Apple was 8% of the PC market in the last quarter and is usually 6-7%, yes they spend a ton of money on Intel but they are by no means a "HUGE" account, the rest of the 92% of the market mostly uses Intel and that isn't counting people that build their own computers. In fact Intel's rise to dominance happened without Apple being a customer at all. So, no, Apple Silicon isn't a big blow to Intel. If Apple made Apple Silicone available to other companies it could potentially be a threat to Intel but as it is they aren't even competitors.
You also seem to be oblivious to the fact that PCs and graphics chips are only part of Intel's business. It is the largest of their business segments but that is not all they do.
A dominant market share has never ever been an ironclad guarantee of a company's continued survival and prosperity. Are you too young to know about this company called Kodak?
Yeah, denigrating Apple is a winning strategy. Perhaps the CEO guy is too young to remember Microsoft’s attempt at that. If it had worked we’d still be using command line OS’s and flip phones.
Yeh, the CEO of Intel chose to denigrate a competitor rather than focus on bringing his own organization up to competitive speed.
Compare his response to that of Jamie Dimon, head of JPMorgan Chase when asked about the challenge Fintech presents: "Absolutely, we should be scared s---less about that,” Dimon said Friday
in a conference call with analysts. “We have plenty of resources, a lot
of very smart people. We’ve just got to get quicker, better, faster. ...
As you look at what we’ve done, you’d say we’ve done a good job, but
the other people have done a good job, too.”
One tries to hit a home run by trash talking the pitcher.
The other steps up to the plate knowing that nothing is assured but confident his team will win and urging it to not underestimate the competition.
Many of these comments are as ignorant as BlackBerry’s comments were when Apple announced that they were going to release a mobile phone. Let the new Intel CEO show what he can do. Competition is good for everyone.
You might want to re-read what I said. I specifically said that Intel didn't own the remainder of the business, I sad they owned the majority of it and as you have pointed out that is in fact true. Further Apple isn't 13% of Intel's business as Intel's business is larger than processors for PCs. CPUs and GPUs make up a bit over half of Intel's business. So saying Apple makes us 13% of Apple's business is just incorrect.
You might want to re-read what I said. My comments were specific to the PC processor business. Having said that, Intel's "Client computing group" which accounts for sales of CPUs to the PC market is by far their largest group and larger than all of their other groups combined. As such, the overall relevancy of the business they are losing is unchanged. Though yes, the 13% applies to that specific business unit.
I re-read it and I’ll quote it for good measure; “ Intel is losing more like 13% of their business.” There was no qualification for business.
Apple was 8% of the PC market in the last quarter and is usually 6-7%, yes they spend a ton of money on Intel but they are by no means a "HUGE" account, the rest of the 92% of the market mostly uses Intel and that isn't counting people that build their own computers. In fact Intel's rise to dominance happened without Apple being a customer at all. So, no, Apple Silicon isn't a big blow to Intel. If Apple made Apple Silicone available to other companies it could potentially be a threat to Intel but as it is they aren't even competitors.
You also seem to be oblivious to the fact that PCs and graphics chips are only part of Intel's business. It is the largest of their business segments but that is not all they do.
A dominant market share has never ever been an ironclad guarantee of a company's continued survival and prosperity. Are you too young to know about this company called Kodak?
Where did I say a dominant market share was a guarantee of survival? The conversation is about where they are currently, which is still dominant. Thanks for chiming in though.
Many of these comments are as ignorant as BlackBerry’s comments were when Apple announced that they were going to release a mobile phone. Let the new Intel CEO show what he can do. Competition is good for everyone.
The situations aren’t really analogous. Apple and Blackberry were competing for the same customers. Apple isn’t competing with intel for customers. Apple has one client for its SoC and that is Apple. Intel’s potential clients are everybody but Apple. Intel’s completion is from AMD and Qualcomm and some other chip makers that I don’t know the name of. And it is AMD that has taken the piss out of intel most recently. That and they belly flopped in mobile.
