<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Intel's Peter Biddle on AppUp, the Atom processor, and more ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-06-18T22:57:23-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[well...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3384081]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I think you've really said it all. I can't hope that there will be any further conversation in this thread after that.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3384081]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[dcolbert@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 07:35:03 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[quick]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3379649]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[and as for processors i have developed the quantum core optical processor and the chemicial core processor]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3379649]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[groovecutter]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2010 04:07:55 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: Intel's Peter Biddle on AppUp, the Atom processor, and more]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3379648]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[my name clive mcnally i inovated the i phone and this is what has been happerning to me sciencepoint 1 biologyif i state that there are 21 nerves in the upper and the lower jaws of a human body in the teeth and this data can be confirmed by any dentists or biologist or an anotomy book {fact}point 2 muscle controll the nerve endings of the human body are controlled by light produced by the chemicials of the human body {fact}all facts can be varifyied by medical journals point 3 {science}light and audio and broadcast signals are infinitly balenced out of oxygen and light and audio and broadcast signals pass through carbon hense when we speak we ossolate oxygen to produce our voices {fact} how do speakersin a sterio work they ossolate oxygen {air} to generate the audio all facts can be varifyiedpoint 4 {signals}fact broadcast signals pass through nearly everything and how do you caculate between two points with no fixed referance noting all broadcast signals can be picked up in any property or building ect you would use 6 pointsto 6 points with the centre points as your start and destination as in navagating through spacepoint 5 audioif i can generate audio anywhere by caculating between points and intensifying a signal at any points plusi can caculate where any objects are or weather they are moving or as to weather they are static and by ossolating oxygen by using a particular frequency ranges anywhere means on the return signal i would know what anybody was saying any where on the planet both inside there heads and outside as in both cases we ossolate oxygen outside and inside in h2o hense inner vocals can be detected as the ossolation of carbon ferrious oxide in the blood movement as the inner voice then also ossolates oxygen hense internal voicepoint 6finally if i can detect any oxygen ossolations on the return signal if i put copper sulphate in to water it changes the ossolation frequencys of oxygen and so i can tell when i have blue water and if i put carbon ferrious oxide in water i can tell when it is red and if i add other chemicials to water the same happens oxygen at those points has a differant frequencys light and audio and broadcast signals are infinitly balenced out of oxygen and that in the nose of humans light and oxygen passes through hydrogen of h2o with light and oxygen passing through hydrogen inside the body and that carbon c 12 6 referance the time on a clock 12/6 and that h2ococo = oxygen in the periodic table the differances on the periodic table = 42 same as the sequencing for the human body take a look plus another the 6 6 6 has 33 33 33 4 3 s and 2 threes  and that 9 9 9 3 lots of 3 x 3 is 9 9 9 and that if the clock has 12 at the top then there is 2 6s and 1 at the bottem then there is a b c d e f g h i j ect but as a = 1 b = 2 ect to z = 26 and that 12345 +1-1 |+1-1 67890 gives the equasion 12345 = 5 and 67890 = 5 there are 4 quardrants of the mouth, 1, 2 , 3, 4. The upper right corner is 1, the upper left is 2, bottom left is 3, and the bottom right is 4. so in quadrant one, the first tooth is 11(one one), then 12(one two), then 13(one three) etc this goes to 18(one eight). 11 starts from the front tooth. then you go to quad 2, 21(two one), 22(two two) etc for each quarant.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3379648]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[groovecutter]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2010 04:01:44 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Fair questions, Zackers...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3378537]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[And I was hoping to hear more analysis and opinion like this in the forums regarding this article - I'm disappointed that your post is the first and sole post asking these questions. Peter made compelling points. Arm has an advantage now, and if you listen to the podcast, Peter acknolwedges this. He talks specifically about how the Qualix CEO made a statement regarding who has the advantage, Intel or ARM - and basically the analysis was that each is weak in an opposite area - and that whoever manages to bring their weak point up to equality *first* will take the lead. In that light, Peter is right, Intel has a tremendous, proven advantage at being able to do this. They've done it before. AMD may have beat Intel to 1Ghz, but Intel was first to get sufficient 1Ghz + chips into the channel and that is what matters to consumers. Intel has tremendous resources in both skill and capital, and they've got a proven track-record of setting their sites on a goal and achieving it. At the same time, I found myself asking how important legacy IA/86 support was to me, these days. Again, there, I think what Peter focused on was that this isn't so much about the consumer perspective for legacy support for code-set compatibility, as it is about where the largest base of experienced developers are comfortable. When you think about it, right now, even with the astronomical growth of the iPhone, there are still probably 10 times as many developers out there familiar with coding for Intel Architecture chipsets, across a huge number of development platforms. If you can entice a ready group of developers and build a model around it, you could quickly close the gap with competitors who have a tremendous head start and lead advantage in the mobile platform in particular, but a relatively small skill pool over-all compared to Intel architecture. I think we tend to hear his points from the consumer/end-user perspective, but if you listen to his responses, he is talking about the momentum that the *developer community* can create behind a hardware platform. And I think that Intel's perspective on their technology lead is edge-to-edge - not isolated just to their Atom core technology. As a semi-conductor manufacturer, Intel absolutely innovates on the most cutting edge fab, wafer and die technologies - and they probably *are* 3-5 years ahead of most of their competitors overall. Does that mean that Atom stands up to ARM? Well... mmmmnnn... that is a hard one - it is difficult to compare the two architectures apples-to-apples. All other things being equal, a low end Atom processor outruns an A8, though - and they're just getting faster. The EXPERIENCE on an iPad is faster, but that is because it is a carefully controlled experience. If you did the SAME things on an Atom based tablet to carefully control the experience, there is no doubt the experience would be BETTER. The only thing I'm not certain about there is battery life - but, I don't think processor cycles is where the iPad builds battery life. It is by careful hardware control of other components, like WiFi radios and other non-CPU power draws. Intel didn't come to me for the interview, by the way, I came to them. I'm sure Peter is a PR person for the Atom line to certain degree - but I think he genuinely believes in his position after talking to him. I mean, Peter was giving these responses because I was *asking* him questions like, &quot;It seems like Intel doesn't need to worry about competition with AMD anymore, ARM seems like the threat to Intel's continued relevence in technology&quot;. That isn't a soft-ball question that says, &quot;Your market has fundamentally changed, and your traditional competitor doesn't even have a road-map, but your NEW competitor is actually out ahead of you... can you even catch up&quot;. Intel thinks they can - and even thinks they're still ahead in many ways. Do we, end users and technology professionals, agree?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3378537]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[dcolbert@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:49:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Is this PR or does Intel live in a bubble?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3377758]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I can't tell if Intel is buying its own hype or not. Biddle might claim that &quot;Intel has a 2 - 5 year &quot;free ride&quot; of remaining relevant in shaping technology patterns&quot;, but when it comes to mobile processors, that's clearly not the case. Otherwise, OEMs would be choosing Atom instead of Arm for the smallest mobile devices. There's no Intel technology lead there.So is this just a PR story Intel is promoting to create FUD while they get their act together in mobile, or do they actually believe they are leading now?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-337648-3377758]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[zackers]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2010 02:59:55 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

