By: Paul (no.delete@this.thanks.com), September 20, 2009 2:30 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
? (0xe2.0x9a.0x9b@gmail.com) on 9/19/09 wrote:
---------------------------
>In addition, the competing company would need a non-trivial amount of money for advertising.
Which the people who would actually make such things, i.e. ARM partners and their customers, do have.
>I think you pointed to the basic problem that is here: the software side. I cannot
>imagine how it would be possible to fully explain to the *masses* that they cannot
>run Word/Excel/VisualStudio/games/etc on an ARM netbook.
So what? They understand that they don't run on something like an iPhone or a N900. Have you ever seen a non techie use a netbook? They use it as a terminal and mostly run a web browser on it. The key is not to market the device as a computer.
Also 1% of a very big market is not to be sniffed at. For example Apple has ~1% of the phone market in most countries it's operating in and shipped ~7 million units last quarter. The current Netbook market is smaller but it's still quite large.
Microsoft have been very successfully in instilling in everyone's mind that a Netbook is just a reduced sized laptop and must run Windows regardless of if the user actually needs to run anything Windows specific.
However if you look at Windows 7 the bottom two SKUs are so crippled that you have to go up to "Home Premium" before you even get such things as multitouch. This adds a large amount to the cost of the unit making it unattractive to the target market.
>facts, what would be your estimate of the potential market share of an x86-INcompatible processor?
Much bigger.
Firstly the companies involved are larger and sounder financially than both AMD and VIA and secondly they aren't in the the x86 market so don't have to pad around trying not to annoy Intel and living with the constant risk of Intel trying to stop them producing x86 chips at all.
Secondly the Nano isn't competitive in terms of power, it has a TDP of 5W for the least hungry Nano U2300.
>The bottom line: Anybody who thinks that [ARM will have more than 1% market share
>1 year after the introduction of the first ARM Cortex-A9 netbook] is insane!
We'll see. Predicting the future is hard and some kinds of insanity are catching.
---------------------------
>In addition, the competing company would need a non-trivial amount of money for advertising.
Which the people who would actually make such things, i.e. ARM partners and their customers, do have.
>I think you pointed to the basic problem that is here: the software side. I cannot
>imagine how it would be possible to fully explain to the *masses* that they cannot
>run Word/Excel/VisualStudio/games/etc on an ARM netbook.
So what? They understand that they don't run on something like an iPhone or a N900. Have you ever seen a non techie use a netbook? They use it as a terminal and mostly run a web browser on it. The key is not to market the device as a computer.
Also 1% of a very big market is not to be sniffed at. For example Apple has ~1% of the phone market in most countries it's operating in and shipped ~7 million units last quarter. The current Netbook market is smaller but it's still quite large.
Microsoft have been very successfully in instilling in everyone's mind that a Netbook is just a reduced sized laptop and must run Windows regardless of if the user actually needs to run anything Windows specific.
However if you look at Windows 7 the bottom two SKUs are so crippled that you have to go up to "Home Premium" before you even get such things as multitouch. This adds a large amount to the cost of the unit making it unattractive to the target market.
>facts, what would be your estimate of the potential market share of an x86-INcompatible processor?
Much bigger.
Firstly the companies involved are larger and sounder financially than both AMD and VIA and secondly they aren't in the the x86 market so don't have to pad around trying not to annoy Intel and living with the constant risk of Intel trying to stop them producing x86 chips at all.
Secondly the Nano isn't competitive in terms of power, it has a TDP of 5W for the least hungry Nano U2300.
>The bottom line: Anybody who thinks that [ARM will have more than 1% market share
>1 year after the introduction of the first ARM Cortex-A9 netbook] is insane!
We'll see. Predicting the future is hard and some kinds of insanity are catching.
