When the founder of a company dies, the following CEO's drive the business into the ground 95% of the time. Ford, Apple, McDonald's, Boeing are the exceptions not the rule. America's fascination with CEO's is misguided.
Of the Fortune 500 companies in 1950, 88% (440) are out of business today!
Thank you Otellini for "passing" on the mobile revolution-brilliant!
Best Regards
To be fair, some of those fortune 500 companies were bought/folded into other companies :-), so the total is probably closer to 70% being out of business. But your point stands.
Intel will survive (at least as a fab), but it may not be relevant beyond that for much longer if they don't reform quick; they still have 5 years before the bottom truly goes out on them.
Other bad news for Intel: Apple will likely make its own modem in the near future. Qualcomm modems are a major pain in the ass for Apple, software and hardware isn't stable and causes many defunct devices (happend to my iPhone 5ses twice), Apple knows this of course and is developing its own solution to be able to guarantee quality in the future. In the meantime they asked Intel to deliver a modem for iPhone 7 and on. Everyone knows (I assume) that Intel has no modems and bought Infinion (modem division) to be into that market. But - as I assume Apple knows now - Infinion modems are not better than Qualcomm (probably worse), so that will be the end of that chapter and Apple will make its own, probably fully integrated in one chip package (and save a truckload of money in the process).
It's telling that Intel's PC business is collapsing at the same time the smartphones have matured. Intel had a great run with x86, and while they still have a future ahead of them, it will demonstrably not be in mobile, other than baseband.
I love to punish MS for adhering to x86 way past it's shelf life, but it was always delusion that MS could push x86 to mobile, and Intel's capitulation puts an end to that future. From here on, developers will have the choice of Universal Apps, Android, or iOS.
I would be surprised if the large software developers like Adobe don't already have plans to push many of their desktop apps to iOS given the expectation of AX growth and iOS evolution in the next two to three generations, and at the same time transitioning to Universal Apps as they can; all to the detriment of x86.
What's next for Apple?
I like to think that it will be this fall, when dual lens cameras come to the iPhone; designed by Apple using Sony imagers, powered by AX and iOS.
Perhaps writers should stop having Apple as the cause of everything that happens. Even before the slump Apple had this last quarter, iPhones composed just 16.3% of worldwide smartphone sales. Intel didn't look at that and decide to discontunue its products in the mobile area. They looked at Android device sales and the lack of movement there in the direction of x86 SoCs.
they also looked at the continuing drop in the sales of Win Phone , and area in which it looked as though x86 has a chance. And as the very first post here said, the M series chops are what Intel is pushing for tablets, such as the lower end Surface models, and light weight notebooks. No doubt, if there is an interest in it, we'll see an SoC with an M series chip.
in this, it's good to remember that, for now, at least, ARM is moving faster than x86 is, and with poorer IP in the area of process technology, where Intel leads meaningfully.
My next door neighbor here in Cupertino is an engineer at Intel. His job is (or was) to run benchmark tests on Atom chips in Android devices.
This guy heavily praises Apple's chips when in casual conversation with me. He says they have some kind of secret in the way they "schedule" operations through the processor. He laments that no one at Intel knows how Apple do it!
Of course, like most engineers here in Silicon Valley, he chooses to use an iPhone. This isn't "fan boy" fiction. The Atom chip has utterly failed to compete in the tablet and smartphone market.
Don't know about special pipeline scheduling or special pipelines compared to other ARM processors, but Apples Ax chips are very efficient (like other ARM cores) because they are designed from the ground up to be so. The step to 64 bit is most recent and did chance a lot, more registers etc, my guess is that pipelining behavior changed also ...
Intel chips have one huge disadvantage compared to ARM (and other suitable processors) in that they use a RISC (like) core (like ARM) and a translation (hardware) layer (unlike ARM) that translates x86 code to the internal RISC equivalent which makes predicting pipeline behavior from x86 source code a nightmare. ARM has no such problem and a good compiler can layout the code in such a way that pipelining goes smooth, which is impossible (much more difficult) for x86 code.
