LTISteve's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/user/528290/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/1319861/comments?source=feed#comment-17223541 17223541
The best news for ARMH was something that Warren East was going around talking about last year that got very little traction in the press because it was a hard concept to comprehend quickly. Instead of focusing on going exclusively after high end processors the idea was to to put low end, easy fast and cheap to build processors in just about everything that has a circuit. The market for the sub $2 processor is large, endless and the margins may be too low for Intel to really care about. This was a mature, responsible and realistic outlook for ARMH to have. A concept that would further fatten it's revenue stream from here to eternity. And the problem was that it wasn't sexy.

Bottom line is ARMH is a good company that still has a bright future but the notion that it's going to beat Intel in the spaces dominated by Intel just haven't worked out. They are simple enough concepts for investors to understand which is why these tales are still spun.]]> Thu, 04 Apr 2013 14:04:49 -0400
The best news for ARMH was something that Warren East was going around talking about last year that got very little traction in the press because it was a hard concept to comprehend quickly. Instead of focusing on going exclusively after high end processors the idea was to to put low end, easy fast and cheap to build processors in just about everything that has a circuit. The market for the sub $2 processor is large, endless and the margins may be too low for Intel to really care about. This was a mature, responsible and realistic outlook for ARMH to have. A concept that would further fatten it's revenue stream from here to eternity. And the problem was that it wasn't sexy.

Bottom line is ARMH is a good company that still has a bright future but the notion that it's going to beat Intel in the spaces dominated by Intel just haven't worked out. They are simple enough concepts for investors to understand which is why these tales are still spun.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1307651/comments?source=feed#comment-16954721 16954721
I enjoy your articles but like the others on here I didn't find your argument as compelling as other articles. At the current time Apple sells two operating systems with two different experiences. They've made no secret that they wish to have one universal operating system as does Microsoft. From phones to desktops they would love it if one operating system runs the gamut.

Now, you could argue that Apple has decided to go with ARM64 processors for desktops and their regular A series SoC's for everything else. I can see that would make sense. I can even argue in favor of such an idea, the half million apps wouldn't need to be ported over to something else, and lets face it, the Mac line isn't a huge growth opportunity for them.

Apple is living in a post Jobs era. They may never be the market innovators again, but they have a large and loyal customer base. As you pointed out, hardware integration and user experience means much more than cutting edge technology to them. This can be best accomplished if there is the exact same operating system and the same things work on it from phone to desktop. An app you love on your phone will work great on your desktop.

A more telling look at what's to come may be something similar to what we saw with Thunderbolt. The two companies can work together and produce something remarkable. They both bring something special to the equation. This is what they can do if they create their own modified version of an x86 processor or even their own flavor of a RISC processor.

Look who Apple is in bed with right now in order to get their own A series processors made. Did Samsung steal Apple's secret sauce and put it in their own phones? I don't know perhaps Apple doesn't Intel and are simply putting on a happy face. But from what I can see this is year seven of the Apple/Intel relationship and there hasn't been any major fights in public, not like with Samsung.

At the current rate Apple's stock is going to be hitting a 40% drop in value from it's all time high. If they keep going with their belief that designer hardware and a pleasant user experience is all that matters we'll probably see it go past a 50% drop. People don't keep their jobs when the stock falls this much, no matter how successful the company has been.

Now, I ask you, put yourself in Tim Cook's shoes for a moment. You have two different OS's and two different types of technology in house . You have to make a decision that will lead your company to a stabilized stock price and one user experience. Which one will you go with? The fabless model with all it's problems and possible node change issues, or Intel who has been the outsider that is playing catch up. Its a decision that will impact the company not only today but five years down the line. Oh, by the way, your background is planning and logistics.

My money is on Intel. ]]> Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:17:19 -0400
I enjoy your articles but like the others on here I didn't find your argument as compelling as other articles. At the current time Apple sells two operating systems with two different experiences. They've made no secret that they wish to have one universal operating system as does Microsoft. From phones to desktops they would love it if one operating system runs the gamut.

Now, you could argue that Apple has decided to go with ARM64 processors for desktops and their regular A series SoC's for everything else. I can see that would make sense. I can even argue in favor of such an idea, the half million apps wouldn't need to be ported over to something else, and lets face it, the Mac line isn't a huge growth opportunity for them.

Apple is living in a post Jobs era. They may never be the market innovators again, but they have a large and loyal customer base. As you pointed out, hardware integration and user experience means much more than cutting edge technology to them. This can be best accomplished if there is the exact same operating system and the same things work on it from phone to desktop. An app you love on your phone will work great on your desktop.

A more telling look at what's to come may be something similar to what we saw with Thunderbolt. The two companies can work together and produce something remarkable. They both bring something special to the equation. This is what they can do if they create their own modified version of an x86 processor or even their own flavor of a RISC processor.

Look who Apple is in bed with right now in order to get their own A series processors made. Did Samsung steal Apple's secret sauce and put it in their own phones? I don't know perhaps Apple doesn't Intel and are simply putting on a happy face. But from what I can see this is year seven of the Apple/Intel relationship and there hasn't been any major fights in public, not like with Samsung.

At the current rate Apple's stock is going to be hitting a 40% drop in value from it's all time high. If they keep going with their belief that designer hardware and a pleasant user experience is all that matters we'll probably see it go past a 50% drop. People don't keep their jobs when the stock falls this much, no matter how successful the company has been.

Now, I ask you, put yourself in Tim Cook's shoes for a moment. You have two different OS's and two different types of technology in house . You have to make a decision that will lead your company to a stabilized stock price and one user experience. Which one will you go with? The fabless model with all it's problems and possible node change issues, or Intel who has been the outsider that is playing catch up. Its a decision that will impact the company not only today but five years down the line. Oh, by the way, your background is planning and logistics.

My money is on Intel. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1302291/comments?source=feed#comment-16854361 16854361 Tue, 26 Mar 2013 20:29:59 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1300481/comments?source=feed#comment-16822721 16822721
Spin on, soon all will be known. ]]> Tue, 26 Mar 2013 10:15:45 -0400
Spin on, soon all will be known. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1288241/comments?source=feed#comment-16544321 16544321 Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:36:50 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/489271/comments?source=feed#comment-4960801 4960801 Tue, 01 May 2012 00:25:38 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/457891/comments?source=feed#comment-3844021 3844021
I get where you are coming from John, you are looking at a short term drop. To pullback 10% the stock would have to drop to $25.38. To grow 10% the stock would have to rise to $31.01

What do you think is more likely to happen? I feel $31 is more likely than $25.38 The reasons you gave are fairly weak. I don't think anybody is waiting on Windows 8 to come out. The lowered estimates always come out by analysts who want to keep the stock down. This time it's not working as reliably as it did before.

Windows 8 on ARM? Who is really looking forward to a lamer version of Windows that doesn't run legacy software? Aside from the delusional ARM fan boys.

