Technology Stocks | Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Jim Mullens who wrote (108568)1/10/2012 9:42:46 PM
From: badger31 Recommendation   of 117536
 
sounds bad for TXN I guess. Q wasn't getting much (if any) of the MMI biz anyways.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Jim Mullens who wrote (108568)1/10/2012 9:43:39 PM
From: mindy19685 Recommendations   of 117536
 
I hope Intel and Sanjay are dismal failures!

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: pheilman_ who wrote (108569)1/10/2012 9:50:51 PM
From: Jim Mullens   of 117536
 
Pheilman, re: INCT v QCOM ...$/sq mm silicon........magnitudes higher ..............



Snip from a post earlier this month


Of the two sides, Intel probably has more to lose and less to gain, Amir said. Grabbing 10 percent of the market for mobile-phone chips wouldn’t be enough to add significant growth to Intel’s sales. Conversely, stronger competition in PCs, where it has more than 80 percent of the market, would hurt Intel’s high average selling prices, he said.

Intel’s processors can cost more than $4,000 each, with an average selling price of about $107, according to Mercury Research in Cave Creek, Arizona. That compares with an average selling price of less than $20 for the typical applications processor in a mobile phone.

Lazard’s Amir estimates that ARM-based processors will grab as much as a third of the market for mobile computers by 2015, up from 8 percent last year. The total market will grow to 340 million units in 2015 from 275 million in 2010, he predicts.

Faster Growth The smartphone market has even bigger growth prospects. It will reach 1.1 billion units by 2015, up from 300 million last year, Amir said. In that period, Intel will increase its share from zero to 13 percent, he estimates.

While phones and PCs are currently separate markets, new software and hardware may blur those distinctions. In the future, consumers and companies will have a wider variety of choices that don’t fit the traditional definitions, In-Stat’s McGregor said. It’s up to the chip companies to evolve.

The winners will most probably be companies that produce packages of chips that deliver Internet connections, graphics and processing, he said. For now, Qualcomm is in the lead.


Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: slacker711 who wrote (108554)1/10/2012 9:51:14 PM
From: waitwatchwander1 Recommendation   of 117536
 
Interesting comments from the Gizmodo site on CYMK (re: ur Mirasol PM). Back in the early 90's I played with an Indeo video board. It used a form of CMYK and I remember it was a pain in the butt with each video frame being contained within 3 separate frame buffers. I ended up building some software which performed OCR upon a TV cable channel which broadcast stock prices in real time over the day and a daily summary during the evening hours. I was fortunate enough to only need the luminescence frame in order to perform OCR via least squares pattern recognition.

Before the internet, I used this software and VCR tapes to capture stock prices on a daily basis. Around 1997, I got tired of that process and found an online stock data provider that I've been with ever since. With Google finance and all, it's kind of obsolete these days but I still collect and analysis the data on a fairly regular basis. I've fed the data into a neural network for pattern recognition on numerous occasions but not much has yet to come of those efforts. You may remember my interest in CUDA parallel computing and Tesla for those activities. I'll likely die before discovering anything great or wonderful in those efforts.

I'm not surprised by what we have seen with Mirasol over the last few months. With the departure of the Iridym founder, there are issues which should have been expected . I still think there is potential for the product but it is likely going to take the efforts of a new crew before one sees any significant movement away from that which is available today. That's one of the reasons I decide to take the Kyobo plunge now rather than wait for something newer to arrive upon our shores. Mirasol is a 2014 affair.

My immediate concern now turns towards the 8960, its applicability to tablet computing and its availability in sufficient volume to garner continued smartphone market share. If the 8960 is only a smartphone platform, we're going to be losing ground within the chipset market. Qualcomm Atheros should be additive on that front but likely not as additive as first envisioned. Those products are also likely still a year or so away. I hate to see another few years like that which we have just completed but that is where I'm at these days. I am only thankful that cdma/wcdma royalties have yet to plateau but once that happens watch out below. LTE today is where wcdma was is 2002.

I do find the idea of Snapdragon TV promising but that is even younger than Mirasol. It's also highly software dependent which appears to be becoming no ones forte. What we are seeing today on the intelligent TV front is nothing but a demo of what could be and only ??? knows how much of it is real and how much is nothing but virtual reality. I suspect much more of the later than the former. Win8 is also going to be late. I'm now almost positive of that matter. MDM, Gobi and embedded RF products are becoming our saviour.

There is lots of potential these days but it is now taking so much code to get anything into a practical and expandable vein that one just can't expect productive product being produced within a realistic time frame. It's almost as if another software revolution is need for us to get beyond today's coding barriers. Maybe that's the place to look for growth. Just some random thinking of no serious consequence.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: mindy1968 who wrote (108572)1/10/2012 9:58:44 PM
From: Jim Mullens3 Recommendations   of 117536
 
mindy, re: Sanjay / failures

He's already caught a couple of huge breaks moving to MOT w/ the spin-off bonus, then the GOOG buy, making him set for life. No doubt he was a tireless, dedicated worker for QCOM, but then again his Scorpion / Snapdragon project suffered significant delays under his watch. Would sure like to understand the full story here.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Jim Mullens who wrote (108570)1/10/2012 9:59:30 PM
From: slacker7111 Recommendation   of 117536
 
Yeah, that's why I'm wondering how it will perform against chips its actually going to compete with, namely Cortex A15 designs. The gap here is pretty big, but not insurmountable I think, and the A15 looks promising as well.