Maybe Intel doesn't know what's going on because compiler technology isn't there strong point? (Yes I know Intel has the most capable compiler officially, it could very well be that they do know the problem, but cannot fix it because of the reason I gave).
Edit: Intel tried much earlier to get rid of its ancient x86 architecture by defining a 64 bit architecture without backward compatibility, but that failed miserably and they had to follow AMD into 64 bit land, but that included 32bit x86 compatibility ... (rats)
Perhaps writers should stop having Apple as the cause of everything that happens. Even before the slump Apple had this last quarter, iPhones composed just 16.3% of worldwide smartphone sales. Intel didn't look at that and decide to discontunue its products in the mobile area. They looked at Android device sales and the lack of movement there in the direction of x86 SoCs.
they also looked at the continuing drop in the sales of Win Phone , and area in which it looked as though x86 has a chance. And as the very first post here said, the M series chops are what Intel is pushing for tablets, such as the lower end Surface models, and light weight notebooks. No doubt, if there is an interest in it, we'll see an SoC with an M series chip.
I think it's plain wrong to suggest this has nothing to do with Apple.
It seems to me that what we're seeing goes far deeper than just canceling Atom.
Intel just announced a layoff of 12,000 workers. That's 12,000 out of about 120,000 - quite literally a "decimation". And also that it's shifting resources "to refocus its sights on modems, data center, Internet of Things and memory chips". This is conceding the entire mobile space to ARM. And that just has to have an effect on the PC space. So maybe we'll see a renewed attempt by Microsoft to get Windows onto ARM?
Another possibility is that Intel will itself license ARM and develop chips for others to use, rather than having a bunch of smaller companies do that. This would not surprise me even a little bit.
Perhaps writers should stop having Apple as the cause of everything that happens. Even before the slump Apple had this last quarter, iPhones composed just 16.3% of worldwide smartphone sales. Intel didn't look at that and decide to discontunue its products in the mobile area. They looked at Android device sales and the lack of movement there in the direction of x86 SoCs.
they also looked at the continuing drop in the sales of Win Phone , and area in which it looked as though x86 has a chance. And as the very first post here said, the M series chops are what Intel is pushing for tablets, such as the lower end Surface models, and light weight notebooks. No doubt, if there is an interest in it, we'll see an SoC with an M series chip.
The High end tablets, which despite all the boo boo about falling sales, are still selling a lot, are hurting Intel. Apple still has a run at that, especially with the PRO experience being just the start of laptop replacement not being X86. As people transition from using expensive laptop chips to well, less expensive ARM tablet chips, Intel's going to hurt A LOT.
Even if they are able to transition to tablets (or phone!), their margins will be ripped apart. The old Intel of the last 30 years is DONE.
By the time AMD gets their current chips out, only thing keeping Intel above them will be process and name recognition. That's only going to keep them ahead for 3-5 years tops.
Other bad news for Intel: Apple will likely make its own modem in the near future. Qualcomm modems are a major pain in the ass for Apple, software and hardware isn't stable and causes many defunct devices (happend to my iPhone 5ses twice), Apple knows this of course and is developing its own solution to be able to guarantee quality in the future. In the meantime they asked Intel to deliver a modem for iPhone 7 and on. Everyone knows (I assume) that Intel has no modems and bought Infinion (modem division) to be into that market. But - as I assume Apple knows now - Infinion modems are not better than Qualcomm (probably worse), so that will be the end of that chapter and Apple will make its own, probably fully integrated in one chip package (and save a truckload of money in the process).
Apple will get sued by Qualcomm, Broadcom and just about everyone else unless they spend the next 5 years do FRAND deals over the half a gazillion patents. The current players will fight tooth and nail to keep their revenue streams intact. Apple had better tread carefully if they do decide to enter this hardware space.
If anything Intel lost to Qualcomm as did TI instruments and Nvidia. Citing Apple as the reason is foolish. They had no competition with apple in this market. They knew when they where developing this chip it was a .0001% chance it would end up in an iOS device. The devices they wanted it in was LG, HTC and all the growing Chinese OEMs.