"One of the reasons that headwinds may be facing the PC market is because of what is scheduled to come out the second half of 2012. Windows 8, a new generation of ultrabook, and ultrathin laptops is coming out. Consumers may be holding off buying because of this"

It's "Are coming out" not "Is coming out". Unfortunately your logic is about as flawed as your grammar. Ultrabooks are from Intel, it's their baby. What you just said actually supports Intel position, not weakens it.

It's nice you read charts, and yes sometimes it works other times it doesn't. In the past you could make a lot of money betting against Intel. The steady rise in the stock is making many a short very nervous right now. Time is running out to cover. Instead of dropping below $27 it went above $28. I expect more bad press in a desperate attempt to cover over the next few weeks. I sincerely hope the shorts fry!

One other thing to consider, the P/E on Intel is low. Those who missed out on the Apple stock rise may jump into Intel because it's P/E is 4 points lower. They may perceive a jump in share price on the low P/E alone. And since Intel does supply Apple, all the better!]]> Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:46:37 -0400
I get where you are coming from John, you are looking at a short term drop. To pullback 10% the stock would have to drop to $25.38. To grow 10% the stock would have to rise to $31.01

What do you think is more likely to happen? I feel $31 is more likely than $25.38 The reasons you gave are fairly weak. I don't think anybody is waiting on Windows 8 to come out. The lowered estimates always come out by analysts who want to keep the stock down. This time it's not working as reliably as it did before.

Windows 8 on ARM? Who is really looking forward to a lamer version of Windows that doesn't run legacy software? Aside from the delusional ARM fan boys.

"One of the reasons that headwinds may be facing the PC market is because of what is scheduled to come out the second half of 2012. Windows 8, a new generation of ultrabook, and ultrathin laptops is coming out. Consumers may be holding off buying because of this"

It's "Are coming out" not "Is coming out". Unfortunately your logic is about as flawed as your grammar. Ultrabooks are from Intel, it's their baby. What you just said actually supports Intel position, not weakens it.

It's nice you read charts, and yes sometimes it works other times it doesn't. In the past you could make a lot of money betting against Intel. The steady rise in the stock is making many a short very nervous right now. Time is running out to cover. Instead of dropping below $27 it went above $28. I expect more bad press in a desperate attempt to cover over the next few weeks. I sincerely hope the shorts fry!

One other thing to consider, the P/E on Intel is low. Those who missed out on the Apple stock rise may jump into Intel because it's P/E is 4 points lower. They may perceive a jump in share price on the low P/E alone. And since Intel does supply Apple, all the better!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/440531/comments?source=feed#comment-3602671 3602671
But I do have something useful to say. It's the number 480. Once Apple stock price hits that everybody will know that Apple has dropped 20 percent from it's high.

The other useful thing I have to say is "Intel." You can hate on Intel all you want but the truth is that Intel has been a good partner to Apple as far as I can tell. I can't recall when Intel has let down Apple in any major way. They worked on Thunderbolt together for example. The Apple/Samsung relationship is just a bit too odd. They are partners and enemies at the same time. Apple is helping pay for a plant in the US for Samsung and then suing them at the same time.

At the start the ARM processor in the iPad was the middle finger to Intel with the notion that Apple was in charge of it's pirate ship. Now it's taking on water. Apple is too large and has too much going for it to rely on Samsung and TSMC to produce cutting edge technology in reliable quantities.

Had Apple played it's cards right they could have worked with Intel with a proprietary x86 processor at 32nm this year, 22nm next year and 14nm the year after. Think about it, an iPad that runs iOS but could also run OS/X and Windows in Sand boxed windows. It could have the security the iPad needs for corporate utilization. It could be like Windows 8 but with an iOS user interface. I believe this may be up Apple's sleeve anyway but running core processors like the Ivy Bridge i5. I did recall them filling a patent on something like this. Could be an iPad Pro? ]]> Mon, 19 Mar 2012 01:30:10 -0400
But I do have something useful to say. It's the number 480. Once Apple stock price hits that everybody will know that Apple has dropped 20 percent from it's high.

The other useful thing I have to say is "Intel." You can hate on Intel all you want but the truth is that Intel has been a good partner to Apple as far as I can tell. I can't recall when Intel has let down Apple in any major way. They worked on Thunderbolt together for example. The Apple/Samsung relationship is just a bit too odd. They are partners and enemies at the same time. Apple is helping pay for a plant in the US for Samsung and then suing them at the same time.

At the start the ARM processor in the iPad was the middle finger to Intel with the notion that Apple was in charge of it's pirate ship. Now it's taking on water. Apple is too large and has too much going for it to rely on Samsung and TSMC to produce cutting edge technology in reliable quantities.

Had Apple played it's cards right they could have worked with Intel with a proprietary x86 processor at 32nm this year, 22nm next year and 14nm the year after. Think about it, an iPad that runs iOS but could also run OS/X and Windows in Sand boxed windows. It could have the security the iPad needs for corporate utilization. It could be like Windows 8 but with an iOS user interface. I believe this may be up Apple's sleeve anyway but running core processors like the Ivy Bridge i5. I did recall them filling a patent on something like this. Could be an iPad Pro? ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/440531/comments?source=feed#comment-3591621 3591621
I can admit that tablet sales, namely iPad sales have had an impact on consumer PC purchases. There, I said it. Can you admit that the iPad, and the iPhone 4s isn't exactly what the fan base was hoping for? I'll put it another way. If Steve Jobs was alive and healthy and firmly at the helm of Apple would he stand up in front of a crowd of people at a press conference wearing his finest black turtleneck and blue jeans and present either of these products?

You say that the iPad will continue to grab PC market share and I am saying that it won't eclipse it's own sales of the iPad2. The writing's on the wall. One thing for certain, it's hard to keep running with the Post PC Era line of hyperbole when iPad can't even outsell it's previous version.

All I am suggesting is that we look at sales numbers, PC year over year sales and iPad year over year sales draw conclusions from them. If PC sales fall further in percentage than iPad sales in percentage I'll admit that we're in a post pc era where tablets are taking over. But, if iPad sales sink then the reality is that the iPad was nothing more than a consumer electronics fad. Deal?]]> Sun, 18 Mar 2012 14:49:01 -0400
I can admit that tablet sales, namely iPad sales have had an impact on consumer PC purchases. There, I said it. Can you admit that the iPad, and the iPhone 4s isn't exactly what the fan base was hoping for? I'll put it another way. If Steve Jobs was alive and healthy and firmly at the helm of Apple would he stand up in front of a crowd of people at a press conference wearing his finest black turtleneck and blue jeans and present either of these products?

You say that the iPad will continue to grab PC market share and I am saying that it won't eclipse it's own sales of the iPad2. The writing's on the wall. One thing for certain, it's hard to keep running with the Post PC Era line of hyperbole when iPad can't even outsell it's previous version.

