Intel lost $929mn on mobile in Q1 '14

[mrmt]

Could it be that Intel is holding back purposely for now because of Windows 8's bad rep? "Wait and see if Windows 9 is any good before investing more into this touchscreen business".

That ship has sailed long ago. Intel is the leader in Chromebooks and is trying to become a top Android partner, plus they have OSX and Tinzen. I'd say that Intel is pretty much hedged against Microsoft.

 

[TreVader]

Intel should just stay out of mobile. They aren't dexterous enough to compete successfully in mobile and they know it. They're gonna need all the money they can get once apple starts producing desktop chips.



Mobile is intels life boat. They know that by 2016 apple will be producing all it's own desktop and laptop chips and that's an instant MASSIVE loss in marketshare. The moment an A9 or A10 powered Apple laptop comes out they've lost and mobile is what they think will save them.


They'd be better off working on an architecture that actually works (Haswell) vs an example of their incompetence (Bay Trail)

 

[CHADBOGA]

sure win8 on desktop hasn't taken off like win7 did but it's still growing at a rapid pace which isn't necessarily reflected in the number of licensed copies, if you take pirated versions into account you'll see that win8 is still a smash hit relatively speaking.

LOL. Win 8 is doing even worse than Vista did.

Was Vista also a smash hit?

 

[R0H1T]

LOL. Win 8 is doing even worse than Vista did.

No it isn't, check the VCG & OS subsections & you'll see a large number of users praising win8 for it's performance improvements over win7, the majority of people who hate it are just butthurt over the lack of their fav (but now defunct) start menu or aren't willing to adapt to new ways of computing !

Was Vista also a smash hit?

Where did I say or infer that

 

[CHADBOGA]

No it isn't, check the VCG & OS subsections & you'll see a large number of users praising win8 for it's performance improvements over win7, the majority of people who hate it are just butthurt over the lack of their fav (but now defunct) start menu or aren't willing to adapt to new ways of computing !

You can make up whatever reasons you want for why Win 8 is some glorious success, but it has been a disaster for Microsoft & the PC industry.

I'll take sales figures from industry sources over the VCG & OS subsections.

It is the sales that determine success, not forum goers wishes.

Where did I say or infer that

Industry sources show that Win 8's adoption rate has been even worse than Vista's.

So if you are going to insist that Win 8 has been a smashing success, then logic would dictate that you believe Vista was a smashing success too.

You are using logic aren't you?

 

[NTMBK]

No it isn't, check the VCG & OS subsections & you'll see a large number of users praising win8 for it's performance improvements over win7, the majority of people who hate it are just butthurt over the lack of their fav (but now defunct) start menu or aren't willing to adapt to new ways of computing !

Yes, because Anandtech posters are highly representative of the general populace :awe:

 

[TeknoBug]

Yes Windows 8 isn't doing as well as Windows 7 was, however gamers installs Windows 8 because DX 11.1/2 gives a much better performance boost over what Windows 7 offers and has better multicore scheduling (important for AMD FX users), otherwise non-gamers has no reason to go with Windows 8, unless of course they buy a new PC or laptop in the past year.

 

[R0H1T]

Yes, because Anandtech posters are highly representative of the general populace :awe:

Nope it's because I visit or am part of about half a dozen other forums where users don't pick on win8 just because it lacks ye old start menu D:

 

[tential]

It's hilarious to see people make wide sweeping claims on this forum without any numbers to back them up. It's why posting on this forum is utterly deteriorated. No one posts any facts and when you do post facts people just ignore them.

 

[tential]

Intel should just stay out of mobile. They aren't dexterous enough to compete successfully in mobile and they know it. They're gonna need all the money they can get once apple starts producing desktop chips.



Mobile is intels life boat. They know that by 2016 apple will be producing all it's own desktop and laptop chips and that's an instant MASSIVE loss in marketshare. The moment an A9 or A10 powered Apple laptop comes out they've lost and mobile is what they think will save them.


They'd be better off working on an architecture that actually works (Haswell) vs an example of their incompetence (Bay Trail)

So Intel should stay out of mobile even though it's their lifeboat?

Just lol......

 

[R0H1T]

It's hilarious to see people make wide sweeping claims on this forum without any numbers to back them up. It's why posting on this forum is utterly deteriorated. No one posts any facts and when you do post facts people just ignore them.

