Intel (INTC) will reportedly launch its next-gen Haswell CPUs in April 2013. Haswell, like the...

This news story has 4 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

Cincinnatus Comments (2200)
 
Neither Ivy Bridge nor Haswell are meant for tablets. That's the Atom line. Comparing either of the notebook/desktop cpus with ARM is like comparing a Ferrari with a Nissan Sentra.

Here's info on the future Atom line which competes with ARM:
http://cnet.co/PbDHz0
19 Jul 2012, 07:48 PM Reply Like

SA Editor Eric Jhonsa Comments (563)
 
Microsoft appears to feel differently, the Windows 8 Pro version of Surface features a Core i5 Ivy Bridge CPU. Also, Intel says 40 ultrabook designs involve touchscreen systems.

http://bit.ly/OeBW4Z
20 Jul 2012, 12:33 PM Reply Like

Cincinnatus Comments (2200)
 
Intel owns the trademark for Ultrabook and Ultrabooks need to meet Intel specs. If you can catch Intel claiming that an Ultrabook is just another tablet then please point me to it. They're being positioned as a mid- to high-end notebook replacement. The touchscreen doesn't make it a tablet, any more than an Apple MacBook Air would have been become a tablet had Jobs ok'd a touchscreen for it. (Some of us remember that HP desktop models had touchscreens back in the 1980s - that didn't make them tablets. http://bit.ly/PrtuCg)

Ultrabook info here:
http://bit.ly/O2jf2k

Likewise Microsoft clearly sees Surface Pro as defining a new category that is more than a tablet. Neither the price-point, form factor, or specs are the same as the ARM version. I've seen estimates of $200 to $300 more for the Surface Pro over the RT. It clearly does not see the ARM version competing with the Surface Pro version, so I don't know how you see Microsoft feeling differently.

http://bit.ly/PrtuCh

The fundamental distinction is in the usage model. The usage model for a traditional tablet a la iPad doesn't require Ivy Bridge or Haswell horsepower. Ultrabooks are intended to replace notebooks not tablets. The Surface Pro attempts to be a hybrid of the two in form factor (but not in performance or price-point), but it's unclear what success it will receive. I think much depends upon how well people take to the keypad design. If that's rejected then it reverts to being a tablet usage model.
20 Jul 2012, 04:12 PM Reply Like

SA Editor Eric Jhonsa Comments (563)
 
The Surface Pro has a tablet's form factor (just a little thicker/heavier) and feature set. I think arguing over whether it's officially a tablet ends up being a debate over semantics.

I'm happy with my iPad, but if Microsoft/Intel can get the thickness and weight of Surface Pro down a bit, I'd take a close look. Having something that can work well either as a tablet or a notebook, depending on whether a keyboard/touchpad is attached, intrigues me.

But it's a fair point that a lot of Intel's tablet activity revolves around Atom/Clover Trail. Time will tell how effective Atom is at competing against high-end ARM processors (Krait, Tegra 4, Exynos, etc.). The early feedback for ARM/Windows RT systems in terms of size, performance, and battery life is pretty good.
21 Jul 2012, 07:41 PM Reply Like