All I am suggesting is that we look at sales numbers, PC year over year sales and iPad year over year sales draw conclusions from them. If PC sales fall further in percentage than iPad sales in percentage I'll admit that we're in a post pc era where tablets are taking over. But, if iPad sales sink then the reality is that the iPad was nothing more than a consumer electronics fad. Deal?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/440531/comments?source=feed#comment-3589981 3589981
Your premise was lifted from the speaking points and the marketing slides by Tim Cook at the iPad press conference. For months now we've been hearing he's no Steve Jobs and he's trying to deflect the scrutiny of yet another 'phoned in' Apple product update.

Apple analysts were expecting to see one million new iPads sold the first day. That should be simple, right? All they needed to do was to get one in 55 current iPad owners in to buy a new one during the time of an improving world economy. It's been days and I've still haven't see the press release Google it, you'll see everybody talking about that like is was a slam dunk, but oops, it didn't happen.

What does this mean? Apple got complacent when they saw the iPhone 4s sales take off. People were putting off updating their aging iPhones and were really hoping for the iPhone 5. But they took the 4s because they couldn't wait any longer. Google the wish lists of the iPhone 5. The problem is that better smart phones are on the market and Apple isn't selling them. The latest iPad is pathetic. Frankly it wasn't worthy of a press conference. This time around there is no driving force for people to update their iPad2 with a slightly improved version of the same thing. And since Apple is so very tied into the success of iPad, if sales suffer the stock will suffer. At a stock price of $480 the company will have lost 20% of it's value from it's high of $600.

The point is that going after the PC was desperate of Tim Cook and is silly of you to continue on with his line of hyperbole. Since you didn't bother to dig deeper let me help you. Apple isn't innovating like they used to with Steve Jobs. They were once in a position of telling the consumer what they wanted before they even knew it. Now, they're not there anymore So if they can't innovate at the very least they can start listening to their client base and offering things that they are asking for. Nobody is asking for a 45nm 1ghz ARM processor. They needed to update this desperately. Offering this up is taking advantage of their considerable costumer loyalty.

When sales suffer and the stock suffers perhaps Mr. Cook will hear the wake up call? Apple owes its customers something much better than that latest iPad. There is no excuse! ]]> Sun, 18 Mar 2012 13:11:05 -0400
Your premise was lifted from the speaking points and the marketing slides by Tim Cook at the iPad press conference. For months now we've been hearing he's no Steve Jobs and he's trying to deflect the scrutiny of yet another 'phoned in' Apple product update.

Apple analysts were expecting to see one million new iPads sold the first day. That should be simple, right? All they needed to do was to get one in 55 current iPad owners in to buy a new one during the time of an improving world economy. It's been days and I've still haven't see the press release Google it, you'll see everybody talking about that like is was a slam dunk, but oops, it didn't happen.

What does this mean? Apple got complacent when they saw the iPhone 4s sales take off. People were putting off updating their aging iPhones and were really hoping for the iPhone 5. But they took the 4s because they couldn't wait any longer. Google the wish lists of the iPhone 5. The problem is that better smart phones are on the market and Apple isn't selling them. The latest iPad is pathetic. Frankly it wasn't worthy of a press conference. This time around there is no driving force for people to update their iPad2 with a slightly improved version of the same thing. And since Apple is so very tied into the success of iPad, if sales suffer the stock will suffer. At a stock price of $480 the company will have lost 20% of it's value from it's high of $600.

The point is that going after the PC was desperate of Tim Cook and is silly of you to continue on with his line of hyperbole. Since you didn't bother to dig deeper let me help you. Apple isn't innovating like they used to with Steve Jobs. They were once in a position of telling the consumer what they wanted before they even knew it. Now, they're not there anymore So if they can't innovate at the very least they can start listening to their client base and offering things that they are asking for. Nobody is asking for a 45nm 1ghz ARM processor. They needed to update this desperately. Offering this up is taking advantage of their considerable costumer loyalty.

When sales suffer and the stock suffers perhaps Mr. Cook will hear the wake up call? Apple owes its customers something much better than that latest iPad. There is no excuse! ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3586341 3586341 Sun, 18 Mar 2012 10:03:34 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3586181 3586181 Sun, 18 Mar 2012 09:58:08 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3585971 3585971
You're right, ARM licensees left too much on the table. Most of them don't have the cash to take on Intel head to head. They are already battle weary from dueling with each other. Motorola Mobility had to sell out last year before Intel entered the market. Paulo is convinced that ARM lack of profit model will bring Intel's profits down as well. Sorry, Intel knows how to make money! ]]> Sun, 18 Mar 2012 09:48:51 -0400
You're right, ARM licensees left too much on the table. Most of them don't have the cash to take on Intel head to head. They are already battle weary from dueling with each other. Motorola Mobility had to sell out last year before Intel entered the market. Paulo is convinced that ARM lack of profit model will bring Intel's profits down as well. Sorry, Intel knows how to make money! ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3585861 3585861
I love how you assume that Intel won't sell any Medfield devices. Did you learn this "magic thinking" from Steve Jobs?]]> Sun, 18 Mar 2012 09:44:05 -0400
I love how you assume that Intel won't sell any Medfield devices. Did you learn this "magic thinking" from Steve Jobs?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3585781 3585781 Sun, 18 Mar 2012 09:40:00 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/440531/comments?source=feed#comment-3585531 3585531
The 93% of Fortune 500 companies testing the iPad was thrown out by Steve Jobs during one speech when he was alive. It was said and never followed up on. When Tim Cook recently talked about the iPad that statistic was never followed up on. What was shown was the stats of iPad sales versus HP sales. What Cook didn't mention and what you didn't pick up on was months earlier at HP they watched their own ARM tablet flop known running on their own WebOS crash and burn in a period of a few months . HP believed so much in your view of the future that they spent a fortune to buy PALM to get said OS. And it sold well, exceptionally well, in fact people stood in line for hours to buy a tablet

Gee this is fun being able to write like you do. Yes, leaving out large pieces of information like their $600 tablets were put on a $99 fire sale. But when you tell the entire story it's not as much fun. Standing in the wreckage of pushing ARM based tablets the former HP CEO mentioned that HP may get out of the PC business. And then he was promptly replaced by Meg Whitman. She took over control of the aircraft while the nose was pointing down and picking up speed. Sale suffered as they should have because who in their right mind would want to buy an HP PC after that fiasco? Tim Cook compared the stats that quarter to the iPad as part of his snake oil sales presentation. But the iPad is nowhere near selling what PC's do. They are at a pace of 100 million units per quarter, not 15 like Mr. Cook eluded to.

It took the spotlight off the iPad for a moment. On the one hand the iPad has/had a 20 to one sales lead over the competition which makes it the tablet of choice. But when you see the latest iPad for what it is, it's disturbing. It features a 45nm 1ghz dual core ARM processor. Wait a minute, it's the same processor as in the iPad2!!! They just threw in a quad core GPU and a nice screen and repackaged the same old same old. Someday, perhaps Apple will get the 32nm processing line working. Forgetting that Intel had theirs working a couple of years ago. TSMC's 28nm ARM processing line has been down for the past month. And Intel is about to crank their 22nm line up to full speed.
To put it frankly, the iPad is a big steaming pile of obsolete technology. Had they stuck with Intel they could two generations ahead by now. Run any app side by side any iPad and on a Samsung Galaxy S II and tell me that faster and better processors really don't matter, they do!

