China's Allwinner Outsold Intel, Qualcomm In Tablet Processors In 2012 121
An anonymous reader writes "ARM licensee Allwinner sold more application processors for tablet computers in 2012 than Intel and Qualcomm put together, according to this EE Times article that references market researcher Strategy Analytics. Overall one in five tablet processors was provided by a Chinese vendor in 2012, according to the article, partly because they sell chips at half the price of similarly specified chips from better known vendors."
This is called dumping (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
apple and samsung don't sell their phones at a loss
the carriers pay part of the cost and add it to your service plan
Re: (Score:2)
which is, 300+20*36 = $1,010 for a $700 phone.
Only the phone is not worth anything without a service plan therefore your conclusion is incorrect. Go and check your figures and try again.
Re:This is called dumping (Score:5, Insightful)
Undercutting competition is pretty much the definition of the hallowed free market. He who can sustain the loss the longest wins, that shouldn't surprise anyone.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's the very definition of capitalism.
Trying to prevent Chinese companies from doing that would be called socialism.
Let's see all those right-wing Americans try to wiggle out of this one.
Re: (Score:3)
That's not exactly the same thing. In the cases of consoles and cell phones they are simply shifting the cost to licensing and service plans respectively. It is a valid business strategy. Dumping is more about taking the hit long enough to drive your competitors out of business. That is simply anti-competitive.
Correction of your first sentence: it isn't even close to the same thing. Everything else is dead accurate.
Re: (Score:3)
That's not entirely comparable as the Xbox division is one of MS's most profitable in terms of revenue/expenses. If Xbox division were operating at a net loss then you'd have an argument. Of course, we'd also need data on these Allwinner supplied manufacturers before we can say whether or not they are dumping. I'm not sure it's that clear cut this time compared to what was done previously in the solar industry.
Re:This is called dumping (Score:5, Informative)
The xbox division ran at a huge loss for many years before it ever turned a profit...
Re: (Score:2)
Xbox has lost 3 Billion in 10 years, 2012 being the worst. Sony too, which goes to show, if people stop buying Games; you can kiss big name Consoles goodbye. If it's true they will soon cost $100 for a Game (Some do already) then it's over.
Re:This is called dumping (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at video game consoles, Sony (They be Japan) and Microsoft (American) sold their consoles at losses.
Selling consoles at a loss actually makes sense because the company doing it owns the IP and there is a "lock-in" effect once games are developed for the console.
Dumping by Allwinner makes no sense, and there is no reason to believe that is what they are doing. The IP is owned by ARM (a British company) and there is no "lock-in": phone/tablet can easily switch since the software is compatible.
Dumping accusations are almost always BS from a competitor clamoring for protectionism and subsidies. If the dumping was a real concern, it would be consumers that complain, rather than competitors. Allwinner is gaining market share because they keep their costs low, manufacture high volumes, and accept modest profit margins. They are winning because they deserve to win. If their competitors don't like it, maybe they could, you know, like ... compete.
Re:This is called dumping (Score:4, Interesting)
ShanghaiBill: Dumping by Allwinner makes no sense ... The IP is owned by ARM (a British company) and there is no "lock-in": phone/tablet can easily switch since the software is compatible.
There's even less lock-in for commodity memory parts, yet the Japanese were dumping those parts back in the 80's. Years later they admitted that's exactly what they were doing.
ShanghaiBill: Dumping accusations are almost always BS from a competitor clamoring for protectionism and subsidies.
Do you have any evidence for such a broad statement, or are we just supposed to accept your assertion at face value?
ShanghaiBill: If the dumping was a real concern, it would be consumers that complain, rather than competitors.
WTF? Why would the consumers complain? I'm dying to hear that explanation.
ShanghaiBill: Allwinner is gaining market share because they keep their costs low, manufacture high volumes, and accept modest profit margins.