You're right. Just another example of Apple-induced misperspective. Generates page views, and keeps the complainers that "this isn't Apple news" at bay whenever a connection to Apple is made.
However, this would be a very different story had Apple adopted Intel for iOS. Very different, probably wouldn't even be written since Intel would be swimming in piles of cash.
Perhaps writers should stop having Apple as the cause of everything that happens. Even before the slump Apple had this last quarter, iPhones composed just 16.3% of worldwide smartphone sales. Intel didn't look at that and decide to discontunue its products in the mobile area. They looked at Android device sales and the lack of movement there in the direction of x86 SoCs.
they also looked at the continuing drop in the sales of Win Phone , and area in which it looked as though x86 has a chance. And as the very first post here said, the M series chops are what Intel is pushing for tablets, such as the lower end Surface models, and light weight notebooks. No doubt, if there is an interest in it, we'll see an SoC with an M series chip.
I think it's plain wrong to suggest this has nothing to do with Apple.
Plain wrong, eh. Well, instead of just making that statement, why don't you actually say something? Give some good, cogent reasons why. And I'm not talking about ARM SoCs getting better because Apple is working on them. That's not a real reason.
Perhaps writers should stop having Apple as the cause of everything that happens. Even before the slump Apple had this last quarter, iPhones composed just 16.3% of worldwide smartphone sales. Intel didn't look at that and decide to discontunue its products in the mobile area. They looked at Android device sales and the lack of movement there in the direction of x86 SoCs.
they also looked at the continuing drop in the sales of Win Phone , and area in which it looked as though x86 has a chance. And as the very first post here said, the M series chops are what Intel is pushing for tablets, such as the lower end Surface models, and light weight notebooks. No doubt, if there is an interest in it, we'll see an SoC with an M series chip.
The High tablets, which despite all the boo boo about falling sales, are still selling a lot, are hurting Intel. Apple still has a run at that, especially with the PRO experience being just the start of laptop replacement not being X86. As people transition from using expensive laptop chips to well, less expensive ARM tablet chips, Intel's going to hurt A LOT.
Even if they are able to transition to tablets (or phone!), their margins will be ripped apart. The old Intel of the last 30 years is DONE.
By the time AMD gets their current chips out, only thing keeping Intel above them will be process and name recognition. That's only going to keep them ahead for 3-5 years tops.
Within 5 years I see a lot of layoffs coming.
First I'd like to reply about AMD.
forget them. We've heard so many things in the last several years about how AMD's new chips are going to make the difference, that I've lost count. The only thing that's keeping AMD going now are the chips they're selling to the console game manufacturers. Those are anything but leading edge chips. AMD has failed in every other category, and I don't see that changing.
What we're seeing is that the newer category of the 2 in 1's are selling. So, Windows tablets are not selling well, even though Surface Pro sales are increasing, but those 2 in 1's are seeing sales increases.
just like anything else in this business, it's complex, and anyone who thinks they have a simple answer is wrong.
Aside from what the real cause is, this is great for Apple and not so great for others when it comes to tablets.
Apples A Series is the most advanced ARM architecture out there. When ARM tablets match laptops (and we're close with the iPad Pro and the A9X), what are the Android vendors going to turn to to match the performance of future Apple devices?
Apple made the right decision years earlier by making advanced cores while everyone else was stuck in the dead-end race of "moar cores and moar GHz". Apple could, for example, make a quad core A10 with four A9 type cores and have an extremely powerful mobile processor. What's Samsung going to do with Exynos? Start making 12 or 16 core processors? Apple already dominates tablets. Now their domination will go even further as they are the only company that can produce future processors with enough power to replace laptops (now that Intel has bowed out).