I'm glad you mentioned that Apple makes most of it's revenue off of ARM devices. The iPhone 4s had Siri, but none of the features iPhone fans screamed for like a larger screen and faster processor. The iCloud was an iFlop. And the iPad is yet another rehash of a previous product. Apple has shown no innovation since the death of Steve Jobs. It used to be a company that hit home runs whenever they got up to bat. Now its mildly amused just to make it to first base. The post PC era lost it's spiritual leader. Who will take his place and bring the movement forward? Tim Cook? Get real!

Intel is just about starting to ship processors for phones and tablets. They have large contracts. Not bad for a company that every ARM guru argued just a few months ago would "never get a processor in a phone." Worse yet, they have long term contracts with Motorola, Lenovo, Orange and a large Indian telecom company.

I get your point that the computer has moved away from the form factor of the desktop. But as long as you continue to distort the facts that this is a zero sum game that Intel and Microsoft will eventually lose, the more you'll be called on it. Intel has never made more money than it has right now. The last three years have been wonderful. Every 122 ARM devices needs a new server. Intel has been raking in the profits. And by 2016 their production will double. All the vendors you mention can grow. ARM is going to grow and according to their president they welcome the competition from Intel in the phone and tablet market. It only forces them to make their products better. He gets that he's not playing a zero sum game. Keep in mind that the iPhone and iPad did their very best in the very worst of the recession . Our desire for technology is only growing. ]]> Sun, 18 Mar 2012 09:28:31 -0400
The 93% of Fortune 500 companies testing the iPad was thrown out by Steve Jobs during one speech when he was alive. It was said and never followed up on. When Tim Cook recently talked about the iPad that statistic was never followed up on. What was shown was the stats of iPad sales versus HP sales. What Cook didn't mention and what you didn't pick up on was months earlier at HP they watched their own ARM tablet flop known running on their own WebOS crash and burn in a period of a few months . HP believed so much in your view of the future that they spent a fortune to buy PALM to get said OS. And it sold well, exceptionally well, in fact people stood in line for hours to buy a tablet

Gee this is fun being able to write like you do. Yes, leaving out large pieces of information like their $600 tablets were put on a $99 fire sale. But when you tell the entire story it's not as much fun. Standing in the wreckage of pushing ARM based tablets the former HP CEO mentioned that HP may get out of the PC business. And then he was promptly replaced by Meg Whitman. She took over control of the aircraft while the nose was pointing down and picking up speed. Sale suffered as they should have because who in their right mind would want to buy an HP PC after that fiasco? Tim Cook compared the stats that quarter to the iPad as part of his snake oil sales presentation. But the iPad is nowhere near selling what PC's do. They are at a pace of 100 million units per quarter, not 15 like Mr. Cook eluded to.

It took the spotlight off the iPad for a moment. On the one hand the iPad has/had a 20 to one sales lead over the competition which makes it the tablet of choice. But when you see the latest iPad for what it is, it's disturbing. It features a 45nm 1ghz dual core ARM processor. Wait a minute, it's the same processor as in the iPad2!!! They just threw in a quad core GPU and a nice screen and repackaged the same old same old. Someday, perhaps Apple will get the 32nm processing line working. Forgetting that Intel had theirs working a couple of years ago. TSMC's 28nm ARM processing line has been down for the past month. And Intel is about to crank their 22nm line up to full speed.
To put it frankly, the iPad is a big steaming pile of obsolete technology. Had they stuck with Intel they could two generations ahead by now. Run any app side by side any iPad and on a Samsung Galaxy S II and tell me that faster and better processors really don't matter, they do!

I'm glad you mentioned that Apple makes most of it's revenue off of ARM devices. The iPhone 4s had Siri, but none of the features iPhone fans screamed for like a larger screen and faster processor. The iCloud was an iFlop. And the iPad is yet another rehash of a previous product. Apple has shown no innovation since the death of Steve Jobs. It used to be a company that hit home runs whenever they got up to bat. Now its mildly amused just to make it to first base. The post PC era lost it's spiritual leader. Who will take his place and bring the movement forward? Tim Cook? Get real!

Intel is just about starting to ship processors for phones and tablets. They have large contracts. Not bad for a company that every ARM guru argued just a few months ago would "never get a processor in a phone." Worse yet, they have long term contracts with Motorola, Lenovo, Orange and a large Indian telecom company.

I get your point that the computer has moved away from the form factor of the desktop. But as long as you continue to distort the facts that this is a zero sum game that Intel and Microsoft will eventually lose, the more you'll be called on it. Intel has never made more money than it has right now. The last three years have been wonderful. Every 122 ARM devices needs a new server. Intel has been raking in the profits. And by 2016 their production will double. All the vendors you mention can grow. ARM is going to grow and according to their president they welcome the competition from Intel in the phone and tablet market. It only forces them to make their products better. He gets that he's not playing a zero sum game. Keep in mind that the iPhone and iPad did their very best in the very worst of the recession . Our desire for technology is only growing. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3509941 3509941
BTW, where does that boatload of money Microsoft make in server sales come from if nobody is buying it?

I'm an Intel investor, not Microsoft. I can care less what they do. But to someone else's point both Apple and Microsoft have announced their plans to take their OS/X and Windows platforms down to the phone level. Meanwhile Google is looking to take Android up a few levels. Makes you wonder why they were so anxious get into bet with Intel? What's up their sleeves. Probably something a lot better than Windows on ARM! ]]> Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:16:16 -0400
BTW, where does that boatload of money Microsoft make in server sales come from if nobody is buying it?

I'm an Intel investor, not Microsoft. I can care less what they do. But to someone else's point both Apple and Microsoft have announced their plans to take their OS/X and Windows platforms down to the phone level. Meanwhile Google is looking to take Android up a few levels. Makes you wonder why they were so anxious get into bet with Intel? What's up their sleeves. Probably something a lot better than Windows on ARM! ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3492621 3492621
Your double speak sounds so convincing, and if I were a simpleton investor I may be persuaded by it, but no, I know better. ARM is big on talking about tomorrow's business plans. ARM servers and ARM based windows PC's.

These "powerful" ARM vendors you are bragging about have just spent the last few years beating the snot out of each other They couldn't wait to undercut each other to get more market share. Motorola Mobility gave up and sold to Google. Nvidia is, well talking a great game. BTW, how many people do you know who have/had a Tegra 2? Now how many have a Tegra 3? I rest my case.

