The new -- and younger -- face of Intel
The dominant theme in this set of predictions for 2012 is the mobile conversion as we abandon our desktops for mobile devices and the Cloud. Intel, while the dominant maker of microprocessors, doesn’t have a strong product position in mobile. Worse still, the company has a leadership vacuum and a culture that has not adapted well to change. Deep pockets aren’t enough when you don’t know where to spend the money and you are running out of time. That’s Intel.
The company is desperate. It needs a mobile product line that doesn’t exist and there isn’t enough time left to develop one internally. For Intel the build or buy decision has already been made (buy, buy, buy) though I doubt that at this moment much of the company fully even knows that. But shortly they will.
The only obvious purchase for Intel to make is San Diego-based Qualcomm, which would instantly give Intel a solid mobile product line, deep technology and mobile IP holdings, and a dominant position in a market where Intel is currently struggling. Other mobile technology companies are possible acquisitions, like Marvell, but Qualcomm is the only sure win and Intel can’t afford to do less than win.
But Qualcomm will be expensive, with a current market cap of $92 billion — ninety-two billion!!! — compared to $124 billion for Intel, itself. This will be the most expensive acquisition in Intel history and — given that Intel will have to offer Qualcomm a $10+ billion premium — will be more a merger of equals.
And as a merger of equals, here’s how the deal will go down. Intel CEO Paul Otellini will become chairman, relinquishing his Intel CEO position to Paul Jacobs, Qualcomm’s current CEO and son of co-founder Irwin Jacobs who is about to retire from the Qualcomm board.
This is all good. Both are fine companies and the combination will make them stronger. I think it will receive regulatory approval. Jacobs and Qualcomm will bring a tectonic shift to Intel that the larger company needs. Otellini, who has been without a graceful exit, will finally have one.
Cynics may say this merger devalues the vaunted Intel Architecture but I would argue at this point that IA is not only without value, it actually comes at a cost because it has to be maintained. Intel needs a revolution, Qualcomm needs a next stage of growth and a captive fab to bring it greater economies of scale.
Now where do they put the headquarters?
I think Intel might be better served buying nVidia. They also do a good SOC, and Intel would finally be able to make a good GPU.
That’s what I thought two years ago but in order to buy there must be a seller and nVidia seems pretty determined to remain independent. Besides, Qualcomm is better for Intel.
Forget Qualcomm, just buy ARM.
As I said, there are other possible acquisitions, but for Intel Qualcomm would be a challenge while ARM would be impossible from an anti-trust standpoint.
The neat thing about ARM is that they wouldn’t have to buy it, just license it. But that leads to problems too…see my other post below.
ARM works best as being an independant company, sharing it’s technology to whoever wishes to buy. Robin Saxby understood that as being the best model for such a small company, and let’s not forget it’s a tiny company!
Can’t see how a regulatory agency would even allow that, and frankly, what’s in it for ARM? Fabs? They got access to plenty of those. Name recognition? They got that in spades. More customers? Seriously, which of their customers would be happy licensing a product now owned by somebody they’ve been competing with?
I find it tough to imagine such a JV – Why would Qualcomm board want to get into this Intel mess when they are executing well on their own? What would Intel do with Infineon’s technology which is not exactly complementary to Qualcomm’s competency. Qualcomm uses their own processor core but licenses ARM instruction set which again makes their products not very Intel technology friendly. A merger of this size has a good potential to be a political quagmire which will mostly result in a clumsy crash.
i86 processor compatibility is emphatically NOT wanted here. Intel has it all, and all its buyers except the server market are looking at the end of the line for their businesses.
mobile is taking over. and ARM multi-core is the new i86.
same argument for Intel buying any other direct competitor like AMD or nVidia. corpses joining for the jump off the cliff.
InQualTel would be king of the hill in ARM and flash, with all the fabs you could ever want, channels, sources… if it passes DoJ and EC review, a big win.
What EXACTLY does Intel need here? Intel presumably wants to make money from the future gusher that is mobile.
