For the average user, iWorks may suffice for the average user. However, for more complex uses, especially the "Numbers". I have been trying the full version for the Mac, in the case of "Numbers", it cannot do so many tasks that even my old Excel 1998 is capable of doing.
post #11 of 21
The iPad (aka, iPad) is for fun. The Mac (aka, x86) is for fun and for work. Apple should make a truly light (400 to 600 g) and pocketable (or almost) Mac of any form factor (tablet, slider or clamshell). Even if it has lower battery life than the iPad, because that is a Mac. A Mac in your pocket or purse.
post #12 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

Nascent? I keep seeing this word, every time people talk about the tablet market. I feel like the Spaniard from Princess Bride. You all know the line.

Forgive me for being pedantic here, but this bothers me. Tablets have been around for frikken ages. Remember the Newton? Don't wanna call that a tablet? Okay, then remember the Go tablet? Windows was in version 3.1 when that thing came out. Microsoft later made a whole version of Windows specifically for tablets. There were tons of tablets out there.

That's not to minimize the iPad. Exactly the opposite. These things have been around forever. They've appealed only to niches. They didn't set the world on its ear.

This year, Apple stepped in and showed everyone how to do it right, got 95% of that market. It has everyone scrambling to copy them. And so we have to recast the market as being nascent to explain it? Nascent brings with it the connotations of youth and future vitality. Just meeting the last criteria shouldn't be enough to use the term, because it then implies the first criteria and is thereby misleading.

Part of why this bothers me is that it minimizes Apple's contribution here. It's like a lot of things that came before. The iPod was not the first MP3 player; but after it came out, people acted like Apple succeeded because of some first-mover advantage it hadn't actually had. When the iPhone was announced, tons of people scoffed because the smart phone market had already matured to the point than no one could reasonably be expected to step in and make a splash. Now everyone is copying the iPhone and acting like it was an immature market that Apple got an early break with. And here we are now, talking about the iPad like tablets are some new thing. Be fair here. They've been around for ages, they sucked, Apple recast them in a way that took everyone off guard, and the market is exploding. But it's an ancient market. It simply sucked up until 2010.

And I love how the Apple haters went on about how stupid the ipad was when it was showed off earlier this year. And Engadget's Joshua Topolsky had to shut down the comments for a few days until folks calmed down. Now look, Apple has the tech industry scrambling for an ipad killer. And what really bites is how the tech sites are going off on Apple by flipping the script as we say on the streets, and saying that the ipad is a joke and the new Android tablets are the ones to beat. OMFG!
post #13 of 21
ARM has been kicking Intel's butt in this space for years. They are right not to be worried, not out of arrogance but just out of past data.
post #14 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

ARM has been kicking Intel's butt in this space for years. They are right not to be worried, not out of arrogance but just out of past data.

The other factor here is that intel publishes it's road map well ahead so you can generally see what's on the way
post #15 of 21
I thought Apple said that it was their design, not anyone's else (like ARM).
post #16 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

Nascent? I keep seeing this word, every time people talk about the tablet market. I feel like the Spaniard from Princess Bride. You all know the line.

Forgive me for being pedantic here, but this bothers me. Tablets have been around for frikken ages. Remember the Newton? Don't wanna call that a tablet? Okay, then remember the Go tablet? Windows was in version 3.1 when that thing came out. Microsoft later made a whole version of Windows specifically for tablets. There were tons of tablets out there.

That's not to minimize the iPad. Exactly the opposite. These things have been around forever. They've appealed only to niches. They didn't set the world on its ear.

This year, Apple stepped in and showed everyone how to do it right, got 95% of that market. It has everyone scrambling to copy them. And so we have to recast the market as being nascent to explain it? Nascent brings with it the connotations of youth and future vitality. Just meeting the last criteria shouldn't be enough to use the term, because it then implies the first criteria and is thereby misleading.

Part of why this bothers me is that it minimizes Apple's contribution here. It's like a lot of things that came before. The iPod was not the first MP3 player; but after it came out, people acted like Apple succeeded because of some first-mover advantage it hadn't actually had. When the iPhone was announced, tons of people scoffed because the smart phone market had already matured to the point than no one could reasonably be expected to step in and make a splash. Now everyone is copying the iPhone and acting like it was an immature market that Apple got an early break with. And here we are now, talking about the iPad like tablets are some new thing. Be fair here. They've been around for ages, they sucked, Apple recast them in a way that took everyone off guard, and the market is exploding. But it's an ancient market. It simply sucked up until 2010.

Nice post! Agree with you 100%.
post #17 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doorman. View Post

I thought Apple said that it was their design, not anyone's else (like ARM).

Is it really too much trouble to learn what's going on before posting?

ARM designed a series of chips - and licenses their reference designs.

Licensees are free to modify the chip designs to add their own features - which is what Apple did. So, technically, Apple designed a modification of the ARM reference design - and then found someone to make that chip for them.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #18 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

Nascent? I keep seeing this word, every time people talk about the tablet market. I feel like the Spaniard from Princess Bride. You all know the line.

Forgive me for being pedantic here, but this bothers me. Tablets have been around for frikken ages. Remember the Newton? Don't wanna call that a tablet? Okay, then remember the Go tablet? Windows was in version 3.1 when that thing came out. Microsoft later made a whole version of Windows specifically for tablets. There were tons of tablets out there.

That's not to minimize the iPad. Exactly the opposite. These things have been around forever. They've appealed only to niches. They didn't set the world on its ear.

This year, Apple stepped in and showed everyone how to do it right, got 95% of that market. It has everyone scrambling to copy them. And so we have to recast the market as being nascent to explain it? Nascent brings with it the connotations of youth and future vitality. Just meeting the last criteria shouldn't be enough to use the term, because it then implies the first criteria and is thereby misleading.

Part of why this bothers me is that it minimizes Apple's contribution here. It's like a lot of things that came before. The iPod was not the first MP3 player; but after it came out, people acted like Apple succeeded because of some first-mover advantage it hadn't actually had. When the iPhone was announced, tons of people scoffed because the smart phone market had already matured to the point than no one could reasonably be expected to step in and make a splash. Now everyone is copying the iPhone and acting like it was an immature market that Apple got an early break with. And here we are now, talking about the iPad like tablets are some new thing. Be fair here. They've been around for ages, they sucked, Apple recast them in a way that took everyone off guard, and the market is exploding. But it's an ancient market. It simply sucked up until 2010.

hear hear...
post #19 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post

If Apple switched from the PowerPC to Intel, Apple can switch from ARM as well.


But wouldn't that further fragment iOS?

Already you need different versions for different hardware. Wouldn't changing CPUs make things even worse?
post #20 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-J View Post

But wouldn't that further fragment iOS?

Already you need different versions for different hardware. Wouldn't changing CPUs make things even worse?

LLVM

It's almost ready for primetime, and XCode already speaks it. Once Apple pushes compile to LLVM bytecode as the primary way for an app to be built, the ARM/Intel issue goes away unless the dev wants to include any assembler. But then you only need to do assembler for small parts of an app so maybe it's not so bad to incluse both versions in a Universal package. We are that close to true device inside-the-box CPU independence at the application layer.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #21 of 21
I wouldnt worry either if I was buddies with Apple.

One thought he was invincible... the other thought he could fly.

They were both wrong.

Reply

One thought he was invincible... the other thought he could fly.

They were both wrong.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › ARM CEO not worried about Intel tablet PC threat