Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 10th Dec 2005 17:07 UTC
Intel Intel's chairman chided plans by rival AMD and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to build a $100 laptop for the developing world. At a press conference in Sri Lanka on Friday, Craig Barrett said that potential computer users would scoff at the computer's lack of features. Barrett also said the device isn't worthy of being called a laptop. "I think a more realistic title should be 'the $100 gadget'," he mused. "The problem is that gadgets have not been successful."
Order by: Score:
Jealous
by Tom K on Sat 10th Dec 2005 17:55 UTC
Tom K
Member since:
2005-07-06

Intel's just jealous that they didn't score the CPU contract for it. I'm sure that poor kids in under-developed countries are going to be disappointed at the fact that the laptop is missing Firewire, IR sensors, or maybe Gigabit Ethernet ports.

What a total dunce.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Jealous
by DevL on Sun 11th Dec 2005 02:15 UTC in reply to "Jealous"
DevL Member since:
2005-07-06

Indeed. And if average Joe gets to know that a 500 MHz CPU can be useful these days, why would he need to buy the latest and greatest from Intel? No surprises in this article.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Jealous
by Soulbender on Mon 12th Dec 2005 05:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Jealous"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"No surprises in this article."

Actually, I found it surprising. Not that Intel is jealous because that's no surprise but the fact that Barret didnt understand what a PR nightmare he has created for Intel by publicly showing what an arrogant a$$hole he is. Picking on a project that aims to provide computers for the less fortunate ( you know, the ones that dont get to be chairman of Intel and dont get to jetset around the world) is incredibly low. He could have scored Intel massive goodwill by supporting it but I guess he dont have the smarts for that.

Edited 2005-12-12 05:22

Reply Score: 2

RE: Jealous
by Soulbender on Mon 12th Dec 2005 04:42 UTC in reply to "Jealous"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

For once I find myself in agreement with Linux is Poo.
Good job making yourself and your company look like a bunch of total jealous a$$holes Mr Barret.

Reply Score: 1

Sour grapes
by john on Sat 10th Dec 2005 18:22 UTC
john
Member since:
2005-11-10

If the new "gadgets" had an "Intel Inside" logo on it, he would be singing the praises of it.

I'm glad someone is trying to bring computing to people who could not otherwise afford it.

Since you can't expect people to give the hardware away, the only other option is to find ways to bring the cost down to a range that is affordable. Maybe the machines won't be powerhouses with every feature, but it's a start.

I use AMD and Linux, and I'm happy. I'm sure the recipients of these new laptops will be too. :-)

John

Reply Score: 5

RE: Sour grapes
by DigitalAxis on Sat 10th Dec 2005 19:23 UTC in reply to "Sour grapes"
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

I suspect you're right, but on the other hand you could read this as the reason WHY Intel didn't try to be a part of the project...

Reply Score: 1

Doesn't get it...
by Anonymous on Sat 10th Dec 2005 18:24 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

"potential users would scoff at the lack of features".

Yes... because when you live in Ethiopia and have never used a computer before, you're going to complain that you don't have DX9 compliant graphics.

It's now clear why Intel is losing the technology war to AMD.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Doesn't get it...
by DigitalAxis on Sat 10th Dec 2005 19:28 UTC in reply to "Doesn't get it..."
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

I don't think this has anything to do with a technology war, I think this has more to do with a marketshare war.
Intel might indeed have better technology, but AMD will get massive volume.
AMD stands to make tremendous profit off of this: all the orders for AMD Geode processors will require new fabs SOMEONE will have to pay for, new fabs will allow them to make lots more chips, and that removes Intel's chip-supplying advantage... then there's the tremendous PR boost should they succeed, even if (as I assume) AMD only makes minimal profit off the actual manufacture of the chips.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Doesn't get it...
by Anonymous on Sun 11th Dec 2005 07:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Doesn't get it..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

I don't think Intel has better technology at all. Itanium chips suck, and AMD kicks their butt in price and performance when you compare the newest offerings from both companies.

On another note, there are files in every Windows CD that are built and optimized not by Microsoft, but by Intel. The main goal and strategy behind the creation of these file is to make Windows perform better on Intel chips than AMD chips. That isn't better technology. That is cheating.

This is why AMD chips always seemed slower when you ran Windows, but faster when you ran Linux or one of the BSDs.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Doesn't get it...
by Anonymous on Sun 11th Dec 2005 22:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Doesn't get it..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

I'm not an Intel fan by any measure but ... cheating? Oh jesus. Optimization is not cheating by any measure. Intel produces compilers tuned for its products. I suppose that is cheating too? Come on, man, think before you post.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Doesn't get it...
by haugland on Mon 12th Dec 2005 13:12 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Doesn't get it..."
haugland Member since:
2005-07-07

I might even be the other way around. Intel is apparantly losing a lot of benchmarks because the developers do not enable optimizing for speed?