Assuming that this was directed at me, care to explain what sweeping claims you're talking about? And I'm sure you have better sources to back you theories right?

 

[lefty2]

As regards the handset business, I don't think Intel should be burning cash designing products that no one wants. If you're going to make a smartphone SoC then you have to have both WCDMA and TD-SCDMA, not just LTE. And the modem needs to be integrated in the SoC. If you can't do that then you can't compete against Qualcomm, which means you're going to have to pony up a lot of "contra revenue" before any OEM is going to put the chip in their phone.

 

[R0H1T]

You can make up whatever reasons you want for why Win 8 is some glorious success, but it has been a disaster for Microsoft & the PC industry.

I'll take sales figures from industry sources over the VCG & OS subsections.

It is the sales that determine success, not forum goers wishes.

You're making a fundamental mistake by tying MS with the decline of PC market, this decline started with the launch of the original iPhone & then accelerated with the introduction of iPad & now Intel has finally seen the writing on the wall, with the rapid traction of Android tablets last year, & hence the insane levels of contra revenue.

Industry sources show that Win 8's adoption rate has been even worse than Vista's.

So if you are going to insist that Win 8 has been a smashing success, then logic would dictate that you believe Vista was a smashing success too.

You are using logic aren't you?

That maybe true for corporate sector but the smashing success of win8 phones, surface pro 2 or even the ASUS Transformer Book shows that even the name Windows still sells in itself & the only one losing marketshare in the process is Intel & MS has very little to do with it!

 

[frozentundra123456]

The problem with Win 8 is not whether it is a good OS or not, but one of perception. The casual user who first sees the win 8 interface is confused, put off, and probably doesn't even know how to get to the desktop, much less navigate without a start menu. They don't really care if it gives you 20% faster fps in BF4, computers today are plenty fast running win 7 for the vast majority of users in the vast majority of apps. What they see first is an unfamiliar, confusing interface that replaces a familiar one.

Fairly or not, the public perception of win 8 also plays into this. As to how much win 8 has contributed to the slowdown of the PC market, I have no idea, but it certainly has not helped things.

 

[CHADBOGA]

That maybe true for corporate sector but the smashing success of win8 phones, surface pro 2

LOL Please tell us more about their smashing success.

or even the ASUS Transformer Book shows that even the name Windows still sells in itself & the only one losing marketshare in the process is Intel & MS has very little to do with it!

So the Transformer T100TA is a success, is powered by Intel, but is an example of Intel failure.

Just brilliant analysis all round. LOL

 

[R0H1T]

LOL Please tell us more about their smashing success.

Smashing success as compared to Vista, I haven't read or heard the same horror stories that were commonplace circa 2006, & like I said the corporate sector(to a lesser extent govt as well) is holding back on Windows purchases mainly because they may have to purchase new hardware as well. Win8 is more solid & stable than win7 & you can keep LOL all you want it want change this fact, btw did you ever think that since the PC sector is declining the win8 adoption rate will be lower than Vista or can't you discern such a small thing ?

So the Transformer T100TA is a success, is powered by Intel, but is an example of Intel failure.

Just brilliant analysis all round. LOL

Check this list ~ Notebooks

The Exynos based chromebook was the bestseller for a long time, Intel based models are also smash hit, because it had chrome OS meaning the OS sells & not because it had Intel inside, do yourself a favor & try to understand why Apple is such a tech monolith at this point in time!

Hint - it's not because of Intel powered Macbooks!

 

[CHADBOGA]

btw did you ever think that since the PC sector is declining the win8 adoption rate will be lower than Vista or can't you discern such a small thing ?

The reports took into account percentages, not raw numbers and even then, more PC's are being sold now than when Vista came out.

Can you discern such a big thing?

 

[Pheesh]

You realize Intel is a silicon company, right? If you don't think the performance and performance/W of their silicon contributes to the success of certain products you're beyond help.

 

[azazel1024]

Convenient for you to ignore that Intel said the majority of loss isn't from the selling price of the chips but from R&D costs of future products. Let's go check and see if you posted the same foolery when AMD was posting losses, shall we?

It takes a lot of money to break into new technology markets. But you know this.

R&D and they are also paying out a fair amount in subsidies it looks like. Its going to take 64-bit android drivers to really make a difference in mobile for them. Bay Trail-T is a pretty darned good chip, but right now it can't ship in Android products at all...leaving Intel with only a small slice of the phone and tablet Android market.