Other bad news for Intel: Apple will likely make its own modem in the near future. Qualcomm modems are a major pain in the ass for Apple, software and hardware isn't stable and causes many defunct devices (happend to my iPhone 5ses twice), Apple knows this of course and is developing its own solution to be able to guarantee quality in the future. In the meantime they asked Intel to deliver a modem for iPhone 7 and on. Everyone knows (I assume) that Intel has no modems and bought Infinion (modem division) to be into that market. But - as I assume Apple knows now - Infinion modems are not better than Qualcomm (probably worse), so that will be the end of that chapter and Apple will make its own, probably fully integrated in one chip package (and save a truckload of money in the process).
Well, Apple is moving to Intel modems. The new phones should have at least 40% using Intel modems. It doesn't matter that intel bought Infinion, it's a long time past, and Intel has been making major improvements to their line. If Apple thinks they good enough, then likely they are, or Apple wouldn't move to them.
maybe Apple is investigating making their own chips there, but it will take years, and the first ones out won't be great.
Other bad news for Intel: Apple will likely make its own modem in the near future. Qualcomm modems are a major pain in the ass for Apple, software and hardware isn't stable and causes many defunct devices (happend to my iPhone 5ses twice), Apple knows this of course and is developing its own solution to be able to guarantee quality in the future. In the meantime they asked Intel to deliver a modem for iPhone 7 and on. Everyone knows (I assume) that Intel has no modems and bought Infinion (modem division) to be into that market. But - as I assume Apple knows now - Infinion modems are not better than Qualcomm (probably worse), so that will be the end of that chapter and Apple will make its own, probably fully integrated in one chip package (and save a truckload of money in the process).
Apple will get sued by Qualcomm, Broadcom and just about everyone else unless they spend the next 5 years do FRAND deals over the half a gazillion patents. The current players will fight tooth and nail to keep their revenue streams intact. Apple had better tread carefully if they do decide to enter this hardware space.
Probably, that's a nice destination for Apples gigantic money surplus, if all things fail, they can easily buy the companies you mention (without losing any money compared to burning it).
Another possibility is that Intel will itself license ARM and develop chips for others to use, rather than having a bunch of smaller companies do that. This would not surprise me even a little bit.
That would certainly be ironic given that Intel had the brilliant (for its time) StrongARM architecture and team and chose not to use it for application processing after they upgraded it to XScale, selling it off. However they still make ARM based dedicated chips (IXP) and they probably still have an ARM architecture license for that.
I think it's plain wrong to suggest this has nothing to do with Apple.
Plain wrong, eh. Well, instead of just making that statement, why don't you actually say something? Give some good, cogent reasons why. And I'm not talking about ARM SoCs getting better because Apple is working on them. That's not a real reason.
Why, maybe dictate it for me, your already doing that.
The High tablets, which despite all the boo boo about falling sales, are still selling a lot, are hurting Intel. Apple still has a run at that, especially with the PRO experience being just the start of laptop replacement not being X86. As people transition from using expensive laptop chips to well, less expensive ARM tablet chips, Intel's going to hurt A LOT.
Even if they are able to transition to tablets (or phone!), their margins will be ripped apart. The old Intel of the last 30 years is DONE.
By the time AMD gets their current chips out, only thing keeping Intel above them will be process and name recognition. That's only going to keep them ahead for 3-5 years tops.
Within 5 years I see a lot of layoffs coming.
First I'd like to reply about AMD.
forget them. We've heard so many things in the last several years about how AMD's new chips are going to make the difference, that I've lost count. The only thing that's keeping AMD going now are the chips they're selling to the console game manufacturers. Those are anything but leading edge chips. AMD has failed in every other category, and I don't see that changing.
What we're seeing is that the newer category of the 2 in 1's are selling. So, Windows tablets are not selling well, even though Surface Pro sales are increasing, but those 2 in 1's are seeing sales increases.
just like anything else in this business, it's complex, and anyone who thinks they have a simple answer is wrong.
While everything is "complex", the fact Intel's profits are going to go away (no matter how it happens), is not really in dispute. The replacement is no replacement for their lost profits, even if they got the same revenues out of it (which is doubtful).
