April 4, 2014 at 16:51Why is Intel betting on Google Chrome OS?
It turns out that some analysts precisely Chromebook sees new hope for the revival of the market the PC - see .: "Chromebook - a new hope of the PC market?" .
And Intel is already betting on Google Chrome OS , and is very happy about the appearance of 20 new chromebook models in 2014 on the Intel platform - see: “Intel promises the appearance of 20 chromebook models in 2014” !
And it becomes noticeable that the Wintel alliance is weakening, and Intel is trying to bet specifically on Google .
But Google is developing both of its OS: Google Chrome OS and Google Androidnot tied to any particular hardware platform. And today, for example, most tablets and smartphones with Google Android work on ARM chips - because they are cheaper and more energy efficient.
Gradually, ARM chips are already starting to appear in their performance, very close to Intel x86 notebook chips - see: “Analysis confirmed that the Apple A7 chip belongs to desktop processors . ” And this means that another year will pass and most of the Chromebooks will be made on new modern 64-bit ARM chips - Intel chips that are not inferior in power to them. Why on ARM chips, and not on Intel chips? Yes, everything is very simple - because ARM chips are cheaper and more energy efficient than Intel's!
That's exactly why I think that Intel’s bet on Google Chrome OS is pointless. Google will not force its hardware partners to choose Intel chips, and as soon as ARM chips competing in performance with Intel chips appear, the entire Chromobuk market will switch to cheap ARM chips (well, simply because they are cheap)!
But why should such a huge corporation like Intel pay attention to some cheap Chromebooks?
And all these Intel’s actions come from the fact that the old classic (familiar) Intel’s PC and x86 server market (which Intel almost monopolized) does not grow at all :(
This is easy to see if you carefully read the following articles:
* “В In 2013, the PC market showed new anti-records "(01.2014);
* “IDC predicts a bleak future for PC” (05.2013);
* “The server market is falling, the forecast is bleak” (05.2013).
And sometimes you have to read it very carefully, because analytic companies sometimes want to embellish the gloomy picture - well, for example, in these articles with joyful headlines:
* “World server shipments grew in the IV quarter of 2013 by 3.2% to 2.6 million” ( 02.2014) - " In monetary terms, the server market amounted to $ 13.66 billion in the fourth quarter of 2013, which is 6.6% less than a year earlier ..." ;
* “The global server market slowed down by 3.7%. The leaders of HP and IBM »(02.2014) - we read the section “SITUATION IN THE X86 SERVER MARKET”: “At the same time , there was no increase in quantitative terms , in relation to the 3rd quarter of 2012 about the same number of servers were sold in the world - about 2.2 million ...” .
But Intel doesn’t just need to sell a lot of processors, but also earn more money, and in monetary terms, the x86 server market continues to fall :(
As yet another evidence of the bleak present (and possibly future) x86 server market is that that IBM suddenly decided to sell its x86 server business - see: "IBM says goodbye to x86 servers, the entire line is sold to Lenovo . "
Most likely precisely because if a piece this market can still grow a little (and more often it just stands still), then in money terms it has been falling all the time for more than a year (and accordingly the margin has been falling in this market - well, it’s not profitable becomes for the manufacturer - only the Chinese can afford to work with such a low margin, and therefore with low quality).
Moreover, Intel’s shareholders always demand the growth of the company - this is the principle of capitalism: if the company does not grow - does not capture more and more new markets, then it makes no sense to invest in this company.
Intel has to look for new and not familiar markets for its chips with a shrinking classic PC market, such as the market: Khrombukov , Internet tablets, Smartphones , “Internet of Things” , etc.
Honestly, these are the markets of all small, cheap, mobile garbage - read the "gadgets" with a minimum margin - on which serious profit can be made only if you sell chips with 100 million or more copies! -What achieve these mobile markets in competition with cheaper ARM and MIPS -chipami oh how not easy - see .: «ARM Partners have put on the market more than 50 billion chips since 1991" .