Keep their costs low? Semi fab is almost all capital costs, and the equipment costs are the same around the world. The only way to keep costs low in that situation is sweetheart loan rates and government loan guarantees.
Manufacture high volumes. Please name a digital semi fab that doesn't manufacture in enormous volumes. That's the only way you can amortize the cost of a multi-billion dollar fab.
Accept modest profit margins. Please provide a comparison between Allwinner's and their competitior's profit margins. For bonus points, please explain why you would believe the accounting statements of any Chinese company.
Re: This is called dumping (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's even less lock-in for commodity memory parts, yet the Japanese were dumping those parts back in the 80's. Years later they admitted that's exactly what they were doing.
No they didn't. "Dumping" means selling below cost to drive competition out of the marketplace. Selling below cost for other reasons is not dumping and is not illegal. The Japanese were selling memory below cost because they had excessive capacity and market prices had fallen below break even. If they had cut production, their losses would have been even worse, because most of the cost was capital investment.
ShanghaiBill: Dumping accusations are almost always BS from a competitor clamoring for protectionism and subsidies.
Do you have any evidence for such a broad statement, or are we just supposed to accept your assertion at face value?
Just look at reality. Dumping accusations occur all the time, very, very few of these result in
Re: (Score:2)
"Dumping" means selling below cost to drive competition out of the marketplace. Selling below cost for other reasons is not dumping and is not illegal.
No, dumping is defined as either selling below the price in the manufacturer's home market or selling below average production cost. Japan was fond of citing marginal production cost, which in something as capital intensive as semis is a lot lower and essentially meaningless. If Japan was not dumping in the first place, then why did they agree to stop doing it?
Dumping accusations occur all the time, very, very few of these result in government action.
Banks commit fraud all the time and it rarely results in government action. What's your point?
The only thing that comes close is rare earths, and the Chinese companies did not raise the price, they just restricted exports. That is certainly anti-competitive, but not quite the same.
"Not quite the same". Gotta love it - congratulations o
Re: (Score:2)
So your contention is that the average consumer buying a tablet would know the pricing of the components
No, that is not my contention. I said that the tablet and smartphone manufacturers would know. They would be the ultimate victims of dumping. But of course they are not complaining, because Allwinner currently has only 20% market share and is going up against global giants like Intel, Samsung and TMSC, so any accusations that they are trying to "corner the market" by dumping is patently absurd.
Re: (Score:1)
In fact, Cell Phones are sold at losses providing you get a service plan with them.
It's not a loss, it's a credit. The phone company will never have a loss on a cell phone; you will either pay for it via the plan fees, or you will pay the early termination fee. Either way they get their money. Of course once the term of the contract ends, you become a pure profit center.
Re: (Score:1)
I was willing to grant your argument some shred of credibility until I read the last sentence. Apparently you didn't even take your own argument seriously enough to maintain a straight face.
Re:This is called dumping (Score:4, Interesting)
Apparently you didn't even take your own argument seriously enough to maintain a straight face.
My, aren't we solemn. If making a joke invalidates all serious points, then I've never made a serious point in my life.
Re: (Score:3)
This is why the natural monopoly myth is so flawed.
This has nothing to do with natural monopolies. That applies to things like a municipal water supply, because it's utterly impractical to build multiple "competing" sets of water mains under the streets.
If and when they raise prices back up, consumers and investors won't stick around ... they compete against the whole of society which at any time has numerous entrepreneurs and capital investors eager to make a buck. They will jump at any chance they see in faltering or manipulative businesses.
So sayeth simple minded economists, who ignore things like barriers to entry. Hint: semi fabs cost a lot of money. They require a lot of expertise. They cannot frictionlessly pop into and out of existence like so many hot dog stands.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
People discount "Chinese hacking" stories, but I do remember how the US solar industry got utterly destroyed. First the solar companies were complaining about intrusion attempts and showing logs about attacks. Six months later, out came the panels from China that cost less than it took to gather the rare earths to dope the PV silicon.
