Intel's "Atom" processors
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Robert Green on April 4, 2008, 10:10 am
Please log in for more thread options schools Wednesday, adding bigger screens and more data storage capacity as the chip maker ratchets up its rivalry with the One Laptop per Child organization, which sells a competing machine.>>
(Isn't *real* competition a wonderful thing! It's pretty preposterous that with all the economies of technology and scale that a current laptop still costs $600-$1500 and much more when software is considered.) <<Intel executives also rolled out five new processors under the ''Atom'' brand name. The chips are designed for pocket-size Internet devices. The chips come in speeds up to 1.86 gigahertz while using less than 3 watts of power . . . Intel said it has sold "tens of thousands" of the machines but declined to provide more specific data. Intel and OLPC have feuded furiously over their competing products. The Cambridge, Mass.-based nonprofit OLPC says it has sold hundreds of thousands of its $188 machines. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology spinoff's low-cost XO laptop includes a microprocessor from Advanced Micro Devices Inc., the world's No. 2 microprocessor maker behind Intel.>>
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=108&sid=1379123 -- Bobby G. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Bill Kearney on April 4, 2008, 5:32 pm
Please log in for more thread options > (Isn't *real* competition a wonderful thing!
Feh, real competition would've been Digital actually marketing and supportig the StrongARM. Instead they tanked, Intel bought it and pretty much treated it like a red-headed-stepchild. Now they're trying to foist x86 crap on the mobile market? No thanks. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Robert Green on April 4, 2008, 7:57 pm
Please log in for more thread options > > (Isn't *real* competition a wonderful thing!
>
supportig
> Feh, real competition would've been Digital actually marketing and > the StrongARM. Instead they tanked, Intel bought it and pretty much
treated
> it like a red-headed-stepchild. Now they're trying to foist x86 crap on
the
> mobile market? No thanks.
Even though the subject was the "Atom" the real focus was on the war between Intel's efforts at laptops for schoolchildren and the One Laptop per Child organization's much cheaper (and apparently more capable) machines. At least Intel is finally off the "every new CPU chip generation has to run faster, hotter and consume considerably more power than the last one" pathway. The new chips only draw 3 watts, but in a few years, that will seem as ridiculous as giant Zalman-type copper fin coolers. The x86 world is alive and well, or so thought Apple when it finally crossed over, so I wouldn't write it off just yet. Lots and lots of software tools, tested, tried and true. That tends to keep the old stuff in play for quite a while. -- Bobby G. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Bill Kearney on April 5, 2008, 7:43 pm
Please log in for more thread options > The new chips only draw 3 watts
Are claimed to draw that, but it's unclear at what level of 'performance' is indicated. More marketing lies from Intel. > Lots and lots of software tools, tested, tried and true.
Not in the mobile and device markets. Do some reading, ARM leads that sector by a CONSIDERABLE margin. With quite a lot of tools and software supporting it. > That tends to keep the old stuff in play for quite a while.
Portable, yet still crap is worthless. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Intel's "Atom" processors | April 4, 2008, 10:10 am |
| Panasonic Reveals Atom-based Toughbook UMPC, Mini-notebooks Shrug | June 26, 2008, 5:44 pm |