This is the big question. Does Krait provide a substantial jump versus current dual and even quad-core competitors?


One nice datapoint that has come out of CES is that Lenovo expects their Krait based tablet to be out in "early" Q2.


Slacker

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (108551)1/10/2012 10:00:49 PM
From: neolib5 Recommendations   of 117536
 
If you have more specific ideas, I'm sure we'd all like to hear them.

OEM's who use Qualcomm devices are selecting from an ecosystem of many suppliers, including the ability, like Apple or Samsung, to customize their own SOCs if they so desire. There is a level of compatibility, and engineering design expertise that is common to this ecosystem. The multiple vendors (even though the SOC's might be unique) assures competitive pricing. Just look at how Apple is looking at TSMC vs Samsung.

Intel will be unique (aside perhaps from some competition from AMD) in offering a non-compatible ecosystem of x86. They have a very long history of wanting high prices for their solutions, because they have effectively had monopoly power. Why would OEM's choose Intel solutions given such a history? The issues are more business than technical. Intel (and all the ARM players as well) are going to suffer very rapidly the same problem that has hit the PC business: Chip performance has largely outstripped user needs due to lack of software innovation. The mobile sector brought exactly this sort of software innovation, but starting on hardware with significantly lower performance than current PC CPUs. The early smartphone and tablet SOCs would not have any value in the PC sector because their absolute performance was so low. But the software was tailored to that, and enabled innovative user capabilities despite the lower absolute hardware performance. The rate of innovation in the ARM SOC world is progressing much more quickly than even the x86 rate, and as we get faster and more cores in ARM SOCs they will also get to the point quite quickly where the average user experience on mobile gadgets is no longer benefiting from the increased performance, UNLESS compelling software can help things out.

Fundamentally, innovation in mobile gadgets is being done by Apple and Google and all the apps developers, not so much by the CPU designers. Intel was used to the PC sector where Dell, HP, etc, didn't do much in the way of innovation anymore, having ceded that to Intel. Intel was happy with that in the PC space. Look at Intel's PC CPU margins vs its OEM partners margins in the consumer PC space, then think of Apple's margins in the consumer section.

Even Intel's copying of Macbook Airs is designed primarily to keep Intel's margins high, it won't help its OEM partners much, especially since Intel has held the line at wacking the CPU prices in Ultrabooks and instead left it to the OEM's to squeeze the price lower to attract customers. Its good for Intel, but nobody else.

OEM's who are awake can ask themselves what the business model with Intel predicts for them. Will it result in them getting Apple's margins, or will it simply give Intel good margins and leave them with what??

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Jim Mullens who wrote (108575)1/10/2012 10:22:47 PM
From: waitwatchwander   of 117536
 
Maybe it's a GooTel Affair?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: slacker711 who wrote (108511)1/10/2012 10:48:02 PM
From: Jim Mullens   of 117536
 
Slacker, re: Lenovo SmartTV / Snapdragon enabled. MPQ8064 v 8060

“To be kind, the Qualcomm press release is badly written.”

Well, it had me fooled !!! I don’t feel too bad… it also caught Jeffrey….. “to be kind” .. badly written / clever / misleading????

The only specific chipset mentioned in the PR is the S4 MPQ8064 (quad-core), but that was in a standalone paragraph. The next paragraph simply stating that the first Snapdragon Smart TV will be launched by Lenovo, with no mention of a specific chipset powering such.

Not being kind, the PR was misleading when there was no reason for such trickery.

Snip>>

Snapdragon processors will power the next wave of enhanced smart TV experiences — including leading audio/video capabilities, pure web browsing and more robust apps — delivering on Qualcomm's commitment of keeping consumers continuously connected to their favorite devices, content and apps. The Snapdragon S4 MPQ8064 processor features a 1.5GHz quad-core CPU—based on Qualcomm's Krait micro-architecture—Adreno™ 320 graphics and advanced audio/video capabilities, delivering mobile users the highest performing mobile experience while consuming less power.


The first Snapdragon powered smart TV, which is being launched by LENOVO, combines Qualcomm's mobile expertise and Lenovo's computing/CE expertise to enable the world's first smart TV running on the Android 4.0 operating system




http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/qualcomm-expands-snapdragon-family-with-introduction-of-processors-for-smart-tvs-and-digital-media-adapters-137002688.html

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Jim Mullens who wrote (108579)1/11/2012 12:13:29 AM
From: slacker711   of 117536
 
Not being kind, the PR was misleading when there was no reason for such trickery.


That would definitely be the other interpretation. I agree though that there would be zero reason for it (Lenovo had already announced the real processor) so I'll stick with giving them the benefit of the doubt.


Slacker

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.