AMD will hurt Intel in the mid to low range and changing tastes will hurt Intel in the High End. AMD doesn't need to eat all Intel's sales to hurt them, if they gain 30% of Intel's mid range it will hurt too.
It's basically a tag team of many factors that's the cause of their problems.
The low end will be occupied by ARM based tablets and things like Chromebooks.
There is not enough market in high end laptops from vendors other than Apple to sustain their profits and Apple will move away at least part of their product line from them (the low end laptop, high end tablets).
Apple's huge volume drive process upgrades at TSMC and Samsung, Intel right now has to continue doing all of that for its own chips; if sales falter in the high end, their process advantage that's been slipping might disappear pretty fast.
As I said, Intel in 5 years will likely be a shadow of itself.
Fighting for margins, is constant battle and Intel has been through a miracle been able to do it for 45 years with a product that's very hard to really differentiate (they have been a master of marketing as much as tech).
Apple has been in the same battle for profits for nearly as long, it is helped by being able to differentiate its product a bit more and being a bit more diversified. People bitch about Apple's pricing, but keeping their price up, and keeping the perceived value up is very hard; any step towards commodity is what leads fortune 500 company to eventual oblivion.
Comments
Intel will survive (at least as a fab), but it may not be relevant beyond that for much longer if they don't reform quick; they still have 5 years before the bottom truly goes out on them.
Not to mention Apple likely don't want your MacBook to drive another display with its current iGPU.
Both will likely be fixed once Kaby Lake arrives.
Qualcomm modems are a major pain in the ass for Apple, software and hardware isn't stable and causes many defunct devices (happend to my iPhone 5ses twice), Apple knows this of course and is developing its own solution to be able to guarantee quality in the future.
In the meantime they asked Intel to deliver a modem for iPhone 7 and on.
Everyone knows (I assume) that Intel has no modems and bought Infinion (modem division) to be into that market. But - as I assume Apple knows now - Infinion modems are not better than Qualcomm (probably worse), so that will be the end of that chapter and Apple will make its own, probably fully integrated in one chip package (and save a truckload of money in the process).
I love to punish MS for adhering to x86 way past it's shelf life, but it was always delusion that MS could push x86 to mobile, and Intel's capitulation puts an end to that future. From here on, developers will have the choice of Universal Apps, Android, or iOS.
I would be surprised if the large software developers like Adobe don't already have plans to push many of their desktop apps to iOS given the expectation of AX growth and iOS evolution in the next two to three generations, and at the same time transitioning to Universal Apps as they can; all to the detriment of x86.
What's next for Apple?
I like to think that it will be this fall, when dual lens cameras come to the iPhone; designed by Apple using Sony imagers, powered by AX and iOS.
they also looked at the continuing drop in the sales of Win Phone , and area in which it looked as though x86 has a chance. And as the very first post here said, the M series chops are what Intel is pushing for tablets, such as the lower end Surface models, and light weight notebooks. No doubt, if there is an interest in it, we'll see an SoC with an M series chip.
http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/221881-apples-a9x-goes-head-to-head-against-intels-core-m-in-arm-x86-grudge-match
in this, it's good to remember that, for now, at least, ARM is moving faster than x86 is, and with poorer IP in the area of process technology, where Intel leads meaningfully.
Intel chips have one huge disadvantage compared to ARM (and other suitable processors) in that they use a RISC (like) core (like ARM) and a translation (hardware) layer (unlike ARM) that translates x86 code to the internal RISC equivalent which makes predicting pipeline behavior from x86 source code a nightmare.
ARM has no such problem and a good compiler can layout the code in such a way that pipelining goes smooth, which is impossible (much more difficult) for x86 code.
Maybe Intel doesn't know what's going on because compiler technology isn't there strong point? (Yes I know Intel has the most capable compiler officially, it could very well be that they do know the problem, but cannot fix it because of the reason I gave).