So then, why haven’t they made money so far? Because Atom is an in appropriate chip. So then, why was Atom pushed as Intel’s solution? Ahhh —- now we get to the heart of the matter. Intel drank its own koolaid — they truly believed that x86 everywhere was a sane slogan. They did not take into account the insane design complexity and verification times that come along with x86.
Why does this matter? Because
(a) Has this disease disappeared yet? Look at the civil war going on inside MS regarding Windows everywhere. After a promising start with Win Phone 7, the Windows Everywhere crowd is back in charge, and Steve Jobs is laughing from his grave as his last stealth attack on MS (his “post-PC” nonsense) threatens to destroy both the company’s desktop hegemony and its relevance to mobile.
If the x86 Everywhere faction is ultimately in charge at Intel, acquiring Qualcomm just means they’ll be a larger company struggling to keep up with ARM, not a more successful one.
(b) OK, so let’s assume Intel is finally willing to admit that the burden of x86 compatibility is just too much cost for too little gain in the mobile space. Then what does Qualcomm get them? They get an ARM core — which they could license from ARM directly, or they could design their own. They get access to a bunch of neat wireless chips — but those are chips that play in a low profit, very competitive space.
If MBAs are in charge, they presumably have something in mind along the lines of “we can put these Qualcomm RF cells on our ARM chips and have kick-ass SOCs”. The problem is that
[1] There are limits to how much you can integrate silicon this way, because of interference and very different process requirements. But non-integrated silicon means people can buy non-Intel RF parts.
[2] The mobile game is all about the vendor creating as powerful a SYSTEM as possible. To do this, vendors need to be able to design their own SOCs and support chips, with ONLY what they want on them and no extra crap. This flies in the face of Intel’s current business model.
(c) So, assuming Intel gets over their x86 Everywhere obsession, I don’t see that Qualcomm inside Intel suddenly makes Intel a major player. And going with the ARM instruction set means Intel is just one of a dozen ARM manufacturers. Yes, one with better fabs, but still, there’s a limit to what that is worth.
The third option is to come up with a clean slate Intel owned ISA — plus even a new inter-chip connection model which would allow the Intel CPU to hook up to Intel provided RF modules at lower power or with better quality than current solutions.
A new ISA would be no more humiliating (to the extent that humiliation is a factor) than going with ARM. It would allow Intel to start clean — even ARM admits they’d made mistakes and started as clean as possible (but obviously with severe constraints) when they went 64-bit.
But of course Intel is hopeless at designing ISAs. They got lucky with x86 at the start, and every change they have made to it sucks. Itanic was a disaster. MMX is horrifying and, after four iterations of SSE that’s still pretty awful. They got lucky with x86-64, essentially because AMD did all the work. So what to do?
Here’s a wild idea: negotiate with IBM and/or Freescale to use PPC as the starting point. Don’t use exact PPC — the instruction set has accumulated some crud over the years, and it makes sense to ditch the worst offenders. But this way you get a clean ISA, and you can get your tool chains and OS up and running without too much work. And best of all, you can now compete in the same space as ARM, but as a solo player, not as one of a dozen clones.
Having worked for both Qualcomm and Intel I definitely agree with your prediction, it makes total sense, but frankly only if the Jacobs family doesn’t see Intel as a boat anchor.
Qualcomm is fabless and Intel has fabbed their chips in the past. Intel brings the manufacturing power. Qualcomm has the telephony designs and patents, the relations with handset makers and a ship-software-at-all-costs culture.
Intel recently acquired the WiFi chipmaking division of Infineon and tried putting them in charge of their bloated software bureacracy, but no mobile phone shipped in 2011.
Qualcomm would demand CEO-ship and perhaps Chairmanship, I see Paul Jacobs as wanting to be Chairman and maybe getting it. On paper it’s a merger of equals, but in reality Qualcomm is flying high while Intel is a puff of wind away from a tailspin.
Actually Intel acquired the modem business of Infineon and they do ship ultra low cost (sub $10 BOM) phones in Asian market
You guys are really down on x86, but Michael Dell sees plenty of life left and whereas Apothekar was willing to unload that part of HP, he got himself fired for his fool opinion.
