Intel: The chipset is the product

Robert Myers wrote:

The _other_ company sells performance. We sell dreams. :-).

My, oh my. Are we in a trolling mood or what!

:-)

Grumble wrote:
Robert Myers wrote:

The _other_ company sells performance. We sell dreams. :-).


My, oh my. Are we in a trolling mood or what!

:-)


The implication being that selling dreams over performance is a bad
thing? I don't happen to think it is.

Intel's Chief Architect of the P4 era says that he warned Intel
management that the NetBurst architecture had bought them some breathing
room--a few years at most.

The players in the Intel architecture mini-drama seem to an outsider as
if they might be stubbornly goal-oriented, but they don't, any of them,
seem inept.

Intel sometimes seems to act as if it could rearrange virtually
anything, including physics, to suit its market objectives. Anybody
knows that, in a showdown between physics and marketing, physics wins.

Except if you're Intel, apparently. :-).

Over the long haul, if people really need performance, and Intel can't
deliver it, Intel is in trouble. On the short haul, it would be
difficult and dangerous for Intel to try to persuade people that it is
silly for them to focus on performance differences they will never
notice. In a year or two, Intel might be right back where it was with
P4, trying to convince them that a 2.4GHz CPU was faster than a 1.7Ghz
CPU in a way that justified an upgrade. Right now, though, Intel needs
to get its customers to think about something other than single-threaded
performance without engaging in tedious and dangerous explanations.

Intel has big architectural changes in mind: offloading significant
pieces of work, like network processing, from the main CPU. If Intel
were giving advice in "The Graduate," it would be whispering
"Multi-threading." Intel has the clout to make a major change in
programming style like that stick, but even Intel can't make it happen
overnight. In the short haul, Intel has to concede single-threaded
performance to AMD and to get its customers to think about something
else. It looks to me as if they understood exactly what they need to
do, and they are doing it.

Eventually, Intel will be back to selling performance, but the kind of
performance it will have to sell is going to require significant
customer education.

The consumer CPU business may repeat the mistake of HPC and try to force
a vector quantity (usable performance) into a nearly meaningless scalar
(linpack, top 500, etc.), but I can hope not. With any luck, Intel will
be able to move the focus off single-threaded performance and things
that look like stand-ins for single-threaded performance onto more
sophisticated measures of value.

Sophistication in measuring value is great conversation for hardware
groups on Usenet, but when you're trying to make a sale, you don't want
the party reaching for his or her credit card to be thinking about
complexity. In such a circumstance, dreams are the preferred commodity
to be offering for sale.

RM

On Wed, 26 May 2004 00:21:32 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:

What do you do when you're having competitive problems with your main
product and there is no guaranteed relief in sight?

You change the subject. At least, that's what I infer Intel to be doing
with Grantsdale:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory...h/news/2591485

Hmm, Centrino for the desktop? All they need is a name for the "package"
now. Any guesses... anybody?

Where do they get this stuff: "Because the chip set incorporates features
like Dolby audio and advanced 3-D video previously found only in add-on
cards..."? Wot a loada BULL****! Intel plays catch-up and a buncha
anal...ysts drop their drawers in public!!! How embarrassing.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

George Macdonald wrote:
On Wed, 26 May 2004 00:21:32 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:


What do you do when you're having competitive problems with your main
product and there is no guaranteed relief in sight?

You change the subject. At least, that's what I infer Intel to be doing
with Grantsdale:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory...h/news/2591485


Hmm, Centrino for the desktop? All they need is a name for the "package"
now. Any guesses... anybody?


Since picking a brand name is a big deal these days (there are IP issues
with practically any name you can think of), and since there is so
little time, one suspects that Intel is going to have to do without. If
this weren't a hurry-up job, they'd have a brand name ready and we'd
have been exposed to it dozens of times by now. Think of the marketing
barrage that preceded Centrino.

Where do they get this stuff: "Because the chip set incorporates features
like Dolby audio and advanced 3-D video previously found only in add-on
cards..."?

They get it from the press release, one gathers. I haven't yet found
the culpable press release on Intel's site, though.

Wot a loada BULL****! Intel plays catch-up and a buncha
anal...ysts drop their drawers in public!!! How embarrassing.


You worry me sometimes. Can't you just relax and enjoy the show? :-).

RM

On Thu, 27 May 2004 05:29:14 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:

George Macdonald wrote:
On Wed, 26 May 2004 00:21:32 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:


What do you do when you're having competitive problems with your main
product and there is no guaranteed relief in sight?

You change the subject. At least, that's what I infer Intel to be doing
with Grantsdale:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory...h/news/2591485


Hmm, Centrino for the desktop? All they need is a name for the "package"
now. Any guesses... anybody?


Since picking a brand name is a big deal these days (there are IP issues
with practically any name you can think of), and since there is so
little time, one suspects that Intel is going to have to do without. If
this weren't a hurry-up job, they'd have a brand name ready and we'd
have been exposed to it dozens of times by now. Think of the marketing
barrage that preceded Centrino.