I love how you tried to downplay manufacturing. Here's the history of TSMC. 2009 "We have our yield problems nearly worked out at 40nm." Then they said the same thing in 2010. But, they never shut down a line. Why don't you ask the CFO at TSMC what a small deal that is for them. This is going on for weeks! Then they will go back to making low yields. And maybe by next year they may get a bit better yields. They need to sell about a hundred million units before they can break even, and then stay there for a while to make a profit. I don't see them hitting the break even point before 2015. So, I hope you are excited about 28nm because you'll be there for a very, very long time. There is a very realistic possibility that Intel will be at 14nm before the breakeven point of 28nm for ARM.

The PC industry is collapsing? Bzzz, sorry, wrong! 400 million units last year and despite recessions and hard drive shortages it still grew! But in your world it doesn't matter. The world of big pipe
dreams.

I'm glad you still love the Apple processor. The iPad had a 40nm A4 ARM processor at 40nm. Then it went dual core in the second version and now, three generations in, it's still 1ghz, still 40nm and this time using a quadcore GPU. Word on the street is that TSMC little shut down got Nvidia ousted from Apple. They Macbook is going right to Ivy Bridge. And once the tear down happens we'll find out if the rumors of Intel GPU's to do Apple a solid are true.

But, manufacturing doesn't matter, right? Big pipe dreams, the internet of things .64 bit ARM servers, bla bla bla. We'll see who has the right business model. ]]> Thu, 15 Mar 2012 00:01:42 -0400
Your double speak sounds so convincing, and if I were a simpleton investor I may be persuaded by it, but no, I know better. ARM is big on talking about tomorrow's business plans. ARM servers and ARM based windows PC's.

These "powerful" ARM vendors you are bragging about have just spent the last few years beating the snot out of each other They couldn't wait to undercut each other to get more market share. Motorola Mobility gave up and sold to Google. Nvidia is, well talking a great game. BTW, how many people do you know who have/had a Tegra 2? Now how many have a Tegra 3? I rest my case.

I love how you tried to downplay manufacturing. Here's the history of TSMC. 2009 "We have our yield problems nearly worked out at 40nm." Then they said the same thing in 2010. But, they never shut down a line. Why don't you ask the CFO at TSMC what a small deal that is for them. This is going on for weeks! Then they will go back to making low yields. And maybe by next year they may get a bit better yields. They need to sell about a hundred million units before they can break even, and then stay there for a while to make a profit. I don't see them hitting the break even point before 2015. So, I hope you are excited about 28nm because you'll be there for a very, very long time. There is a very realistic possibility that Intel will be at 14nm before the breakeven point of 28nm for ARM.

The PC industry is collapsing? Bzzz, sorry, wrong! 400 million units last year and despite recessions and hard drive shortages it still grew! But in your world it doesn't matter. The world of big pipe
dreams.

I'm glad you still love the Apple processor. The iPad had a 40nm A4 ARM processor at 40nm. Then it went dual core in the second version and now, three generations in, it's still 1ghz, still 40nm and this time using a quadcore GPU. Word on the street is that TSMC little shut down got Nvidia ousted from Apple. They Macbook is going right to Ivy Bridge. And once the tear down happens we'll find out if the rumors of Intel GPU's to do Apple a solid are true.

But, manufacturing doesn't matter, right? Big pipe dreams, the internet of things .64 bit ARM servers, bla bla bla. We'll see who has the right business model. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3478631 3478631

Intel will do a much better job containing the threat than ARM can do in enlarging it. For every 122 ARM devices sold Intel sells one server. The server sales alone add up to more profit than the 122 smartphone sales.

The iPad has sold a total of 55 million units. Last year the PC shipped 400 million units in the post PC era. The PC isn't dead, and no, it's not having it's margins slashed by small ARM players.

The bottom line, people want powerful x86 processors. There will be more, not less in the future. And Intel can contain the threat. while still getting it's margins . ]]> Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:26:30 -0400

Intel will do a much better job containing the threat than ARM can do in enlarging it. For every 122 ARM devices sold Intel sells one server. The server sales alone add up to more profit than the 122 smartphone sales.

The iPad has sold a total of 55 million units. Last year the PC shipped 400 million units in the post PC era. The PC isn't dead, and no, it's not having it's margins slashed by small ARM players.

The bottom line, people want powerful x86 processors. There will be more, not less in the future. And Intel can contain the threat. while still getting it's margins . ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/434051/comments?source=feed#comment-3475861 3475861
As for iOS and Android scaling up, it's the other way around, both Microsoft and Apple want to scale down OS/X and Windows to smaller platforms. The fist attempt is Windows 8.

On the ARM side, there is a huge problem. The posterchild for ARM products has to be the iPad. It still outsells the competition 20 to 1. It's coming out in a thicker form factor with a very lackluster ARM processor. First Global Foundries fell apart to the point that AMD sold it's stake and paid get out of contracts. Now TSMC is having problems with 28nm to the point it closed down it's lines. This fabless foundries concept is falling apart at the seams. I don't care how you spin it, there should have been a 28nm ARM processor in the iPad. There isn't. This looks very, very, very bad for ARM!

As for your cost of processor math, lets work on a new formula. You are a phone company executive at any of the large cell services around the world. HTC comes along and shows you a new phone that will cost you over $400, Apple does the same, and so does Samsung. You have to buy it and give it to an end user while hopefully making enough money on a two year contract to make your money back. Then an Intel sales rep comes along and shows you a prototype of a smartphone that costs less than $200. They have designed it themselves and they've they give you a list of Asian contract manufactures who will make the phone for half of what you can get other phones for. The specs on performance and battery life are comparable to the ARM phones. And it runs Android Ice Cream Sandwich out of the gate. Plus Intel will help fund advertising. Please show me the math of why it's worth spending twice as much for something in an industry with ever tightening margins? How does that math work out?

The gold old days of ARM ended last year. Most of the companies are too small and fragmented to take on Intel, with the exception of Qualcom. Intel is going to grab large chunks of business in the smart phone market. The market share gain for Intel will be fast.

The market agrees with me, Intel is pushing new 52 week highs whereas ARMH is nowhere near it's 52 week high right now. Go ahead and advise everybody to bet against Intel. See where it gets them.]]> Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:21:01 -0400
As for iOS and Android scaling up, it's the other way around, both Microsoft and Apple want to scale down OS/X and Windows to smaller platforms. The fist attempt is Windows 8.

On the ARM side, there is a huge problem. The posterchild for ARM products has to be the iPad. It still outsells the competition 20 to 1. It's coming out in a thicker form factor with a very lackluster ARM processor. First Global Foundries fell apart to the point that AMD sold it's stake and paid get out of contracts. Now TSMC is having problems with 28nm to the point it closed down it's lines. This fabless foundries concept is falling apart at the seams. I don't care how you spin it, there should have been a 28nm ARM processor in the iPad. There isn't. This looks very, very, very bad for ARM!