Only a very stupid person makes those kind of flippant and ignorant remarks. It shows he is ill suited for the position he holds. A responsible board would show him the door.
I am a little surprised he didn't call them "that fruit company" if Intel does bail out on its foundries in the US to outsource to China that will be devastating to the state of Oregon. If any company were to purchase the foundries it would take a massive investment to bring them up to speed.
Apple was 8% of the PC market in the last quarter and is usually 6-7%, yes they spend a ton of money on Intel but they are by no means a "HUGE" account, the rest of the 92% of the market mostly uses Intel and that isn't counting people that build their own computers. In fact Intel's rise to dominance happened without Apple being a customer at all. So, no, Apple Silicon isn't a big blow to Intel. If Apple made Apple Silicone available to other companies it could potentially be a threat to Intel but as it is they aren't even competitors.
You also seem to be oblivious to the fact that PCs and graphics chips are only part of Intel's business. It is the largest of their business segments but that is not all they do.
A dominant market share has never ever been an ironclad guarantee of a company's continued survival and prosperity. Are you too young to know about this company called Kodak?
Where did I say a dominant market share was a guarantee of survival? The conversation is about where they are currently, which is still dominant. Thanks for chiming in though.
Actually, you should perhaps reread -- or if it's not late -- rewrite what you wrote. You're the one that brought up silly arguments about market share. If you're bringing up market share, it's pretty much what @tundraboy boy said. There's no reason to bring it up otherwise.
Don't walk it back. Just suck it up, admit you were wrong, and move on.
Intel’s HQ is in Santa Clara. Hell, Intel’s presence was one of the driving forces BEHIND Silicon Valley.
Intel has facilities in Oregon but the headquarters of the company is in Silicon Valley.
obJust: I have friends who work there.
Things like this are proof there is no editors on this site. You see mistakes like this all the time here. How could such an obvious mistake make it into an article?
Apple was 8% of the PC market in the last quarter and is usually 6-7%, yes they spend a ton of money on Intel but they are by no means a "HUGE" account, the rest of the 92% of the market mostly uses Intel and that isn't counting people that build their own computers. In fact Intel's rise to dominance happened without Apple being a customer at all. So, no, Apple Silicon isn't a big blow to Intel. If Apple made Apple Silicone available to other companies it could potentially be a threat to Intel but as it is they aren't even competitors.
You also seem to be oblivious to the fact that PCs and graphics chips are only part of Intel's business. It is the largest of their business segments but that is not all they do.
A dominant market share has never ever been an ironclad guarantee of a company's continued survival and prosperity. Are you too young to know about this company called Kodak?
Where did I say a dominant market share was a guarantee of survival? The conversation is about where they are currently, which is still dominant. Thanks for chiming in though.
Actually, you should perhaps reread -- or if it's not late -- rewrite what you wrote. You're the one that brought up silly arguments about market share. If you're bringing up market share, it's pretty much what @tundraboy boy said. There's no reason to bring it up otherwise.
Don't walk it back. Just suck it up, admit you were wrong, and move on.
If you are going to chime in take the time to read the entire thread so you have the context of why I brought up market share rather than jump on a comment mid thread and straw man it. The article says intel was previously dominant, there is no previous about it they still are .... today. Talking about what they are today isn’t saying what they will be in the future which.
Apple was 8% of the PC market in the last quarter and is usually 6-7%, yes they spend a ton of money on Intel but they are by no means a "HUGE" account, the rest of the 92% of the market mostly uses Intel and that isn't counting people that build their own computers. In fact Intel's rise to dominance happened without Apple being a customer at all. So, no, Apple Silicon isn't a big blow to Intel. If Apple made Apple Silicone available to other companies it could potentially be a threat to Intel but as it is they aren't even competitors.
You also seem to be oblivious to the fact that PCs and graphics chips are only part of Intel's business. It is the largest of their business segments but that is not all they do.