And yet most people still don't know what Centrino is or what it is
supposed to cover. How many times do you hear someone refer to a "Centrino
CPU"? I guess Centrium is too obvious as a name for the desktop package
and possibly, as you say, already taken... but a quick search doesn't turn
up anything in the computer industry which clashes.

I'm not so sure about "hurry-up" here... the way Intel has been sponsoring
startups in the home oriented multimedia sphere and filling in with
in-house nuts-n-bolts stuff. A big fanfare at rollout with dog 'n' pony
shows all over could have more impact than a ramped info-trickle.

Where do they get this stuff: "Because the chip set incorporates features
like Dolby audio and advanced 3-D video previously found only in add-on
cards..."?

They get it from the press release, one gathers. I haven't yet found
the culpable press release on Intel's site, though.

Wot a loada BULL****! Intel plays catch-up and a buncha
anal...ysts drop their drawers in public!!! How embarrassing.


You worry me sometimes. Can't you just relax and enjoy the show? :-).

I can stand clueless but clueless pretending to be expert advice/opinion
prickles with me - bald-faced lies ****es me off.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

George Macdonald wrote:
And yet most people still don't know what Centrino is or what it is
supposed to cover. How many times do you hear someone refer to a
"Centrino CPU"? I guess Centrium is too obvious as a name for the
desktop package
and possibly, as you say, already taken... but a quick search doesn't
turn up anything in the computer industry which clashes.

Hell, even most of us that know better have to often use the Centrino term
instead of Pentium-M, just so that others will understand what we're talking
about.

Yousuf Khan

George Macdonald wrote:
On Thu, 27 May 2004 05:29:14 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:


George Macdonald wrote:

On Wed, 26 May 2004 00:21:32 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:


snip


I'm not so sure about "hurry-up" here... the way Intel has been sponsoring
startups in the home oriented multimedia sphere and filling in with
in-house nuts-n-bolts stuff. A big fanfare at rollout with dog 'n' pony
shows all over could have more impact than a ramped info-trickle.


They've definitely been clearing ground for this current agenda for a
while, but I think it's fair to infer that the exact timing and delivery
of much of this stuff is being forced upon them. If Prescott had turned
out the way Intel wanted to, we'd be hearing about Megahertz, not chipsets.

Where do they get this stuff: "Because the chip set incorporates features
like Dolby audio and advanced 3-D video previously found only in add-on
cards..."?

They get it from the press release, one gathers. I haven't yet found
the culpable press release on Intel's site, though.


Wot a loada BULL****! Intel plays catch-up and a buncha
anal...ysts drop their drawers in public!!! How embarrassing.


You worry me sometimes. Can't you just relax and enjoy the show? :-).


I can stand clueless but clueless pretending to be expert advice/opinion
prickles with me - bald-faced lies ****es me off.


Intel is using the relative technological unsophistication of those who
write for the press to get its advertising message across as hard news.
They didn't invent the game, of course. Every technology company
draws from the same pool of PR types, and it would be amazing if the PR
style of Intel differed significantly from industry norms in terms of
what comes natural.

Intel does seem to me to be much more calculating about its message than
most, and they seem to make it work for them. I am probably more
inclined than the average technologist to pay attention to these sorts
of things, but it really does seem to me that you can't understand what
Intel is up to without understanding the messages it is trying to
convey. That's why I take up bandwidth in hardware groups calling
attention on it. :-).

As to genuine cluelessness/misinformation, it seems to me like you would
need some kind of logarithmic scale. Consumers aren't very well
informed about the actual properties of the laundry detergents they buy.
The difference, you might fairly object, is that technical-sounding
press releases from Proctor and Gamble don't frequently show up in the
press as hard news. Don't know what to say about that.

I give Intel considerable credit for having successfully cultivated a
market by persuading so many people that they needed all that muscle to
begin with. I don't think things like that just happen. I have to be
careful with this line of thinking, though, because it would eventually
lead to my expression very grudging admiration for Microsoft, and we
wouldn't want that.

RM

On Fri, 28 May 2004 15:34:29 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:

George Macdonald wrote:
On Thu, 27 May 2004 05:29:14 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:


George Macdonald wrote:

On Wed, 26 May 2004 00:21:32 GMT, Robert Myers
wrote:


snip


I'm not so sure about "hurry-up" here... the way Intel has been sponsoring
startups in the home oriented multimedia sphere and filling in with
in-house nuts-n-bolts stuff. A big fanfare at rollout with dog 'n' pony
shows all over could have more impact than a ramped info-trickle.


They've definitely been clearing ground for this current agenda for a
while, but I think it's fair to infer that the exact timing and delivery
of much of this stuff is being forced upon them. If Prescott had turned
out the way Intel wanted to, we'd be hearing about Megahertz, not chipsets.