Congress saved Harley from being curbstomped when foreign competitors came out with better products. Of course, something as critical to US national security as distributed
Re: (Score:2)
oil independence seems lost on people in DC
Not at all. Given some of TPTB there, they consider independence a bad idea.
Re: (Score:2)
People discount "Chinese hacking" stories, but I do remember how the US solar industry got utterly destroyed.
Don't forget Nortel too.
Re: This is called dumping (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure this would qualify as dumping as Allwinner devices aren't competing for the same consumers as Intel or Samsung devices. In solar and rare earths, branding hasn't mattered -- panels are panels, rocks are rocks, they're commodities and no matter where they're from they compete for the same buyers -- so selling them at below market price can have a great impact on the other players in the market. Allwinner chips, however, mostly go in sub $100 tablets that compete only in their own segment -- they
Re:This is called dumping (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, they are selling at or below cost to suck up market share.
no, they're not. they're a profit-maximising company, just like any other profit-maximising company. if they did what you're accusing them of doing, they'd go bankrupt.
what we believe they have done is just said, "right: we're going to aim BIG". rather than be scared shitless of the NREs for processor development, they simply decided that they would aim for an extremely large number of processors, and either got a PRC Govt Grant or just got very very good investors. they would then have negotiated an EXTREMELY good rate with one of the fabs, based on the projected volume, and that alone would allow them to sell at the price that they set out to sell at. especially if they placed a cash order for a vast number of chips.
so it's simple economics and sound business sense that has allowed them to sell a 1ghz processor at $7.50 when all *PREVIOUS* competition *INCLUDING COMPETITORS IN CHINA* were selling at around $11 or even $13 for a product that had less features.
the other thing that has allowed them to take the world by storm in this area is the extremely high level of integration in their SoC, as well as working with (i believe they actually own) X-Powers to create an exceptionally low-cost and highly optimised Power Management IC, called the AXP209. the cost of this PMIC is $1.50 in volume.
basically you can get away with $30 worth of parts to do a seriously good little board, which has 1gb of RAM, 4gb of NAND Flash, ethernet, SATA, USB2 and HDMI and more, when everyone else is struggling to hit $35 to $38. that's a big, big difference in this kind of market, and it explains why, when the Allwinner A10 was introduced, that a major recession occurred INSIDE CHINA, in the Electronics District of Guangdong, Shenzen.
i'll say that again, in case you didn't understand. whilst you are accusing China (the country) of "price dumping in the USA", *one very ambitious young company* managed to cause a MAJOR RECESSION IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY.
why is that? it's because the electronics industry in china is critically dependent on and focussed on volume sales. the Allwinner A10 and its associated PMIC and high level of integration left many factories holding out-of-date stock. companies that did NOT move over to the A10 in time were left with stock that they couldn't shift. if they did shift - reneging on contracts in the process, in many cases - they left the SUPPLIERS holding the stock, and i don't know if you're aware of this but China basically operates on a cash-only, cash-up-front basis.
the shift caused by the introduction of the A10 was so vast, and so quick, that it basically wiped out any company that didn't change over in time. including the ODM company that we were talking to at the time, whose clients (factories) all had invested in AMLogic's $13 processor at the time.
so - please do be better informed before making assumptions and accusations such as those which you are making, ok? the country you live in is a very small market compared to china. america is not even particularly relevant, here, because americans expects bigger, better and much much faster than a 1ghz single-core low-power ARM processor. please take more care, ok?
Re: (Score:2)
they're a profit-maximising company, just like any other profit-maximising company. if they did what you're accusing them of doing, they'd go bankrupt. ... got a PRC Govt Grant or ...
Yes, government handouts are an excellent way to maximize profits.
Re: (Score:2)
True. Lots of European and American companies also agree.
