I seriously doubt that Intel would shoot themselves in the foot with a .50cal hollow point exploding round filled with acid like that.
Intel Strategy Shuts Out PC Enthusiasts
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Huh, that sure would help AMD out. Course, it'd only effect people who actually are going to change there CPU, which I assume is not the majority of all PC owners and thus it's hard to say what's gonna happen.
Whoa, dude. As a person like me, I understand it fine. No need to be so condescending.Dexter111 said:
I work in PC retail and I call it as I see it. Any of the significant rendering, scientific work and a couple of other applications you mentioned are done on an entirely different server-based architecture rather than an old-school tower PC. The vast majority of what we sell is laptops - where CPUs are soldered in as a matter of course - followed by all-in-ones (which are frequently based on laptop architectures), then iPads and Nexus 7s and such. Tower desktops are low, low, low on the list. We get far more people coming and asking about the Nexus 10 than we do about the i7-3770K and liquid cooling setups.
I'm very aware of the limitations of tablets - like I said, I personally hate the things and they're designed to fill a hole between the smartphone and the laptop that simply isn't there in my life. (Partly because there's no space for the laptop either, unless I finally manage to pin down a cheap second hand top end Vaio P.) But you can't target a niche market. Most companies make their money by aiming for the mainstream (or the lowest common denominator, call it what you will), and until it shakes down, right now that means laptops and tablets. Reading something, browsing the web a bit and maybe reading e-mails is all that a hell of a lot of people ever do with their computers.
Even Nintendo realised a while back that their competition in the handheld market wasn't coming from the PSP and the Vita. It's coming from the iPhone. Tablets and smartphones are all that matters right now. I hate them, they're limited, they're completely wrong for a lot of specialist applications (and some not-very-specialist - the reason laptops still thrive is mainly the fact that they've got a proper keyboard and access to a familiar version of Microsoft Office). But they're selling by the millions. Our store manager recently struck a business deal to supply 8,000 tablets to one company. That's not even lightweight personal stuff, that's an actual business that's aiming that way now. Manufacturers simply cannot afford to ignore that market.
Nobody ever said Windows 8 was a good idea. But there was a point a couple of years ago when some variant of Windows was installed on some 85% of the computer systems on the planet. That number is falling fast, and it's not OSX that's eating it, it's Android - for much the same reason that ARM dominates the global processor market right now, not Intel. Windows 8 is a blatant marketing grab, a reactionary play to get into a market where they have practically zero presence. It's all wrong for anything other than a tablet or an all-in-one touchscreen. But those are where the wind is blowing right now. As Jarvis Cocker once sang, "It stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust. But the takings are up by a third; c***s are still running the world."
Chances of intel doing this: <10%.
They already have a non-socket solution, so changing the main line of CPUs to this makes very little sense.
Not that it'll matter if they do - people will just stick with the old generation of CPUs until Intel quickly reverse their position, much like MS will do with Win8 once they realize 90% of people call bullshit on it.
They already have a non-socket solution, so changing the main line of CPUs to this makes very little sense.
Not that it'll matter if they do - people will just stick with the old generation of CPUs until Intel quickly reverse their position, much like MS will do with Win8 once they realize 90% of people call bullshit on it.
Am I the only one who thought "...the fuck?" when I read this?
Pretty much every kid and their mother is running an Intel Core chip or has used one at some point. The Core2Duo, Core2Quad, Core i5, Core i7 (both in SB and IB flavors), etc etc...all those series fall under that naming scheme.
That's true, but your average Joe doesn't know or care about the differences between a Core 2 Duo and all 3 flavours of a Core i7. Haven't you ever tried to explain something about computers to a non-technical person and watched their eyes glaze over? If your are lucky they will know what version of Windows their computer runs. If you are really lucky they will know if it has an Intel or AMD CPU and NVidia or AMD graphics.Aaron Sylvester said:
AMD's 20% will grow among those who care about controlling every part of their system, if Intel puts the squeeze on as described above. What percentage of the total market those people comprise is another question. I have to suspect it's small enough that Intel is willing to let them go in order to get a larger return on the business and casual consumer markets. If the tablet invasion has shown us anything, it's that people will buy whatever hardware happens to be inside a device, as long as it has a slick feature list and good marketing.