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1895906,00.asp

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Doesn't get it...
by Anonymous on Mon 12th Dec 2005 14:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Doesn't get it..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

This is CHEATING!

http://www.swallowtail.org/naughty-intel.html

Thats how they optimize... if you find that fair optimization on part of intel, I fear you need some brain...

And theres more... but many will never know...

-iMoron

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Doesn't get it...
by OMRebel on Mon 12th Dec 2005 15:34 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Doesn't get it..."
OMRebel Member since:
2005-11-14

Wrong. They have code that checks to see what processor is being used. If it returns from the check that it's Intel, it runs optimized code that would run just as well on AMD as it does Intel. If it doesn't return Intel, then it runs a different set of instructions that is slower.

Perhaps you're the one that needs to actually think before you post such rhetoric.

Reply Score: 1

Agreed
by thebackwash on Sat 10th Dec 2005 18:27 UTC
thebackwash
Member since:
2005-07-06

This is pure marketspeak. Intel is jealous that it didn't win the contract, and now it wants to have an influence on the language that surrounds the device. That is pretty much all it can do. It can't attack this thing on any other grounds. You'd think Intel would say, "we hope to reach an agreement in the future where Intel can spearhead enabling the adoption of computer technology in the third world," or at least tacitly applaud the efforts of those who do so, while continuing to offer solutions that don't compete with this laptop initiative. Phooey on you, Intel.

Reply Score: 5

Anonymous
Member since:
---

The Latest "Must Have" Gadgets for the College-Bound Student
http://www.intel.com/personal/resources/five_must_haves.htm

oh whoops

Reply Score: 0

it's called chartity!
by Anonymous on Sat 10th Dec 2005 18:50 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

What a moron. This computer (yes computer that's what it is) was designed for people in our self created 3rd world countries, that is, computers for the rich elite's neglected.
It is an effort to get some sort of computer in there schools to keep the kids up to date and perhaps provide them with a few tools to possibly help lift themselves up since world Government(s) won't spend a cent where there is no profit for them.

Then you get some dork from high up in Intel's little corporate web who comes out and says it's laughable because of the lack of features.

Well if it is so limited buddy, why not fork out some doe and produce a low cost computer for the 3rd world neglected yourselves.
I bet if they did strings would most certainly be attatched. That's why MIT turned down a free offer of OSX for this thing!

Screw corrupt and greedy corportations, screw there use and abuse of human beings to promote there own personal self gain, and screw the heads that run them...

...not to mention all the people that mindlessly let jerks like that have power.

Reply Score: 2

doing a woz?
by Kroc on Sat 10th Dec 2005 18:53 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Bitter? Noooooo...

Reply Score: 1

Sad..sad
by jaypee on Sat 10th Dec 2005 19:17 UTC
jaypee
Member since:
2005-07-28

Sometimes, it's better to just say nothing than to speak and expose yourself to being an a$$. Quite simply, the cost of parts is a huge factor when buildin a $100 computer. I'm fairly certain that due diligence was done to determine which chip-maker could reach their cost threshold and AMD was chosen based on that concern.

Also, to knock a group that's trying to bring technology at low costs to other parts of the world that may not otherwise get it, strikes me as low-class.

Reply Score: 4

Anonymous
Member since:
---

He lives in a world where he doesn't starve, doesn't have to scratch for pennies a week, doesn't thirst for plain, old water.

In his world, there is no reason for a $100 computer or gadget because he would never use one or have his children use one.

Remove the success from his life and he might quickly see the need.

--bousozoku

Reply Score: 4

I love my intel gadget :)
by Anonymous on Sat 10th Dec 2005 19:48 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

From a similar article on Yahoo News:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051209/tc_nm/technology_intel_dc

"We work in the are of low cost affordable PCs, but full function PCs," he said. "Not handheld devices and not gadgets."

Which is odd -- I have this wonderful gadget handheld PC/phone (Siemens SX-66) running an Intel Xscale chip. I guess my next PDA will have to run an ARM chip or something.

Reply Score: 0

RE: I love my intel gadget :)
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 10th Dec 2005 21:37 UTC in reply to "I love my intel gadget :)"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Which is odd -- I have this wonderful gadget handheld PC/phone (Siemens SX-66) running an Intel Xscale chip. I guess my next PDA will have to run an ARM chip or something.

Xscale *is* ARM.