As for your cost of processor math, lets work on a new formula. You are a phone company executive at any of the large cell services around the world. HTC comes along and shows you a new phone that will cost you over $400, Apple does the same, and so does Samsung. You have to buy it and give it to an end user while hopefully making enough money on a two year contract to make your money back. Then an Intel sales rep comes along and shows you a prototype of a smartphone that costs less than $200. They have designed it themselves and they've they give you a list of Asian contract manufactures who will make the phone for half of what you can get other phones for. The specs on performance and battery life are comparable to the ARM phones. And it runs Android Ice Cream Sandwich out of the gate. Plus Intel will help fund advertising. Please show me the math of why it's worth spending twice as much for something in an industry with ever tightening margins? How does that math work out?

The gold old days of ARM ended last year. Most of the companies are too small and fragmented to take on Intel, with the exception of Qualcom. Intel is going to grab large chunks of business in the smart phone market. The market share gain for Intel will be fast.

The market agrees with me, Intel is pushing new 52 week highs whereas ARMH is nowhere near it's 52 week high right now. Go ahead and advise everybody to bet against Intel. See where it gets them.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/417521/comments?source=feed#comment-3276421 3276421
There's a reason why AMD is in the state of hurt it's in now, and no it's not because it's superior technology was run down by the evil, bribing Intel. Your story is old, worn out, and full of holes.

Intel can and has played on a level playing field when it comes to value. Intel has a long history of throwing AMD bones. It was Robert Noyce from Intel who was one of the first investors in AMD. They have had secondary supplier deals thanks to Intel. AMD has benefited from lucrative cross license agreements from Intel.

Without Intel there would be no AMD and you just don't seem to get it. What are these "Secret" industry standards you are talking about ? Yes they are working with software vendors to make sure that your computers, tablets and cellphones are safe from hackers. Is that a bad thing?]]> Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:30:51 -0500
There's a reason why AMD is in the state of hurt it's in now, and no it's not because it's superior technology was run down by the evil, bribing Intel. Your story is old, worn out, and full of holes.

Intel can and has played on a level playing field when it comes to value. Intel has a long history of throwing AMD bones. It was Robert Noyce from Intel who was one of the first investors in AMD. They have had secondary supplier deals thanks to Intel. AMD has benefited from lucrative cross license agreements from Intel.

Without Intel there would be no AMD and you just don't seem to get it. What are these "Secret" industry standards you are talking about ? Yes they are working with software vendors to make sure that your computers, tablets and cellphones are safe from hackers. Is that a bad thing?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/417521/comments?source=feed#comment-3272991 3272991 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 19:56:53 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/417521/comments?source=feed#comment-3271341 3271341 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:43:02 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/411901/comments?source=feed#comment-3192891 3192891
I think the future is hardware driven. The average consumer will blow through hardware faster than ever before as it becomes cheaper and more readily available.

The key to a lot of Microsoft's success is that it's reselling code that it's been selling for years. How different is Word 2010 than 2003 or earlier? How much of the original code never really changed? Yes they keep updating it, but the reality is that this a cash cow for Microsoft. Keep in mind that these new servers being sold are to support the many new phones and tablets entering the market.

The difference between Apple and Microsoft is that Apple seems to get behind a few products and market them at full throttle. Microsoft has more products than you'll ever know about that have been somewhat introduced and forgotten about.

Since you brought up Windows 8 and ARM. Windows and ARM have gone together for years, in the early days as a PDA known as Windows CE then Windows Mobile and now Windows Phone. Windows phone now has 10 percent of the apps of iOS. Microsoft had the Zune as their alternative to the iPod. Do you own one?

Microsoft has had a lot of success in business with their software, but not as much with consumers except for XBox. Windows on ARM devices will not be able to run legacy software, and now won't have have the security features to make them relevant in their one stronghold, corporate IT. And seeing that there are very few metro apps, a luke warm reception of the Windows 8 interface, and a business model based on many failed experiments of the past (Windows Phone, Zune) how can you get excited about this product?

This isn't the first time that Microsoft was excited about a RISC processor. They made Windows NT just to run on these processors because they felt that's where the server market was heading. They waited a few years and rolled the code base back into the x86 world in one product known as Windows XP.

Windows 8 on x86 may be mildly compelling. The ability to use a tablet as a poor man's iPad and then use it as a poor man's netbook may make sense if you can run legacy software. Windows ARM is going nowhere other than the initial hoopla of the first ARM based Windows products.

Microsoft does have the ability for a great future if they can get behind a few more good ideas. I see Windows 8 and think that they are trying the Steve Jobs approach of "You want this, though you don't know you want this." This approach isn't good for Microsoft. They aren't learning the consumer market fast enough to take advantage of the changing times. ]]> Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:53:58 -0500
I think the future is hardware driven. The average consumer will blow through hardware faster than ever before as it becomes cheaper and more readily available.

The key to a lot of Microsoft's success is that it's reselling code that it's been selling for years. How different is Word 2010 than 2003 or earlier? How much of the original code never really changed? Yes they keep updating it, but the reality is that this a cash cow for Microsoft. Keep in mind that these new servers being sold are to support the many new phones and tablets entering the market.

The difference between Apple and Microsoft is that Apple seems to get behind a few products and market them at full throttle. Microsoft has more products than you'll ever know about that have been somewhat introduced and forgotten about.

Since you brought up Windows 8 and ARM. Windows and ARM have gone together for years, in the early days as a PDA known as Windows CE then Windows Mobile and now Windows Phone. Windows phone now has 10 percent of the apps of iOS. Microsoft had the Zune as their alternative to the iPod. Do you own one?

Microsoft has had a lot of success in business with their software, but not as much with consumers except for XBox. Windows on ARM devices will not be able to run legacy software, and now won't have have the security features to make them relevant in their one stronghold, corporate IT. And seeing that there are very few metro apps, a luke warm reception of the Windows 8 interface, and a business model based on many failed experiments of the past (Windows Phone, Zune) how can you get excited about this product?

This isn't the first time that Microsoft was excited about a RISC processor. They made Windows NT just to run on these processors because they felt that's where the server market was heading. They waited a few years and rolled the code base back into the x86 world in one product known as Windows XP.

Windows 8 on x86 may be mildly compelling. The ability to use a tablet as a poor man's iPad and then use it as a poor man's netbook may make sense if you can run legacy software. Windows ARM is going nowhere other than the initial hoopla of the first ARM based Windows products.

Microsoft does have the ability for a great future if they can get behind a few more good ideas. I see Windows 8 and think that they are trying the Steve Jobs approach of "You want this, though you don't know you want this." This approach isn't good for Microsoft. They aren't learning the consumer market fast enough to take advantage of the changing times. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/380791/comments?source=feed#comment-2815801 2815801
Since this is an investor board may I suggest that anybody holding ARMH trade it in for Intel right about now? You can get a 1 to 1 stock trade right about now. Intel with a $12B capex, and ARMH with PE over 70. It's a good time to jump ship.

Intel will be showing up in the mobile smartphone market next quarter, the same time that HP will be paying lipservice to the ARM based servers. Except, well, Intel has orders and contracts already for their processors. HP will be touting vaporware.