People are assuming either that Intel will leverage their market share to partake of either serious wallet rape or to limit the choices we have now by supplying fewer versions hence saving itself a ton on development/manufacture.Eri said:
Personally i think it will probably pan out a bit different. its a bit too early for the MS move i suspect this first round of integrated core bundles ie the welded chip to mobo + integrated stuff will actually be extremely good and not to highly priced. getting both the high and mid ends to flock adoringly to them. this will kill the ailing AMD off and do about the same to the motherboard makers. and it will be the generation after that actually drops the belt buckle.
But im also not overly worried, i do not see this happening outside of the states for legal reasons. i just dont see the EU allowing it on legal terms or Intel will at least be forced to still supply its chips to other parties as it does now as well as running thier own "intergrated bundles"
Yes, people will always love having pre-packaged computers, and love getting 'what you see is what you get' machines. Tablets and consoles prove this point. But even people that want a pre-packaged computers aren't happy with the inability to swap parts out down the line. At the risk of getting all libertarian on this, I don't think the market will play this out in Intel's favor. This has already been done. People didn't want it. If you want proof, look to Apple or Gateway.
Presuming any of this doom and gloom 'all your components will be soldered together forever and ever!' stuff is even true.
Yes, there are some (many) who only ever play casual games. Yes, there are some who won't touch that stuff with a 20 foot poll. But there is plenty of overlap.
If Intel believes that there is not, then it's making a big mistake.
I'm sure my grandmother isn't willing to open up 'My Computer' and look at the C drive at all and runs everything through the Start Menu or My Documents. Does that mean having a directory or control over where and how things are saved is a moot point too?
Presuming any of this doom and gloom 'all your components will be soldered together forever and ever!' stuff is even true.
The problem here is that, the desires that drive the tablet market aren't necessarily the desires that drive the PC market. Because a lot of people who own PCs also own tablets. I know a lot of guys that wouldn't even DARE to not make their own machine, and still own tablets. Because their portable or casual gaming desires don't have the same demands as their 'hardcore' desires. It's a mistake to believe that because somebody might be willing to fire up Angry Birds while on the toilet they would be OK with that level of processing power for their main gaming rig, or be against gaming entirely.TheEndlessGrey said:
Yes, there are some (many) who only ever play casual games. Yes, there are some who won't touch that stuff with a 20 foot poll. But there is plenty of overlap.
If Intel believes that there is not, then it's making a big mistake.
I'm not sure how 'I'm not personally comfortable opening up my machine' really relates to PC enthusiasts though.Bhaalspawn said:
I'm sure my grandmother isn't willing to open up 'My Computer' and look at the C drive at all and runs everything through the Start Menu or My Documents. Does that mean having a directory or control over where and how things are saved is a moot point too?
Oh I totally agree that's the flaw in the idea, and I myself am one of those guys who has never once bought a pre-built computer but still has a tablet. The conflicting needs and usage patterns is why I hope Microsoft is smart enough to leave PC Windows alone while they pursue the tablet market with WinRT, but if they can start to merge the spaces to squeeze a few percentage points of market share, why would Intel not try to do the same? We're seeing the old giants starting to lose their grip, and fear drives irrational decisions.Damien Granz said:
There is a large range between 'I'm not personally comfortable opening up my machine' and swapping out CPU chips. I have no problem replacing RAM, video cards, hardrives, DVD drives, power sources and even a motherboard but it never really occurred to me that I would need to replace a CPU chip. When I do a computer upgrade I am guaranteed to replace my motherboard while I might keep a lot of the other components if they are compatible.Damien Granz said:
I always considered myself a 'PC enthusiast' but apparently I am only another one of the 'unwashed masses' now.
So whats the point of this? I cant come up with any logical reason for this expect for laptops and such... Like is Intel just going to give up the market on workstations and servers?