They have a big percentage of the Windows tablet market though...and though slow in growth, Windows tablets do seem to be getting a bigger market share as well as tablets becoming a bigger market too.

Cherry Trail-T has all the hallmarks of an awesome mobile processor when it drops.

That doesn't include the fact that Intel is still a bit out from Silvermont making it in to a phone chip.

I wouldn't give Intel years and years and years to make a dent in the phone and tablet market, but they do have real and GOOD shipping product that is slowly winning them market share and they have several products poised to release that might very well earn them a very large piece of the market in the coming year or three.

I am sure Intel is planning on mobile being a loss for them for at LEAST another year and possibly two or three. They can afford to take the long run look at it though.

 

[R0H1T]

You realize Intel is a silicon company, right? If you don't think the performance and performance/W of their silicon contributes to the success of certain products you're beyond help.

That number represents 10~20% of the overall electronics market based on Si not anymore IMO. Performance is a secondary factor in selling gadgets these days, sure some people think that Octa core SoC's are cool but they;ll buy a phone firstly based on their brand preference then OS & lastly based on the specs of the device, of course price matters as much but that's a separate issue cause basically you get what you pay for. Also I don't recall saying that performance doesn't matter but if you think that the Surface Pro 2, with an ARM SoC inside & a full blown win8 not RT, would've been a massive failure then you're being as delusional as everyone else who's blaming MS for the decline of the PC market.

I won't indulge with you or anyone else on this topic anymore, I strongly believe that portability & connectivity matter more than sheer performance in today's world of computing, you can disagree with me but Intel's financials paint a different picture than what you or most others want to see!

 

[R0H1T]

The reports took into account percentages, not raw numbers and even then, more PC's are being sold now than when Vista came out.

Can you discern such a big thing?

You think forcing corporates or the govt to upgrade their systems is such an easy task, in which case I should sell you a bridge :sneaky:

They only upgrade when they have to & since the 08 crash everyone is keeping their money just too close to their chest, another major factor you've conveniently ignored !

 

[CHADBOGA]

You think forcing corporates or the govt to upgrade their systems is such an easy task, in which case I should sell you a bridge :sneaky:

They only upgrade when they have to & since the 08 crash everyone is keeping their money just too close to their chest, another major factor you've conveniently ignored !

The upgraders have been demanding Win7, not Win8 be on their computers.

Microsoft have admitted they stuffed up with Win8 and have sacked high profile people over it, yet you keep insisting it is a smash success.

 

[Mushkins]

That number represents 10~20% of the overall electronics market based on Si not anymore IMO. Performance is a secondary factor in selling gadgets these days, sure some people think that Octa core SoC's are cool but they;ll buy a phone firstly based on their brand preference then OS & lastly based on the specs of the device, of course price matters as much but that's a separate issue cause basically you get what you pay for. Also I don't recall saying that performance doesn't matter but if you think that the Surface Pro 2, with an ARM SoC inside & a full blown win8 not RT, would've been a massive failure then you're being as delusional as everyone else who's blaming MS for the decline of the PC market.

I won't indulge with you or anyone else on this topic anymore, I strongly believe that portability & connectivity matter more than sheer performance in today's world of computing, you can disagree with me but Intel's financials paint a different picture than what you or most others want to see!

What? The Surface Pro 2 has a full on laptop i5 in it. The regular Surface is the one with the ARM SoC running Windows RT.

 

[R0H1T]

The upgraders have been demanding Win7, not Win8 be on their computers.

I never said they were, btw were corporates & govt lining up to install Vista after 06 ?

Microsoft have admitted they stuffed up with Win8 and have sacked high profile people over it, yet you keep insisting it is a smash success.

Compared to Vista & there are more metrics than just the sales numbers to prove this but since all you keep doing is LOL & posting the same 2 words over & over again I'll stop responding to your nonsensical comments :thumbsdown:

 

[R0H1T]

What? The Surface Pro 2 has a full on laptop i5 in it. The regular Surface is the one with the ARM SoC running Windows RT.

What I said was that the surface Pro 2 was a smashing success because (a) it had full blown windows on it (b) Intel inside was always a secondary factor. If one could get a full blown Windows desktop on an ARM powered SoC then that device would still fly off the shelves, provided it was priced right.