I dunno, x86 is still big business and I don’t see a cell phone fad derailing that. That’s because you can play way better games on the big screen than the little screen and a lot less eyestrain too for evening surfing. I think as more and more people get tuned into the high cost of cell phone data access and crashing the car on the motorway, mobile will see a bit of a correction. For instance Intel is far from dead, but Palm sure is and RIM and Nokia are both knockin on heaven’s door.
> evening surfing
There’s an ipad for that.
PCs will be glorified drafting tables in no time flat.
People hate work.
“People hate work.” But spend most of their time doing it.
Much as I am no Intel fan, I think a lot of people have lost a lot of money betting on the fall of Intel prematurely.
Beyond this, I predict if Intel were to acquire or merge with Qualcomm, the resulting culture clash would be disastrous. Very unlikely, IMHO.
Bob, what has been the success rate of your acquisition predictions in the past? M&A are always very difficult to predict. Acquiring Qualcomm may be the best decision in your eyes, but who knows what exactly goes on inside Intel management’s heads. Even if the merger happens if may not happen on the year we think.
Consider Yahoo. It was supposed to be acquired by Microsoft except it didn’t happen.
Bob moves to 1 of 3. I like this one. It does make sense, especially when you watch Apple build their own chips with Samsung. The CPU business isn’t what it was.
You are correct in that the CPU business is not what it once was, but Intel doesn’t know that. And as long as they continue to have massively profitable quarters like they have been having lately, they aren’t going to know that and it would be hard to call them short-sighted for not knowing that.
The last pro-active move Intel made with regards to communications was the $1B purchase of Level1, which was disastrous. They would have been better off putting $1B of 1 dollar bills into a pile and lighting it on fire.
The’ve gotten a little bit smarter recently with acquisitions, a Linux company whose name I forget and McAfee, by making them wholly owned subsidiaries, but this is a company of about equal size, whose CEO you can’t make a VP of some new side business. I just don’t see how the Intel culture, as it is currently set up, could make this work.
That doesn’t make Bob’s prediction “wrong”. He didn’t predict it will ultimately work, just that it would happen. And companies make stupid merger/purchase decisions all the time (AOL/Time Warner).
Qualcomm doesn’t own any fabs, and its core architecture is licensed. One of those valuations is wrong.
there are Jacobs family involved. they’re slick. real slick. it may be a fake valuation, but it will stick.
What Qualcomm has licensed is their CPU architecture. That’s not where their valuation is. Their valuation is in their patents (starting with CDMA) and in a number of chips that implement a number of RF specs, and implement them well.
Don’t forget qcom 20bn cash…so closer to 70bn EV.
“devalues the vaunted Intel Architecture”
Ha ha ha, good one. This piece of crap x86 disaster is the load its mother should have swallowed. The only reason this inferior, ugly, ham-fisted architecture survived – even flourished – is not because of its elegance or superiority, but because of its availability.
Anyone who’s ever had to work with the retard known as x86 knows what I’m talking about. PowerPC, ARM, 68K, etc… Just look at Microsoft – you can “win” even if you’re not the best. It’s not that simple.
As an engineer, I’m offended by the x86. The clowns in Folsom should be ashamed of their bastard creation.
ahhh, another fan of linear memory addressing instead of paging. how did we become dinosaurs?
If you’re going to make comments like that you should know that paging and segmented addressing schemes are totally orthogonal concepts. Intel’s “16:16 into 20” address hack predates their introduction of paging support by a good eight years. Every other modern ISA manages to accommodate virtual memory without resorting to the legacy-driven arrangement Intel uses.
The 90’s called. They want their RISC is always superior always argument back…
geez, buddy–keep it PG
Qualcomm has a market cap of $90 billion. Even Apple doesn’t have enough money to buy Qualcomm.
So how exactly can Intel buy Qualcomm, on of the hottest large cap companies for mobile?
Duh.
Merger. the $90 billion merger will cost $110-120 billion by the time all the M&A banks in the country dip their beaks.
That’s it. I’m done reading this website. You are no better than DigiTimes.