Re: (Score:3)
There is another factor. Chinese OEMs naturally prefer Chinese parts. I say naturally because the datasheets are available in Chinese (not badly translated from English either) and they can deal with local reps and distributors.
Let me be clear that it isn't racism or anything like that. Allwinner is just providing a good service to Chinese companies. Intel doesn't have the networks or the Chinese staff to match it.
Re: (Score:3)
There is another factor. Chinese OEMs naturally prefer Chinese parts.
you're right... and yet this should not surprise anyone. insert "country X" for "Chinese" and you'll get the same answer. in fact, i think you'll find that "company X prefers to work with parts that are sourced locally".
I say naturally because the datasheets are available in Chinese (not badly translated from English either) and they can deal with local reps and distributors.
with the rhombus tech initiative, we're doing ok. just :) it is extremely hard though. luckily i've been picking parts that are clearly and obviously commonly available, done in volumes so huge that the datasheets leaked in some cases years ago out onto the internet.
but yes: it's much e
Re: (Score:2)
There is another factor. Chinese OEMs naturally prefer Chinese parts.
you're right... and yet this should not surprise anyone. insert "country X" for "Chinese" and you'll get the same answer. in fact, i think you'll find that "company X prefers to work with parts that are sourced locally".
For chips? You're kidding (at least if you think it has to do with convenience rather than government pressure). I can believe that non-Chinese chip vendors are doing a bad job on translating their literature or having local reps (perhaps because they realize it's pointless in the face of Chinese government pressure) but there is no other reason to prefer locally made chips. It's not like you're talking about parts built specifically for your product (e.g. plastic moldings). When I pick chips for a design I
Re: (Score:2)
For chips? You're kidding
no i'm not. the extreme case is buying all china parts and sourcing a 32mhz XTAL that's only available in europe. the lead times alone would absolutely kill such a project, let alone getting the export licenses.
TI's SoCs for example - the ones with a DSP - are actually classified as "weapons" for god's sake! they have BXPA "Munitions" classifications slapped on them.
remember that it's usually the top-end ICs that are exclusively made in e.g. Taiwan: there are plenty of semiconductor companies that can do
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They're a profit-maximising company that's heavily subsidised by the Chinese government. From what I can remember, the main companies who were affected by this were other Chinese manufacturers of ARM SoCs though; Allwinner aren't really playing in the same market as companies like Qualcomm and Intel.
Re: (Score:2)
either got a PRC Govt Grant or just got very very good investors.
How do you think you get a grant from the government? You do what they want.
So what? (Score:2)
Intel sold basically 0 tablet CPUs, and Qualcomm is not that far ahead of them.
How did they compare to Samsung, whoever actually fabs Apple ARM CPUs and Nvidia?
Re: (Score:2)
Intel sold basically 0 tablet CPUs
Yes, yes, we know the Surface Pro sales have been disappointing.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's approaching a million sales after being on sale only in a few countries, that isn't so bad.
Re:So what? (Score:5, Informative)
Samsung is manufacturing those in Texas. Technically that is in the US although the residents there seem to think differently.
As of August 2012,[18] the A5 is manufactured at Samsung's Austin, Texas factory. Samsung invested $3.6 billion in a facility in Austin to produce chips such as processors, and nearly all of that wing's output is dedicated to Apple components.[19] Samsung has invested a further $4.2 billion at the Austin facility in order to transition to a 28 nm fabrication process by the second half of 2013
Re: (Score:3)
Texas. Technically that is in the US although the residents there seem to think differently.
No conflict there - residents outside of Texas agree.
Re: (Score:1)
Technically Austin is in Texas, although the residents there seem to think differently. :-)
(Disclosure: Currently living there.)
Re: (Score:2)
Technically Austin is in Texas, although the residents there seem to think differently. :-)
(Disclosure: Currently living there.)
So do you think they're right?
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know if they do packaging as well?