PS: I'm interested in your opinion. What do you think about it?
And Intel is already betting on Google Chrome OS , and is very happy about the appearance of 20 new chromebook models in 2014 on the Intel platform - see: “Intel promises the appearance of 20 chromebook models in 2014” !
And it becomes noticeable that the Wintel alliance is weakening, and Intel is trying to bet specifically on Google .
But Google is developing both of its OS: Google Chrome OS and Google Androidnot tied to any particular hardware platform. And today, for example, most tablets and smartphones with Google Android work on ARM chips - because they are cheaper and more energy efficient.
Gradually, ARM chips are already starting to appear in their performance, very close to Intel x86 notebook chips - see: “Analysis confirmed that the Apple A7 chip belongs to desktop processors . ” And this means that another year will pass and most of the Chromebooks will be made on new modern 64-bit ARM chips - Intel chips that are not inferior in power to them. Why on ARM chips, and not on Intel chips? Yes, everything is very simple - because ARM chips are cheaper and more energy efficient than Intel's!
That's exactly why I think that Intel’s bet on Google Chrome OS is pointless. Google will not force its hardware partners to choose Intel chips, and as soon as ARM chips competing in performance with Intel chips appear, the entire Chromobuk market will switch to cheap ARM chips (well, simply because they are cheap)!
But why should such a huge corporation like Intel pay attention to some cheap Chromebooks?
And all these Intel’s actions come from the fact that the old classic (familiar) Intel’s PC and x86 server market (which Intel almost monopolized) does not grow at all :(
This is easy to see if you carefully read the following articles:
* “В In 2013, the PC market showed new anti-records "(01.2014);
* “IDC predicts a bleak future for PC” (05.2013);
* “The server market is falling, the forecast is bleak” (05.2013).
And sometimes you have to read it very carefully, because analytic companies sometimes want to embellish the gloomy picture - well, for example, in these articles with joyful headlines:
* “World server shipments grew in the IV quarter of 2013 by 3.2% to 2.6 million” ( 02.2014) - " In monetary terms, the server market amounted to $ 13.66 billion in the fourth quarter of 2013, which is 6.6% less than a year earlier ..." ;
* “The global server market slowed down by 3.7%. The leaders of HP and IBM »(02.2014) - we read the section “SITUATION IN THE X86 SERVER MARKET”: “At the same time , there was no increase in quantitative terms , in relation to the 3rd quarter of 2012 about the same number of servers were sold in the world - about 2.2 million ...” .
But Intel doesn’t just need to sell a lot of processors, but also earn more money, and in monetary terms, the x86 server market continues to fall :(
As yet another evidence of the bleak present (and possibly future) x86 server market is that that IBM suddenly decided to sell its x86 server business - see: "IBM says goodbye to x86 servers, the entire line is sold to Lenovo . "
Most likely precisely because if a piece this market can still grow a little (and more often it just stands still), then in money terms it has been falling all the time for more than a year (and accordingly the margin has been falling in this market - well, it’s not profitable becomes for the manufacturer - only the Chinese can afford to work with such a low margin, and therefore with low quality).
Moreover, Intel’s shareholders always demand the growth of the company - this is the principle of capitalism: if the company does not grow - does not capture more and more new markets, then it makes no sense to invest in this company.
Intel has to look for new and not familiar markets for its chips with a shrinking classic PC market, such as the market: Khrombukov , Internet tablets, Smartphones , “Internet of Things” , etc.
Honestly, these are the markets of all small, cheap, mobile garbage - read the "gadgets" with a minimum margin - on which serious profit can be made only if you sell chips with 100 million or more copies! -What achieve these mobile markets in competition with cheaper ARM and MIPS -chipami oh how not easy - see .: «ARM Partners have put on the market more than 50 billion chips since 1991" .
PS: I'm interested in your opinion. What do you think about it?