Look, you ARMH investors have been sold a bill of goods long enough and there has been countless articles about how ARM is going to eat Intel's lunch, just wait. Well, we have waited. And all we've seen is that their licensees have beaten each other bloody trying to get orders. They have a 98% market share of of the smartphone market, and things still aren't all that great. Intel breathing down their back will kill off the weak ones.

You act like ARM will be the first RISC processor to go up against Intel in servers. Wrong, there have been RISC processors for many, many years, and Intel continues to grow at their expense.

Intel is too large, too smart, too powerful, and too rich to defeat. You tea leaf readers can connect all the dots you want. ARMH is the world's most expensive $5 stock. Even Apple north of $500 is a more logical investment. Of the two stocks you'll lose less money in over the year, it would certainly be Apple. ]]> Tue, 21 Feb 2012 20:05:44 -0500
Since this is an investor board may I suggest that anybody holding ARMH trade it in for Intel right about now? You can get a 1 to 1 stock trade right about now. Intel with a $12B capex, and ARMH with PE over 70. It's a good time to jump ship.

Intel will be showing up in the mobile smartphone market next quarter, the same time that HP will be paying lipservice to the ARM based servers. Except, well, Intel has orders and contracts already for their processors. HP will be touting vaporware.

Look, you ARMH investors have been sold a bill of goods long enough and there has been countless articles about how ARM is going to eat Intel's lunch, just wait. Well, we have waited. And all we've seen is that their licensees have beaten each other bloody trying to get orders. They have a 98% market share of of the smartphone market, and things still aren't all that great. Intel breathing down their back will kill off the weak ones.

You act like ARM will be the first RISC processor to go up against Intel in servers. Wrong, there have been RISC processors for many, many years, and Intel continues to grow at their expense.

Intel is too large, too smart, too powerful, and too rich to defeat. You tea leaf readers can connect all the dots you want. ARMH is the world's most expensive $5 stock. Even Apple north of $500 is a more logical investment. Of the two stocks you'll lose less money in over the year, it would certainly be Apple. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/316061/comments?source=feed#comment-2130909 2130909
"Global slowdown is a major problem for Intel. Business inventory is building up at the same time need for business infrastructure is in decline. "

Actually, it's the other way around. The hard drive shortage caused inventory to get depleted. It has pushed off upgrades to 2012 making what will be on tap to be a good year even better.

Since the author didn't take time to really research Intel more than a few splash screens of generic research on the Yahoo finance board while barfing back statistics to prove a very shallow point let's look at what Intel will be doing next year.

#1. Bouncing back from an inventory decline based in Q411.
#2. Entering smartphones and tablets with new Atom processors, taking on ARM head to head.
#3. Leading the industry once again with Ivy Bridge line of processors which will based on a 22nm processor technology. It will be in full production while ARM will be spending the next year getting 28nm out the door.
#4. Benefiting as the only processor supplier ready for Microsoft Windows 8 (the author of this article told everybody to go buy Microsoft less than a month ago).
#5. Growing based on strong demand in Brazil, Russia, India and China.
#6. Growing server sales based on high demand for cloud computing applications. For every 122 smart phones sold Intel sells another server to support it.

I am conservative about Intel, and having watched the stock for a few years now I can predict that Intel will spend most of the year in the high 20's with the occasional breech of the thirty dollar range.

But not to worry, every year someone warns us not to buy Intel. Jim Kramer has told us many times this year to buy AMD instead, it's a steal at $7 a share!

This is a warning to the chart sniffers about Intel. Before you bother to write about it, do your research. If you have an opposing POV we don't mind, just back in up with facts. If you don't, it looks like there are a lot of people who frequent this board and know Intel well enough to call you on it!]]> Tue, 27 Dec 2011 11:00:08 -0500
"Global slowdown is a major problem for Intel. Business inventory is building up at the same time need for business infrastructure is in decline. "

Actually, it's the other way around. The hard drive shortage caused inventory to get depleted. It has pushed off upgrades to 2012 making what will be on tap to be a good year even better.

Since the author didn't take time to really research Intel more than a few splash screens of generic research on the Yahoo finance board while barfing back statistics to prove a very shallow point let's look at what Intel will be doing next year.

#1. Bouncing back from an inventory decline based in Q411.
#2. Entering smartphones and tablets with new Atom processors, taking on ARM head to head.
#3. Leading the industry once again with Ivy Bridge line of processors which will based on a 22nm processor technology. It will be in full production while ARM will be spending the next year getting 28nm out the door.
#4. Benefiting as the only processor supplier ready for Microsoft Windows 8 (the author of this article told everybody to go buy Microsoft less than a month ago).
#5. Growing based on strong demand in Brazil, Russia, India and China.
#6. Growing server sales based on high demand for cloud computing applications. For every 122 smart phones sold Intel sells another server to support it.

I am conservative about Intel, and having watched the stock for a few years now I can predict that Intel will spend most of the year in the high 20's with the occasional breech of the thirty dollar range.

But not to worry, every year someone warns us not to buy Intel. Jim Kramer has told us many times this year to buy AMD instead, it's a steal at $7 a share!

This is a warning to the chart sniffers about Intel. Before you bother to write about it, do your research. If you have an opposing POV we don't mind, just back in up with facts. If you don't, it looks like there are a lot of people who frequent this board and know Intel well enough to call you on it!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/314206/comments?source=feed#comment-2109273 2109273
" Intel has become accustomed to dictating to the rest of the electronics market the designs of finished products."

Look back to point one, this was what you suggested Intel should do. So, Lucy, which is it?

"It's the software inside the chip that counts" Software inside of a chip? There is no software inside a chip, but there is microcode inside of Intel's processors, You're right, it's what counts. BTW, ARM processors have no microcode. The scale the industry is using now is "performance per watt" and ARM offers great performance per watt. But after a few watts Intel stomps them cold. And Intel is scaling down it's power consumption of it's processors to take on ARM head on.

"I'm still long Intel but I wonder for how long." Feel free to sell your Intel stock. You are thinking that a design firm in Cambridge England with an annual revenue less than what Intel spends on lunch each year will somehow rule the world. They deal with middlemen like TI and Nvidia and then these companies hire fabs to do their manufacturing. The bad news for AMD was that GF had problems, but they were only billed for processors they received, this year they get billed for all of them, thus making a bad situation even worse. This is what you are fighting for?

For every 122 smartphones sold Intel sells one server. The profitability on this one server far exceeds the profits on that number of phones. Intel has benefited more from ARM than ARM has from itself. But as Intel enters the smartphone business it will do so at 32nm, followed by 22nm, and then in a year to 18 months 14nm. They will have a 3 to five year lead in the industry. Intel will have the best fabs in the world, the best transistors in the industry, and a top 50 internationally recognized brand name along a huge marketing budget.