I think their getting too close to actual consumer products for their own
good - quite a dilemma for them as to how far they tread on the toes of
consumer name-brand OEMs in their quest to own the market.

Where do they get this stuff: "Because the chip set incorporates features
like Dolby audio and advanced 3-D video previously found only in add-on
cards..."?

They get it from the press release, one gathers. I haven't yet found
the culpable press release on Intel's site, though.


Wot a loada BULL****! Intel plays catch-up and a buncha
anal...ysts drop their drawers in public!!! How embarrassing.


You worry me sometimes. Can't you just relax and enjoy the show? :-).


I can stand clueless but clueless pretending to be expert advice/opinion
prickles with me - bald-faced lies ****es me off.


Intel is using the relative technological unsophistication of those who
write for the press to get its advertising message across as hard news.
They didn't invent the game, of course. Every technology company
draws from the same pool of PR types, and it would be amazing if the PR
style of Intel differed significantly from industry norms in terms of
what comes natural.

Intel does seem to me to be much more calculating about its message than
most, and they seem to make it work for them. I am probably more
inclined than the average technologist to pay attention to these sorts
of things, but it really does seem to me that you can't understand what
Intel is up to without understanding the messages it is trying to
convey. That's why I take up bandwidth in hardware groups calling
attention on it. :-).

Calculating maybe but I think it has more to do with the susceptibility of
the microprocessor market to BS... due to the presence of a bunch of
(mostly) ignorant "analysts" who are presented as, and perceived by the
even more ignorant news agencies like Reuters, as gurus of the industry.
The news chain is simply primed for BS... for no good reason. The Inquirer
and The Register to the rescue??:-)

As to genuine cluelessness/misinformation, it seems to me like you would
need some kind of logarithmic scale. Consumers aren't very well
informed about the actual properties of the laundry detergents they buy.
The difference, you might fairly object, is that technical-sounding
press releases from Proctor and Gamble don't frequently show up in the
press as hard news. Don't know what to say about that.

People have a direct method of "benchmarking" their detergents though -
they know that, e.g., a store brand detergent gets used up faster or leaves
a horrible scent on their shirts and blouses. Perhaps the auto industry
would be a better comparison as far as consumer technology but the $$ per
finished product is in a different ball-park. There, the outsource
companies take an intentionally low profile - e.g. how many people know
that Magna Steyr builds whole vehicles for M.B and BMW, who gladly put
their "griffe" on them.

In the auto industry there is plenty of expert opinion BS of course but the
consumer is generally in a good position to see it as opinion. The
"experts" cannot, however, get away with the kind of incompetence we see in
many computer industry articles where, either the analyst being quoted is
clueless or the author so unqualified that it all turns out as umm, tripe.
The prognostications on 64-bit x86 are a prime example of this - take a
look at the 64-bit Support section of
http://enterprise-windows-it.newsfac...ory/24055.html where it
looks like the author is just so inadequate to the task that he shouldn't
be writing about the computer industry. Add in the "analyst" bias/misread
and what comes out is gobbledygook.

I give Intel considerable credit for having successfully cultivated a
market by persuading so many people that they needed all that muscle to
begin with. I don't think things like that just happen. I have to be
careful with this line of thinking, though, because it would eventually
lead to my expression very grudging admiration for Microsoft, and we
wouldn't want that.

You need to start worrying about your favorite topic though, now that M$
has declared its intention to enter the HPC market.chuckle

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Robert Myers wrote:
What do you do when you're having competitive problems with your main
product and there is no guaranteed relief in sight?

You change the subject. At least, that's what I infer Intel to be
doing with Grantsdale:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory...h/news/2591485

They've already had experience hyping a chipset, otherwise known as
Centrino. They'll have to come up with a slick moniker for Grantsdale too. I
wonder if they're going to do like in the Centrino campaign, start
emphasizing the whole processor/chipset combo? They certainly can't hype the
Pentium 4 Prescott as it now stands -- it's a big embarrassment for them.
Perhaps with a re-emphasis on a chipset combo, rather than a processor, they
can easily take people's focus off of the actual processor and slip the old
processor away (Prescott), and replace it with a new processor (Dothan)
without people noticing? Prestidigitation.

Yousuf Khan

On Thu, 27 May 2004 04:57:21 GMT, "Yousuf Khan"
wrote:

They've already had experience hyping a chipset, otherwise known as
Centrino. They'll have to come up with a slick moniker for Grantsdale too. I
wonder if they're going to do like in the Centrino campaign, start
emphasizing the whole processor/chipset combo?

There's been a tendency to capitalize on existing successful branding
campaigns - look at the life of the Pentium name, which was originally
just a replacement for '586. That would argue for the possibility of
names such as Centrino-D (for desktop), Centrino II, and such. One
thing the marketeers are aware of is the risk of confusing your
non-technical customers with too many name brands. You want them to
go "Oh, sure. Centrino. That's good, right? And Centrino II must be
better!"


Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer