AMD, ARMH, INTC, NVDA | Stock Discussion Forums

SiliconInvestor

register

Technology Stocks | AMD, ARMH, INTC, NVDA

Previous 10 | Next 10

To: pgerassi who wrote (2777)	9/22/2011 11:00:05 AM
From: neolib	of 9730

The point remains that people are buying "underpowered" devices, because the compactness enables a mode of use which is not attainable with more conventional, better performing devices. This is what Intel, AMD, and MS failed to understand: Which performance metrics are really important. It turns out that quad or hex core 3GHz x86 is not actually what most consumer use benefits from, compared to whether it fits in your pocket, and this is the case for a very large fraction of what many people use "computing" for. Of course it doesn't work so well for running Excel, Word, CAD, etc. I'm just looking around at my extended family & friends and looking at how they use computers, and I can see the bulk of desktops/notebooks being used far less than smartphones/tablets. At work, the answer is "It depends". I don't think tablets will make much of a dent in CAD of most flavors, but for delivery (FedEx, UPS, etc), sales, and even professionals (MDs, social workers, etc) I can see iOS or Android mobile gadgets becoming the standard computing tool, at first with a desktop or notebook back on the desk, but as people become more comfortable and addicted to the mobile gadget, and as software evolves to enable more, that old style PC is going to accumulate more and more dust.

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

To: SonnyListon who wrote (2779)	9/22/2011 11:09:34 AM
From: neolib	of 9730

I'll agree in the sense that I think tablets, at least if restricted to larger sizes, will lose out to "smartphones". What is the difference between a tablet and smartphone, other than screen size? The convergence is between communication and computing. Neither your desktop or notebook have any chance of being a portable phone (not for technical but for ergonomic reasons), but your phone can become a portable computer (already has, that is what a smartphone/tablet is). If you think its a fad, you need to explain how mobile communication is a fad. I suppose its always possible people will decide they don't like all the constant chatter, and would rather only have access to communication and computing at fixed or designated locations, (kind of like smoke free zones have taken over), but I doubt it.

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

From: bit3	9/22/2011 11:23:33 AM
	of 9730

Gartner Trims Global Media Tablet Sales Forecast For Year Last update: 9/22/2011 10:33:07 AM DOW JONES NEWSWIRES Worldwide media tablet sales are set to total 63.6 million units this year, according to market-research firm Gartner Inc., a slight moderation from the level expected earlier this year. Still, tablet sales in 2011 look on track to far exceed sales of 17.6 million units recorded last year. Gartner in April forecast tablet sales of 69.8 million units for the year. Weighing down the sales forecast for the year, Gartner said, is sluggish sales of tablets with Google Inc.'s (GOOG) Android operating system. The firm estimates Android tablets are on pace to ship 11 million units, down from its April estimate of 13.9 million units. "So far, Android's appeal in the tablet market has been constrained by high prices, weak user interface and limited tablet applications," said Carolina Milanesi, research vice president at Gartner. Sales of Apple Inc.'s (AAPL) iPad, leading the market with an estimated 73% percent of worldwide media tablet sales this year, are expected to total 46.7 million units. Gartner expects tablet sales to continue on a strong pace through 2015, when sales are forecast to reach 326.3 million units. -By Mia Lamar, Dow Jones Newswires; online.wsj.com

Share	Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

To: neolib who wrote (2780)	9/22/2011 11:29:41 AM
From: SonnyListon	of 9730

Smartphones are a lot easier to handle than a tablet and of course they serve the purpose of being a phone. I was shocked when I picked up an iPad2 at how heavy it was, especially when people talk about how it could be a great book reader. I believe the Kindle is half the weight of the iPad2 and I doubt tablets like the XOOM are much lighter than an iPad2. I want Intel to sort out the Ultrabook concept. As it is, I am sorely tempted to get an 11" MacBook Air, but SB's 24fps bug makes it an unacceptable purchase. The 11" MacBook Air/Ultrabook would allow me to easily perch it on the side of a sofa arm or sit it on my lap whilst sitting upright in bed and at no time do I lose the functionality of a fully fledged PC.

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

To: SonnyListon who wrote (2783)	9/22/2011 12:10:05 PM
From: neolib	of 9730

Smartphones are a lot easier to handle than a tablet and of course they serve the purpose of being a phone. Which is all you need to know to realize that the smartphone end of the spectrum will win over the tablet end. IMHO, the defining size limit is that at which one appears foolish talking into it. If you don't look like a complete nerd using it as a phone, its OK. Anything bigger will lose in the end. allow me to easily perch it on the side of a sofa arm or sit it on my lap whilst sitting upright in bed and at no time do I lose the functionality of a fully fledged PC. But in all honesty, while using it on your sofa or in bed, what fraction of the time do you need a fully fledged PC (and make some allowance for how the software for mobile gadgets might evolve to deal with those situations). My answer is that other than for work, I very seldom need a full PC, but I do use 1) browsing, 2) phone, 3) music, 4) video, 5) camera when not at work. For video, I would like a larger screen, but a smartphone with DLP would work for that too, but perhaps less conveniently. If I can easily carrier it in a pocket, that will win.

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

To: SonnyListon who wrote (2774)	9/22/2011 1:11:48 PM
From: fastpathguru	of 9730

What information states that internal Microsoft people were expecting a lawsuit? You didn't provide any such information. And clearly I know much more about how this industry operates than you do. With your attempt at evasion over Microsoft's self-interest, by playing the OEM canard, how do you explain why Microsoft bothers to run television ads and other media ads if things were as you say? The answer is clearly because things are not as you say. A) The question of liability to consumer claims is directly discussed by no less than Intel's Paul Otellini (referenced) and MS's Will Poole and Bob Aoki on pages 17-18 of the following: blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com B) Microsoft was implicitly concerned with exposure to claims from mislead customers by controlling the messaging and crafting disclaimers of sufficient robustness to narrowly avoid exposure. (They were ultimately successful in crafting and defending this "fine print" strategy.) See page 53 (pdf page #) of the following for the email entitled "Vista Capable Disclaimer": i.i.com.com C) Regardless of who benefitted or benefitted more, there was only ONE reason why MS lowered the bar for "Vista Capable": The deficiencies in Intel's product line and schedule. Page 133 of above-linked exhibit-a for a taste: "We have removed the requirement for Vista Capable machines ... This was based on a huge concern raised by Intel regarding 945 chipset production supply and the fact that we wanted to get as many PCs as possible logo'd by the 4/1 REV date." For more fun reading, see also: blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com and a sampling from the media: msftextrememakeover.blogspot.com bloomberg.com informationweek.com m.zdnetasia.com pcmag.com news.cnet.com redgage.com blogs.computerworld.com fpg PS: I'd REALLY love to see what was on the five redacted pages directly following these email comments on page 69-70 of that exhibit-a: "MSFT felt that moving the date would put indirect OEMs (mainly AMD's customers) at a disadvantage vis-a-vis their direct competitors." "As you may recall - in the past few months, over 50% of the PCs sold thru the retailers in the US have AMD hardware (this excludes DELL, of course). We should not dismiss AMD in the retail space." (After which of course, MSFT indeed DID change the date, "based on a huge concern raised by Intel...") fpg

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

Previous 10 | Next 10

Copyright/IP Policy

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