Oh, one other thing I forgot to mention, Intel is going to double it's manufacturing capacity by 2016. Mark my words, we are entering a blood bath cage fight to the death in the processor industry and the weak will not survive. ]]> Thu, 15 Dec 2011 22:27:27 -0500
" Intel has become accustomed to dictating to the rest of the electronics market the designs of finished products."

Look back to point one, this was what you suggested Intel should do. So, Lucy, which is it?

"It's the software inside the chip that counts" Software inside of a chip? There is no software inside a chip, but there is microcode inside of Intel's processors, You're right, it's what counts. BTW, ARM processors have no microcode. The scale the industry is using now is "performance per watt" and ARM offers great performance per watt. But after a few watts Intel stomps them cold. And Intel is scaling down it's power consumption of it's processors to take on ARM head on.

"I'm still long Intel but I wonder for how long." Feel free to sell your Intel stock. You are thinking that a design firm in Cambridge England with an annual revenue less than what Intel spends on lunch each year will somehow rule the world. They deal with middlemen like TI and Nvidia and then these companies hire fabs to do their manufacturing. The bad news for AMD was that GF had problems, but they were only billed for processors they received, this year they get billed for all of them, thus making a bad situation even worse. This is what you are fighting for?

For every 122 smartphones sold Intel sells one server. The profitability on this one server far exceeds the profits on that number of phones. Intel has benefited more from ARM than ARM has from itself. But as Intel enters the smartphone business it will do so at 32nm, followed by 22nm, and then in a year to 18 months 14nm. They will have a 3 to five year lead in the industry. Intel will have the best fabs in the world, the best transistors in the industry, and a top 50 internationally recognized brand name along a huge marketing budget.

Oh, one other thing I forgot to mention, Intel is going to double it's manufacturing capacity by 2016. Mark my words, we are entering a blood bath cage fight to the death in the processor industry and the weak will not survive. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/303192/comments?source=feed#comment-2001850 2001850
In 2009 TSMC said they have fixed the yield problems with 40nm, then again in 2010! Intel will be at 22nm while TSMC will be playing with 28nm. When they have it perfected and ready for market Intel will be at 14nm.

Intel will have a 2 to five year lead on ARM. And here's the part that's going to hurt Dana, they will sell their processors at a premium over ARM.

Next year Intel opens a fab that will kick out 60K wafers a month of 22nm Atom processors that will take on ARM in their market. Trust me, those CPU's are going somewhere. Ouch!

Another thing, Intel enjoys a 90% market share in servers. There was a time that RISC (Arm stands for Acorn RISC Manufactruing) servers were clearly superior to Intel. So much so that Microsoft made Windows NT just to have a code base ready for RISC. And guess what? RISC went nowhere. So much so that they rolled the code base back to x86 and called it Microsoft Windows XP.

The ARM based server is not going after Intel's 90% but the scrap 10% of the market. Intel is an extreme player in this market, far more fierce than you let onto. This ARM server is a one trick pony, and Intel has a two year warning right now. They are used to having AMD spring superior technology on the market and then working in real time to deal with it. This two year advance notice is so much appreciated. Trust me, Intel will have something to neutralize it long before it comes out

ARMH is suffering from soft numbers, manufacturing issues, and a very real threat from Intel next year, this is the dog and pony show that they use to take the focus off the concerns that it has some very serious clouds on the horizon and actually may not be worth a PE of 80. ]]> Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:16:41 -0400
In 2009 TSMC said they have fixed the yield problems with 40nm, then again in 2010! Intel will be at 22nm while TSMC will be playing with 28nm. When they have it perfected and ready for market Intel will be at 14nm.

Intel will have a 2 to five year lead on ARM. And here's the part that's going to hurt Dana, they will sell their processors at a premium over ARM.

Next year Intel opens a fab that will kick out 60K wafers a month of 22nm Atom processors that will take on ARM in their market. Trust me, those CPU's are going somewhere. Ouch!

Another thing, Intel enjoys a 90% market share in servers. There was a time that RISC (Arm stands for Acorn RISC Manufactruing) servers were clearly superior to Intel. So much so that Microsoft made Windows NT just to have a code base ready for RISC. And guess what? RISC went nowhere. So much so that they rolled the code base back to x86 and called it Microsoft Windows XP.

The ARM based server is not going after Intel's 90% but the scrap 10% of the market. Intel is an extreme player in this market, far more fierce than you let onto. This ARM server is a one trick pony, and Intel has a two year warning right now. They are used to having AMD spring superior technology on the market and then working in real time to deal with it. This two year advance notice is so much appreciated. Trust me, Intel will have something to neutralize it long before it comes out

ARMH is suffering from soft numbers, manufacturing issues, and a very real threat from Intel next year, this is the dog and pony show that they use to take the focus off the concerns that it has some very serious clouds on the horizon and actually may not be worth a PE of 80. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/303192/comments?source=feed#comment-2001780 2001780
The ARM server you are talking about will be Intel roadkill. Let's be clear, ARM isn't going after the 90% of the server market Intel enjoys. They will be fighting for the scraps of the 10%.

ARM is a great $5 stock with a $25 hype factor associated with it. Who are going to be the bagholers when ARMH turns out to be the next Netflix?]]> Fri, 28 Oct 2011 13:47:45 -0400
The ARM server you are talking about will be Intel roadkill. Let's be clear, ARM isn't going after the 90% of the server market Intel enjoys. They will be fighting for the scraps of the 10%.

ARM is a great $5 stock with a $25 hype factor associated with it. Who are going to be the bagholers when ARMH turns out to be the next Netflix?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/290354/comments?source=feed#comment-1868564 1868564
Apple is a good stock, but when they ousted Steve Jobs the first time the company was on life support over a decade later. It nearly went out of business. Shares were about $5 each and Microsoft had to step in to financially bail them out. The short term post Steve Jobs era they will be fine. It's five years down the line they have to worry about. Apple seems to be a strong consumer label right now, just like Sony was in the late 80's through the 90's.

Looking at yesterday's charts to predict the future is blind. Intel has the chance to double in size in the next five years, or crumble. Of the two companies I see more upside with Intel with it's new Ivy Bridge/ Tri Gate technologies. Apple may have another IPhone or IPad idea on tap. If not, it will be a slow and gradual ride down in their stork price.]]> Mon, 29 Aug 2011 12:04:58 -0400
Apple is a good stock, but when they ousted Steve Jobs the first time the company was on life support over a decade later. It nearly went out of business. Shares were about $5 each and Microsoft had to step in to financially bail them out. The short term post Steve Jobs era they will be fine. It's five years down the line they have to worry about. Apple seems to be a strong consumer label right now, just like Sony was in the late 80's through the 90's.

Looking at yesterday's charts to predict the future is blind. Intel has the chance to double in size in the next five years, or crumble. Of the two companies I see more upside with Intel with it's new Ivy Bridge/ Tri Gate technologies. Apple may have another IPhone or IPad idea on tap. If not, it will be a slow and gradual ride down in their stork price.]]>