Well, except for the fact that he states up front that he’s guessing, as opposed to Digitimes who calls their guessing “news.”
[…] Cringely “Prediction 3: Intel buys Qualcomm“: The dominant theme in this set of predictions for 2012 is the mobile conversion as we […]
Why should Qualcomm allow itself to be bought by Intel when Qualcomm could buy AMD for peanuts? A lot more opportunity for Jacobs with that option.
AMD is an Intel without the bling. they’re always the second sister and consistently throughout their history Wall Street has distrusted their ability to make a profit.
with good reason.
AMD is a sucker play. ATI and ARM are their future.
It kind of makes you wonder about Intel selling off StrongARM/XScale five years ago. That seems like it would have been a better mobile strategy. I guess they still hold an ARM license they’re not using, but I suppose they didn’t want to dilute the Atom mindshare.
Intel itself could really care less about continuing forward the x86 line. Remember, it tried to move off of that line nearly 10 years ago with Itanium and IA64 – which was suppose to provide compatibility to x86/IA32 to pull forward software, but primarily move Intel to IA64 and free them from the agreements with AMD, nVidia, and all the other x86-cross licensing folks. They were then forced by AMD – with AMD64 – to continue with x86 line, and worse yet they had to adopt a rivals instruction set – AMD64, first as EMT64 and then later Intel64. So the x86 line has a lot of baggage they’d love to be free from.
Intel’s main problem is that x86 is so promiscuous and wide-spread in the markets that they are having a very hard time doing so, thus the Atom processor’s continuance of the x86 instruction set.
Now with Microsoft committing to support ARM with Windows 8, in part because ARM processors are far better for embedded environments (e.g. phones, tablets, netbook, etc.) and don’t have the heating issues that most of Intel’s product lines do, look for Intel to do something that will boldly say “we are not simply x86; we can do it too, even if it means a different instruction set”.
As such, whether buying Marvell, Broadcom, Qualcom, etc – if there is an architecture in place to do that, look for them to use it outright and abandon x86 without looking back.
They couldn’t force the desktop market to abandon x86, and they’ll probably let them continue using it to reap the benefits of the dying platforms, while taking advantage of the mobile markets to drop the x86 restrictions on the company and move to new grounds.
This will not happen… the abandoning of x86… until severe market losses force it to happen. It is too ingrained. Even when the memory market was collapsing around them and the x86 was the only profitable line in the early-mid 80’s, Intel still considered itself a memory company.
Pain like that is going to have to happen for them to consider not being an “x86 company”. Look at Atom – everything they are trying to do with Atom was something they could have done with StromARM/XScale, but they decided instead to sell that business off rather than structure their way around making it a success.
As long as Intel is highly profitable with x86 (and they have made something like record profits for the last 4 quarters with it), they are not going to see this as a viable option.
I quite agree that that will be the case.
In part, that is what they learned from Itanium – don’t abandon x86 or even very very good x86-compatibility; thus the Atom processor is x86, and they don’t have the guts to try abandoning x86 again until, as you said, strong market loses force them to.
I just wouldn’t be surprised if they did try to resurrect a non-x86 side of the business if they did a purchase as Bob suggested, but in no way would I expect them to drop x86 even while doing so as x86 is their present bread, butter, and water. Anything else will just be a bit of sugar on the bread for the time being.
’tis a bold prediction, but I just don’t see it. Intel has an atrocious record with acquisitions, and as this would be a merger, it would be even more difficult.
The problem Intel has (and I know this having worked there in the past), is that they are kind of like North Korea in a way. An insulated hermit kingdom, whose “dear leader” is the x86. Everybody who works there pretty much came there straight out of college. They have no idea how the outside world works, and frankly, aren’t interested in how the outside world works. They are convinced there way is the right way because they make more money than
As long as they are making so much profit (and their last few quarters have been record profits), they aren’t going to see this naval gazing behavior as an issue, and any attempt to merge it with some other culture is going to result in unmitigated disaster. Intel has to suffer severe market failures as a means of shaking them awake before they will see this and could have a merger be successful.