Topic | Posted By | Date |
---|---|---|
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Wilco | 2009/09/16 11:00 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/16 03:51 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Potatoswatter | 2009/09/16 04:12 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Megol | 2009/09/16 04:21 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Wilco | 2009/09/18 01:13 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Megol | 2009/09/18 11:54 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | someone | 2009/09/16 06:01 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Seni | 2009/09/16 06:41 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | someone | 2009/09/16 07:32 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | anon | 2009/09/16 08:58 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | David Kanter | 2009/09/17 04:53 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | someone | 2009/09/17 06:10 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | David Kanter | 2009/09/17 03:02 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | anon | 2009/09/20 05:34 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Seni | 2009/09/17 02:05 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Wilco | 2009/09/17 03:29 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Seni | 2009/09/17 03:53 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Wilco | 2009/09/17 11:31 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | David Kanter | 2009/09/18 04:17 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Jouni Osmala | 2009/09/16 09:40 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Martin Høyer Kristiansen | 2009/09/17 01:15 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Wilco | 2009/09/18 01:56 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Jouni Osmala | 2009/09/18 04:46 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Michael S | 2009/09/18 06:22 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Wilco | 2009/09/18 11:36 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | rcf | 2009/09/19 08:49 AM |
The other sides of the coin | ? | 2009/09/19 11:09 AM |
The other sides of the coin | Paul | 2009/09/20 02:30 AM |
The other sides of the coin | Jukka Larja | 2009/09/20 10:20 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | AM | 2009/09/19 03:41 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Michael S | 2009/09/18 05:15 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Michael S | 2009/09/18 05:48 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Wilco | 2009/09/18 01:15 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Michael S | 2009/09/20 09:00 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Linus Torvalds | 2009/09/20 09:59 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Michael S | 2009/09/20 10:42 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Linus Torvalds | 2009/09/20 02:19 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Michael S | 2009/09/20 03:12 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | anonymous | 2009/09/20 04:58 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Michael S | 2009/09/21 02:49 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Wilco | 2009/09/21 03:38 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Linus Torvalds | 2009/09/21 07:05 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | none | 2009/09/21 07:10 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Linus Torvalds | 2009/09/21 08:24 AM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | IntelUser2000 | 2009/09/21 06:59 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | Linus Torvalds | 2009/09/21 07:15 PM |
Atom-based Octane III | David Wragg | 2009/09/22 04:11 AM |
Atom-based Octane III | Arun Ramakrishnan | 2009/09/22 10:02 PM |
Many Atoms -> Molecule ? :-) (NT) | Anon4 | 2009/09/23 03:49 AM |
Many Atoms -> Molecule ? :-) (NT) | Arun Ramakrishnan | 2009/09/23 04:11 AM |
Scalar DFlops/Hz | Michael S | 2009/09/20 12:00 PM |
Scalar DFlops/Hz | Wilco | 2009/09/20 12:45 PM |
VMLA.f64 | Michael S | 2009/09/20 01:46 PM |
VMLA.f64 | Paul | 2009/09/20 02:16 PM |
VMLA.f64 | Wilco | 2009/09/20 04:45 PM |
ARM announces 2GHz netbook CPU | David Kanter | 2009/09/18 04:19 PM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | slacker | 2009/09/17 12:05 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | slacker | 2009/09/17 12:21 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Wilco | 2009/09/17 02:10 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | xxx | 2009/09/17 02:31 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Wilco | 2009/09/17 03:04 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Hello | 2009/09/21 06:47 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | none | 2009/09/21 09:04 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Wilco | 2009/09/21 02:12 PM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Hello | 2009/09/22 02:46 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | 2009/09/17 02:24 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | slacker | 2009/09/17 04:28 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | 2009/09/17 05:23 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | rcf | 2009/09/17 06:58 AM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Cooper | 2009/09/17 03:33 PM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | anon | 2009/09/17 05:32 PM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | anon | 2009/09/17 10:50 PM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Howard Chu | 2009/09/17 08:48 PM |
Who wants an ARM netbook? | Foo_ | 2009/09/21 03:44 AM |
ARM for server | KISS | 2009/09/17 06:13 AM |
ARM for server | Linus Torvalds | 2009/09/17 06:57 AM |
ARM for server | Adrian | 2009/09/17 08:04 AM |
ARM for server | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/17 08:19 AM |
ARM for server | Adrian | 2009/09/17 08:49 AM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | KISS | 2009/09/17 09:08 AM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | anon | 2009/09/17 09:44 AM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/17 11:00 AM |
