How Qualcomm Tried and Failed to Steal Intel's Crown Jewel

Re:How Qualcomm Tried and Failed to Steal Intel's Crown Jewel by sometimesijust on Sunday September 23, 2018 @01:36AM (#18049558)

This is an objectively bad article. I'm still trying to figure out exactly which November the author is talking about. But I do think there is an interesting story in there if it was written by a better journalist with some/any actual insider information.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Qualcomm Tried and Failed to Steal Intel's Crown Jewel by abainbridge on Sunday September 23, 2018 @03:38AM (#18049887)

Agreed.

I'm still trying to figure out which Qualcomm product the author is talking about. Does it exist? Was it bad? Did people buy it? If not, why?

I don't believe the author's justification as to why Qualcomm was in the best position to make a success of an ARM server chip - there's a quote from a Gartner analyst and the assertion that you need a product road-map. What? Is that it? Surely the important thing is to make a good chip, make it cheap and produce enough to meet demand. Do that consistently for two years and the big cloud vendors will start buying. I don't think you need to be Qualcomm to achieve that.

Why couldn't a startup company break into this market? For example, this one https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Ampere-e...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Qualcomm Tried and Failed to Steal Intel's Crown Jewel by Tempest1981 on Sunday September 23, 2018 @05:21AM (#18050226)

Maybe this:

“the Qualcomm Centriq 2400 features up to 48 Qualcomm Falkor cores—our custom Armv8-based CPU core”

https://www.qualcomm.com/products/server-processors

[ Parent | on HN ]