Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Mon 28th Jun 2010 23:01 UTC
Intel Intel has been working lately on "Atomising" the Android mobile OS in lieu of the upcoming Froyo (or 2.2) release so that it can be installed natively on x86 devices-- Atom-based netbooks in particular. Says Renee James, Senior VP for software and services at Intel: "Our expectation is that [native x86 Android] will be based on the Froyo release and will be available this summer to developers... [it] wasn't tremendously difficult, as we have a lot experience in Linux". The fun is supposed to arrive for developers this summer.
Thread beginning with comment 431862
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Laurence
by Laurence on Tue 29th Jun 2010 10:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Laurence"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

Well, ARM has overwhelming dominance in mobile/embedded market.


Which counts for nothing on the netbook market unless they can utilise the brands they've gained in the mobile space.

ARM should be perfect for netbooks but at the moment it's an x86 / Windows arena.

So I stand by my point that I think this a real shame for ARM. Particlarly as iPad-style tablets are the latest fad. I can see Intel stealing the market from ARM just like they did with netbooks.

Edited 2010-06-29 10:08 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Laurence
by vodoomoth on Tue 29th Jun 2010 11:27 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Laurence"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

So I stand by my point that I think this a real shame for ARM. Particlarly as iPad-style tablets are the latest fad. I can see Intel stealing the market from ARM just like they did with netbooks.


It's fine to stand by your point but your last sentence is off key.

Who can say "Intel stole the netbook market from ARM"? Netbooks are still laptops no matter what the marketing people said. Intel has always played in that field. Was ARM in the game? Had ARM initiated the netbook market or been one of its pioneer actors, maybe you could have said "it's a shame ARM didn't keep its market share". Even then, markets usually involve several competitors, not landlords and thieves.

As far as I know, ARM netbooks are not common. I still have to see one in my town here in France. An ARM laptop may exist but I haven't heard of it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Laurence
by Laurence on Tue 29th Jun 2010 11:54 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Laurence"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

It's fine to stand by your point but your last sentence is off key.

Who can say "Intel stole the netbook market from ARM"? Netbooks are still laptops no matter what the marketing people said. Intel has always played in that field. Was ARM in the game? Had ARM initiated the netbook market or been one of its pioneer actors, maybe you could have said "it's a shame ARM didn't keep its market share". Even then, markets usually involve several competitors, not landlords and thieves.


The reason why I said what i said was simply because ARM is perfect for netbooks: it's cheap, lower powered, moderately spec'ed and ultra-portable.

You stated that netbooks are essentially laptops, which is true in a broader sense of the term. But the reality is that the two devices perform very different roles. Netbooks were never intended to be "laptops" in the traditional sense, but rather a cheap hub for online services and an office suite. Where as laptops these days are as powerful as many desktops and are usually brought to perform desktop-type processing while offering portability.

So taking the above into account, there's no reason why ARM shouldn't have had more success.


That said, I do think that ARM wasn't entirely to blame. Some of the Linux distro's bundled were so poor that it put off many people and then when MS entered into the market, they had the money to subsidise Windows so much that it became doubly unattractive to run anything other than Windows XP on x86.

Now it's looking too late for ARM to recover as Intel already have optimised netbook CPUs out there to compete with ARM (where initially there was only the Celleron which was virtually no competition to ARM).

So while I don't entirely blame ARM for losing the netbook battle, they should still have had a much greater market share in that product line than they currently do.

As far as I know, ARM netbooks are not common. I still have to see one in my town here in France. An ARM laptop may exist but I haven't heard of it.

That's exactly my point though. They could have and should have been more common.
The netbook market is an ideal market space for ARM to flurrish, but it just felt like they were held back.

Edited 2010-06-29 11:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3