article about google server | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/17 11:04 AM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | anon | 2009/09/17 11:28 AM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/17 11:47 AM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | anon | 2009/09/17 10:31 PM |
Networking | David Kanter | 2009/09/18 05:13 PM |
Networking | Wilco | 2009/09/19 01:35 AM |
Networking | Paul | 2009/09/19 05:47 AM |
Networking | anon | 2009/09/19 06:03 AM |
Networking | David Kanter | 2009/09/19 02:04 PM |
Networking | Wilco | 2009/09/19 03:15 PM |
Networking | David Kanter | 2009/09/19 03:37 PM |
Networking | Wilco | 2009/09/20 05:11 AM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | a reader | 2009/09/17 01:28 PM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | A. No. Nymous | 2009/09/24 04:48 PM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | Howard Chu | 2009/09/24 10:19 PM |
Let's talk about an ARM-inside big machine | KISS | 2009/09/26 12:06 AM |
Screen resolutions | Rob Thorpe | 2009/09/18 10:09 AM |
Screen resolutions | Howard Chu | 2009/09/18 12:32 PM |
ARM for server | Groo | 2009/09/17 12:15 PM |
ARM for server | Richard Stacpoole | 2009/09/17 02:49 PM |
ARM for server | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/17 06:35 PM |
ARM for server | Richard Stacpoole | 2009/09/17 09:21 PM |
ARM for server | Linus Torvalds | 2009/09/18 06:33 AM |
ARM for server | Michael S | 2009/09/18 07:15 AM |
ARM for server | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/18 07:56 AM |
ARM for server | slacker | 2009/09/18 03:50 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/18 04:27 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | slacker | 2009/09/18 05:42 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/18 06:06 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Howard Chu | 2009/09/18 06:14 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/18 07:33 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Howard Chu | 2009/09/18 09:31 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Anin | 2009/09/19 10:28 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Megol | 2009/09/22 06:58 AM |
causes of mechanical stress | slacker | 2009/09/18 08:13 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/18 08:52 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | David Kanter | 2009/09/18 10:31 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Ungo | 2009/09/22 04:34 PM |
causes of mechanical stress | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/23 10:00 AM |
causes of mechanical stress | Linus Torvalds | 2009/09/19 08:44 AM |
causes of mechanical stress | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/19 11:24 AM |
causes of mechanical stress | slacker | 2009/09/19 04:33 PM |
anecdotal lack of reliability of Macs | kdg | 2009/09/21 12:08 PM |
anecdotal lack of reliability of Macs | anon | 2009/09/22 09:30 AM |
anecdotal lack of reliability of Macs | kdg | 2009/09/22 11:33 AM |
ARM for server | Anon | 2009/09/18 07:35 PM |
ARM for server | anon | 2009/09/18 08:20 PM |
ARM for server | RagingDragon | 2009/09/19 12:33 PM |
ARM for server | anon | 2009/09/20 11:29 AM |
ARM for server | Anon | 2009/09/19 02:29 PM |
ARM for server | anon | 2009/09/20 11:24 AM |
ARM for server | RagingDragon | 2009/09/20 02:16 PM |
[O.T.] "carbon steel" | Michael S | 2009/09/20 03:45 PM |
[O.T.] "carbon steel" | slacker | 2009/09/20 05:04 PM |
[O.T.] "carbon steel" | RagingDragon | 2009/09/21 09:42 PM |
[O.T.] "carbon steel" | Michael S | 2009/09/22 12:36 AM |
ARM for server | Anon | 2009/09/20 06:52 PM |
ARM for server | anon | 2009/09/26 07:56 AM |
ARM for server | Ungo | 2009/09/22 04:25 PM |
ARM for server | RagingDragon | 2009/09/23 11:13 AM |
ARM for server | Carlie Coats | 2009/09/24 09:28 AM |
ARM for server | slacker | 2009/09/18 08:24 PM |
ARM for server | Richard Stacpoole | 2009/09/18 05:34 PM |
ARM for server | Jukka Larja | 2009/09/18 09:17 PM |
ARM for server | Megol | 2009/09/19 02:18 AM |
ARM for server | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/18 07:31 AM |
ARM for server | Richard Stacpoole | 2009/09/18 05:18 PM |
ARM for server | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/18 09:20 PM |
ARM for server | Richard Stacpoole | 2009/09/19 12:02 AM |
ARM for server | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/19 03:57 AM |
ARM for server | Richard Stacpoole | 2009/09/19 04:24 AM |
ARM for server | Richard Cownie | 2009/09/19 07:12 AM |
ARM for server | Jukka Larja | 2009/09/18 09:57 PM |
ARM for server | Mark Christiansen | 2009/09/18 03:17 PM |
Cortex performance | Tom W | 2009/09/19 08:52 AM |
Cortex performance | anon | 2009/09/19 09:50 AM |
Cortex performance | Howard Chu | 2009/09/19 11:57 AM |
Cortex performance | Howard Chu | 2009/09/19 12:05 PM |
Cortex performance | Wilco | 2009/09/19 01:38 PM |
Cortex performance | Howard Chu | 2009/09/20 10:59 PM |
No silicon yet? | someone | 2009/09/17 12:18 PM |
No silicon yet? | anon | 2009/09/18 12:06 AM |
No silicon yet? | anon | 2009/09/18 07:30 AM |
No silicon yet? | Hello | 2009/09/21 07:38 AM |
No silicon yet? | anon | 2009/09/21 12:44 PM |
No silicon yet? | none | 2009/09/21 11:54 PM |
No silicon yet? | Wilco | 2009/09/22 01:24 AM |
No silicon yet? | ? | 2009/09/22 11:18 AM |
No silicon yet? | IntelUser2000 | 2009/09/22 12:13 PM |
No silicon yet? | none | 2009/09/22 01:40 PM |
No silicon yet? | Wilco | 2009/09/22 02:53 PM |
No silicon yet? | a reader | 2009/09/23 07:45 AM |
No silicon yet? | ? | 2009/09/22 11:34 PM |
Why China Mobile choose Marvell PXA920? | Michael S | 2009/09/22 02:49 AM |
Why China Mobile choose Marvell PXA920? | Wilco | 2009/09/22 02:23 PM |
Why China Mobile choose Marvell PXA920? | Michael S | 2009/09/22 02:46 PM |
Why China Mobile choose Marvell PXA920? | Wilco | 2009/09/22 03:03 PM |
Why China Mobile choose Marvell PXA920? | Michael S | 2009/09/22 04:48 PM |
Why China Mobile choose Marvell PXA920? | Paul | 2009/09/22 05:46 PM |
Why China Mobile choose Marvell PXA920? | Anon4 | 2009/09/23 03:53 AM |