A dominant market share has never ever been an ironclad guarantee of a company's continued survival and prosperity. Are you too young to know about this company called Kodak?
Where did I say a dominant market share was a guarantee of survival? The conversation is about where they are currently, which is still dominant. Thanks for chiming in though.
Actually, you should perhaps reread -- or if it's not late -- rewrite what you wrote. You're the one that brought up silly arguments about market share. If you're bringing up market share, it's pretty much what @tundraboy boy said. There's no reason to bring it up otherwise.
Don't walk it back. Just suck it up, admit you were wrong, and move on.
If you are going to chime in take the time to read the entire thread so you have the context of why I brought up market share rather than jump on a comment mid thread and straw man it. The article says intel was previously dominant, there is no previous about it they still are .... today. Talking about what they are today isn’t saying what they will be in the future which.
Where can I buy my MIGA (Make Intel Great Again) hat? This guy sounds exactly like a certain wannabe dictator.
Fake news. Biden is in capable of stringing that many words together at one time.
“incapable”
As in “incapable of organising an armed white supremacist insurrection in a porn star’s boudoir”.
Thank you for catching the change iOS made that I did not. As for your other part, that makes about as much sense as Biden talking about his hairy legs. I guess it made you feel good though and that is all that matters.DaRev said:
I am a little surprised he didn't call them "that fruit company" if Intel does bail out on its foundries in the US to outsource to China that will be devastating to the state of Oregon. If any company were to purchase the foundries it would take a massive investment to bring them up to speed.
Sadly that’s the story of many industrial facilities here in the States. The options are;
Intel invests to get them up to date.
They sell them and a competitor invests.
They outsource it to China and bulldoze.
Two out of three portions are bad because there’s a pretty good chance it will be China that buys them. Intel created their own situation.
Where can I buy my MIGA (Make Intel Great Again) hat? This guy sounds exactly like a certain wannabe dictator.
Fake news. Biden is in capable of stringing that many words together at one time.
“incapable”
As in “incapable of organising an armed white supremacist insurrection in a porn star’s boudoir”.
Thank you for catching the change iOS made that I did not. As for your other part, that makes about as much sense as Biden talking about his hairy legs. I guess it made you feel good though and that is all that matters.DaRev said:
Do we have to look forward to 4 years of this nonsense? Oh well.... Hate does strange things to human brains. It's kinda sad.
Many of these comments are as ignorant as BlackBerry’s comments were when Apple announced that they were going to release a mobile phone. Let the new Intel CEO show what he can do. Competition is good for everyone.
The situations aren’t really analogous. Apple and Blackberry were competing for the same customers. Apple isn’t competing with intel for customers. Apple has one client for its SoC and that is Apple. Intel’s potential clients are everybody but Apple. Intel’s completion is from AMD and Qualcomm and some other chip makers that I don’t know the name of. And it is AMD that has taken the piss out of intel most recently. That and they belly flopped in mobile.
Other than AMD, Qualcomm, & Nvidia, who else has the talent and financial resources to take on Intel in the non-Apple market? None that I’m aware of.
Biden has not taken office good yet and already companies are returning to sending jobs to China. If they do that then we should't buy another product with an intel chip in it.
Biden has not taken office good yet and already companies are returning to sending jobs to China. If they do that then we should't buy another product with an intel chip in it.
Those companies mostly never left China. Or, if they did it was to another Asian country.
No country ever became more competitive by living in the past or trash talking its competition.
Give it up. You got conned by the ConMan. We fired that idiot -- he trashed the economy, ran up the debt and cost us too many jobs.
Comments
As in “incapable of organising an armed white supremacist insurrection in a porn star’s boudoir”.
"Absolutely, we should be scared s---less about that,” Dimon said Friday in a conference call with analysts. “We have plenty of resources, a lot of very smart people. We’ve just got to get quicker, better, faster. ... As you look at what we’ve done, you’d say we’ve done a good job, but the other people have done a good job, too.”