Edit: Intel tried much earlier to get rid of its ancient x86 architecture by defining a 64 bit architecture without backward compatibility, but that failed miserably and they had to follow AMD into 64 bit land, but that included 32bit x86 compatibility ... (rats)
Intel just announced a layoff of 12,000 workers. That's 12,000 out of about 120,000 - quite literally a "decimation". And also that it's shifting resources "to refocus its sights on modems, data center, Internet of Things and memory chips". This is conceding the entire mobile space to ARM. And that just has to have an effect on the PC space. So maybe we'll see a renewed attempt by Microsoft to get Windows onto ARM? Another possibility is that Intel will itself license ARM and develop chips for others to use, rather than having a bunch of smaller companies do that. This would not surprise me even a little bit.
Apple still has a run at that, especially with the PRO experience being just the start of laptop replacement not being X86.
As people transition from using expensive laptop chips to well, less expensive ARM tablet chips, Intel's going to hurt A LOT.
Even if they are able to transition to tablets (or phone!), their margins will be ripped apart. The old Intel of the last 30 years is DONE.
By the time AMD gets their current chips out, only thing keeping Intel above them will be process and name recognition.
That's only going to keep them ahead for 3-5 years tops.
Within 5 years I see a lot of layoffs coming.
You're right. Just another example of Apple-induced misperspective. Generates page views, and keeps the complainers that "this isn't Apple news" at bay whenever a connection to Apple is made.
However, this would be a very different story had Apple adopted Intel for iOS. Very different, probably wouldn't even be written since Intel would be swimming in piles of cash.
First I'd like to reply about AMD.
forget them. We've heard so many things in the last several years about how AMD's new chips are going to make the difference, that I've lost count. The only thing that's keeping AMD going now are the chips they're selling to the console game manufacturers. Those are anything but leading edge chips. AMD has failed in every other category, and I don't see that changing.
What we're seeing is that the newer category of the 2 in 1's are selling. So, Windows tablets are not selling well, even though Surface Pro sales are increasing, but those 2 in 1's are seeing sales increases.
just like anything else in this business, it's complex, and anyone who thinks they have a simple answer is wrong.
Apples A Series is the most advanced ARM architecture out there. When ARM tablets match laptops (and we're close with the iPad Pro and the A9X), what are the Android vendors going to turn to to match the performance of future Apple devices?
Apple made the right decision years earlier by making advanced cores while everyone else was stuck in the dead-end race of "moar cores and moar GHz". Apple could, for example, make a quad core A10 with four A9 type cores and have an extremely powerful mobile processor. What's Samsung going to do with Exynos? Start making 12 or 16 core processors? Apple already dominates tablets. Now their domination will go even further as they are the only company that can produce future processors with enough power to replace laptops (now that Intel has bowed out).
maybe Apple is investigating making their own chips there, but it will take years, and the first ones out won't be great.
Why, maybe dictate it for me, your already doing that.
The replacement is no replacement for their lost profits, even if they got the same revenues out of it (which is doubtful).
AMD will hurt Intel in the mid to low range and changing tastes will hurt Intel in the High End.
AMD doesn't need to eat all Intel's sales to hurt them, if they gain 30% of Intel's mid range it will hurt too.
It's basically a tag team of many factors that's the cause of their problems.
The low end will be occupied by ARM based tablets and things like Chromebooks.
There is not enough market in high end laptops from vendors other than Apple to sustain their profits
and Apple will move away at least part of their product line from them (the low end laptop, high end tablets).
Apple's huge volume drive process upgrades at TSMC and Samsung, Intel right now has to continue doing all of that for its own chips; if sales falter in the high end, their process advantage that's been slipping might disappear pretty fast.
As I said, Intel in 5 years will likely be a shadow of itself.
Fighting for margins, is constant battle and Intel has been through a miracle been able to do it for 45 years with a product that's very hard to really differentiate (they have been a master of marketing as much as tech).
Apple has been in the same battle for profits for nearly as long, it is helped by being able to differentiate its product a bit more and being a bit more diversified.
People bitch about Apple's pricing, but keeping their price up, and keeping the perceived value up is very hard; any step towards commodity is what leads fortune 500 company to eventual oblivion.