Often it seems outfits have fabs in western countries, but then send the bare dies off to the orient to be packaged (in epoxy, with pins and stuff- wire bonding the pins to the die, etc. I don't mean onto reels or into tubes / trays, though I imagine that is done at the same place).
Re:So what? (Score:5, Informative)
These are cheap for a reason, and they're unpopular in the rest of the world for a reason.
The Allwinner chips used in these tablets are all ARM Cortex-A8 based. A Cortex-A8 is basically unfit for a tablet. The lowest end tablets sold by Apple, Samsung, Motorola, Sony, Acer, and Asus 4 years ago didn't have a CPU this slow. Just because they can get away with selling these in China doesn't mean that they are worth anything.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Allwinters most popular chip at the moment is quad Cortex-A7.
Rockchip is another Chinese manufacturer making quad A8 (RK3188)
Both are faster than fastest Tegra3.
Re: (Score:1)
Both are faster than fastest Tegra3.
For what definition of "faster than"? A7 is a pretty weak core. It was optimized for very low power and die area, not for high performance. Tegra3 uses Cortex-A9, which is an older design but actually faster if all else is held equal (same clock speed, equivalent memory subsystem).
(The reason you see quad A7 popping up in cheap Allwinner SoCs is that A7 is tiny. Really tiny. Area has a direct relationship with cost in semiconductor manufacturing. Also, ARM probably charges lower per-unit royalties for
Re: (Score:2)
I admit I was misleading. GPU is faster, CPU is slower.
Rockchip on the other hand wins both cpu and gpu comparison (with crusty overclocked quad mali400) against fastest Tegra3.
My point was cheap Chinese SOCs aren't about bottom dollar_and_performance anymore. They are still bottom dollar, but performance starts to catch up.
Re: (Score:2)
Both are faster than fastest Tegra3.
For what definition of "faster than"? A7 is a pretty weak core. It was optimized for very low power and die area, not for high performance. Tegra3 uses Cortex-A9, which is an older design but actually faster if all else is held equal (same clock speed, equivalent memory subsystem).
(The reason you see quad A7 popping up in cheap Allwinner SoCs is that A7 is tiny. Really tiny. Area has a direct relationship with cost in semiconductor manufacturing. Also, ARM probably charges lower per-unit royalties for smaller / lower performance cores like the A7.)
Someone mod this guy up. A7 is a single issue, in-order core with basically no frills. An A9 like in the Tegra 3 is a triple issue out of order processor with a much faster FPU. It blows an A7 away in performance by a wide margin, although it is a much larger and more expensive chip.
Re: (Score:2)
Allwinters most popular chip at the moment is quad Cortex-A7.
Really? Because when I look at alibaba et al, what I see is mostly A13 based, which is a single-core Cortex-A8.
Re: (Score:2)
Plenty of A31 around, still If I was shopping for a cheap tabled I would look at RK3188 instead.
Re: (Score:3)
Sometimes a person is perfectly fine with buying and using a toaster instead of buying and using a whole oven.
The same goes for tablets; for casual surfing or communications, a slower, smaller tablet is fine for many people. Those who have tasks that require more CPU power will, of course, purchase different tablets more suitable for those types of tasks. But those uses don't' negate the value of cheap, "lightweight" tablets for other users' uses.
Re: So what? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
So, you are saying you owned something from China that didn't perform well, but don't mention the model or processor.
The article is specifically taking about Allwinner, which use Cortex A8. That's the same processor running in the origonal iPad and performs pretty fine for browsing the web.
so? (Score:4, Interesting)
The article mentions 20% volume market share, that's pretty much the chineese share of the world's population. Congrats, you've retaken your own market, good for you guys.
The article also mentions that Apple has a 48% revenue share. What the fuck guys. Pick a measure and stick to it. All that tells us is that Apple phones are probably more expensive per processor than their competitors. Big surprise.
Re: (Score:1)
20% market share != 20% world population
There is such a thing as socioeconomics.