It isn’t enough for the top executives to see it (not that they really do). It has to be a part of the entire organization, from top to bottom. And incredibly few people at the mid to lower levels see this. When I worked there and described to them how a fab like Samsung or TSMC works, and how ARM works, they were just flabbergasted. It was like I was speaking Latin to a country of Greeks. They just didn’t get it and couldn’t see how something like that could even exist, let alone be successful.
And Intel, despite the myths it tells about itself, is not a very pro-active company (outside of fab technology). From an architecture and market standpoint, it is more generally a follower. They wait until a threat emerges and then do a pretty good job to rise up in response. They were slow to the game with RISC, and then re-engineered their product line to be nearly as good. They were slow to multi-core, but now embrace it. They were slow to active power management, and are racing fast to catch up. Being proactive – discovering some new market and actively addressing it – just isn’t their forte. This is why the StrongARM/XScale thing didn’t work for them. They tried to build and market ARM processors the same way they build and market x86 processors, but the markets are different. Their XScale products weren’t winning in the market, but as soon as it was sold to Marvell and a different corporate culture, it was tweaked properly and sold very well. Oh, and the people from Intel who went over to Marvell were all, almost to a man, run out of Marvell.
If there were a merger like this, one culture will have to replace the other, and Intel is still the most profitable of the two, so it is more likely that the older, stodgier, Intel corporate culture would win out, thus defeating the purpose.
Hi Bob, Read your predictions and weighed up the future and came to the conclusion, “neither do I”
Intel seems disinterested in the low margin mobile market. Surely they’re not just now waking up to the popularity of mobile, yet they’ve never done anything to indicate a desire to compete at the low end.
All those mobile devices are connected to cloud data centers running an ever-increasing number of high-margin Xeon processors and Intel chipsets.
I wouldn’t say that Intel’s “not interested”… I would say that they don’t know how to do it. They would love x86 everywhere, just as Microsoft would love Windows everywhere. But neither company can figure out how to sell their wares into those lower margin markets without eventually cannibalizing their higher end markets, and doing that terrifies them.
But, and Steve Jobs proved this with the iPod –> iPhone/iPod Touch, either you cannibalize yourself, or somebody else will be happy to. Had Microsoft not been such a stickler with how they did tablet computing (trying to make a tablet just like a regular PC in terms of cost), there may not be an iPad, right? Had Intel not kept trying to convince everybody to buy workstation class performance machines for using Facebook, maybe they’d have a processor that could go into an iPad.
For the record, I will never abandon the PC for either mobile or the cloud. But I fear I will not be given a choice in the matter. We’re being “curated” into both.
A further question for Mr. Cringely, on the subject of 80s dinosaurs: what is IBM’s stake in helping Google with patents for Android?
This is an exciting and through provoking prediction. I can’t wait to see what follows.
Intel isn’t going to do this. Not this year, anyway. They will not show any weakness over IA. Look at how many years it took them to abandon Netburst after that architecture failed them? And that was just over IA variants. And good grief, they’re still making Itanium, for that matter. They burned their ARM ships to prevent return by selling the StrongARM stuff and doubling down on Atom. They just aren’t going to do anything that would appear to admit defeat or back down at this point. Besides, they’re expecting to crush everyone with process technology. Moore’s law won’t end due to physical limitations, it’ll end due to cost limitations. I’m thinking Intel is betting the entire industry will reach cost limits of Moore’s law before the mobile wars are over and Intel will be the only foundry able to subsidize the best process tech for portable use from profits and processors for server/desktop use, with enough difference to make up for the shortcomings of their architecture. I don’t think that’s a bet that’s easy to calculate the odds on but I think Intel thinks they know the answer and will not be dissuaded easily.
What I think is interesting is when Intel does acquire/merge with Qualcomm is the background of the CEO. Intel had technical CEOs until Paul Otellini who has a MBA, but with Paul Jacobs Intel would have young smart CEO with a PHD in EE & CS. So my reading would be is that when Intel was a growth company it had technical CEO, but after a certain point became a business less driven by the marketplace and more about marketing.
While technology is certainly a serious consideration, do not forget demographics.