Reply Score: 5

Soooooo
by Emerson on Sat 10th Dec 2005 20:44 UTC
Emerson
Member since:
2005-09-19

"Let them eat cake", eh?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Soooooo
by jaypee on Sat 10th Dec 2005 23:41 UTC in reply to "Soooooo"
jaypee Member since:
2005-07-28

"Let them eat cake", eh?

Basically...

Reply Score: 1

Bad Move by Intel
by asupcb on Sat 10th Dec 2005 20:57 UTC
asupcb
Member since:
2005-11-10

This move by Intel is totally ignorant on their part. They should have just kept quiet or even offered to give them Xscale chips at reduced cost. It is no wonder that Intel's stock is down and AMD's is up.

Reply Score: 1

Just suprised
by Anonymous on Sat 10th Dec 2005 21:13 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

We havn't got someone from MS saying how useless they are because they're not running a Feature Rich Microsoft OS on it...

Reply Score: 0

"He would do wouldn't he'
by chemical_scum on Sat 10th Dec 2005 21:15 UTC
chemical_scum
Member since:
2005-11-02

Said Mandy Rice-Davies during the Profumo scandal in Britain for those old enough and English enough to remember.

Reply Score: 1

RE: "He would do wouldn't he'
by Anonymous on Sat 10th Dec 2005 21:40 UTC in reply to ""He would do wouldn't he'"
Anonymous Member since:
---

"He would say that wouldn't he?"

Reply Score: 0

Heat
by hhcv on Sat 10th Dec 2005 22:06 UTC
hhcv
Member since:
2005-11-12

You'll probably find that Africa has enough heat - why add to it with intel cpus?

Reply Score: 2

AMD beat intel compalancy
by Anonymous on Sun 11th Dec 2005 03:27 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

intel got complacent, and so AMD beat it many times. from 64bit cmputing to the current fastest and lowest-cooking CPUs, opteron in Suns, not xeons.

i think Intel needs to get humble or it will go down.

Reply Score: 0

If the president if Intel said it...
by ITPro on Sun 11th Dec 2005 23:01 UTC
ITPro
Member since:
2005-07-10

...then it must be so.

No doubt he would approve of the $100 laptop if it used Centrino, had a 15.4" wide-screen, full-color display, and etc... But wait a minute... Oh, yeah... then it wouldn't be a $100 laptop anymore, would it? Call it a "gadget" if it please you, but whereas the intended beneficiaries might actually get the $100 "gadget," few of them, given the current state of affairs, will ever get a "full-function" laptop.

Ironically, not long ago in this forum there was a thread entitled "Breathing New Life Into Old Computers Using GEOS" (http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=11620) about a company called Breadbox Computer Company LLC which has recycled GEOS into the basis of a product intended to be "a Low-cost Technology Solution for Your School Using Breadbox Software." The idea is to provide a low-cost, low resource intensity software suite usable on older technology machinery, a concept somewhat similar to the $100 laptop.

Needless to say, there are those who think that GEOS would be so much better if only it were Windows, but others had their own ideas about a low-cost solution to educational needs. In that discussion, I quipped that I was the inventor of a new technology called RRICE (Reduced Resource Intensity Computing), but the salient portion of my remarks had to do with "third world countries where so many people are cash poor and their primary asset is their own labor." I observed that "Necessity and need unite to help drive inventiveness with remarkable results; just consider all those old automobiles still operating daily in Cuba," but this isn't about how clever I am. The point is that the cash poor folks of the third world probably can and will get a lot of mileage out of the $100 "gadget," if they ever get one.

Reply Score: 1

Agreed
by Anonymous on Mon 12th Dec 2005 07:34 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Yes I agreed the most, do you want a $300 Mercedes Benz?

Reply Score: 0

$100 Gadget
by Anonymous on Wed 14th Dec 2005 23:07 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

People in general are very ignorant of what compueters can do. Imagine the Xmas 2005 shopper with the $300 Walmart laptop trying to load Doom 3. Laughable, but there will be some who will try. People buy to a price-point in this country, not to a set of needs.

Many chipmakers HATE long-run chip mfg. Year on year cost reductions, etc drive margin out of the product and you are producing the equivalent of a model T while doing Ferraris at other fabs.

This is NOT a big win on AMD's part other than the humanitarian goodwill it will generate.

But enthusiasts beware, if the mass market for new machines with latest/greatest dries up, enthusiasts will not continue to get the benefits of Moore's law either.

I think the Intel spokesman's comments on their face are crass, but I think he was talking to the domestic marketplace. WE shouldn't expect $100 laptops, unless we want 386's and grayscale screens. Anyone want to go back?

Reply Score: 0