In Other News (Score:2)
Luthair outsells Newegg in CPUs delivered to his friend Fred.
Seriously, this is a fairly specific claim, ignoring and ignores the much larger number of CPUs sold in phones.
Move the goal posts and declare victory! (Score:5, Insightful)
So wait, they beat the single-digit of designs that used Intel Atom and failed, combined with the almost nothing of Android tablets not made by Samsung?
How impressive!
Re: (Score:3)
The rest of the Android category belongs to Nvidia.
They compared to two companies that sell tiny amounts of Tablet CPUs.
Allwinner is a winner. (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a couple of tablets with Allwinner A10 SOC. Even better, there are development boards available with SOC, and some of them are Open Hardware, well documented boards. If you look at Wikipedia's list of Single Board Computers,
you will find the Allwinner on a number of development boards, such as the A13-OLinuXino, Cubieboard, Gooseberry, and Hackberry. In addition to Allwinner tablets, I have a couple of Raspberry PI SBCs. I'm hoping to get one of the Allwinner based development boards in order to see how it compares to the Raspberry.
Best wishes,
Bob
Re: (Score:2)
Are there any with an open GPU? This is the big obstacle to getting XBMC on an Allwinner device.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
No. Which is all the more reason why the first vendor to open their specs is going to grab a lot of marketshare.
Re: (Score:3)
Those people care about whether their apps work or not. Go look at the cheap tablets on eBay and look for how many are advertising that Netflix works (because often it doesn't).
Nobody cares about drivers, but people do care about what drivers enable.
Re: (Score:2)
Depending on how you define "open source", the Raspberry PI has it.
Re: (Score:2)
GPU is not a problem, video decoder (cedar) is, but there is a working open source driver now for A10. There is also a working open source driver for MALI400.
Both experimental, but nightly builds work ( as good as experimental stuff would)
Re:Allwinner is a winner. (Score:5, Informative)
The GPU isn't the problem. It's the fact that Allwinner still hasn't created an Android OMX stack for their hwaccel video codecs.
People don't understand that the ARM SoC world is different than the desktop world - in the desktop world, EVERYTHING graphics-related is on the GPU, and it's all blobbed up.
In the ARM SoC world, the graphics subsystem is split up significantly, with a lot of mix-and-match opportunities.
For example, Mali 400MP GPUs are found in a wide variety of SoCs - Samsung Exynos4, Allwinner, Amlogic chips, Rockchip RK3066, some MediaTek chips, and I think a few others. People say, "when will there be hwaccel on Mali" - the answer is NEVER. This is because hwaccel video decoding is done by separate components in the SoC. In the case of Samsung Exynos, it's Samsung's MFC. In the case of Qualcomm, it's "vidc". In the case of Allwinner, it's CedarX. Amlogic's is just "amplayer" or something like that. FYI, at least the kernel interfaces (albeit not the firmware) for MFC and vidc are open-source, as are OMX stacks for both of those implementations.
You can also see other interesting pairings too - for example, Samsung's MFC engine is very similar between Exynos3 and Exynos4, despite Exynos3 having a PowerVR GPU, and Exynos4 having Mali 400MP.
Samsung's MFC has "good enough" OMX support to do XBMC on Exynos3, 4, and 5.
Allwinner simply has NO OMX decoding solution for Android using CedarX, only their special proprietary player.
Same for Amlogic's amplayer - the only reason XBMC works with Amlogic chips is because XBMC had "special" nonstandard playback support added.
The end result is a lot of people.
Re: (Score:3)
It's the fact that Allwinner still hasn't created an Android OMX stack for their hwaccel video codecs
Who said anything about Android? I want XBMC on GNU/Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I went through this process a few months ago for a handful of devices I needed, and this is the only reason why they weren't cheap Allwinner devices. I know my project isn't a bleep on a blip on their production scale, but if I made this decision then others probably have too.
A whole different class of projects can exist when devices are $60 instead of $200 - I hope their software can catch up to their hardware sooner rather than later.