This nation is maturing at a rapid rate and that part of the demographic could care less about the latest and greatest. They want to search the internet and send pictures of their grand kids around. They are used to a big screen on their desk and it is all they need. My adult children have all the latest stuff and spend hundreds a month using it. Does it cost out? No! Do they still do it? Yes!
As a former electronics facility owner I can tell you the “big” money is not made manufacturing products, it is made creating great solutions. Paper clips and staples would have never made it big if paperwork wasn’t flying everywhere unabated.
Answer me this. Why does Qualcomm need Intel? They don’t… Apple does not make their own items and neither do many past long term tech successes. Fresh thinking is always the key to the future. It’s why nature kills off us old folks to make way for the next generation. It’s evolution and it’s not nice to mess with mother nature!
Are we really going to abandon our desktops?
The reason I ask this question is because I have a LOT of experience using high performance real/near real time simulations (e.g. FPSs, Combat Flight Simulations, MMORPGs, et al) – and the quality of that experience is directly impacted by not only the quality of the display, but also on the advanced local processing capability of the high-end gaming desktop system.
The network is currently also the most noticeable, if not the biggest bottleneck to performance, and everything is done to make client-server communications efficient as a result. When the network burps latency drops frames and in a competitive setting causes much gnashing of teeth and wailing.
Also – anyone here who has played console and PC games can tell you: console gaming experience is less precise and more in tuned with the casual gamer due to the limitations in processing power and the game pad interfaces. PCs, on the other hand, provide a plethora of interface options (flight sticks, key pads, head motion tracking/viewing systems etc), and you can build up a respectable processing monster as desired – up to the point of overclocking, water cooling and other extremes; very very difficult to do in the console arena. Portable devices – phones and pads – can’t touch the PC in terms of the quality of the gaming experience
I was a member of the first generation that had hand held electronic games – Coleco/Mattel Electronic Quarterback/Football; took it everywhere. However, as I got older and found better (e.g. more immersive) simulations – I had a tendency to trade up to better systems. Today I use a 42″ HDTV with fast refresh – primarily because I’m getting old – and can more easily read the text on the big screen – but secondarily because that screen and the desktop system I have attached to it provide the best simulation experience. I think the current teens and twenty-somethings will have a similar experience – wanting to improve their gaming experiences beyond the small/mobile screen.
General purpose computers by their very nature are infinitely re-definable simulation devices. In fact I would argue that is all they do, whether you are trying to simulate a complex environment – like a virtual game world, or a more simple environment – like a spreadsheet/mathematical ‘world’. Leaving that flexibility behind doesn’t sound like ‘advancement’ to me. (See Cory Doctorow’s very prescient discussion of this subject: https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/nwzps/the_coming_war_on_general_computing_cory_doctorow/ )
“as we abandon our desktops”
“everyone is going mobile”
Don’t you just hate the way media hacks attempt to make it sound like everyone is the same, everyone wants the same thing, and by using the word “we”, that they are down with the mindless masses?
As the chimpanzee in the street finds that they can twitter, watch porn and play children’s games on a device that fits in their pocket, the ratio of mobile devices to fixed installations will undoubtedly change, as there are a lot of chimps in the street. But what does this have to do with the serious use of computers, which is what I thought these articles were supposed to be about?
It is as if Cringely has reduced himself to the role of spokesman for the toy industry.
Don’t you just hate the way bozos with a narrow focus attempt to generalize everyone who have a different view as something degrading? Or perhaps you’re jealous of chimpanzees?
I’ve read Cringely for a long time and I think his view is a lot wider that what you seem to think of as ‘serious use of computers”.
Bob,
why would Intel not consider buying Broadcom instead of Qualcomm? Based on BRCM’s current market cap of 15B$ (that’s ~1/6th of Qualcomm’s) but almost as formidable, with a rich and diverse portfolio and strong culture of execution? Besides Broadcom seems to be taking foothold in
What’s your take on it?