Re: (Score:1)
Huh? XBMC on Android uses the standard NEON interface for video acceleration, if you want to run it under ARM Linux you'll need to configure your kernel to enable NEON support but you should be able to use the same code as the ARM branch.
Re: (Score:2)
XBMC on Android uses the standard NEON interface for video acceleration
There are also Tegra builds and generic non-NEON builds of XBMC for Android floating around, e.g. on XDA.
NEON is not OpenMAX (Score:1)
Huh indeed. I think you might be confusing NEON [arm.com] the ARM SIMD engine with OpenMAX [khronos.org] the media processing API.
Re: (Score:1)
I have a Cubieboard. It has an A10. It's not so 'open' as advertised. The GPU on all A10 devices, a MALI 400, is closed, but the relima project is making good progress in creating an open driver. This GPU however can only be used GLES, not video decoding in hardware. For this there's CedarX which I think is Allwinner IP. For all practical purposes blob support does not work, at least on proper Linux. Maybe Android support is better, I haven't tried it. This CedarX definitely isn't open and I don't know of a
Re: (Score:2)
Are there any with an open GPU?
Under construction [limadriver.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes the Allwinner seems to be a real game changer. Those guys : http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ are building an open hardware platform similar to the Raspberry PI and based on the Allwinner A10, if I remember well it's price will be around $25, while it's much more powerfull. There have already been some articles here on Slashdot about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for that Wikipedia Suggestion - Now have it bookmarked
Re:Allwinner is a dog (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Very kind of you. I would never turn up my nose at a medal.
That it is inexpensive is what makes it interesting. I can afford to dedicate an Allwinner A10 tablet as a glorified remote control/streamer for MPD, one with the ability to check my mail and browse. I also use it to shut down various computers when I leave the house. I can take one apart, without worrying too much about whether I can get it back together. I would be much less inclined to use it this way if it were more expensive.
As for the
Also not stabbing people in the face (Score:2)
I never was an AMD person because my coding just was happier on Intel products. But with ARM I look forward to them expanding their products and make my life better. With Intel I just don't ca
Re: (Score:2)
I never was an AMD person because my coding just was happier on Intel products.
Unless you were doing APC work, distributed or symetrical processing, or creating fancy bulk data moves with gpu's, or some really farout math, you shouldn't have noticed a whole lot of difference between the two platforms. How was your code "happier" on Intel? It would have been really happy to run on AMD if you ever ran into Intel's "divide by zero" [wikipedia.org] bug in the mid 90's.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I am fairly sure that few non-subsidized companies on this planet could wareh
Good for them. (Score:2)
Of course, they're outselling the poorest selling portion of the market so it doesn't really matter.
But regardless, good for them. I suspect some of this is to get big names to consider putting their product in their devices. Seems reasonable if it pays off.
Reliable? (Score:2)
Highly selective metrics (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are currently almost NO tablets with Qualcomm processors.
I think one Lenovo unit has some sort of Qcom in it. Sony's Tablet Z has an APQ8064, but it hasn't hit the market outside of Japan yet. I can't think of any other examples really - but Qualcomm DOMINATES in phones right now.
The tablet situation might change at I/O - lots of rumors that the Nexus 7's replacement will be Qualcomm-based.
NVidia and TI have, so far, been dominating the Android tablet market. iPads have been Samsung-manufactured Ap
Re: Highly selective metrics (Score:2)
Why not.... (Score:5, Interesting)
The A8 and A13 processors absolutely rock and dont require a stupid NDA for you to sign just to get your hands on what is needed to use it.
45nm and 40nm? (Score:1)
Wow, they're really partying like it's 2008! Somehow I don't think anyone is afraid of Allwinner unless they manage to steal 28nm and below technologies really soon.
They are already outclassed massively and it's only going to get worse as everyone moves to 22/20nm and before long 14nm.