[…] I, Cringely » Prediction 3: Intel buys Qualcomm – would this pass antitrust muster? […]
I’d shift this prediction to 2013. In 2012 they’ll first wait and see what Win 8 will do for them. And they’ll know by then if a 22nm atom processor will be competitive with ARM processors. If mobile is going to take over, then mobile will need some CPU power.
On the other hand, GPU seems to be more important in the consumer space, while CPU is important in the server space. And look what Qualcomm is doing with WP7; it may not be popular, but the graphics are smooth.
Oh man, where to start…
Qualcomm will never sell to Intel or to anyone. Why should they? They are highly profitable and have $12 billion in the bank.
Instead, Qualcomm is trying to become the next Intel. Look at their latest marketing campaign– promoting their Snapdragon chip to the public in an attempt to create a brand ala “Intel Inside”. I think Qualcomm will eventually succeed in overtaking Intel as the world’s most valuable semiconductor company, and perhaps also succeed in becoming the worlds largest semiconductor company by sales.
Also, Intel won’t buy Broadcom after already buying Infineon’s wireless chip business. If Intel buys anything they’ll buy a smaller connectivity chip company, or perhaps the connectivity chip division of a large semiconductor company.
This prediction is based on dated info. Look at the Intel Medfield SoC specs publicly announced at CES. Not bad for a first offering. They have a chnace to compete. They can always make SSDs, maybe even fabricate ARM if x86 indeed get’s killed. Entertaining though.
If Intel’s new chip is successful, they will be in an even better position to by Qualcomm.
This prediction makes so much sense that I shudder at the possibilities. (No sarcasm)
Best IP Phones…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Prediction 3: Intel buys Qualcomm – Cringely on technology[…]…
I don’t see this happening. Intel is going to fight the mobile battle with homegrown innovation and manufacturing prowess. Silvermont at 14nm and with out of order core and trigate transistor tech will be a serious contender in mobile. Add to that their experience in high performance memory bus architecture that’s standardized for x86 vs. not so much for arm soc’s and I would be very worried about intel in mobile in 2014. One really has to wonder what they showed Sanjay jha to get him to cut the Motorola and intel deal for android
From time to time, beats by dre find that even with no beats by dre studio router, they’re still picking up a wireless signal. that is the price we could accept about louis items, their wireless alerts may be broadcasting via your louis vuitton men bags space. An answer here might be ask the neighbor to show off the facility to their router before they go to mattress, to your monster beats by dre studio and theirs. the dr dre headphone features simple silver trim and closely resembles the classic handset style beats by dre solo is known for and for those who crave a little louis vuitton shoulder bags and more colour. As a common rule, limit cell cheap beats by dre phone usage, particularly lengthy calls.Driving for hours can really be boring so having some louis vuitton denim entertainment could really help to break the louis vuitton monogram handbags monotony. Think movies or music or crayons and drawing pads, even books!
[…] Intel non sarebbe in grado con le sue forze di recuperare ARM nel mercato ultra-mobile e dovrebbe acquisire Qualcomm. L’operazione non farebbe scattare l’antitrust, al contrario di una eventuale […]
Much much respect for putting up all this content in such an cool way.
it shows they care about their readers…
experience, and that they know how to use spell check (best invention ever).creativitycreating content on a daily or weekly basis can be exhausting. of course, if you have passion for what you are blogging about, some of this will just naturally…
[…] concludere, Intel si è dimostrata capace di sfatare i pregiudizi pessimistici su x86. La teoria di Cringely sull’acquisto di Qualcomm è palesemente errata. Naturalmente la strada per il successo è ancora lunga e la casa di Santa […]
traffic quickly. when this does not happen,…
they become impatient and frustrated and finally give up without even giving their blog a second chance.patience in blogging pays. when you start blogging you need to keep to it. remember that consistence, interesting and relevant posts will demonstrat…
few ideas you should start your own…
blog. a small truck load of people open their blogs on the internet and it is a wonderful forum for you to write. so how do you use blogging to bring you the fame you look for? because what you write…
Way Beyond Smooth Sampled Rap Instrumental…
[…]Prediction 3: Intel buys Qualcomm[…]…
This is an exciting prediction.
This is an exciting and through provoking prediction. Very nice view